For similar reasons as with supressed science, there are important facts and simple treatments for many dis-eases that are kept from the mass population.
For example, Jim Humble and his MMS Protocols have treated many thousands of people in Africa and around the world, annihilating diseases such as malaria, cancer and aids and yet you will not hear anything about these simple treatments in the media - other than disinformation.
The multi-billion dollar medical science and pharmaceutical industries profit from 'treating' diseases, not symptoms and their treatments are highly ineffective - other than for generating enormous profits.
"The drug companies, with the help of the scientific community, have created a scientific “truth” that ensures they will have no competition. And unfortunately they are the group that doesn’t want well people; they want the money that comes from sick people. If you cure a sick person, he won’t pay you any more money. That is a self-evident truth that the laymen of the world do not seem to consider.
Don’t you think it is kind of funny that after 100 years of the new scientific modern technology, not one single cure for a single disease has ever been found? Doesn’t it seem crazy that the exact same cancer treatments have been in use, with no practical improvements, for 100 years, and still less than 3% of patients recover?" - Jim Humble
There are other reasons relating to the elite's fear of over population and a strong desire on their part to control the size of the human race.
"There are a number of alternative healing therapies that work so well and cost so little (compared to conventional treatment), that Organized Medicine , the Food & Drug Administration, and their overlords in the Pharmaceutical Industry (The Big Three) would rather the public not know about them. The reason is obvious: Alternative, non-toxic therapies represent a potential loss of billions of dollars to allopathic (drug) medicine and drug companies.
The Big Three have collectively engaged in a medical conspiracy for the better part of 70 years to influence legislative bodies on both the state and federal level to create regulations that promote the use of drug medicine while simultaneously creating restrictive, controlling mechanisms (licencing, government approval, etc) designed to limit and stifle the availability of non-drug, alternative modalities. The conspiracy to limit and eliminate competition from non-drug therapies began with the Flexner Report of 1910 ." - EducateYourself.org
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.
This is how the MMS Protocols are able to effectively cure severe diseases including most types of cancer and even engineered viruses such as AIDS and H1N1.
I highly recommend purchasing his e-book, "The Master Mineral of the Third Millenium". It provides comprehensive information on how and why MMS works, how to make it and many protocols for treating a wide range of diseases.
MMS is available in many countries, despite attempts to discredit and shut it down by the authorities. I have been cautioned that there are some online suppliers who are not particularly trustworthy so I would suggest doing your research before purchasing from any particular online seller.
I am happy to recommend two New Zealand based suppliers to anyone, please send us an email.
Hydrogen peroxide treatment is similar to MMS treatments but not as powerful. It has been around for decades and there are good sources of information online.
Related:Healing from Vaccine Injuries through Homeopathy
A storehouse of information, proof and truth about the lies regarding vaccinations. The claim that vaccination has wiped out deadly scourges has reached legendary status. But are these claims backed by historical records or do they represent the most deceptive and successful public relations coup in the history of the medical industrial complex?
And if vaccines-and not better sanitation etc. – saved humanity from disease, then where are today's epidemic of Scarlet Fever victims for which no vaccine was ever administered? It is also imperative to understand that the definition + diagnosis of polio was dramatically changed when the polio vaccine was introduced, further manipulating statistics. VaccinesUncensored.com
Loneliness More Hazardous To Your Health Than Obesity Or Smoking September 1 2017 | From: Mercola
Loneliness doesn't just affect your mind; it can also cause a number of health problems.
For example, previous research shows feeling lonely can raise your blood pressure up to 14 points, with greater increases the longer loneliness persists. With that, the risk for heart disease and dementia also increases.
More recently, researchers concluded social isolation and loneliness may have more severe consequences than obesity and smoking. Other recent research reveals the brain-related changes associated with feelings of loneliness start to take place after as little as 24 hours of isolation.
Loneliness More Hazardous to Your Health Than Obesity
Negative emotions will invariably impact your physical well-being, and feeling lonely is no different. According to two meta analyses presented at the 2017 Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association, loneliness and social isolation - which are similar but not identical - pose greater threats to public health than obesity, raising your risk for premature death by as much as 50 percent. As reported by Medical News Today:
"While loneliness and social isolation are often used interchangeably, there are notable differences between the two. Social isolation is defined as a lack of contact with other individuals, while loneliness is the feeling that one is emotionally disconnected from others.
In essence, a person can be in the presence of others and still feel lonely.
According to a 2016 Harris Poll of more than 2,000 adults in the U.S., around 72 percent reported having felt lonely at some point in their lives. Of these adults, around 31 percent reported feeling lonely at least once a week."
The first analysis, which looked at 148 studies involving more than 300,000 adults, found social isolation increased the risk of premature death by 50 percent.
The second, which evaluated 70 studies that included more than 3.4 million individuals, found social isolation, loneliness and living alone correlated with a 29 percent, 26 percent and 32 percent increased risk of mortality respectively.
Overall, this is comparable to the risk of premature death associated with obesity and other well-established risk factors for mortality, including the risks associated with smoking 15 cigarettes a day.
Other Health Risks Associated With Loneliness
According to the American Osteopathic Association, which commissioned the Harris Poll cited above, loneliness plays a role in many chronic health conditions, including pain, drug or alcohol abuse and depression. Recent studies have linked loneliness to an increased risk for Alzheimer's disease, heart attack and stroke, and lower survival rates for breast cancer patients.
Studies have also shown that people who are lonely are more likely to experience:
Epidemic of Loneliness and Social Isolation Looms Large
According to a 2010 study on loneliness conducted by the AARP, an estimated 42.6 million Americans over the age of 45 suffer from chronic loneliness, and census data reveals more than 25 percent of the U.S. population live alone. Why is loneliness becoming an increasingly prevalent experience?
According to researchers, common reasons include:
Long work hours
Use of social media surpassing face-to-face interaction
Frequent travel for work
Living far from family
Delaying and/or forgoing marriage
Commenting on the Harris Poll on loneliness, Dr. Jennifer Caudle, assistant professor of family medicine at Rowan University School of Osteopathic Medicine noted:
"Loneliness is an invisible epidemic masked by our online personas, which are rarely representative of our real emotions. It's important for patients to understand how their mental and emotional well-being directly affects the body …
Face-to-face communication is critical for emotional and mental health. Seeking out meaningful human interactions makes patients happier and, ultimately, healthier overall."
In light of a growing population of seniors and the rising prevalence of social isolation in general, Julianne Holt-Lunstad, Ph.D., a professor of psychology who led the two meta-analyses, suggests we need to tackle loneliness both on an individual basis and as a society.
To do this, she suggests devoting resources to:
Social skills training for school-aged children
Training doctors to incorporate social connectedness evaluations into their medical screening
Seniors are also advised to prepare for the social implications of retirement, as many adults have few if any social networks outside of the workplace
The Mind-Body Connection
It truly is amazing how your mindset can influence your physical health. It's a powerful force that can either bolster or undermine your physical and mental health.
One reason for this has to do with epigenetics, which centers on the notion that environmental factors such as stress and diet influence your genetic expression.
It is the expression of your genes - not the genes themselves - that dictates whether you develop certain diseases or age prematurely.
Your epigenome is readily influenced by physical and emotional stresses - how you respond to everything that happens in your environment, from final exams to childhood abuse. So, if you are chronically lonely, this negative emotion will influence the expression of your genes and thus impact your risk of developing disease.
This also explains why, as Dawson Church cites in his book "The Genie in Your Genes: Epigenetic Medicine and the New Biology of Intention," heart surgery patients who have a strong social support network and spiritual practice have one-seventh the mortality rate of those who don't!
Strategies to Address Loneliness
If you struggle with loneliness, you're certainly not alone. The question is what to do about it. Following are a number of suggestions and strategies pulled from a variety of sources that can help address loneliness.
Join a Club
Proactive approaches to meeting others include joining a club and planning get-togethers with family, friends or neighbors, Meetup.com is an online source where you can locate a vast array of local clubs and get-togethers. Despite the evils of Facebook, it is a place where you can find local community interest groups.
Many communities also have community gardens where you can benefit from the outdoors while mingling with your neighbors.
Learn a New Skill
Consider enrolling in a class or taking an educational course. Even learn a new language - begin with a free app like Duolingo and maybe consider taking classes as well.
As described by Baya Voce in the TED Talk above, rituals are a powerful means for reducing loneliness. Examples include having weekly talk sessions with your girlfriends and/or making meal time a special time to connect with your family without rushing.
Consider a Digital Cleanse
If your digital life has overtaken face-to-face interactions, consider taking a break from social media while taking proactive steps to meet people in person. Recent research shows Facebook may be more harmful than helpful to your emotional well-being, raising your risk of depression - especially if your contacts' posts elicit envy.
In one recent study, Facebook users who took a one-week break from the site reported significantly higher levels of life satisfaction and a significantly improved emotional life.
Make Good Use of Digital Media
For others, a phone call or text message can be a much-needed lifeline. As noted by Will Wright in his TED Talk, "digitizing empathy" can be a powerful way to help each other.
Examples of this include sending encouraging text messages to people who are struggling with loneliness, offering support and help to live healthier lives and follow through on healthy lifestyle changes.
In the U.K., seniors can call the Silver Line, a help line for older people where they can speak to a live person for as long as they wish. The help line is open 24 hours a day, year-round. The service receives an average of 10,000 calls per week.
Exercise with Others
Joining a gym or signing up with a fitness-directed club or team sport will create opportunities to meet people while improving your physical fitness at the same time.
Routinely frequenting local shops, coffee shops or farmers markets will help you develop a sense of community and encourage the formation of relationships.
Talk to Strangers
Talking to strangers in the store, in your neighborhood or on your daily commute is often a challenge, but can have many valuable benefits, including alleviating loneliness (your own and others'). Talking to strangers builds bridges between ordinary people who may not otherwise forge a connection.
People of the opposite gender, different walks of life or different cultures hold a key to opening up to new ideas or making connections with old ones. In this short video, reporter for The Atlantic, Dr. James Hamblin, demonstrates techniques for learning how to talk with strangers.
Volunteering is another way to increase your social interactions and pave the way for new relationships. When you are feeling sad, lonely and / or depressed, often helping others not only takes your mind off your problems - but can give you a sense of accomplishment in helping others.
Adopt a Companion Pet
A dog or cat can provide unconditional love and comfort, and studies show that owning a pet can help protect against loneliness, depression and anxiety.
The bond that forms between a person and a companion pet can be incredibly fulfilling and serves, in many ways, as an important and rewarding relationship. The research on this is really quite profound.
For instance, having a dog as a companion could add years to your life, as studies have shown that owning a dog played a significant role on survival rates in heart attack victims. Studies have also revealed that people on Medicaid or Medicare who own a pet make fewer visits to the doctor.
The unconditional acceptance and love an animal gives to their owner positively impacts their owner's emotional health in ways such as:
Boosting self-confidence and self-esteem
Helping to meet new friends and promoting communication between elderly residents and neighbors
Helping you cope with illness, loss and depression
Reducing stress levels
Providing a source of touch and affiliation
If you're looking for a furry friend, check out your local animal shelter. Most are filled with cats and dogs looking for someone to love. Petfinder.com is another excellent resource for finding a pet companion.
Move and / or Change Jobs
While the most drastic of all options, it may be part of the answer for some.
To make it worthwhile, be sure to identify the environment or culture that would fit your personality best and consider proximity to longtime friends and family.
“Just one,” you swear. But that’s the third time you’ve given into your sweet tooth this week. As a smart, ambitious person, you know bad habits keep you from reaching your goals. You know you’re capable of self-control. Yet, despite your best efforts, you’ve been unable to change.
Whether it’s mid-day snacking, procrastinating, or skipping workouts, feeling powerless in the face of bad habits can really take a toll on your motivation, even your self-esteem. What if it’s not a lack of willpower that’s to blame? What if the advice you’ve been given about how to “break” a bad habit is actually wrong?
If you’ve been trying different methods over and over but nothing’s working, it’s time for a new approach that leverages the science of behavior change.
The Psychology of Bad Habits
You can spend hours researching life hacks. However, if you don’t first understand the psychology driving habits, you’ll never see any real success.
When you break it down, habits are comprised of three distinct stages:
In the mid-day munchies example, the cue is fatigue. This triggers a routine: getting up and heading to the kitchen. The reward? Yummy goodness that gives you a temporary energy boost.
It turns out that the habit loop is incredibly powerful and is something that has been hardwired into our psyches.
It also helps explains exactly why habits are so hard to shake. The truth is, we actually never break bad habits, rather “bad” behaviors are replaced with more positive alternatives.
Putting the Habit Loop to Work
If you’re ready to kick bad habits for good, here are three steps for leveraging the habit loop to finally change your behavior.
Step 1: Identify the Stages
First identify the cue, routine, and reward that lead to your habit. Look at the circumstances surrounding the behavior including the time of day, who you’re with, and what emotions you’re feeling.
For example, recognize how after a tough day at work (cue), you come home and plop down on the couch (routine). Flash forward and you’ve finish an entire series on Netflix (reward). The downside is you’ve also squandered free time meant to be used for working on your side business.
Step 2: Explore Alternatives
Now that you have a clear breakdown of what’s happening at each stage of your habit loop, brainstorm healthier routines that will produce the results you want.
What alternative behaviors might provide comparable reward to the one you are trying to eliminate? What else would give you a sense of accomplishment, happiness, relaxation - whatever core need your current “bad habit” is satisfying?
Create a list of options. Could you swap out your open-ended Netflix binge for brief meditation or a walk with your partner? Focus on new routines that will help you decompress after a stressful day (the cue) and leave you in a positive frame of mind to get freelance work done (reward).
Now it’s time to experiment with subbing in new routines to get a sense of what works best for you.
Make do-able commitments to test drive new routines and approach them as a series of experiments. Maybe you try a post-work meditation for two weeks and find it’s not for you. After more testing, you may find more vigorous exercise is what helps you get in zone.
Step 4: Anticipate Setbacks
Behavior change is hard. No one is immune from the occasional slip-up, so when it happens, don’t beat yourself up or retreat into negative self-talk.
Instead, make your habit loop bulletproof: anticipate and plan for setbacks. If you’re trying to stick to a diet, think through situations that might challenge your healthy eating habits such a fancy business dinners, traveling for work, or high-stress times.
Once you learn how to work within the psychology of habits, rather than against it, chances are you’ll find greater success in beating negative behaviors once and for all.
How The US Government Is Hiding Vaccine-Related Deaths + MIT Scientist Shows What Can Happen To Children Who Receive Aluminum Containing Vaccines August 30 2017 | From: VaccineImpact / CollectiveEvolution / Various
This latest article by Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., explains how world governments go to great lengths to hide vaccine-related deaths.
The fact that vaccines do cause deaths sometimes is not even a fact in dispute. In addition to the deaths reported in the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), the Department of Justice supplies a quarterly report to the Advisory Commission on Childhood Vaccines on cases settled for vaccine injuries and deaths.
The American public is largely unaware that there is a “vaccine court” known as the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (NVICP). This program was started as a result of a law passed in 1986 that gave pharmaceutical companies total legal immunity from being sued due to injuries and deaths resulting from vaccines.
If you or a family member is injured or dies from vaccines, you must sue the federal government in this special vaccine court.
Many cases are litigated for years before a settlement is reached, and a November 2014 GAO report criticized the government for not making the public more aware that the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program exists, and that there are funds available for vaccine injuries and deaths.
Therefore, the settlements represented by vaccine injuries and deaths included in the DOJ reports probably represent a small fraction of the actual vaccine injuries and deaths occurring in America today.
Also, as we have previously reported, the CDC lists 130 official ways for an infant to die, but vaccine deaths are not even an option. If the death does not fall into one of these 130 causes, it usually gets listed as SIDS (Sudden Infant Death Syndrome).
SIDS has skyrocketed since the 1986 National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program started.
Hiding Vaccine-Related Deaths With Semantic Sleight-of-Hand
Although experts are less willing to openly disclose the fact that adverse reactions can and do include death, one has only to look at reports to the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) to see that mortality is a possible outcome. From 1990 through 2010, for example, VAERS received 1,881 reports of infant deaths following vaccination, representing 4.8% of the adverse events reported for infants over the 20-year period.
Moreover, analysts acknowledge that VAERS, as a passive surveillance system, is subject to substantial underreporting. A federal government report from 2010 affirms that VAERS captures only about 1% of vaccine adverse reports.
On the international frontier, the public health community - with the World Health Organization (WHO) in the vanguard - previously used a six-category framework to investigate and categorize serious adverse events following immunization (AEFI), including death.
Guided by this tool, public health teams examined temporal criteria and possible alternative explanations to determine whether the relationship of an AEFI to vaccine administration was “very likely/certain,” “probable,” “possible,” “unlikely,” “unrelated,” or “unclassifiable.”
In 2013, the WHO’s Global Advisory Committee on Vaccine Safety discarded the prior tool, ostensibly because users “sometimes [found it] difficult to differentiate between ‘probable,’ ‘possible,’ and ‘unlikely’ categories.” The WHO enlisted vaccine experts to develop a “simpler” algorithm that would be more readily “applicable” to vaccines.
The resulting four-category system now invites public health teams to classify an AEFI as either “consistent,” “inconsistent,” or “indeterminate” with a vaccine-related causal association or as “unclassifiable.”
Despite the patina of logic suggested by the use of an algorithm, “the final outcome of the case investigation depends on the personal judgment of the assessor” [emphasis added], especially (according to the tool’s proponents) when the process “yields answers that are both consistent and inconsistent with a causal association to immunization.”
In a 2017 letter in the Indian Journal of Medical Ethics, Drs. Jacob Puliyel (an India-based pediatrician and member of India’s National Technical Advisory Group on Immunization) and Anant Phadke (an executive member of the All India Drug Action Network) raise important questions about the revised tool.
They describe an Orwellian Catch-22 situation wherein it is nearly impossible to categorize post-vaccine deaths as vaccine-related. This is because the revised algorithm does not allow users to classify an AEFI as “consistent with causal association with vaccine” unless there is evidence showing that the vaccine caused a statistically significant increase in deaths during Phase III clinical trials.
By definition, however, any vaccine not found to “retain safety” in Phase III trials cannot proceed to Phase IV (licensure and post-marketing surveillance). The result of the algorithm’s convoluted requirements is that any deaths that occur post-licensure become “coincidental” or “unclassifiable.”
Drs. Puliyel and Phadke describe what happened in India when the country’s National AEFI committee assessed 132 serious AEFI cases reported between 2012 and 2016, including 54 infant deaths that followed administration of a pentavalent all-in-one vaccine intended to protect recipients against diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, hepatitis B, and Haemophilus influenzae type b infections.
For babies who survived hospitalization, the committee classified three-fifths (47/78) of the AEFI as causally related to vaccines (with 47% of the incidents viewed as “product-related” and 13% as “error-related”), but they rated nearly all (52/54) of the deaths as either coincidental (54%) or unclassifiable (43%) despite mounting evidence that pentavalent and hexavalent vaccines are increasing the risk of sudden unexpected death in infants.
“…doctors who “naïvely” accept biased reports on vaccine safety “are losing the trust of the public and in the process…endangering public health.”
The absurdity and negligence inherent in the ultimately subjective WHO checklist have not escaped the attention of others in India and beyond. In a series of comments published in the journal Vaccine in response to the 2013 publication of the revised tool, commenters issued the following scathing remarks:
“Even if a healthy child dies within minutes following vaccination and there is no alternate explanation for the AEFI, even then the powers that be could easily declare that death as coincidental and not due to the vaccine, thanks to the new AEFI. This is dangerous ‘science’.”
“Amongst the 20 items of their checklist, no less than 15 (75%) are devoted to refute a vaccine-induced causality [emphasis in original]…. After all and as the authors confess with an astonishing ingenuousness, the main point is to ‘maintain public confidence in immunization programs.’”
“People understand that there are no true coincidences—only events that have been made to appear to be coincidental by either a genuine lack of understand[ing] of the overall facts leading to the ‘coincidence’ reported or by the deliberate suppression of the facts, including when…AEFIs that result in death are made to ‘disappear.’”
“It seems that huge business in [the] vaccine industry is affecting [the] science of vaccines and we are developing various ways to promote the business at the cost of human lives. …Going for a less sensitive tool for safety concerns is not only illogical but risky for the children of the world.”
Unfortunately, many vaccine proponents appear to be more concerned with forestalling “misconceptions” and “erroneous conclusions about cause and effect” than they are about preventing and identifying adverse events following vaccination. The result, as Dr. Puliyel argues, is that doctors who “naïvely” accept biased reports on vaccine safety “are losing the trust of the public and in the process…endangering public health.”
MIT Scientist Shows What Can Happen To Children Who Receive Aluminum Containing Vaccines
A claim often heard from the “pro-vaccination” community when it comes to linking vaccines to autism is that there is no evidence to substantiate those claims. This view is absolutely absurd and dangerous given the fact that a tremendous amount of scientific evidence exists and is available in the public domain that suggests some vaccines could possibly play a role in the development of autism.
When it comes to Monsanto’s glyphosate and other commonly used pesticides (as well as other environmental toxins), the science linking them to possible causes of autism (among many other diseases like Alzheimer’s and cancer) seems to be irrefutable and abundant. You can read more about that here:
Furthermore, we’ve had statements made from scientists who’ve had long careers with vaccine manufactures, pharmaceutical companies and health organizations like the CDC. We also have documents that indicate scientific fraud and manipulation of data when it comes to the adverse affects of vaccinations.(1)
Many examples of “funny business” within the food industry are also making their way into the public domain when it comes to the role of GMO’s and pesticides regarding their link with various diseases.
One example (out of many) is the fact that after a study was published showing that two Monsanto products, a genetically modified (GM) maize and Roundup herbicide were linked to cancer, kidney and liver damage, the journal that published the study appointed a former Monsanto scientist to decide which papers on GM foods and crops should be published.
Vaccine Truth On Radio New Zealand
On the morning of May 17, 2016, the spokesperson for the group 'No Forced Vaccines' Katherine Smith, spoke on RadioNZ's Morning Report about her warranted concerns regarding vaccines and suggested some healthy alternatives to vaccinating.
The story was under the heading on the RadioNZ website: "Concerns that people are being coerced into being vaccinated"
The study was then retracted, but has been republished in another journal since. (2) You can read more about (and view) this study here.
One thing we now know for sure is that the development of autism goes far beyond genetics.
The research suggesting that vaccines and glyphosate could possibly play a role in autism comes from various peer-reviewed scientific journals as well as independent research conducted by renowned scientists from all over the world. One of those scientists is Dr. Stephanie Seneff.
This article will focus mostly on her views regarding the connection between aluminum containing vaccines and autism. Information regarding autism and pesticides are linked in two articles above after the first paragraph.
Dr Seneff is a Senior Research Scientist at the MIT Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory. In recent years her research has focused specifically on biology, nutrition and health. Within the past three years alone she has written over a dozen papers in multiple medical and health related journals touching upon many modern day diseases such as Alzheimer’s disease and autism (among others). (3)
Vaccines and Autism
In North America alone, millions of doses of vaccines are administered to children every year. Various chemicals are added to the vaccines as preservatives, and theses chemical additives have been responsible for stirring up quite the controversy, especially within the past couple of years. One common substance found in vaccines is aluminum.
A paper published by Dr. Seneff in 2012 argues that severe adverse reactions to the chemicals (like aluminum) within vaccines can be associated with life threatening conditions that are associated with the heart and brain. The paper goes on to argue that there is a relationship between autism and acute adverse reactions to vaccinations.
Dr Seneff is not claiming that vaccines cause autism, she is simply claiming that children could be vulnerable to an acute reaction to an aluminum adjuvanted vaccine, which could cause neuronal damage. (4)
The study also outlines how autism is associated with elevated levels of nitrate in the blood stream, and that aluminum likely plays a role in in the excess nitrate production.
Furthermore, the study shows how abnormally high levels of aluminum were recently found in hair analyses of over half of 34 autistic children that were analyzed. Another important factor mentioned in her research is that autism is associated with abnormal immune function, and this (she argues) is enhanced by aluminum adjuvants in vaccines. (4)
In summary, the paper argues that autism develops as a result of a deficiency in the supply of cholesterol sulfate to stabilize the colloidal suspension system of the blood.
Cholesterol sulfate supply is maintained by nitrate levels “acting in the epidermis, the endothelium, and the suspended blood cells, and that it requires the substrates cholesterol and sulfur, as well as sunlight, to provide the necessary activation energy for the reaction.” (4) Vaccines come into the picture because:
“Aluminum-containing vaccines are problematic, not only because aluminum causes eNOS to switch from sulfate to nitric oxide production, but also because aluminum can induce necrosis of tissues at the vaccination site, emulating the process of tissue damage to the placenta in preeclampsia. In both cases, the release ofmitochondrial DNA into the blood stream may trigger an acute autoimmune reaction.” (4)
The study concluded that:
“We have proposed in this paper a novel hypothesis for the underlying pathology that links autism, and extreme adverse reactions to vaccines. We would also recommend the elimination of aluminum as an adjuvant in vaccines.” (4)
“Aluminum is an experimentally demonstrated neurotoxin and the most commonly used vaccine adjuvant. Despite almost 90 years of widespread use of aluminum adjuvants, medical science’s medical understanding of their mechanisms of action is still remarkably poor.
There is also a concerning scarcity of data on toxicology and pharmacokinetics of these compounds. In spite of this, the notion that aluminum in vaccines is safe appears to be widely accepted.”(5)
- Dr. Chris Shaw, with the UBC Departments of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences and Experimental Medicine and the Graduate Program in Neuroscience
I’d also like to mention that experimental research clearly shows that aluminum in adjuvant form creates a risk for autoimmunity, long-term brain inflammation and subsequent neurological complications and may as a result have profound and widespread adverse health complications.(5)
Professor Christopher Shaw and Dr. Lucija Tomljenovic of UBC (in a recent study) also show that the more children receive vaccines with aluminum adjuvants, the greater their chance is of developing autism, autoimmune diseases and neurological problems later in life.
A demonstrated neurotoxin, Aluminum is the only approved adjuvant in the US. Its use presents the risk of brain inflammation, autoimmunity and other adverse health consequences.(6)
Just as a side note, it is known that aluminum accumulates in the brain and that this accumulation is associated with Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s diseases and with Gulf War Syndrome. (7)(8)
“Experimental research clearly shows that aluminum adjuvants have a potential to induce serious immunological disorders in humans. In particular, 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.”
A study published in the Journal Pediatrics found that:
“Aluminum is now being implicated as interfering with a variety of cellular and metabolic processes in the nervous system and in other tissues.” (source)
A Role for the Pineal Gland In Neurological Damage Following Aluminum Adjuvented Vaccination
The paper discussed above by Dr. Seneff is from 2012. In more recent news regarding Dr. Seneff, she recently presented more scientific research at the Third International Symposium on Vaccines in March 2014. It was part of the 9th International Congress on Autoimmunity.
As noted above, Dr. Seneff commonly makes the case that neurological brain diseases are a result of an insufficient supply of sulfate to the brain. She argues that systematic sulfate deficiency “may be the most important factor in many of the health issues facing us today.”
“One of the consequences of insufficient sulfate in the brain is that it impairs the brain’s ability to eliminate heavy metals and other toxins. To make matters worse, those same toxic metals also interfere with sulfate synthesis. The net result can be an accumulation of cellular debris.”
Some interesting studies have been done when it comes to Heparin Sulfate, which also plays a key role in fetal brain development, protecting against damaging free radicals. When it comes to autism and sulfate deficiency, intriguing evidence of what happens when heparan sulfate is deficient comes from both human and mouse studies of autism.
In one study, “mice engineered to have impaired heparan sulfate synthesis in the brain displayed all the classic features of autism, including sociocommunicative deficits and stereotypies.” (9) (animal testing is cruel, unnecessary and not needed anymore. There are alternative methods that now exist researchers can use to do their testing.)
Another study published in the Journal Behavioural Brain Research found that this type of deficiency exists in the subventricular zone of the lateral ventricles of four autistic people.
The authors concluded that this “may be a biomarker for autism, and potentially involved in the etiology of the disorder.” (10)
What Dr. Seneff is suggesting is that melatonin is a key factor in the delivery of sulfate to the brain. That sunlight exposure helps the pineal gland build up supplies of sulfate by the day, storing it in heparan sulfate molecules.
When the evening comes around, the pineal gland produces melatonin, and transports it as melatonin sulfate to several parts of the brain.
The significance here is that there is an association of autism with heparan sulfate depletion in the lateral and third ventricles, and the tip of the third ventricle is located within the pineal gland. (Source)
When everything is working how it’s supposed to be working, the pineal gland delivers sulfate to the third ventricle, among other parts of the brain. But when the brain is loaded with toxic chemicals, like aluminum, it hinders that process.
“In addition, melatonin not only transports sulfate but also is an outstanding antioxidant and binds toxic metals to help dispose of them. It may come as no surprise, then, that melatonin impairment has been implicated in autism.”
As far as aluminum goes, it’s a well known fact that it plays a role in various neurological diseases, and that it may disrupt the pineal glands ability to produce sulfate, which means the brain cannot cleanse itself of heavy metals and they just continue to accumulate.
“The pineal gland is particularly susceptible to aluminum and other heavy metals because it is not protected by the blood-brain barrier and has a very high blood perfusion rate.”
The pineal gland’s vulnerability to aluminum is illustrated in a 1996 paper showing that the concentrations of aluminum in the pineal gland were “consistently observed” and “markedly higher” than in other brain tissues examined (pituitary, cortex, and cerebellum) (11)
“Scientists are taking note of the fact that we live in an “age of aluminum,” with aluminum exposure occurring through vaccines as well as multiple other channels.
Moreover, although many experts would have us believe that the question of thimerosal and vaccine safety went away after federal agencies issued lukewarm recommendations to reduce its use as a vaccine preservative in the early 2000s, Dr. Seneff noted that thimerosal is still very much relevant.”
In summary, Dr. Seneff is pointing to the fact that many neurological diseases of the brain have a common origin, which includes an insufficient supply of sulfate to the brain. She is concluding that enhanced toxic metal exposure (aluminum) impairs the brains ability to detox itself and eliminate them.
As a result, these toxic metals interfere with sulfate synthesis, create a heparan sulfate deficency which in turn leads to autism (as mentioned and pointed out with the studies cited above.) (12)
I’d also like to mention that autism is comprised of a very large spectrum. Some of the ailments associated with diagnosis might not be ailments at all, but gifts that are in no way associated with vaccines.
On the other hand, I do believe in some cases, characteristics that are seen in some autistic children are the cause of various toxins from pesticides to vaccines, especially children who have a genetic make up that makes them more sensitive to these chemicals.
In some cases (I believe) it’s a result of these various toxins, and again, in other cases I believe it is a gift, and possibly an evolutionary step.
People To Be Allowed To Pick Their Own Gender Without Doctor's Diagnosis, Under UK Government Plans & American College Of Pediatrics Reaches Decision: Transgenderism Of Children Is Child Abuse August 30 2017 | From: Independent / BizPacReview / Various
The transitioning process will be streamlined to remove bureaucracy.
Equalities Secretary Justine Greening is to consult on the plans to reform gender identity laws
The Government is planning to reform gender identity rules to make it easier for people to choose their own gender in law.
Under plans being considered by ministers, adults will be able to change their birth certificates at will without a doctor’s diagnosis, while non-binary gender people will be able to record their gender as “X”.
Changes to the law will be consulted on and will ultimately be included in a planned Gender Recognition Bill, set to be published in the autumn.
Under current laws – established in 2004 – a person who wishes to transition must apply for a Gender Recognition Certificate. This requires a doctor's diagnosis of gender dysphoria and that someone spend two years of living as a member of the opposite gender.
The reforms were recommended by Parliament’s Women and Equalities Committee last year, which said that they were key to trans people being “treated equally and fairly”.
Plans for self-identification were included in the Labour manifesto, though not the Conservative one. The Gender Recognition Bill did not appear in the Queen’s Speech last month.
Suzanna Hopwood, a member of the Stonewall Trans Advisory Group, said:
“It’s vital that this reform removes the requirements for medical evidence and an intrusive interview panel, and finally allows all trans people to have their gender legally recognised through a simple administrative process.”
Equalities minister Justine Greening said:
“This Government is committed to building an inclusive society that works for everyone, no matter what their gender or sexuality, and today we’re taking the next step forward.
We will build on the significant progress we have made over the last 50 years, tackling some of the historic prejudices that still persist in our laws and giving LGBT people a real say on the issues affecting them.”
The announcement comes just days after Jeremy Corbyn urged the Conservatives to overhaul transgender rights.
On Wednesday Mr Corbyn said the current arrangements were "wrong" and that people should be allowed to self-identify.
American College Of Pediatrics Reaches Decision: Transgenderism Of Children Is Child Abuse
The American College of Pediatricians issued a statement this week condemning gender reclassification in children by stating that transgenderism in children amounts to child abuse.
“The American College of Pediatricians urges educators and legislators to reject all policies that condition children to accept as normal a life of chemical and surgical impersonation of the opposite sex. Facts – not ideology – determine reality.”
The policy statement, authored by Johns Hopkins Medical School Psychology Professor Paul McHugh, listed eight arguments on why gender reclassification is harmful.
1. Human sexuality is an objective biological binary trait: “XY” and “XX” are genetic markers of health – not genetic markers of a disorder.
2. No one is born with a gender. Everyone is born with a biological sex. Gender (an awareness and sense of oneself as male or female) is a sociological and psychological concept; not an objective biological one.
3. A person’s belief that he or she is something they are not is, at best, a sign of confused thinking. When an otherwise healthy biological boy believes he is a girl, or an otherwise healthy biological girl believes she is a boy, an objective psychological problem exists that lies in the mind not the body, and it should be treated as such.
4. Puberty is not a disease and puberty-blocking hormones can be dangerous. Reversible or not, puberty-blocking hormones induce a state of disease – the absence of puberty – and inhibit growth and fertility in a previously biologically healthy child.
5. According to the DSM-V, as many as 98% of gender confused boys and 88% of gender confused girls eventually accept their biological sex after naturally passing through puberty.
6. Children who use puberty blockers to impersonate the opposite sex will require cross-sex hormones in late adolescence. Cross-sex hormones (testosterone and estrogen) are associated with dangerous health risks including but not limited to high blood pressure, blood clots, stroke and cancer.
7. Rates of suicide are twenty times greater among adults who use cross-sex hormones and undergo sex reassignment surgery, even in Sweden which is among the most LGBQT – affirming countries.
8. Conditioning children into believing a lifetime of chemical and surgical impersonation of the opposite sex is normal and healthful as child abuse.
The left, as one might expect, reacted swiftly with claws fully extended.
Think Progress described the American College of Pediatricians as a “hate group masquerading as pediatricians.”
The Huffington Post said that “Once again, Paul McHugh has used the ever more tarnished name of Johns Hopkins to distort science and spread transphobic misinformation.”
McHugh, who formerly served as Johns Hopkins’ psychiatrist in chief, issued an opinion last year stating the transgenderism is a “mental disorder” and sex change is a “medical impossibility.”
The statement was also signed by Drs. Michelle A. Cretella, M.D., president of the American College of Pediatricians, and Quentin Van Meter, M.D., the organization’s vice president.
Google Will Help Diagnose Your Clinical Depression: It’s Wonderful August 29 2017 | From: JonRappoport
In my work-in-progress, The Underground, here is what I wrote about Google: “They’re clever, I’ll give them that. They’re saying you can search them for any information in the world, but they’re really searching you.”
Google has decided it’s not doing enough to lead us into a better world. So now it’s going to enter the field of psychiatry.
“Offering a medically validated, anonymous screening questionnaire for clinical depression if you search for information on the condition. This won’t definitively indicate that you’re clinically depressed, to be clear, but it will give you useful information you can take to a doctor.”
“Google and others are determined to fight fake news, and they know that the consequences of false or incomplete medical information could be serious. If you need help, they want to be sure you get the appropriate support.”
Let’s see if I can help Google fight false or incomplete medical information. For example, be aware that there is no defining lab test for clinical depression.
No blood test, no urine test, no saliva test, no brain scan, no genetic assay.
Committees of psychiatrists sit down and look at unscientific menus of human behavior, lump certain behaviors together, and arbitrarily label them “clinical depression.”
Therefore, any Google questionnaire is simply going to feed into that trough of pseudoscience. That’s all.
Then, of course, there are the drugs that come with a diagnosis of depression. Drugs like Prozac, Paxil, Zoloft. I’ll help Google fight “incomplete medical information” in this area as well.
In 2004, Dr. Peter Breggin, eminent psychiatrist, expert witness in court trials, and author of Toxic Psychiatry, wrote the following about these drugs. I suggest paying close attention:
“On March 22  the FDA issued an extraordinary ‘Public Health Advisory’ that cautioned about the risks associated with the whole new generation of antidepressants including Prozac and its knock offs, Zoloft, Paxil, Luvox, Celexa, and Lexapro, as well as Wellbutrin, Effexor, Serzone, and Remeron.
The warning followed a public hearing where dozens of family members and victims testified about suicide and violence committed by individuals taking these medications.”
“…In the debate over drug-induced suicide, little attention has been given to the FDA’s additional warning that certain behaviors are ‘known to be associated with these drugs’ including ‘anxiety, agitation, panic attacks, insomnia, irritability, hostility, impulsivity, akathisia (severe restlessness), hypomania, and mania’.”
“From agitation and hostility to impulsivity and mania, the FDA’s litany of antidepressant-induced behaviors is identical to that of PCP, methamphetamine and cocaine - drugs known to cause aggression and violence. These older stimulants and most of the newer antidepressants cause similar effects as a result of their impact on a neurotransmitter in the brain called serotonin.”
“For more than a decade, I have documented in books and scientific reports how this stimulation or activation profile can lead to out-of-control behavior, including violence…”
“As a psychiatrist and as a medical expert, I have examined dozens of cases of individuals who have committed suicide or violent crimes while under the influence of the newer antidepressants such as Prozac, Zoloft, Paxil, Luvox and Celexa. In June in South Carolina, Christopher Pittman will go on trial for shooting his grandparents to death while they slept. Chris was twelve when his family doctor started him on Zoloft.
Three weeks later the doctor doubled his dose and one week later Chris committed the violent acts. In other cases, a fourteen-year-old girl on Prozac fired a pistol pointblank at a friend but the gun failed to go off, and a teenage boy on Zoloft beat to death an elderly woman who complained to him about his loud music. A greater number of cases involve adults who lost control of themselves while taking antidepressants.
In at least two cases judges have found individuals not guilty on the basis of involuntary intoxication with psychiatric drugs and other cases have resulted in reduced charges, lesser convictions, or shortened sentences.”
“The FDA includes mania in its list of known antidepressant effects. Manic individuals can become violent, especially when they are thwarted, and they can also ‘crash’ into depression and suicidal states. They can carry out elaborate but grandiose and doomed plans.
One clinical trial showed a rate of 6% manic reactions…on Prozac. None developed mania on a sugar pill [placebo]. Even in short-term clinical trials, 1% or more of depressed adults develop mania compared to a small fraction on the sugar pill.”
“Unfortunately, there are also risks involved with stopping antidepressants. Many can cause withdrawal reactions that last days and sometimes longer, causing some patients to feel depressed, suicidal or even violent. Stopping antidepressants should be done carefully and with experienced clinical supervision.”
“…the FDA and the medical profession must forthrightly educate potential patients and the public about the sometimes life-threatening risks associated with the use of antidepressant medications.”
Here is the kicker. Google can do anything it wants to with the information in this article, the one you’re now reading. It can lower its ranking.
Google can control the flow of information.
Given that Google has that kind of power, I strongly suggest caution when it touts its own “depression questionnaire.” It’s not only rigging the system, it is the system.
How To Kill a Whole Lot of People: Scripps Scientists Publish How They Made H7N9 Virus More Transmissible August 28 2017 | From: ActivistPost
In 2014, a moratorium was placed on federally funded research which involved making flu viruses more lethal.
The moratorium was placed after heated debate generated by research published by a Netherlands team, headed up by Ron Fouchier.
Fouchier’s research had produced a strain of H5N1 which was able to go airborne, thus greatly enhancing its ability to spread. Fouchier focused on the transmission of the disease among ferrets, which are the lab stand-in for people.
Now, scientists in California have published research concerning enabling the human-to-human transmission of the bird flu virus H7N9. This virus strain is of concern to scientists as it has already infected 1500 people and killed 40% of them. H7N9 has not been known, however, to spread easily from human contact.
The article explaining the three genetic changes which need to be made to transform H7N9 into a virtual pandemic agent was published on June 15, 2017 in the journal PLOS Pathogens.
According to Scripps biologist Jim Paulsen, as quoted in an NPR article, “As scientists we’re interested in how the virus works. We’re trying to just understand the virus so that we can be prepared.”
The NPR article quotes Paulsen as stating he wants next to test the mutated strain on ferrets.
Reuters reported on a number of scientists who were enthusiastic about the Scripps findings. Reuters quoted immunology expert Fiona Culley, who stated that “This study will help us to monitor the risk posed by bird flu in a more informed way, and increasing our knowledge of which changes in bird flu viruses could be potentially dangerous will be very useful in surveillance.”
Reuters also quoted virologist Wendy Barclay. “These studies keep H7N9 virus high on the list of viruses we should be concerned about,” she said. “The more people infected, the higher the chance that the lethal combination of mutations could occur.”
Not all the scientists interviewed were happy about the research. When posed with the question of scientists making the genetic changes in the actual H7N9 virus, David Relman, a Stanford professor of microbiology and immunology, was quoted by NPR as stating, “I would be very hesitant, were they to want to do that. In fact, I would be reluctant to have them do that.”
What are the chances that this research may be used for nefarious purposes?
Since 2001, the US government has poured over $100 billion dollars into what was initially called “Biodefense” but has euphemistically been renamed “Health Security.”
Many of these programs are dual-use; that is to say the research can be used for either protection or weaponization. Scientists argue that it is necessary to first create the weapon (in this case a pandemic agent) in order to research the cure.
However, the US’s record of straightforwardness surrounding her “Biodefense” or “Health Security” programs has been abysmal. The limp-wristed investigation into the anthrax mailings of 2001, in which federal investigators neglected or refused to consider any lab but Fort Detrick as the locus for mailing the anthrax spores - which killed five and sickened over a dozen - resulted in the probable culprit at US Army’s Dugway Proving Ground getting a “Get out of Jail Free” card.
It was less than two years ago when Dugway was caught sending live anthrax through the mail to labs, worldwide. Initially, it was thought that nine labs received the live anthrax. The number soon expanded and it was ultimately admitted that 575 separate shipments of live anthrax had gone out in the span of a decade.
The official excuse, “We didn’t know our deactivating equipment wasn’t working!” was suspect, given numerous earlier reports that the equipment was faulty.
It has also come to light that the US has been leading the UN around by its virtual nose and providing false information both to the Biological Weapons Convention and also to the 1540 Committee concerning its “Biodefense” programs.
The reality is that the sort of research that delves into how to make H7N9 spread easily and efficiently among humans is the kind of research that should raise substantial alarm. According to sources in the US government, the moratorium on publishing this type of research is soon to be lifted.
Shortly, anyone with two specimen vials to rub together may very well be able to surf the Web and learn how to create a worldwide plague. And in our current technocracy, with its worship of science as an inherent good, there just doesn’t seem to be much concern about this.
In 1998, Secretary of State Madeleine Albright said,“Iraq is a long way from [America], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risk that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face. And it is a threat against which we must and will stand firm.”
We never found those weapons in Iraq. In our zeal to protect ourselves from bogeymen and “rogue states,” we may well have become the very threat that we feared.
Just as an everyday atlas can orient you to the roads, borders, and landmarks that constitute your external world, we hope this Vitamin Atlas can help you navigate your internal world.
The GOOD Wellness Project is an eight-month collaboration with Walgreens and Vitamin Angels, in support of the #100MillionReasons initiative to bring vital micronutrients to 100 million malnourished children across the globe by 2017. In order to gain clarity and raise awareness about health and well-being, we are diving into vitamins, alternative medicine, the effects of the environment on our body systems, and more, to provide a deeper understanding of what it looks like to live a healthy, well-balanced life.
Glyphosate Herbicide And Toxic Heavy Metals Act Like "Binary Weapon" To Destroy Kidneys & Four Popular Companies Who Own The Medical Treatments For The Diseases Their Products Cause August 20 2017 | From: NaturalNews / WakingTimes
New research out of Sri Lanka has demonstrated a toxicological aspect of glyphosate that many scientists and laymen alike have overlooked or never even investigated.
Besides its inherent toxicity, glyphosate, the primary herbicide chemical used in Monsanto's Roundup formula, actually makes other toxins and heavy metals more damaging to the body than they otherwise would be on their own.
During the same year that Sri Lankan President Maithripala Sirisena announced a ban on the import and use of glyphosate due to its nephrotoxicity, researchers from Rajarata University and California State University Long Beach determined that glyphosate amplifies the way heavy metals pollute and disrupt normal bodily functions, including the normal function of the kidneys.
C. Jayasumana and his team, who conducted previous research on glyphosate, are trying to get to the bottom of an epidemic of SAN, or Sri Lankan Agricultural Nephropathy, that has been affecting Sri Lankan paddy farmers at an ever-increasing rate since 1994, which is right around the time glyphosate was introduced.
Earlier research pegged both arsenic and cadmium exposure as factors in this deadly endemic disease, which manifests as tubulo-interstitial type nephropathy.
For their study, the team collected urine samples from patients with SAN living in the Padavi-Sripura region of the country, one of the locations where SAN rates have reached epic proportions.
They then compared these samples to those collected from two sets of control groups, one with healthy participants from the same region, and another with participants living in another part of the country.
After analyzing all the samples for 19 different heavy metals as well as the presence of glyphosate, the team learned that heavy metal contamination was particularly problematic in the endemic region and specifically amplified in those who were also exposed to glyphosate. In other words, participants with glyphosate in their systems also had higher-than-normal levels of heavy metals.
"People in disease endemic areas [are] exposed to multiple heavy metals and glyphosate," the study reports. "Results are supportive of toxicological origin of SAN that is confined to specific geographical areas ... multiple heavy metals and glyphosates may play a role in the pathogenesis."
"Heavy metals excessively present in the urine samples of patients with SAN are capable of causing damage to kidneys. Synergistic effects of multiple heavy metals and agrochemicals may be nephrotoxic."
Glyphosate Directly Associated with Kidney Damage, as Evidenced by Higher Creatinine Levels
Levels of creatinine, the waste product left over from the production and use of creatine in muscle metabolism, were also found to be substantially higher in participants exposed to glyphosate.
Creatinine levels in the body generally level out at around two percent under healthy circumstances, but in the participants who were contaminated with glyphosate and heavy metals, creatinine levels were much higher.
Elevated levels of creatinine are indicative of impaired kidney function or kidney disease, which suggests that glyphosate, heavy metals, or more likely a combination of both are causative factors in impaired kidney function and kidney disease, as demonstrated in the study.
"Epidemiological studies have shown a strong association between exposure to heavy metals and the prevalence of chronic kidney disease (CKD)," the authors explain in their paper, which was published in the journal BMC Nephrology.
"We measured glyphosate in urine because two authors ... have formulated a hypothesis that incriminates glyphosate and heavy metal complexes as a causative factor for SAN."
Dr. Stephanie Seneff from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) has conducted her own research on this subject and reached similar conclusions. Be sure to check out her findings and solutions at the following link.
Four Popular Companies Who Own The Medical Treatments For The Diseases Their Products Cause
Listed below are four lethal connections between Big Pharma and some of our most popular consumer products, of which all consumers deserve to be made aware.
Nestlé is the world’s largest food & beverage corporation, owning more than 2,000 brands in 191 countries. The vast majority of Nestlé’s profits come from dairy-centric products. Some of their most popular brands include Gerber Baby, Nesquik Chocolate Milk, Toll House, Kit Kat, Crunch Bar, Hot Pockets, DiGiorno, Lean Cuisine, and Dreyer’s Ice Cream.
Nestlé also owns the pharmaceutical company Prometheus Therapeutics and Diagnostics, whose message to doctors is: “Prometheus is your partner in helping patients with chronic digestive disorders live active, healthy lives.”
Celiac disease is one of today’s most prevalent and lucrative digestive disorders, estimated to affect 1 in 100 people worldwide.
In fact, regarding the global rise in celiac disease prevalence, prominent celiac researcher Dr. Detlef Schuppan declared: “The amount of gluten ingested does not explain it.”
When a corporation so heavily profits from the commercial use of dairy, a well-known digestive irritant, while also profiting from prescribing treatments for the side effects of improper digestion, that is a major conflict of interest. If we continue to pay Nestlé $92.3B per year, watch celiac cases continue to skyrocket - even amidst all the new gluten-free options.
Johnson & Johnson and Janssen Pharmaceuticals
The main ingredient of Johnson & Johnson’s (JNJ) baby powder is talcum powder, or talc. Several studies have linked frequent usage of talc in the genital region to pelvic inflammation and an increased risk of ovarian cancer.
Ovarian cancer patients are recommended to have 50ml injected once a month for at least 4 monthly cycles. So, 50ml of Doxil, the monthly dosage, costs $5,516, and if repeated for 4 monthly cycles, as recommended, the total cost of Doxil treatment is $22,064.
In 2017, about 22,000 women in the U.S. will receive a new diagnosis of ovarian cancer, and about 14,000 U.S. women will die from ovarian cancer. Ovarian cancer is ranked 5th among all cancer deaths in women, making it the most lethal form of cancer of the female reproductive system.
Today, an American woman’s risk of developing ovarian cancer during her lifetime is around 1 in 75, and her chances of dying from ovarian cancer is around 1 in 100.
When we multiply the 22,000 thousand new U.S. cases of ovarian cancer per year by the $22,000 cost of a round of Doxil chemo, this comes out to a $484 million per year opportunity for JNJ. It should now be evident why Johnson & Johnson shouldn’t be allowed to sell talcum-laced baby powder while also selling ovarian cancer chemo treatments.
Merisant is owned by MacAndrews and Forbes, who also own vTv Therapeutics. vTv Therapeutics is a biopharmaceutical company engaged in the clinical-stage discovery and invention of treatments, primarily for Alzheimer’s disease and Type 2 Diabetes, as well as central nervous system diseases, metabolic disorders, inflammation, and cancer.
Now, one of Equal Sweetener’s main ingredients is aspartame.
Should we really continue to allow the people who so massively profit from selling aspartame-laced Equal Sweetener the opportunity to also own and sell the pharmaceuticals that deal with the side-effects of aspartame consumption?
Hearthside Food Solutions and 21st Century Oncology
Hearthside Food Solutions is the United States’ largest independent bakery, and the global food industry’s leader in the full-service contract manufacturing of processed grain-based foods and snacks, including baked goods, granola bars, snack bars, energy bars, cookies, crackers, pretzels, croutons, and breadcrumbs.
21st Century Oncology is a leading cancer-care service provider across multiple modalities, including colorectal, breast, uterine, and testicular cancers, and was also named the world’s largest radiation oncology provider, operating 179 global radiation centers, including 143 locations in 17 U.S. states.
While most people already know that eating processed grains is unhealthy, some might not be aware of the high correlation between the consumption of processed, simple carbs with certain types of cancer development, such as prostate, colorectal and uterine cancers, while on the contrary, choosing healthy, complex carbs like legumes and leafy greens is correlated with a significant reduction in the risk for breast, colorectal, and prostate cancers.
Even the ultra-conservative American Cancer Society states on its website that “Food processing may alter foods in ways that might affect cancer risk. An example is the refining of grains, which greatly lowers the amount of fiber and other compounds that may reduce cancer risk.”
Should we really continue to allow the global leaders of processed grain-based foods and snacks the ability to also own the world’s largest tumor radiation company?
What Parents Should Know About EMFs And WiFi & 5G Is An International Health Crisis In The Making August 17 2017 | From: ActivistPost / ActivistPost / Various
EMFs (electromagnetic frequencies) and RFs (radio frequencies) contribute to Electrosmog; both frequencies affect and compromise the human organism, especially children’s.
I’ve been a consumer health researcher since the late 1970s. I was one of the few healthcare professionals to learn and to be concerned about vaccine adverse events in the 1980s, since either doctors I knew or those I worked with began hearing Moms’ heart-wrenching stories of how their infants were damaged by vaccines and had not been the same since.
However, for how harmful vaccines are for virtually castrating the immature immune system of an infant and/or toddler, there is something equally as harmful, if maybe not worse, which just about everyone thinks is perfectly safe. What I’m talking about is microwave technology wavelengths that enable all the smart phones, Apps and other high tech devices and games most people “buy into and love,” plus accept as “safe.” Nothing can be further from the authentic scientific facts.
There are several particulars I think you ought to know. The information is imperative to understanding health problems and issues, which, unfortunately, can stem from and/or be caused by constant EMF exposures, especially at low levels.
1. All smart and/or microwave tech gadgets ‘safety’ parameters are based on World War II science and thermal effects. None consider non-thermal radiation wave length adverse health effects.
2. Any electronic device that can send and/or receive voice, data, graphics, etc. emits RFs. Cell phones, iPhones, Wi-Fi, routers, baby monitors, are significant devices emitting RFs. Those devices operate in the 2-3-4 GHz (gigahertz) range, which are more problematic or harmful especially to children.
3. Why are children more vulnerable to EMFs/RFs? Kids’ bodies and organs are still developing; the brain until around 22 years of age. All human bodies contain between 60 to 70% water with the brain and heart containing higher percentages, i.e., 73% and the lungs contain about 83%. Therefore, children’s smaller, less developed bodies and tissues are more vulnerable to RF exposure, especially from Wi-Fi in school and at home. Microwaves vibrate water.
Water and microwaves: Water molecules contain three atoms and so can vibrate in a number of different ways. When microwaves pass through water the water molecules absorb some of the microwave energy and as a result they twist and turn, writhing around, as the radiation passes by.
Think of Wi-Fi using this analogy: Wi-Fi is like leaving your microwave oven on, operating at high power with the oven door left open. Now think one such analogy and device for every room in your house, if your house is not hard-wired for safe Wi-Fi, but you use routers.
4. Keep all high tech, smart appliances away from the use by children, especially cell phones for those who are young.
5. No cell phones, TV, computers, electronic games in a child’s bedroom. Never allow anyone to sleep with a cell phone on the bed, clasped in their hand or under a pillow. Fried brains, anyone?
6. At night, turn off circuit breakers to bedrooms, if need be, to get away from AMI Smart Meters sending EMFs with dirty electricity or sinusoidal harmonics pulsing over copper wiring inside your bedroom walls, thousand times faster than the 60Hz wiring is built to carry. Those sinusoidal waves radiate out 6 to 8 feet and have been documented as interfering with the brain’s production of melatonin, which occurs during sleep at night when the body is in the recuperative/repair stage of its 24 hour circadian rhythm cycle.
7. The Schumann Resonance is the hertz frequency at which the human body resonates or vibrates electromagnetically, which is 7.83Hz. Humans basically are electromagnetic beings. That is confirmed by medical tests that measure brain, heart and muscle activity. However, EMFs/RFs coming off microwave technology appliances are in the thousands, if not hundreds of thousands times faster ranges, therefore, contributing constant stresses to all bodily functions, especially the brain and central nervous system.
Click on the image above to view a larger version in a new window
8. EMFs/RFs affect children on the Autism Spectrum leading to higher anxieties, plus more confusion. Therefore, exposure should be eliminated from all sources and appliances.
9. High tech reliance is a newly-acquired human addiction, which has psychologists worried about the younger generations and how they are being affected negatively, socially and emotionally.
10. Study a comprehensive chart of the Electromagnetic Spectrum to understand how various smart appliances are rated. Cell phones frequency ranges are from 3KHz to 300 GHz.
Because of such extreme overuse and addictions to iPhones, smart phones and cell phones, tech providers now want to install 5G microwave antennas right outside your front porch on a pole.
5G has not been tested for safety, as far as I know, and it can be assumed the U.S. Federal Communications Commission automatically will approve it as ‘safe’ as they have approved all other frequencies based upon the erroneous ICNIRP (Internal Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection) principle that there are no EMF/RF wavelengths as non-thermal radiation waves, just thermal or heat effects, which comes from World War II radar research days.
It’s 2017; how far behind the scientific times does the microwave industry have to stay to hoodwink everyone, like the tobacco industry did until the 1964 Surgeon General’s Report on Smoking and Health.
11. In April of 2017, an Italian court ruled a work-related use of a mobile phone caused an executive to develop a benign brain tumor. Slowly awareness is coming into the high tech microwave world of legal law suits. However, microwave industry associations’ science is flawed and their products and services are compromising to human health.
12. There’s a terrific cartoon-like infomercial on the Internet about how utility companies Smart Meters will collect and sell your personal use data and information to unknown third parties for marketing purposes without your knowledge and/or consent. High tech created the algorithm “Onzo,” which tracks your every appliance usage. Google O-N-Z-O smart meter algorithm and watch what you don’t know come to reality.
13. One Hertz (Hz) equals one cycle per second. One kilohertz (KHz) is equivalent to one thousand cycles per second. One megahertz (MHz) equals one million cycles per second. A Gigahertz (GHz) is a frequency equal to one billion hertz or cycles per second.
Microwaves are a specific category of radio waves that loosely can be defined as radiofrequency energy at frequencies ranging from 1 GHz to 30 GHz.
14. When an individual’s body biology and biochemistry have been assaulted and saturated for too long by EMFs/RFs and they no longer can tolerate living in the sea of electrosmog from EMFs/RFs. They become electromagnetically hypersensitive (EHS) or idiopathic environment intolerant (IEI), as some medical doctors diagnose the syndrome, which has become more prevalent due to all the smart tech appliances and AMI Smart Meters. 26% of USA citizens are EHS; 19% of Swedish; 27% of Danish and 32% of German citizens are EHS.
16. The FCC safety guidelines say you should not be subjected to a field of 600 microwatts per centimeter squared for more than 30 minutes! A microwatt is equal to one-millionth of a watt. However, no one has factored in the cumulative total number of microwatts from all EMF/RF sources, so that the FCC safety guideline basically is way off the mark, I say. Those figures are based on outdated science. Updated safety guidelines have to be recalculated for 24/7/365 exposures for how humans use microwave tech gadgets:
a. wearing a live cell phone on your person;
b. exposure to Wi-Fi for 6 hours a day, 5 days a week in a school classroom or at your place of employment;
c. AMI Smart Meters pulses and non-thermal exposures coming over inside-house-wall-wires from sinusoidal harmonics thousands times faster than the 60Hz wiring is built to withstand and deliver. Isn’t that both fire and health hazards?
17. Lastly, Lloyd’s of London and Swiss Re, two major insurance companies of the world, will not cover medical expenses incurred due to electromagnetic radiofrequency radiation (EMR), i.e., cell phones, Wi-Fi, cell towers, antennas, DAS network coverage, Internet of Things (IoT), devices, smart meters, etc. What does that tell you?
18. The country of Russia apparently has denied 5G rollout and is planning on using fiber optic cables to deliver Internet to everyone - the safest way possible, but not in the USA or with the FCC!
Now I’d like to share information I consider important to know and was generated by independent AMI Smart Meter researchers in California.
The findings are based upon what they found investigating an Itron AMI Smart Meter output measurements: RF/EMF readings drop from 8,000 to 15,000 microwatts per square meter at 2 to 3 feet away from the meter, and down to 300 microwatts per square meter, or less, at ten feet away.
That information indicates the importance of putting distance between you and an AMI Smart Meter and the use of shielding, if you cannot keep an analog meter.
An analog meter is one that has 5 clock-like dials and a disk that spins. There is an AMR Meter electric companies started installing in the 1980s which reads your usage and sends it to the utility to provide a billing, and no meter reader comes around to read your meter.
The Automatic Meter Reader (remote meter reading) meter looks very similar to an AMI Smart Meter - both are digital in design. The AMR can send information only one way and does not send dirty electricity pulses onto your house wires every 15 seconds or so looking for appliances to hook up with, monitor, surveil and report back to whomever.
Proper and correct shielding methods can be taken, but you have to do your research to see what will work for you and your family.
According to the California researchers’ work I’ve accessed, they report a reading below 10 microwatts per meter squared to be safe except for the most electromagnetically-sensitive individuals, a category which many ASD children unfortunately fall into. From my research, I say having no AMI Smart Meter exposure is the safest of all.
Furthermore, those researchers state the most important achievement for shielding against EMFs/RFs is not to have microbursts of radio waves with a few hundred microwatts per meter squared pulsing into your sleeping areas day and night every ten to fifteen seconds, which AMI Smart Meters pulse.
Please remember you never want to sleep with the head of your bed against the wall near or against the electric AMI Smart Meter wall because of the inevitable magnetic field exposure all AMI Smart Meters emit within four feet in all directions.
People living in apartment complexes or condominiums need to check out where the AMI Smart Meter ‘banks’ are located, usually dozens of meters on one wall area, exponentially increasing the EMF/RF outputs. Stay away from them!
Here are some quick references to make note of:
A. The Smart Meter Guard is a fine wire mesh that encircles the smart meter on sides and front that is grounded to the metal box upon which the smart meter is mounted.
B. Less EMF is an EMF shielding business whose phone number is 888-537-7363. They can provide information how to shield your indoor living and work space from a smart meter.
C. Safe Living Technologies is a retailer of shielding fabrics to protect against sources of RF. The company is run by an engineer and building biologist, Rob Metzinger. Their phone number is 519-240-8735.
D. Use plug-in shut off switches, available online or at some local hardware stores.
E. If you turn off the electric breakers to your bedrooms, make certain you have battery-operated smoke detectors installed in each bedroom.
F. Shielding also can be achieved by using Finemet and Cobaltex fabric from Less EMF (see B above) to create a safe room, such as a bedroom or sleeping area. That may be particularly helpful in apartment buildings where high frequency transient voltage comes from circuits in walls.
G. If you can, it is best to invest in what’s called an electrosmog meter, a device which gives readings in your home for appliances and AMI Smart Meters.
H. Here are the names of the top ten names of vendors to the “Smart Grid”:
Here’s a suggestion to consider: Have a qualified electrician install a circuit breaking wall switch for each bedroom of your home so that at night while you sleep, the hot wires to your outlets that surround your room are shut off.
This way you’re not sleeping within what is known as a dirty electrical circuit field that fluctuates above 60 cycles. That type of spike disturbance keeps human life and frequency patterns off kilter.
Here are some of the common sources of dirty electricity:
Light dimmer switches
Computers and laptops that plug in
Printers and scanners
Fluorescent lights and tubes (CFLs)
Solar power installations
Music Entertainment Systems
Video game consoles
Smart meters and smart appliances
Wi-Fi routers and modems
Battery chargers for cell phones, etc.
Blenders and mixers
Dirty electricity can be measured by using a GS or STETZERiZER® Microsurge Meter.
Using a Microsurge meter and installing a collection of STETZERiZER® Filters is a means by which your electricity can be rendered ‘safer’.
I’d like to leave you with this information, which was emailed to me by a registered radiologic technologist:
"Why are these companies allowed to affix radiation emitting devices to our homes, which expose peeps 24/7 with non-ionizing radiation, which btw…is probably way more damaging because of the radiation being on the “low level side” on the radiation spectrum... these add way up and above, highly, regulated, radiation! exposures.”
Unfortunately, that’s what we have to deal with because of our addictions to microwave-run technologies and gadgets, plus an apparent regulatory disregard for non-thermal radiation science documenting numerous health harms.
5G Is An International Health Crisis In The Making
Recently, I came across one of the most comprehensive articles about 5G and the problems it will create for humankind (and all of creation) if and/or when 5G is rolled out across nations around the globe, which I thought my readers ought to know about.
I contacted the author, Canadian Mr. Jerry Flynn, a retired captain, and asked his permission to use it verbatim in an article I would submit. Mr. Flynn graciously gave his full permission. So, not wanting to waste readers’ time, I submit
“5G” Wireless Technology Should be Banned! Wireless Radiation Violates Human Rights and the Nuremburg [sic] Code of Ethics!
Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada (ISEDC) needs to realize that the general public are becoming aware of the long history of corruption in the USA, which, shamefully, spilled over into Canada and other Western countries in/or around the 1970s.
Evidence of this can be seen in the following: In 1961, US President Eisenhower warned Americans to be on guard against the emergence of a corrupt US military-industrial complex (M-I-C), but too few people heeded him.
In 1968, US President Johnson, in his State of the Union Address, promised to protect the American people from the EMF (electro-magnetic field) radiation emitted by TV sets and other electronic equipment etc.! He subsequently signed into law the Radiation Control for Health and Safety Act.
In 1971, US President Nixon’s own radiation Management Advisory Panel warned him that the levels of ELF (extremely low frequency)/RF (radio frequency) EMF radiation then present in the USA may already be biologically significant, that the nation’s entire population might be at risk, especially if future generations are considered!
In 1995, US President Clinton released a Memorandum stating: “Transmitter masts should not be sited on schools or near residential areas”!
In 2004, US Senator, John McCain (who just underwent surgery to remove a brain tumor) stated that:
"We have compelling evidence that there is an incestuous relationship between the defense industry and defense officials that is not good for America.”
In 2010, US President Obama’s own Cancer Advisory Panel identified the risk to children and adolescents from wireless radiation as the most pressing problem!
Today, in 2017, ISEDC needs to be aware of the declassified 1976 US Defense Intelligence Agency document, which exposes what prompted – and continues to cause – today’s unparalleled corruption:
1. The US military’s determination to remain the most powerful (i.e., technologically advanced) in the world; and,
2. Technology-based industries, such as electric power generation and wireless and telecommunications are encouraged to explore and fully exploit new, commercial applications of wireless technology.
By doing so, those same industries, on which the US Defense Industry depends, ensure that the US military remains the most powerful on earth! Tragically for all Canadians, Health Canada and what was then Industry Canada saw fit in the 1970s to align themselves with the USA and, in so doing, sacrificed forever the health and safety of the people of Canada!
Today, the Government of Canada still appears to be more concerned with industrial growth (and remaining in step with the USA) than it is about protecting the health and safety of Canada’s population!
Non-industry scientists the world over are worried that the new, much higher microwave frequencies used in “5G” technology (28 GHz, 37-40 GHz, 64-71 GHz) have never been independently tested for safety, yet the Canadian telecom industry have already completed their initial tests to prove the technology! (US companies are already installing “5G” in some US states!)
Fifth Generation (“5G”) technology, if implemented nationally, would further irradiate the entire population of Canada – without their knowledge, comprehension of what is being done to them, or their consent! This would be yet another, even more serious violation of the Nuremburg [sic] Code and the most heinous crime imaginable!
While the current and all three previous generations of microwave technology also violate the Nuremburg [sic] Code, informed people fear that “5G” would prove to be mankind’s Armageddon - of Industry’s own selfish creation!
Governments of Canada are elected, in part, to protect the health, safety and well-being of its people. Yet, Health Canada (like the USA):
a. refuses to recognize/admit that there are harmful health and biological non-thermal effects caused by RF EMF radiation;
b. refuses to admit that today’s wireless RF products / devices / toys all emit pulsed non-thermal radiation;
c. refuses to acknowledge/admit that ELF (60 Hz) magnetic fields are harmful to people and other life forms;
d. refuses to recognize/admit that there is such a condition known as “EHS” (electro-hypersensitivity), which affects at least 3% of the world’s entire population; and,
e. has never once seen fit to make it mandatory for Industry to first prove – by qualified, non-industry scientists, replicating real-life applications – that the radiation emitted by wireless products / devices / toys is safe!
Nor has Health Canada ever imposed the Precautionary Principle – even though the WHO (World Health Organization) itself stated – in 2003 – that there was sufficient evidence to justify its application (for both ELF and RF EMFs)!
Nor did Health Canada ever attempt to halt in any way the provinces, who each saw fit to mandate their electric utilities to roll-out ‘smart’ meters – even when the WHO subsequently classified RF EMFs a Class 2B or ‘Possible’ carcinogen, in 2011!
Governments’ total disregard for the health and safety of the public has resulted in:
1. a growing host of disease epidemics, such as autism, ADHD, cancers, Alzheimer’s Disease, Parkinson’s Disease, ALS, and other diseases of the brain, central nervous system and immune system, which most people had not heard of before wireless technology appeared.
(These disease epidemics are now common in every jurisdiction on earth that has adopted wireless technology!);
2. homes / dwellings are now far more susceptible to break-ins, intrusions, and the threat of electrical fires – thanks to provincially-mandated ‘smart’ meters, which are unbelievably intrusive, invasive, hackable, fire-prone, and very expensive; and,
3. Canada’s National Security is now at greater risk than at any previous time in our history, thanks to Government’s irresponsible decision to incorporate ‘smart’ meters in Canada’s national power grid!
No national government today can be unaware of the ‘International EMF Scientists Appeal’! (Again, ‘EMF’ stands for electromagnetic field radiation, which is emitted by all wireless products / devices, but none more so than the insidious ‘smart’ meter, particularly when they are operational in what electric utilities call ‘meshed grid networks’!).
To date, the Appeal has been signed by at least 225 of the world’s leading EMF scientists – from 41 countries! Addressed to the Secretary General of the United Nations, to all UN-member countries and to the Director General of the WHO, it urges all leaders to: ‘Protect mankind and wildlife from EMFs and wireless technology’!
ISEDC also needs to heed that:
On July 25, 2017, CBC TV released the results of a 38-year study (1973-2011) showing that sperm production is down more than 50%! Doctors are very concerned and point to some potential causes. Inconceivably, not a single doctor mentioned ELF or RF EMF radiation as being possible causes! Such is the power of mainstream new media, which controls what people are allowed to see on TV, hear on the radio, or read in newspapers!
Although the public’s health is not ISEDC’s concern, you have a moral obligation to note that, in 1958, the Soviet Union set their safety level for continuous exposure to RF EMF radiation 1,000 times lower (0.01 mW/cm²) than that which the USA (10 mW/cm²) had set in 1955 – which was adopted by Canada and all Western countries! (See Ref. for the History of Exposure Safety Standards.)
Since 1969, the USA has known of the ‘Biologic Effects and Damages to Health” people suffer when exposed to non-thermal EMF. They knew then that non-thermal radiation causes cancer! American doctors also observed gastric bleeding, leukemia, chromosome damage, etc.
In 1988, the US Air Force acknowledged that RF-Microwave radiation has a biological (i.e., non-thermal) effect on living organisms (which includes people)! 
“Since 1998, there have been an enormous number of scientific studies demonstrating damage to biological systems by microwaves below the ICNIRP (and Canada’s Safety Code 6) limits!    
In 1999, Health Canada’s own Safety Code 6 (page 11) stated: “Certain members of the general public may be more susceptible to harm from RF and microwave exposure”!
EMF scientists around the world urge all governments to place a moratorium on “5G” technology!
In conclusion, the world’s only super power, the USA, is dependent on the American communications and electronics industry to ensure that it’s military has the most advanced communications, radar, weapons, and electronic warfare systems of any nation in the world.
Also, since 1955, the US military and its allies – including Canada – have publicly recognized only the thermal effects of RF-MW radiation! Yet Industry has exploited wireless technology – as it is now doing with “5G” technology – even though US military scientists, US non-industry scientists, Eastern-bloc scientists, and other scientists around the world have known for decades that there are hazardous non-thermal effects to microwave frequency radiation!
Prior to mobile technology, few people had heard of autism, ADHD, Alzheimer’s Disease, Parkinson’s Disease, brain tumors, leukemia and other cancers, etc., which today plague most countries of the world!
Scientists also believe that the overall total or cumulative amount of ‘electro-smog’ (emitted by all wireless products / devices / toys) that now saturates planet earth’s environment literally threatens life on earth, as we know it! It is a tragedy that EMF radiation is both invisible and indiscernible, because it is literally everywhere today, and no person and no living thing can escape it!
John Campbell interviews Dr. George Carlo on EMF Cell Phone Dangers (2006)
It is imperative for ISEDC to now heed that most of the EMF scientists in the world have called on ALL governments to place a moratorium on “5G” technology! Were ISEDC to unleash on a still largely unsuspecting, defenseless public the, as yet unknown, hazards of “5G” technology – on top of what the Canadian population is already enduring – would be obscene beyond belief!
Those doing so would be guilty of committing the most heinously cruel crime possible – knowingly and deliberately irradiating an entire national population – without the people’s knowledge, understanding or consent! Absolutely unimaginable!
Yet our national leaders continue to boast to the world that Canada is one of the world’s model democracies! As for Canada’s National Security, nothing is more exposed, more vulnerable or more indefensible than a wireless radio system!
Harvard Study Proves Unvaccinated Children Pose No Risk & Protests Across Europe As Countries Plan Compulsory Vaccination August 11 2017 | From: NeonNettle / MetaCenterChicago / Various
Dear Legislator: My name is Tetyana Obukhanych. I hold a PhD in Immunology. I am writing this letter in the hope that it will correct several common misperceptions about vaccines in order to help you formulate a fair and balanced understanding that is supported by accepted vaccine theory and new scientific findings.
Do unvaccinated children pose a higher threat to the public than the vaccinated?
It is often stated that those who choose not to vaccinate their children for reasons of conscience endanger the rest of the public, and this is the rationale behind most of the legislation to end vaccine exemptions currently being considered by federal and state legislators country-wide.
You should be aware that the nature of protection afforded by many modern vaccines – and that includes most of the vaccines recommended by the CDC for children – is not consistent with such a statement.
I have outlined below the recommended vaccines that cannot prevent transmission of disease either because they are not designed to prevent the transmission of infection (rather, they are intended to prevent disease symptoms), or because they are for non-communicable diseases.
People who have not received the vaccines mentioned below pose no higher threat to the general public than those who have, implying that discrimination against non-immunized children in a public school setting may not be warranted.
IPV (inactivated poliovirus vaccine) cannot prevent transmission of poliovirus (see appendix for the scientific study, Item #1). Wild poliovirus has been non-existent in the USA for at least two decades.
Even if wild poliovirus were to be re-imported by travel, vaccinating for polio with IPV cannot affect the safety of public spaces.
Please note that wild poliovirus eradication is attributed to the use of a different vaccine, OPV or oral poliovirus vaccine.
Despite being capable of preventing wild poliovirus transmission, use of OPV was phased out long ago in the USA and replaced with IPV due to safety concerns.
Tetanus is not a contagious disease, but rather acquired from deep-puncture wounds contaminated with C. tetani spores.
Vaccinating for tetanus (via the DTaP combination vaccine) cannot alter the safety of public spaces; it is intended to render personal protection only. While intended to prevent the disease-causing effects of the diphtheria toxin, the diphtheria toxoid vaccine (also contained in the DTaP vaccine) is not designed to prevent colonization and transmission of C. diphtheriae.
Vaccinating for diphtheria cannot alter the safety of public spaces; it is likewise intended for personal protection only. The acellular pertussis (aP) vaccine (the final element of the DTaP combined vaccine), now in use in the USA, replaced the whole cell pertussis vaccine in the late 1990s, which was followed by an unprecedented resurgence of whooping cough.
An experiment with deliberate pertussis infection in primates revealed that the aP vaccine is not capable of preventing colonization and transmission of B. pertussis (see appendix for the scientific study, Item #2). The FDA has issued a warning regarding this crucial finding.
Furthermore, the 2013 meeting of the Board of Scientific Counselors at the CDC revealed additional alarming data that pertussis variants (PRN-negative strains) currently circulating in the USA acquired a selective advantage to infect those who are up-to-date for their DTaP boosters (see appendix for the CDC document, Item #3), meaning that people who are up-to-date are more likely to be infected, and thus contagious, than people who are not vaccinated.
Among numerous types of H. influenzae, the Hib vaccine covers only type b. Despite its sole intention to reduce symptomatic and asymptomatic (disease-less) Hib carriage, the introduction of the Hib vaccine has inadvertently shifted strain dominance towards other types of H. influenzae (types a through f).
These types have been causing invasive disease of high severity and increasing incidence in adults in the era of Hib vaccination of children (see appendix for the scientific study, Item #4). The general population is more vulnerable to the invasive disease now than it was prior to the start of the Hib vaccination campaign.
Discriminating against children who are not vaccinated for Hib does not make any scientific sense in the era of non-type b H. influenzae disease.
Hepatitis B is a blood-borne virus. It does not spread in a community setting, especially among children who are unlikely to engage in high-risk behaviors, such as needle sharing or sex.
Vaccinating children for hepatitis B cannot significantly alter the safety of public spaces. Further, school admission is not prohibited for children who are chronic hepatitis B carriers.
To prohibit school admission for those who are simply unvaccinated – and do not even carry hepatitis B – would constitute unreasonable and illogical discrimination.
In summary, a person who is not vaccinated with IPV, DTaP, HepB, and Hib vaccines due to reasons of conscience poses no extra danger to the public than a person who is. No discrimination is warranted.
How Often do Serious Vaccine Adverse Events Happen?
It is often stated that vaccination rarely leads to serious adverse events. Unfortunately, this statement is not supported by science.
A recent study done in Ontario, Canada, established that vaccination actually leads to an emergency room visit for 1 in 168 children following their 12-month vaccination appointment and for 1 in 730 children following their 18-month vaccination appointment (see appendix for a scientific study, Item #5).
When the risk of an adverse event requiring an ER visit after well-baby vaccinations is demonstrably so high, vaccination must remain a choice for parents, who may understandably be unwilling to assume this immediate risk in order to protect their children from diseases that are generally considered mild or that their children may never be exposed to.
Can Discrimination Against Families Who Oppose Vaccines for Reasons of Conscience Prevent Future Disease Outbreaks of Communicable Viral Diseases, Such as Measles?
Measles research scientists have for a long time been aware of the “measles paradox.” I quote from the article by Poland & Jacobson (1994)
"Failure to Reach the Goal of Measles Elimination: Apparent Paradox of Measles Infections in Immunized Persons.”
Arch Intern Med 154:1815-1820: “The apparent paradox is that as measles immunization rates rise to high levels in a population, measles becomes a disease of immunized persons.”
Click on the image above to view a larger version in a new window
Low-responders are those who respond poorly to the first dose of the measles vaccine. These individuals then mount a weak immune response to subsequent RE-vaccination and quickly return to the pool of “susceptibles’’ within 2-5 years, despite being fully vaccinated.
Re-vaccination cannot correct low-responsiveness: it appears to be an immunogenetic trait.
Dr. Tenpenny ‘We’re Heading Towards Full Scale Medical Tyranny’
The proportion of low-responders among children was estimated to be 4.7% in the USA. Studies of measles outbreaks in Quebec, Canada, and China attest that outbreaks of measles still happen, even when vaccination compliance is in the highest bracket (95-97% or even 99%, see appendix for scientific studies, Items #6&7).
This is because even in high vaccine responders, vaccine-induced antibodies wane over time. Vaccine immunity does not equal life-long immunity acquired after natural exposure.
It has been documented that vaccinated persons who develop breakthrough measles are contagious.
In fact, two major measles outbreaks in 2011 (in Quebec, Canada, and in New York, NY) were re-imported by previously vaccinated individuals.
Taken together, these data make it apparent that elimination of vaccine exemptions, currently only utilized by a small percentage of families anyway, will neither solve the problem of disease resurgence nor prevent re-importation and outbreaks of previously eliminated diseases.
Is Discrimination Against Conscientious Vaccine Objectors the Only Practical Solution?
The majority of measles cases in recent US outbreaks (including the recent Disneyland outbreak) are adults and very young babies, whereas, in the pre-vaccination era, measles occurred mainly between the ages 1 and 15.
Natural exposure to measles was followed by lifelong immunity from re-infection, whereas vaccine immunity wanes over time, leaving adults unprotected by their childhood shots.
Measles is more dangerous for infants and for adults than for school-aged children. Despite high chances of exposure in the pre-vaccination era, measles practically never happened in babies much younger than one year of age due to the robust maternal immunity transfer mechanism.
Dr. Leonard Coldwell - Vaccines are used to Sterilize and Cull the Population
Dr. Leonard Coldwell talks about how vaccines don't work and how they are designed to cause infertility and wreck havoc on the human physiology.
The vulnerability of very young babies to measles today is the direct outcome of the prolonged mass vaccination campaign of the past, during which their mothers, themselves vaccinated in their childhood, were not able to experience measles naturally at a safe school age and establish the lifelong immunity that would also be transferred to their babies and protect them from measles for the first year of life.
Luckily, a therapeutic backup exists to mimic now-eroded maternal immunity. Infants, as well as other vulnerable or immunocompromised individuals, are eligible to receive immunoglobulin, a potentially life-saving measure that supplies antibodies directed against the virus to prevent or ameliorate disease upon exposure (see appendix, Item #8).
1. Due to the properties of modern vaccines, non-vaccinated individuals pose no greater risk of transmission of polio, diphtheria, pertussis, and numerous non-type b H. influenza strains than vaccinated individuals do, non-vaccinated individuals pose virtually no danger of transmission of hepatitis B in a school setting, and tetanus is not transmissible at all;
2. There is a significantly elevated risk of emergency room visits after childhood vaccination appointments attesting that vaccination is not risk-free;
3. Outbreaks of measles cannot be entirely prevented even if we had nearly perfect vaccination compliance; and
4. An effective method of preventing measles and other viral diseases in vaccine-ineligible infants and the immunocompromised, immunoglobulin, is available for those who may be exposed to these diseases.
Taken together, these four facts make it clear that discrimination in a public school setting against children who are not vaccinated for reasons of conscience is completely unwarranted as the vaccine status of conscientious objectors poses no undue public health risk.
Tetyana Obukhanych, PhD
Tetyana Obukhanych, PhD, is the author of the book Vaccine Illusion. She has studied immunology in some of the world’s most prestigious medical institutions.
She earned her PhD in Immunology at the Rockefeller University in New York and did postdoctoral training at Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA and Stanford University in California.
Dr Tetyana Obukhanych, Ph.D. - Natural Immunity and Vaccination
Dr Tetyana Obukhanych is the author of Vaccine Illusion: How Vaccination Compromises Our Natural Immunity and What We Can Do to Regain Our Health. In her book, she presents a view on vaccination that is radically different from mainstream theories.
Dr Tetyana Obukhanych, has studied immunology in some of the world's most prestigious medical institutions. She earned her PhD in Immunology at the Rockefeller University in New York and did postdoctoral training at Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA. and Stanford University in California.
Protests Across Europe As Countries Plan Compulsory Vaccination
Protests took place around Europe as some EU countries, including Austria, consider making vaccinations compulsory.
Austrians protested in Vienna on May 6th, and Poles did likewise on June 3rd, which last year the Czechs designated ‘Light a Candle’ day to commemorate the lives lost or damaged because of vaccination.
The Italians demonstrated against compulsory vaccination last March, and protests have also taken place in Croatia - where vaccines are already mandatory.
The European Forum for Vaccine Vigilance, which is helping to co-ordinate the protests, describes compulsory vaccination as a breach of fundamental human rights. It says that “a number of European countries” are considering making childhood vaccination mandatory.
Asset, a pro-vaccine group, does not believe that a compulsory programme is the way to go. The group says that vaccination levels are not necessarily higher in countries where it is compulsory; Latvia, for instance, doesn’t have a higher take-up rate than other Baltic states even though parents are legally obliged to have their children vaccinated.
Instead, some countries fine parents who don’t get their children vaccinated, while others make attendance at school more difficult. In France, two parents were jailed after refusing to have their child vaccinated. To find out more about the protests, go to: www.efvv.eu
Trust needs to be won back by the pharmaceuticals, the vaccine skeptics do not trust that industry, here’s a classic example of why, in a leaked pharma memo about a specific vaccine, the pharmaceutical essentially admits that bad batches of this vaccine cause SIDS and then recommends to split the batches up so as you don’t get a cluster of deaths in the same area which can easily be traced to the vaccine.
nstead of fixing the vaccine, he was happy to continue sending out the dangerous vaccine as long as they don’t be caught.
The so-called ‘anti-vaccine’ side gets misrepresented by the mainstream media, they are constantly setting up an ‘anti-vaccine’ strawman and then knocking it down with industry marketing and propaganda disguised as science.
I’ve been involved in this for many years, going deep into the research and the debate, the major problems are that vaccines aren’t being tested properly, nor is the schedule, unvaccinated people aren’t being studied, vaccines are being studied one at a time, not using real controls in safety studies, not looking long-term. In 2017 vaccines are a shot in the dark!
The only way to work out what’s going on is to do the research for yourself, as the system and media has been setup by Big Pharma. That means going to the independent experts, not Big Pharma vaccine patent holder (i.e. making millions from vaccines) ‘experts’ like Paul Offit who the mainstream media go to.
I’ve posted up presentations from the independent experts below, anyone who watches those all the way through will never vaccinate again.
The media cannot be trusted, they have been compromised, and unfortunately vaccine science has also been compromised, as the doctors below will confirm for you.
My friend lost his baby brother from vaccine induced SIDS. The parents took them to court and got a tiny bit of compensation. During the trial the head of the company admitted that he has not vaccinated his own children.
So why the fuck should we. Producing vaccines that are a cure all would conflict severely with their interests in manufacturing drugs to manage symptoms and make people better once they are sick.
The elite rarely vaccinate, even many Hollywood celebrities are avoiding vaccination, somehow they know too much, they know how the game works.
Vaccines are essentially a way of placing taxes on the herd, taxes which get paid to Big Pharma, the price of the vaccine is just the tip of the iceberg, the real money they make is in the lifelong diseases which vaccines regularly induce, highly profitable diseases which leave people as customers to Big Pharma for life.
Many doctors I’ve spoken too don’t vaccinate their own children, but they are forced by the system to continue pushing the madness on others.
Related Articles: Italy in the Crosshairs for Mandatory Vaccination Strategy in Europe
Jeff Bezos Wants To Be Your Medication Dealer: Amazon Goes All-In With Big Pharma To Take Over The Drug Retail Industry & The Myth Of Drug Expiration Dates August 11 2017 | From: NaturalNews / ProPublica
Is anyone surprised? Amazon.com, led by globalist profiteer Jeff Bezos - also the owner of the America-hating fake news rag known as the Washington Post - now wants to be your medication dealer.
According to numerous media reports, Bezos plans to take over the pharmaceutical retailing industry and turn Amazon.com into an elaborate drug dealing machine that earns $50 billion more each year while poisoning the world with toxic prescription medications.
While literally tens of millions of people have been killed by Big Pharma’s deadly drugs since the year 2000, Jeff Bezos thinks that number isn’t high enough and wants to profit from the mass chemical poisoning of humanity now taking place at a “Holocaust” scale. (See PharmaDeathClock.com for a real-time tally of the deaths.)
This the problem with unbridled capitalism combined with quack science medicine: The mass poisoning of the people has become so incredibly profitable that every retailer wants a piece of the lucrative pie.
Meanwhile, all their own children are dying from statin drugs, toxic chemotherapy or suicide-inducing antidepressant medications.
While stupidly thinking they are all getting rich from the “business” of sickness treatment, the sad truth is that they are poisoning themselves and their children with toxic chemicals that also wreak tremendous damage on the environment due to pharmaceutical runoff.
Watch for Amazon.com to soon start pushing psychiatric medications, deadly statin drugs, toxic chemotherapy drugs (modeled after chemical weapons), addictive opioids and the mass drugging of children for profit. This is the new Amazon, where Prime delivery means that flying DRONES will deliver all the chemical medications needed to turn the population into biological drones.
Thanks to Jeff Bezos, America will soon become a zombieland of drugged-out, stupefied mass consumers who are oblivious to reality.
Oh wait… that already happened.
The Myth Of Drug Expiration Dates
Hospitals and pharmacies are required to toss expired drugs, no matter how expensive or vital. Meanwhile the FDA has long known that many remain safe and potent for years longer.
The box of prescription drugs had been forgotten in a back closet of a retail pharmacy for so long that some of the pills predated the 1969 moon landing. Most were 30 to 40 years past their expiration dates - possibly toxic, probably worthless.
Comment: This article come from a mainstream source which is clearly not up-to-speed on the dangers associated with pharmaceutical drugs. However, the article highlights another corrup aspect of the pharmaceutical industry in terms of how they boost profits by mandated "expiry" dates...
But to Lee Cantrell, who helps run the California Poison Control System, the cache was an opportunity to answer an enduring question about the actual shelf life of drugs: Could these drugs from the bell-bottom era still be potent?
Cantrell called Roy Gerona, a University of California, San Francisco, researcher who specializes in analyzing chemicals. Gerona had grown up in the Philippines and had seen people recover from sickness by taking expired drugs with no apparent ill effects.
"This was very cool," Gerona says. "Who gets the chance of analyzing drugs that have been in storage for more than 30 years?"
The age of the drugs might have been bizarre, but the question the researchers wanted to answer wasn't. Pharmacies across the country - in major medical centers and in neighborhood strip malls - routinely toss out tons of scarce and potentially valuable prescription drugs when they hit their expiration dates.
Gerona and Cantrell, a pharmacist and toxicologist, knew that the term "expiration date" was a misnomer. The dates on drug labels are simply the point up to which the Food and Drug Administration and pharmaceutical companies guarantee their effectiveness, typically at two or three years.
Pharmacist and toxicologist Lee Cantrell tested drugs that had been expired for decades. Most of them were still potent enough to be on the shelves today
But the dates don't necessarily mean they're ineffective immediately after they "expire" - just that there's no incentive for drugmakers to study whether they could still be usable.
ProPublica has been researching why the US health care system is the most expensive in the world. One answer, broadly, is waste - some of it buried in practices that the medical establishment and the rest of us take for granted.
Experts estimate such squandering eats up about $765 billion a year - as much as a quarter of all the country's health care spending. What if the system is destroying drugs that are technically "expired" but could still be safely used?
In his lab, Gerona ran tests on the decades-old drugs, including some now defunct brands such as the diet pills Obocell (once pitched to doctors with a portly figurine called "Mr. Obocell") and Bamadex. Overall, the bottles contained 14 different compounds, including antihistamines, pain relievers and stimulants. All the drugs tested were in their original sealed containers.
David Berkowitz, assistant director of the pharmacy at Newton-Wellesley Hospital, said he questions the validity of many drug expiration dates
The findings surprised both researchers: A dozen of the 14 compounds were still as potent as they were when they were manufactured, some at almost 100 percent of their labeled concentrations.
"Lo and behold," Cantrell says, "The active ingredients are pretty darn stable."
Cantrell and Gerona knew their findings had big implications. Perhaps no area of health care has provoked as much anger in recent years as prescription drugs. The news media is rife with stories of medications priced out of reach or of shortages of crucial drugs, sometimes because producing them is no longer profitable.
Tossing such drugs when they expire is doubly hard. One pharmacist at Newton-Wellesley Hospital outside Boston says the 240-bed facility is able to return some expired drugs for credit, but had to destroy about $200,000 worth last year.
A commentary in the journal Mayo Clinic Proceedings cited similar losses at the nearby Tufts Medical Center. Play that out at hospitals across the country and the tab is significant: about $800 million per year. And that doesn't include the costs of expired drugs at long-term care pharmacies, retail pharmacies and in consumer medicine cabinets.
After Cantrell and Gerona published their findings in Archives of Internal Medicine in 2012, some readers accused them of being irresponsible and advising patients that it was OK to take expired drugs. Cantrell says they weren't recommending the use of expired medication, just reviewing the arbitrary way the dates are set.
"Refining our prescription drug dating process could save billions," he says.
But after a brief burst of attention, the response to their study faded. That raises an even bigger question: If some drugs remain effective well beyond the date on their labels, why hasn't there been a push to extend their expiration dates?
It turns out that the FDA, the agency that helps set the dates, has long known the shelf life of some drugs can be extended, sometimes by years.
In fact, the federal government has saved a fortune by doing this.
For decades, the federal government has stockpiled massive stashes of medication, antidotes and vaccines in secure locations throughout the country. The drugs are worth tens of billions of dollars and would provide a first line of defense in case of a large-scale emergency.
Maintaining these stockpiles is expensive. The drugs have to be kept secure and at the proper humidity and temperature so they don't degrade. Luckily, the country has rarely needed to tap into many of the drugs, but this means they often reach their expiration dates.
Though the government requires pharmacies to throw away expired drugs, it doesn't always follow these instructions itself. Instead, for more than 30 years, it has pulled some medicines and tested their quality.
The idea that drugs expire on specified dates goes back at least a half-century, when the FDA began requiring manufacturers to add this information to the label. The time limits allow the agency to ensure medications work safely and effectively for patients.
To determine a new drug's shelf life, its maker zaps it with intense heat and soaks it with moisture to see how it degrades under stress. It also checks how it breaks down over time. The drug company then proposes an expiration date to the FDA, which reviews the data to ensure it supports the date and approves it. Despite the difference in drugs' makeup, most "expire" after two or three years.
"One pharmacist says he sometimes takes home expired over-the-counter medicine from his pharmacy so he and his family can use it.."
Once a drug is launched, the makers run tests to ensure it continues to be effective up to its labeled expiration date.
Since they are not required to check beyond it, most don't, largely because regulations make it expensive and time-consuming for manufacturers to extend expiration dates, says Yan Wu, an analytical chemist who is part of a focus group at the American Association of Pharmaceutical Scientists that looks at the long-term stability of drugs.
Most companies, she says, would rather sell new drugs and develop additional products.
Pharmacists and researchers say there is no economic "win" for drug companies to investigate further. They ring up more sales when medications are tossed as "expired" by hospitals, retail pharmacies and consumers despite retaining their safety and effectiveness.
Industry officials say patient safety is their highest priority. Olivia Shopshear, director of science and regulatory advocacy for the drug industry trade group Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, or PhRMA, says expiration dates are chosen "based on the period of time when any given lot will maintain its identity, potency and purity, which translates into safety for the patient."
That being said, it's an open secret among medical professionals that many drugs maintain their ability to combat ailments well after their labels say they don't.
The federal agencies that stockpile drugs - including the military, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Department of Veterans Affairs - have long realized the savings in revisiting expiration dates.
In 1986, the Air Force, hoping to save on replacement costs, asked the FDA if certain drugs' expiration dates could be extended. In response, the FDA and Defense Department created the Shelf Life Extension Program.
Each year, drugs from the stockpiles are selected based on their value and pending expiration and analyzed in batches to determine whether their end dates could be safely extended. For several decades, the program has found that the actual shelf life of many drugs is well beyond the original expiration dates.
A 2006 study of 122 drugs tested by the program showed that two-thirds of the expired medications were stable every time a lot was tested. Each of them had their expiration dates extended, on average, by more than four years, according to research published in the Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences.
Some that failed to hold their potency include the common asthma inhalant albuterol, the topical rash spray diphenhydramine, and a local anesthetic made from lidocaine and epinephrine, the study said.
But neither Cantrell nor Dr. Cathleen Clancy, associate medical director of National Capital Poison Center, a nonprofit organization affiliated with the George Washington University Medical Center, had heard of anyone being harmed by any expired drugs. Cantrell says there has been no recorded instance of such harm in medical literature.
The drugs kept in emergency crash carts at Newton-Wellesley Hospital, outside Boston, Massachusetts, often expire before they can be used and must be thrown away
Marc Young, a pharmacist who helped run the extension program from 2006 to 2009, says it has had a "ridiculous" return on investment. Each year the federal government saved $600 million to $800 million because it did not have to replace expired medication, he says.
An official with the Department of Defense, which maintains about $13.6 billion worth of drugs in its stockpile, says that in 2016 it cost $3.1 million to run the extension program, but it saved the department from replacing $2.1 billion in expired drugs. To put the magnitude of that return on investment into everyday terms: It's like spending a dollar to save $677.
"We didn't have any idea that some of the products would be so damn stable - so robustly stable beyond the shelf life," says Ajaz Hussain, one of the scientists who formerly helped oversee the extension program.
Hussain is now president of the National Institute for Pharmaceutical Technology and Education, an organization of 17 universities that's working to reduce the cost of pharmaceutical development. He says the high price of drugs and shortages make it time to reexamine drug expiration dates in the commercial market.
"It's a shame to throw away good drugs," Hussain says.
Some medical providers have pushed for a changed approach to drug expiration dates - with no success. In 2000, the American Medical Association, foretelling the current prescription drug crisis, adopted a resolution urging action.
The shelf life of many drugs, it wrote, seems to be "considerably longer" than their expiration dates, leading to "unnecessary waste, higher pharmaceutical costs, and possibly reduced access to necessary drugs for some patients."
Citing the federal government's extension program, the AMA sent letters to the FDA, the US Pharmacopeial Convention, which sets standards for drugs, and PhRMA asking for a re-examination of expiration dates.
No one remembers the details - just that the effort fell flat.
"Nothing happened, but we tried," says rheumatologist Roy Altman, now 80, who helped write the AMA report. "I'm glad the subject is being brought up again. I think there's considerable waste."
At Newton-Wellesley Hospital, outside Boston, pharmacist David Berkowitz yearns for something to change.
On a recent weekday, Berkowitz sorted through bins and boxes of medication in a back hallway of the hospital's pharmacy, peering at expiration dates.
As the pharmacy's assistant director, he carefully manages how the facility orders and dispenses drugs to patients. Running a pharmacy is like working in a restaurant because everything is perishable, he says, "but without the free food."
Federal and state laws prohibit pharmacists from dispensing expired drugs and The Joint Commission, which accredits thousands of health care organizations, requires facilities to remove expired medication from their supply.
So at Newton-Wellesley, outdated drugs are shunted to shelves in the back of the pharmacy and marked with a sign that says: "Do Not Dispense." The piles grow for weeks until they are hauled away by a third-party company that has them destroyed. And then the bins fill again.
"I question the expiration dates on most of these drugs." Berkowitz says.
One of the plastic boxes is piled with EpiPens - devices that automatically inject epinephrine to treat severe allergic reactions. They run almost $300 each.
These are from emergency kits that are rarely used, which means they often expire. Berkowitz counts them, tossing each one with a clatter into a separate container, "… that's 45, 46, 47…" He finishes at 50. That's almost $15,000 in wasted EpiPens alone.
In May, Cantrell and Gerona published a study that examined 40 EpiPens and EpiPen Jrs., a smaller version, that had been expired for between one and 50 months. The devices had been donated by consumers, which meant they could have been stored in conditions that would cause them to break down, like a car's glove box or a steamy bathroom.
The EpiPens also contain liquid medicine, which tends to be less stable than solid medications.
Testing showed 24 of the 40 expired devices contained at least 90 percent of their stated amount of epinephrine, enough to be considered as potent as when they were made. All of them contained at least 80 percent of their labeled concentration of medication.
The takeaway? Even EpiPens stored in less than ideal conditions may last longer than their labels say they do, and if there's no other option, an expired EpiPen may be better than nothing, Cantrell says.
At Newton-Wellesley, Berkowitz keeps a spreadsheet of every outdated drug he throws away. The pharmacy sends what it can back for credit, but it doesn't come close to replacing what the hospital paid.
Then there's the added angst of tossing drugs that are in short supply. Berkowitz picks up a box of sodium bicarbonate, which is crucial for heart surgery and to treat certain overdoses.
It's being rationed because there's so little available. He holds up a purple box of atropine, which gives patients a boost when they have low heart rates. It's also in short supply. In the federal government's stockpile, the expiration dates of both drugs have been extended, but they have to be thrown away by Berkowitz and other hospital pharmacists.
The 2006 FDA study of the extension program also said it pushed back the expiration date on lots of mannitol, a diuretic, for an average of five years. Berkowitz has to toss his out. Expired naloxone?
The drug reverses narcotic overdoses in an emergency and is currently in wide use in the opioid epidemic. The FDA extended its use-by date for the stockpiled drugs, but Berkowitz has to trash it.
On rare occasions, a pharmaceutical company will extend the expiration dates of its own products because of shortages.
That's what happened in June, when the FDA posted extended expiration dates from Pfizer for batches of its injectable atropine, dextrose, epinephrine and sodium bicarbonate. The agency notice included the lot numbers of the batches being extended and added six months to a year to their expiration dates.
The news sent Berkowitz running to his expired drugs to see if any could be put back into his supply. His team rescued four boxes of the syringes from destruction, including 75 atropine, 15 dextrose, 164 epinephrine and 22 sodium bicarbonate.
Total value: $7,500. In a blink, "expired" drugs that were in the trash heap were put back into the pharmacy supply.
Berkowitz says he appreciated Pfizer's action, but feels it should be standard to make sure drugs that are still effective aren't thrown away.
"The question is: Should the FDA be doing more stability testing?" Berkowitz says. "Could they come up with a safe and systematic way to cut down on the drugs being wasted in hospitals?"
Four scientists who worked on the FDA extension program told ProPublica something like that could work for drugs stored in hospital pharmacies, where conditions are carefully controlled.
Greg Burel, director of the CDC's stockpile, says he worries that if drugmakers were forced to extend their expiration dates it could backfire, making it unprofitable to produce certain drugs and thereby reducing access or increasing prices.
The 2015 commentary in Mayo Clinic Proceedings, called "Extending Shelf Life Just Makes Sense," also suggested that drugmakers could be required to set a preliminary expiration date and then update it after long-term testing.
Government and its myriad regulatory agencies work diligently to prevent access to natural or alternative cancer treatments, and doctors and the mainstream media give the impression that the causes of cancer are a mystery.
In reality, one can significantly reduce the likelihood of getting cancer by making lifestyle changes, and according to a recently published study out of Canada found that the total proportion of cancer rates which can be attributed to lifestyle and environmental factors is quite high, nearing 41%.
Regarding the methods used in the study:
“We estimated summary population attributable risk estimates for 24 risk factors (smoking [both passive and active], overweight and obesity, inadequate physical activity, diet [inadequate fruit and vegetable consumption, inadequate fibre intake, excess red and processed meat consumption, salt consumption, inadequate calcium and vitamin D intake], alcohol, hormones [oral contraceptives and hormone therapy], infections [Epstein-Barr virus, hepatitis B and C viruses, human papillomavirus, Helicobacter pylori], air pollution, natural and artificial ultraviolet radiation, radon and water disinfection by-products) by combining population attributable risk estimates for each of the 24 factors that had been previously estimated."
The list above essentially outlines the wide range of personal choices we know can increase the risk of cancer, mainly pointing out that food causes cancer. Along with exercise, and common avoidable environmental factors, cancer is somewhat preventable.
“Overall, we estimated that 40.8% of incident cancer cases were attributable to exposure to the 24 factors included in the analysis (Table 2).
Tobacco smoking was responsible for the greatest cancer burden, accounting for an estimated 15.7% of all incident cancer cases (2485 cases), followed by physical inactivity and excess body weight, which were responsible for an estimated 7.2% and 4.3% of incident cancer cases, respectively.
All other exposures of interest were estimated to be responsible for less than 4.0% of incident cancer cases each."
Within this information is the revelation that so much of our food system works against good health. Perhaps the greatest secret here in all of this is the growing awareness of the negative affects that consumption of sugar has on human health.
In the face of such frightening statistical evidence on rising cancer rates, it is imperative to remember that the individual has more control over their health than the mainstream would have us believe.
‘A Bloody Disgrace’: Watch Jamie Oliver’s Video Message To The New Zealand Government On Sugar Tax
Incensed by the government’s absence from a conference on a proposed sugar tax, this week celebrity chef Jamie Oliver got stuck into the National Party. Watch the video below.
The Essex TV chef campaigned for a sugar tax on soft drinks in the UK and the levy is set to be introduced in 2018. A group of New Zealand scientists and doctors wants our government to introduce a similar tax to address our child obesity rates, but when the government, which has repeatedly ruled out the tax, refused to show up to the conference they enlisted Oliver to give the government some shit.
Read The Spinoff’s two part series for and against a sugar tax.
In a selfie video filmed in his garden on his 17th wedding anniversary, while wife Jools breastfed their baby son in the background, Oliver called the New Zealand government “a bloody disgrace” for their failure to front up.
“Hello you lovely people. Hi to all the people in New Zealand at the sugar tax symposium. Big up Gerhard for reaching out and finding me. How you got me I don’t know…
You’ve got a whole bunch of people in the room that can make a difference. You’ve got politicians there. Apart from the one, or any politician from your government. Which is a disgrace and disgusting. Because it is their job to listen to experts and listen to the public and react and debate internally whether they should make change.
Now guys New Zealand like Britain, has got some of the most obese children on the planet. It’s disgusting, it’s nuts. The world has changed in the last 40 years. All the data is there to justify logically, scientifically, and economically, why we should have a sugary drinks tax.
For us it wasn’t all sugar, it was sugary sweetened drinks. In New Zealand that is 26 percent of all sugar kids get from sugar sweetened drinks. It’s an industry that has come from nothing, to being prolific. Of course they should be taxed. Of course they are contributing to obesity and diet related disease. Of course they are, we all know it.
I spent a year and a half working with the British government to convince them and show them the data that they need a tax. Cameron didn’t want it, the Conservatives didn’t want it, and I got it through. I am here as hopefully hope. France is in. Portugal is in. Hungary is in. Ireland is in. Britain is in. Mexico is in. This is the new norm.
There is a little proviso. No one likes tax. Even when I told my own organisation that we were going to spend two years dedicated to curating a new tax they must have thought I was mad. This is not regressive this is progressive. This is not a tax that’s negative it’s a tax for good.
There is a proviso, you have to make sure that the money raised from this tax goes to elementary or primary schools in NZ. For sport, for food education right, to get kids understanding where food comes from and how it affects their body and then you will find it polls really well. In Britain this tax polled 75 per cent. Politicians in the room, activists, come together. Come together, this is new money! This is new money for the children of New Zealand.
Anyone that could debate this needs a slap. The science is there, the data is there, the measurements there. So today is a beautiful day. Thank you everyone in the room that has come together.
I know you would rather be doing different things, but you care about this. It looks like you are way more organised than we were, but we won guys, we won, we got it through. We got it through. It is now ratified, it is happening.
And here is the genius, it was never about the sugary drinks tax, it is not just about that. That is one of hundreds of things we need to do environmentally to make our countries less obesogenic for our children.
If you want to change health outcomes we have to change 100s of things, but this one thing, it’s not just new money, it’s not just lowering consumption of crap and promoting more milk and more water. It’s symbolic that government will step in when things go wrong.
We can’t spend 40 years learning like in tobacco, we can’t.
But what I have seen in Britain in four months is a complete reformulation of not just sugar but salt and fat in Britain. The sugary drinks tax has been a reformulation turbo charge. It’s amazing.
Have a great symposium.
This is my wife here, it’s our 17th anniversary today. Little [baby] River, having some milk – don’t even get me talking about breastfeeding cos you know it’s all connected.
Guys lots of love, have a brilliant week and go and kick some arse from your government. The fact they’re not there is a bloody disgrace, it’s an embarrassment, and they should not be entrusted with child health if they don’t turn up to your event.
God bless you. Go get it. New money. Kids. Hope. It’s all good.”
Pineal Gland: How To Detox The Part Of Your Brain That Controls Sleep, Aging And Your State Of Mind August 4 2017 | From: HealthyCures / Various
The importance of the detoxification of the pineal gland is he, even though you might not be aware of it.
This little gland is located in the middle of the brain, and its function is related to our physical and mental well-being, due to which it is often called “the third eye”.
Unfortunately, this gland is bombarded with numerous toxins due to the modern lifestyles we lead, the unhealthy foods we consume, and the stress we are daily exposed to. Therefore, it becomes hardened, calcified, and its function is impeded.
However, if you detoxify it, you will restore its function completely.
The pineal gland has the size of a pea and is located in the center of the brain. Its shape is similar to a small Pinecone. Its role is to secrete Melatonin, a chemical whose function is to regulate our sleeping patterns.
Yet, this strong antioxidant also slows down aging. Additionally, the pineal gland also secretes another hormone, serotonin, which is a neurotransmitter which maintains a balance of the mind and keeps us happy.
Scientists have still not confirmed this, but people claim that melatonin supplements create elevated feelings of empathy. Also, it has been hypothesized that the pineal gland produces DMT, a chemical linked to creativity, dreams, and hallucination. This explains its nickname “Third Eye”.
Decalcify the Pineal Gland
The pineal gland gets calcified as a result of the accumulation of toxins. The main culprit is Sodium Fluoride, which is found in most drinking water, and many kinds of toothpaste.
Other causes of calcification of the pineal gland include:
Most processed foods
Mercury (found in most fish)
Yet, these are the most effective ways to detoxify the pineal gland:
Activator X (Vitamin K1/K2)
This vitamin is manifested in two ways- K1 and K2. The first one is found in green leafy vegetables, while K2 is created by microflora in the intestines, and is found in foods like eggs yolks, chicken or goose livers, dairy from organically reared cows, fish roe, sauerkraut, fish oils (omega 3), and shellfish.
In a combination with vitamins A and D3, it eliminates calcium from arteries and the pineal gland and transfers it into the bones instead.
Studies have shown that iodine eliminates sodium fluoride through the urine. Yet, many people are deficient in it, so you should eat more iodine-rich foods, like seaweed, Yet, make sure you also consume calcium as it lowers its levels.
Garlic is one of the most powerful natural antibiotics, and it also detoxifies the pineal gland by dissolving calcium.
You should consume half a bulb every 2 days, and if its odor is too strong for you, soak it in some freshly squeezed lemon juice, or apple cider vinegar.
Apple Cider Vinegar
Raw apple cider vinegar is high in malic acid which detoxifies this gland, so you can add it to salads and enjoy its benefits.
Boron is another potent pineal gland detoxifier, and It removes fluoride from the body system, preventing further calcification.
Distilled water is the purest water form, so it washes away toxins and calcium deposits.
Yet, make sure you also consume minerals during this method.
Tamarind is commonly used in the Ayurveda, and it is made from the bark of the Tamarind Tree. It effectively eliminates fluoride through the urine. Tamarind is often added to some curries for its sweet/sour flavor and used in the preparation of teas and tinctures by steeping in hot water for 2/3 minutes.
The health of the pineal gland is of high importance for the overall health, as it improves the feelings of well-being and the sleep patterns.
You should perform a 4-5 day detox to cleanse it and support its function and make sure you reduce the intake of fluoride as much as possible.
The Secrets of the Pineal Gland
Are There Patents To Manipulate The Human Nervous System Using Electromagnetic Frequencies? August 2 2017 | From: ActivistPost
With all the “fake news,” propaganda and scares to taint impressionable minds with, one has to wonder is there any real news fit to print, to know or to do something with or about?
Well, I just happen to have been “gifted” with a website link “Justia Patents,” which details some of the patents and patents pending for inventions by Hendricus G. Loos that deal with manipulating the human nervous system by the use of electromagnetic fields!
Who is Hendricus G. Loos? According to the website “Quora,” Loos may be a fictitious name that does not belong to a person! Since 1978, Dr. Henry Loos, or Dr. Hank Loos, has been awarded 11 U.S. patents for devices that aim to manipulate the human nervous system. Some of the patents include:
USP# 3009080- Apparatus and method for generating and containing plasma having ultra high temperatures.
USP# 4245909- An optical instrument for measurement of particle size distribution.
USP# 6238333- Remote magnetic manipulation of nervous systems.
USP# 6091994- Pulsative manipulation f nervous systems.
USP# 5782874- Method and apparatus for manipulating nervous system.
USP# 6017302- Subliminal acoustic manipulation of nervous system.
USP# 6506148-Nervous system manipulation by electromagnetic fields from monitor.
All devices are used for Mind Control projects run by CIA or other intelligence agencies. A group of researchers (under the name Dr H Loos) were actually a group of hired professionals for researching and inventing such devices which could be developed and used for mass mind control, PSYOPS, behaviour modification later by CIA.  [CJF emphasis]
So, what’s this all about: fake news or real science? Who knows what the facts really are when vested interests probably want to keep confusion rank.
However, I revert back to the Justia website with its extensive listing of patents and patents pending, which indicate someone has patents for something that borders upon non-thermal radiation at low levels that can and does effectuate the human nervous system upon application of certain techniques granted under U.S. patents.
Here are some of the patents and information relating to Hendricus G. Loos as published at Justica:
In reading the above information, one has to question whether some of the patents are being used in various microwave technologies, smart gadgets and appliances, and possibly even with weather geoengineering.
Those patents confirm scientific information and applications, I think, which ought to be brought to the attention of all fifty state public utility commissions regarding electromagnetic frequencies; how their applications at various low hertz levels function; and their effects on the human organism especially since utility companies are exposing customers to electromagnetic frequencies from smart meters, which are making people sick, disoriented and electromagnetically hypersensitive at frequencies thousands times faster than the frequencies in the patents granted above.
If those patent low frequencies can cause various human biological reactions, what’s going on from EMFs in the gigahertz ranges, which AMI Smart Meters operate at?
One Hertz (Hz) equals one cycle per second. One kilohertz (KHz) is equivalent to one thousand cycles per second. One megahertz (MHz) equals one million cycles per second. A Gigahertz (GHz) is a frequency equal to one billion hertz or cycles per second. See what I mean?
One has to keep in mind the human body’s electromagnetic frequency range is 7.83 Hz!
Where’s the science proving AMI Smart Meters are safe for human exposure 24/7/365?
Significant Ongoing Decline In Sperm Counts Of Western Men & The Astounding Drop In Global Fertility Rates Between 1970 And 2014 August 1 2017 | From: ScienceDaily / BrilliantMaps / Various
A rigorous and comprehensive meta-analysis of data collected between 1973 and 2011 finds that among men from Western countries, sperm concentration declined by more than 50 percent, with no evidence of a 'leveling off' in recent years.
These findings strongly suggest a significant decline in male reproductive health that has serious implications beyond fertility and reproduction, given recent evidence linking poor semen quality with higher risk of hospitalization and death.
A rigorous and comprehensive meta-analysis of data collected between 1973 and 2011 finds that among men from Western countries, sperm concentration declined by more than 50%, with no evidence of a 'leveling off' in recent years.
These findings strongly suggest a significant decline in male reproductive health that has serious implications beyond fertility and reproduction, given recent evidence linking poor semen quality with higher risk of hospitalization and death.
In the first systematic review and meta-analysis of trends in sperm count, researchers from the Hebrew University-Hadassah Braun School of Public Health and Community Medicine and the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai report a significant decline in sperm concentration and total sperm count among men from Western countries.
The study is published today in Human Reproduction Update, a leading journal in the fields of Reproductive Biology and Obstetrics & Gynecology.
By screening 7,500 studies and conducting a meta-regression analysis on 185 studies between 1973 and 2011, the researchers found a 52.4 percent decline in sperm concentration, and a 59.3 percent decline in total sperm count, among men from North America, Europe, Australia and New Zealand who were not selected based on their fertility status. In contrast, no significant decline was seen in South America, Asia and Africa, where far fewer studies have been conducted.
The study also indicates the rate of decline among Western men is not decreasing: the slope was steep and significant even when analysis was restricted to studies with sample collection between 1996 and 2011.
Sperm & Males Dying In Western Countries
The elite are trying to destroy the fertility of western men.
We’ve been told that it was choice, careers and societal reasons behind the falling birth rates in Western Countries. The UN justified massive immigration 17 years ago in their plan to replace the people, the culture, the laws of Western Civilization with the third world.
Today, a massive study shows that in Western countries (alone) sperm rates have plunged — and men are also sicker and dying sooner.
The research was led by Dr. Hagai Levine, Head of the Environmental Health Track at the Hebrew University-Hadassah Braun School of Public Health and Community Medicine, Jerusalem, with Dr. Shanna H Swan, Professor in the Department of Environmental Medicine and Public Health at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, and an international team of researchers from Brazil, Denmark, Israel, Spain and the United States.
While declines in sperm count have been reported since 1992, the question has remained controversial because of limitations in past studies. However, the current study uses a broader scope and rigorous meta-regression methods, conservatively addresses the reliability of study estimates, and controls for factors that might help explain the decline such as age, abstinence time, and selection of the study population.
"Given the importance of sperm counts for male fertility and human health, this study is an urgent wake-up call for researchers and health authorities around the world to investigate the causes of the sharp ongoing drop in sperm count, with the goal of prevention," said Dr. Hagai Levine, the lead author and Head of the Environmental Health Track at the Hebrew University-Hadassah Braun School of Public Health and Community Medicine, in the Hebrew University of Jerusalem's Faculty of Medicine.
The findings have important public health implications. First, these data demonstrate that the proportion of men with sperm counts below the threshold for subfertility or infertility is increasing. Moreover, given the findings from recent studies that reduced sperm count is related to increased morbidity and mortality, the ongoing decline points to serious risks to male fertility and health.
"Decreasing sperm count has been of great concern since it was first reported twenty-five years ago. This definitive study shows, for the first time, that this decline is strong and continuing.
The fact that the decline is seen in Western countries strongly suggests that chemicals in commerce are playing a causal role in this trend," Dr. Shanna H Swan, a professor in the Department of Environmental Medicine and Public Health at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York.
While the current study did not examine causes of the observed declines, sperm count has previously been plausibly associated with environmental and lifestyle influences, including prenatal chemical exposure, adult pesticide exposure, smoking, stress and obesity.
Therefore, sperm count may sensitively reflect the impact of the modern environment on male health across the lifespan and serve as a "canary in the coal mine" signaling broader risks to male health.
Have Sperm Counts Declined? Definitely Yes, Says First-Ever Meta-Analysis on Trends in Sperm Count
In the first systematic review and meta-analysis of trends in sperm count, researchers from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem's Faculty of Medicine and the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai report a significant decline in sperm concentration and total sperm count among men from Western countries.
A rigorous and comprehensive meta-analysis of data collected between 1973 and 2011 finds that among men from Western countries who were not selected on the basis of their fertility status, sperm concentration declined by more than 50%, with no evidence of a “leveling off” in recent years.
These findings strongly suggest a significant decline in male reproductive health that has serious implications beyond fertility and reproduction, given recent evidence linking poor semen quality with higher risk of hospitalization and death. Research on causes of this ongoing decline and their prevention is urgently needed.
The Astounding Drop In Global Fertility Rates Between 1970 And 2014
The map below shows one of history’s most astounding global shifts; the drop in fertility rate between 1970 and 2014. The total fertility rate (TFR) is the average number of children born to each woman in a country. It’s important because, it’s an easy way to tell if a country is growing or not, excluding immigration/emigration.
A country’s population is stable when TFR is equal to replacement rates. These vary by country but globally work out to around 2.1 children per woman. The reason the replacement rate is slightly higher than 2 is not only do women need to replace themselves and the father but also to factor in children who die before reaching adulthood and women who die before the end of their child bearing years.
With that in mind, you can see that many countries in the world (all in dark blue) are now below replacement level including 3 of the 4 BRIC countries (China, Russia and Brazil), all of Europe (except France, Ireland and Turkey) along with Japan, Canada and Australia, among others.
This means that without immigration all these countries will see long term population decreases.
Globally the TFR has dropped from 4.45 in 1970 to around 2.5 in 2014. If the rate keeps falling, the world population will eventually stop growing and may actually start shrinking towards the end of the 21st century.
Here are several other interesting facts:
The Democratic Republic of the Congo, Central African Republic, Niger, Chad and South Sudan all experienced TFR increases between 1970 and 2014.
In 1970, only Finland and Sweden had TFR rates below 2.0 (Czech Republic and Croatia did as well, but were part of Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia respectively). By 2014 that number had risen to at least 72 countries.
The lowest TFR rate in 1970 was Finland at 1.8, but by 2014 Singapore had the lowest rate at just 0.8!
The highest rate in 1970 was Rwanda which had a TFR of 8.2. In 2014, Niger had the highest rate with 6.89 (Rwanda’s has fallen to 4.62).
In terms of absolute decreases the biggest drops have happened in Libya, Maldives, Kuwait, Qatar and Bangladesh.
In terms of relative decreases the biggest drops have occurred in St. Lucia, South Korea, United Arab Emirates, Brunei and Iran.
Finally the world’s two most populous countries have both seen their TFR drop significantly between 1970 and 2014. India’s dropped from 5.5 to 2.4 a 56% decrease, while China’s dropped from 5.5 to 1.6 a 71% decrease and well below replacement.
Fourteen Ways To Protect Yourself From The New World Order (NWO) Agenda August 1 2017 | From: WakeUpWorld
Desperate measures are indeed needed for desperate times. Big black totalitarian clouds loom on the horizon.
The price of ignorance towards the New World Order (NWO) agenda could be very costly. The psychopathic ruling elite own the banks, weapons, gold, drugs and oil, while having the politicians, police, military and mass media etc. in their pockets, and are further tightening that unrelenting grip on the control of our money, health, food, water, air, and all the related science and technology, for complete domination over the human populace.
Fall for any of its carefully cultivated illusions and you could end up broke, losing property, seriously ill, or even end up dead.
In response, this is my heartfelt advice on how to prepare for your survival in the unpredictable, not too distant (potential) future. Here are 14 ways to protect you, your family and friends from the escalating NWO agenda.
14 Ways to Protect Youself from the NWO Agenda
1. Stop Giving Attention to Corporate Sponsored News
Yes, there are a growing number of people who know this, but many still don’t fully understand: Any advantages of selecting one party over the other because of say, a policy in your favour or advantage, such as a tax cut, will only be a short-term payoff.
In the end, if you vote for one of the major parties then you’ll only have to suffer the far greater long-term cost of having chosen a party or so-called representative with connections to the ruling elite’s agenda.
Avoid junk food with its high sugar, salt and cheap/nasty trans-fats and chemical flavor enhancers which will not only not protect you from disease states — it will add to them, even causing depression!
Also, don’t cook food using high temperatures for too long. Extreme temperatures cause the nutritional value (vitamins and enzymes in particular) to denature and greatly reduces the food value. Keep the heat down!
7. Use Natural or Organic Home and Personal Care Products
Mercury amalgam fillings have been known to cause brain damage, lower IQ, contribute to depression and harbour disease-causing bacteria. See a biologic or holistic dentist to get them removed and replaced by safe alternatives such as Zirconium Implants (don’t use metal based or plastic BPA resins). Don’t support dentists who use mercury amalgam or fluoride.
Dental decay can be prevented with good nutrition, like for example using coconut oil as a mouthwash since it contains the antibacterial lauric acid.
12. Maintain Well-Stocked Supplies of Food and Water
In case of a crisis stock up with a few weeks’ supply of food and water in the hope that, by then, things would have died down with normal supply somewhat resumed.
Such a crisis could be a financial one, like a currency collapse, or a fake war, a staged attack (fake alien invasion perhaps, you never know?) or a HAARP (High Frequency Auroral Research Project) secret weather modification… etc used for inducing chaos by the ruling elite and their associates as an excuse to declare martial war on citizens.
In most cases, within three days of a ‘lock down’ (likely less if panic and rioting sets in) all purchasable food supplies will be gone.
Have sufficient physical cash on standby in case of emergency: You may want to consider converting some of your hard earned cash into gold or silver coins as a good investment.
Try looking at non-power grid alternative energy supplies to power up your home. How about solar panels or batteries or supplemental wind generators… etc? Electric vehicles would also not be a bad idea.
"Those who have the privilege to know, have the duty to act.”
- Albert Einstein
Wake up! Use this and other similar articles to spread the word to your family and friends. Get active. If you do nothing, you’ll be unprepared and risk suffering the awful consequences of the escalating NWO agenda.
In addition to these side-effects, it has now been discovered that while chemotherapy does kill cancer cells, it can also trigger cancer cells to disperse throughout the body triggering more aggressive tumors to develop in the lungs and other vital bodily systems.
"Many are given chemotherapy before surgery, but the new research suggests that, although it shrinks tumours in the short term, it could trigger the spread of cancer cells around the body.
It is thought the toxic medication switches on a repair mechanism in the body which ultimately allows tumours to grow back stronger. It also increases the number of ‘doorways’ on blood vessels which allow cancer to spread throughout the body."
In short, chemotherapy is now shown to in some cases increase the likelihood that cancer will spread throughout the patient’s body. The cancer cells are reacting to chemotherapy by dispersing throughout the body to look for new hosts.
"By studying the process of intravasation or entry of cells into the vasculature, Karagiannis et al. discovered that, in addition to killing tumor cells, chemotherapy treatment can also increase intravasation.
Groups of cells collectively known as tumor microenvironment of metastasis (TMEM) can serve as gateways for tumor cells entering the vasculature, and the authors discovered that several types of chemotherapy can increase the amounts of TMEM complexes and circulating tumor cells in the bloodstream."
Karagiannis discovered that mice exposed to chemotherapy saw an increase the number of cancer cells circulating throughout the body and lungs. This research finally offers a scientific explanation of why so many patients see their cancer spread into other parts of their bodies once chemo/radiation treatment begins.
The preferred mainstream cancer treatment has become a means of capitalizing on human suffering, and while it has long been suspected that chemo can do more harm than good, we now have research indicating that this is indeed the case.
Dr. Karagiannis’ study adds a very significant piece of the puzzle of why the contemporary model of cancer care should be abandoned in favor of natural treatments.
Chemotherapy Found To Spread Cancer Throughout The Body, Warn Scientists
Though conventional medicine claims to be winning the war against cancer, along with the holistic health community, we at Natural News have consistently been trying to expose one of the biggest frauds known in human history: CHEMOTHERAPY.
Brainwashed by doctors, oncologists, and the mainstream media, most cancer patients think their only hope for survival is chemotherapy. In America, treating cancer is BIG business. Since the cancer industry makes billions of dollars each year, a cure is not what they are after.
Did you know that the number one side effect of chemotherapy is cancer? Conventional cancer treatments not only fail miserably, they are also designed to make cancer patients sicker. Though chemotherapy may shrink the initial tumor(s), what is happening in the background is far more important. It is the one dark and criminal truth nobody seems to knows about.
A new study published in the journal Science Translational Medicine earlier this month proved what we have been saying for decades; conventional cancer treatments cause more cancer. A team of scientists at New York’s Albert Einstein College of Medicine has found compelling evidence that chemotherapy is only a short-term solution.
Eventually, the drugs will make you sick again, pushing patients towards a second round of expensive treatments. Clever money generating trick: Instead of helping patients to get rid of the disease, they temporarily put it on hold so they can take the dollars twice.
Chemotherapy Kills More Patients than Cancer Itself
The New York scientists explained that while shrinking the tumors, chemotherapy simultaneously opens new doorways for tumors to spread into the blood system, triggering more aggressive tumors which often result in death.
The researchers believe toxic chemo drugs switch on repair mechanisms in the body that allow tumors to grow back faster.
Furthermore, Dr. George Karagiannis, lead author of the study, and his team found that two common chemo drugs increased the number of “doorways” on blood vessels which allowed cancer cells to spread to other parts of the body.
The team also discovered that chemotherapy increased the number of cancer cells circulating the body and lungs of mice.
Though this study only investigated the effects of chemotherapy on breast cancer, the researchers are currently experimenting with other types of cancer to see if similar effects occur, reported The Telegraph.
Dr. Karagiannis noted that women receiving preoperative chemotherapy to treat breast cancer should be monitored to check if the cancer isn’t circulating or creating more possibilities to spread. He recommends taking a small amount of tumor tissue after a few doses of preoperative chemotherapy. If the markers are increased, the therapy should be terminated immediately.
This study is not the first to demonstrate the ways in which chemotherapy can trigger secondary or metastatic cancers. In 2010, researchers at the University of Alabama at Birmingham (UAB) Comprehensive Cancer Center and UAB Department of Chemistry were awarded a $805,000 grant from the U.S. Department of Defense Breast Cancer Research Program to investigate the question whether chemo encourages cancer to spread throughout the body.
Many studies later, we can no longer ignore the answer to that question. YES, patients are dying from chemotherapy, not cancer itself. It has been shown to not only cause secondary cancers but also accelerates tumor growth and causes cancer cells to become resistant to treatment.
Seventy Five Percent of Physicians and Scientists Would Refuse Chemotherapy for Themselves or Their Family
What does this number say about the effectiveness and risks of therapy? Do these people know more? And what is the mainstream media hiding from us?
It Was No Accident That Western Medicine Has Been Twisted Into A Tool Of The Mega Corporations
The American medical system is purposely used to keep the people sick and in debt.
Think about it. When your body is fighting cancer, the last thing it needs is more cancer-inducing, immune suppressing chemicals, right?
Though all scientists and doctors know that chemotherapy is pure poison and can make things worse, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) outlaws doctors from choosing non-chemical routes, such as vitamins, supplements, herbs, superfoods, and other natural cancer solutions, for their patients.
Over the past few years, one study after another has been coming out, linking chemotherapy to cancer. Yet authorities fail to make the healthy call. How much more proof do they need before they start to acknowledge that there are far better, less expensive real cures out there?
Geoengineering And Weather Modification Exposed June 30 2017 | From: ClimateViewer / Various
The most extensive research on Geoengineering and Weather Modification experiments worldwide, with articles, maps, and timelines to fully expose the hidden world of Weather Control.
This page is a table of contents for Jim Lee’s research on Geoengineering. All of the information on this page is backed up by references, feared by trolls and geoengineering lobbyists alike, and is the most accurate literature on who’s controlling your weather, why they are doing it, and where.
For the uninitiated, prepare yourself to be shocked. For you veterans of the Climate Engineering activism world, our articles, maps, and timelines will answer many of your burning questions and help you connect the dots.
As the media distributes pro-geoengineering propaganda in a political climate ruled by fear, the Lord’s of Weather (geoengineering lobbyist’s) are suggesting coating our skies with sulfur, aluminum, titanium, and diamond dust to block the sun and cool our planet.
While acknowledging that Geoengineering Solar Radiation Management will alter rainfall patterns worldwide and likely kill people, the Lord’s of Weather ignore the cold hard facts: after 60 years of cloud-seeding, nobody has ever produced any proof of its efficacy.
Billions of dollars are spent worldwide altering clouds with silver iodide and other chemical nano-particles despite the fact that cloud seeding likely does not work. Even worse, all of the separate cloud seeding programs worldwide could be altering our weather in dangerous ways where the butterfly effects of aggravated clouds destroy property and end lives, even the CIA is worried about weather warfare.
Despite 60 years of jet planes making clouds, aviation-induced cloudiness, persistent contrails, contrail cirrus, and aerosol-cloud interaction are barely understood with today’s best supercomputers and are not properly accounted for in IPCC models.
This active experiment goes on everyday, over your heads, with over 100,000 flights a day worldwide and zero accountability.
Space Weather Modification is also gaining more publicity. When upper atmospheric nuclear explosions were banned back in the 1950’s, the U.S. military still hell bent on replacing our fickle ionosphere with something more reliable decided to dump millions of needles in space to create their own.
Despite these dire warnings, the practice of heating chemical releases in space is just “a conspiracy theory.”
This page is an effort to raise awareness of atmospheric experimentation and to lobby for transparency in the geoengineering and weather modification industries, and hopefully to see an end to weather control efforts, both intentional and unintentional, in hopes that one day my child will see natural weather.
Let one thing in nature stay natural, hand’s off our sky.
Geoengineer Ken Caldeira Gets Caught Lying *Loses Temper*
After lying about weaponizing the weather, has audio played back to him to prove it, then lies again. After being confronted yet again about this fact, he completely loses it and tells the interviewer to shut the f*** up!
The Relationship Between Compulsory Vaccination, Suicide & Euthanasia July 21 2017 | From: TheContrail
The corrupt medical profession and inherent dangers of vaccines: The issues of vaccines - suicide - euthanasia are all inseparable in terms of Nazi philosophy.
That is why the media all around the world at present are pushing propaganda articles about the need to pass new laws to legalize “youth suicide and euthanasia” as “free choice” but take away the “informed choice” for anti-vaccinations groups, because vaccines are going to be used as an integral methodto kill off millions of targeted groups soon.
Remember, in Nazi Germany it involved not only killing off undesirable groups of people by lethal injection and gassing, but mass sterilizing others so that they could not reproduce.
I have a younger sister who, like myself, is a retired physician in Holland who has worked in Belgium also so I am very well informed what is happening there now. Although I live in NZ and am elderly, I still keep myself well informed.
As one who was brought up under the Nazis during WWII, I can assure you that your description calling most modern medical doctors ‘neo-Nazis’ although I hate to admit it, is absolutely true in every respect.
In fact, modern doctors in The Netherlands and Belgium now are much worse than the Nazi doctors ever were, and what has already happened in Belgium is spreading out across the whole western world including here in New Zealand at present.
The problem is when you tell the average uninformed person the full truth like this claiming that these physicians are “Nazis,” which they really are, most people just pull back, because they simply cannot comprehend their supposedly ‘friendly family doctor’ could possibly be such a devil. But he or she is.
This was the case in Nazi Germany also, as the masses historically have always had a sort of ‘blind faith’ in physicians going back to Plato.
According to the End-of-Life Choice Voluntary Euthanasia Society Of New Zealand Inc. the Horizon Poll conducted in May 16-23 2017 on 1274 people from the public aged 18 and over, 75% supported euthanasia and 11% were opposed.
This is very much worse than would have been the case under Hitler.
When you’ve got 75% of brainless morons like this in New Zealand already supporting politicians to pass new laws to engineer their own euthanasia, (which includes their own children if these pea brains only knew it) then you have almost an entire nation remarkably voting for their own premature death.
I note you included in your previous email some YouTube clips illustrating what is going on in Belgium right now. But may I say it is much worse than that.
Already, doctors are euthanizing not only the elderly, but young people with even very slight mental problems, or for example girls or women who have been raped and say they psychologically can’t cope, or any young person who is suffering depression or is unemployed and disillusioned.
This is MUCH WORSE THAN THE NAZIS EVER DID in the Final Solution! It is only beginning to escalate in Europe presently, yet is in the process of expanding worldwide.
Now if the euthanasia of these people itself is not bad enough, do you know that already in about half of the cases these people are being murdered without their consent.
Yes that is right. People are getting admitted into hospital claiming they are suffering from such and such, depression, mental instability or dizzy spells – and they don’t come home.
So you see what you perceptively said about compulsory vaccination relative to the Nuremberg Code, why informed voluntary consent is so vitally important, and if it is removed, it is really the “last straw” and the last step before this medical tyranny is implemented worldwide.
I mean to say, it is not far away from anyone who criticizes the government being classified as mentally unstable, then being arrested and given a lethal injection without his or her consent and sent on their way – to paradise or hell as the case may be.
Here are some more YouTube clips about it which you may not have seen which I’ve gleaned. If people will not get the message after watching these in a strange way they all deserve what’s coming – because the video clips here are simply irrefutable – stunning:
Seven Reasons Why The Internet Of Things Should Scare You & The Internet Of Things Poses Human Health Risks: Scientists Question The Safety Of Untested 5G Technology At International Conference July 15 2017 | From: MakeUseOf / EnvironmentalHealthTrust / Various
It was only a couple of years ago that we – the public- started to understand the term Internet of Things (IoT). Until then, we’d never entertained the idea that our bathroom tap might want to have a chat with the dishwasher.
Our naiveté in these matters promised us many great things. It’s also promising many great dangers.
The IoT is full of inflated promises of increased efficiency, lives made easier, and people and industries made perfect. It’s reminiscent of Snowball falsely promising the others in Animal Farm that their new technology - The Windmill - would bring them a life of peace and leisure. A life in which “sordid labor” would be lifted from their backs.
The same promises were made when email and smartphones were invented.
Click on the image above to view a larger version in a new window
These progresses were hailed as a miraculous salve, ready to be employed by all for an easier and better life. The same is now happening with the IoT. The potential benefits grow bright, while the dangers are cast into the quiet shadows.
It’s time to draw attention to these dangers. Here are seven terrifying promises of the Internet of Things:
1. An Unbearable World of Advertisements
If you think ads being thrust upon you every time you use something digital is frustrating, you’ve seen nothing yet.
It won’t be long until your trousers are horrified by your weight gain. In turn, they’ll conspire against you. They’ll have the TV showing contextual ads about new fad diets. The touch-screen on the fridge will be selling you low-fat yogurt.
Your watch will be telling you to pay for a new fitness app. Google could even have your NEST thermostat, with its many uses, telling you the weight-loss benefits of having the heat turned up.
It used to be the case that our private dwellings were our quiet escape from the bombardments of the high street. But marketers encroached on that privacy through TV ads, cold calling, and more recently, our connected devices.
With the future promising the connectedness of everything including the kitchen sink, the only means of escaping so many advertisements will be atop a snow-covered mountain.
2. A Conspiracy of Perfection With the IoT comes a burgeoning of “tracking devices“. Small devices that track everything from the steps you take, to a minute-by-minute analysis of your cortisol levels. By tracking certain aspects of our lives, we are told, we can “optimize” and “make better life choices”.
In other words, if we have enough data, we will know exactly what to do to become the perfect version of ourselves. If we’re overweight, unwell, tired, or stressed, the fault is ours for not paying attention to “The Data”.
Society will cast asunder us fat, unhappy ones simply for choosing human error over a life dictated by algorithms and apps. The corporations will no-doubt punish us, too. More expensive health insurance because the sensors in the fridge saw how many pork pies we’ve eaten, is just the beginning.
This pressure for continual self-improvement and optimization drags us further from the present than current technology forces us to go. This will necessarily drive an even greater wedge between those who are connected, and those who aren’t.
3. A Waste of Money
It used to be that when we bought a washing machine, it was a rare expense. The next one would be purchased in 15 years or so. Something might go wrong in the meantime, but the guy down the road would fix it.
Today, washing machines have a much shorter lifespan. We have to be prepared to shell out for a new one around every five years (thanks to planned obsolescence). A new smartphone, smartwatch, and tablet every three or four years. A new laptop every four to five years. These lifespans are short. The only consolation is that there’s not too many things to replace.
Your mattress may not need replacing every couple of years, but the sensor inside of it may do. The same goes for your kitchen table, and the sofa. For cheaper connected devices like the kettle, toaster, your belt, light switches and door knobs; expect replacement of these components to become a new, regular expense.
When your house is awash with 30, 50, 100 connected devices, that’s a lot of electronic gadgetry to keep working 365 days per year. That’s a lot of replacing broken sensors. That’s a lot of money.
As the IoT explodes, it’s physically impossible for the security industry to keep up. Simply password protecting each of our devices isn’t working. People are leaving default passwords set, leaving their devices massively vulnerable to attack. But who can blame them? Who would want to manually change the password for 75 devices around home and work?
When a supermarket knows the food that you buy, they can offer you completely personalized deals. When Amazon tracks the products you look at, they can recommend other products based on your individual taste.
It’s good business, sure. But it also means that any information tracked about us, can be linked back to us. The calls you make, messages you send, food you eat, clothes you buy, photos you take. The sites you browse, time you spend sat down, number of beers you drink, steps you take, and conversations you have.
This information is all open for the picking. Once your connected devices are neatly synced up, the picture of you available to corporations and governments will be more detailed than you could ever imagine. Privacy is dead.
6. Complete Digital Exhaustion
Look around. There’s little denying that we’re already over-connected. Kids around the world are suffering from. Family time is being ruined by smartphone notifications. What more do we expect from technology?
Is there any real benefit to be had from an oven that turns itself on when it knows you’re on your way home? From receiving a ping when you’re at work telling you the house is too cold? From your smartwatch telling you your plants need watering when you’re on a run?
All this is setting us up for is complete digital burn-out. The anti-tech movement of neo-luddism is fast expanding for a reason. People are tired of relying so much on technology. They’re craving a simpler way of life. Not the inflated promise of one, which is what we’re facing with IoT, but something actually simpler.
7. Impossible Choices
One of the most pressing technological choices we make today concerns the ecosystems we opt for. When we buy a laptop, do we choose Windows, or Apple? When we buy a smartphone, do we choose Android or iOS?
Once we’ve made a decision, it’s hard to go back. Moving all of your photos, music and videos from one ecosystem to another is a nightmare, and isn’t something you want to be repeating time and again.
When it comes to the IoT, the choice is even more important. This is because the industry is new, and there are no leading ecosystems to set the “Standard” for how devices communicate. The entire industry is fragmented.
Think back to when HD-DVD was battling Blue-Ray. If you placed your bets on HD-DVD, you were out of pocket a year later. We’re in the same position now with the IoT.
If your entire building is running connected devices that rely on different ecosystems, you’ve got a nightmare on your hands. You’ll either have to live with juggling a ton of devices that can’t work together, or you’ll have to replace many of them once a single ecosystem dominates.
The IoT will undoubtedly bring benefits. But it’ll also bring many dangers. Those who are pushing for the IoT to become huge, are those who are set to profit the most from it, and we mustn’t be blindsided by this. After all, the IoT will run on Big Data. And Big Data means Big Money.
The focus of this article has largely been on the use of the IoT in the home. Seems this is the area that’s exciting so many consumers, it’s what so many people envision when they hear the term “Internet of Things”.
Click on the image above to view a larger version in a new window
So we should stop getting giddy about how smart tech can connect our furniture and utensils to the Web. Instead we should focus our efforts on how we can use this technology to make real change. On how the IoT can offer real benefits to those who need it.
After all, who needs their toilet to tell them how many times they’ve been for a wee?
What other things scare you about the Internet of Things? What should we be wary of, and what should we be looking to avoid?
The Internet Of Things Poses Human Health Risks: Scientists Question The Safety Of Untested 5G Technology At International Conference
Replicated research shows that Millimeter waves – used by the Department of Defense in crowd control weapons – interacts with human skin and eyes.
Israeli research studies presented at an international conference reveal that the same electromagnetic frequencies used for crowd control weapons form the foundation of the latest network – branded as 5G – that will tie together more than 50 billion devices as part of the Internet of Things.
Scientists cautioned that before rolling out 5G technologies that use these frequencies, research on human health effects needed to be done first to ensure the public and environment are protected.
“If you are one of the millions who seek faster downloads of movies, games and virtual pornography, a solution is at hand, that is, if you do not mind volunteering your living body in a giant uncontrolled experiment on the human population.
At this moment, residents of the Washington, DC region – like those of 100 Chinese cities – are about to be living within a vast experimental Millimeter wave network to which they have not consented – all courtesy of American taxpayers,” stated Dr. Devra Davis, President of the Environmental Health Trust.
Davis proposed that the Trump Administration could provide funds for research and training by implementing a 2 cents per month fee on all wireless devices, their manufacturers and network providers.
“Training and research in bioelectromagnetics including the evaluation of new technologies is essential before universal deployment”.
“This work shows that the same parts of the human skin that allow us to sweat also respond to 5G radiation much like an antenna that can receive signals. We need the potential adverse health impacts of 5G to be seriously evaluated before we blanket our children, ourselves and the environment with this radiation.”
Potential Risks to Human Health from Future Sub-MM Communication Systems: Paul Ben-Ishai, PhD
This is from the 2017 Expert Forum on Wireless and Health. All presentations from this conference are availible here.
Research studies from the Dielectric Spectroscopy Laboratory of the Department of Applied Physics, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, headed by Dr. Yuri Feldman, indicate that millimeter and submillimeter waves may lead to preferential layer absorption. The number of sweat ducts within human skin varies from two million to four million.
The researchers pointed to replicated peer research of these biological effects in laboratory research conducted in other countries and considered this mechanism of action well proven.
Today’s cellular and Wi-Fi networks rely on microwaves – a type of electromagnetic radiation utilizing frequencies up to 6 gigahertz (GHz) in order to wirelessly transmit voice or data.
However, 5 G applications will require unlocking of new spectrum bands in higher frequency ranges above 6 GHz to 100 GHz and beyond, utilizing submillimeter and millimeter waves – to allow ultra-high rates of data to be transmitted in the same amount of time as compared with previous deployments of microwave radiation.
“Most people are unaware that these waves are cycling several billion times per second. 75 GHz is in fact 75,000,000,000 cycles per second,“ stated Davis about these frequencies rapidly penetrating the skin.
Click on the image above to download the Active Denial Technology PDF
For years, the U.S., Russian and Chinese defense agencies have been developing weapons that rely on the capability of this electromagnetic technology to induce unpleasant burning sensations on the skin as a form of crowd control.
Dr. Paul Ben-Ishai pointed to research that was commissioned by the U.S. Army to find out why people ran away when the beam touched them.
"If you are unlucky enough to be standing there when it hits you, you will feel like your body is on fire.”
The U.S. Department of Defense explains how:
“The sensation dissipates when the target moves out of the beam. The sensation is intense enough to cause a nearly instantaneous reflex action of the target to flee the beam.”
The conference at the Israel Institute for Advanced Studies at Hebrew University (IIAS) was organized in cooperation with the U.S. National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) and the Environmental Health Trust (EHT).
Verizon just announced that 5G networks will be tested in 11 U.S. cities. 5G Networks will involve the deployment of millions of antennas nationwide, thousands in each city, because millimeter waves cannot easily travel through buildings or other obstacles.
Proposed installations have lead to public outcry in residential areas where homeowners do not want antennas mounted at their yards or near schools.
Several researchers at the conference raised concerns that current regulations are not adequate to protect public health.
“There is an urgent need to evaluate 5G health effects now before millions are exposed…. We need to know if 5G increases the risk of skin diseases such as melanoma or other skin cancers,” stated Ron Melnick, the National Institutes of Health scientist, now retired, who led the design of the National Toxicology Program study on cell phone radiofrequency radiation.
Dariusz Leszczynski, PhD, Chief Editor of Radiation and Health, stated that the international organization – called ICNIRP – developing recommendations for public exposure limits of these higher frequencies was planning to classify all the skin in the human body as belonging to the limbs rather than to the head or torso.
Leszczynski cautioned that:
“If you classify skin as limbs – no matter where the skin is – you are permitted to expose it more than otherwise.”
“The use of sub-terahertz (Millimeter wave) communications technology (cell phones, Wi-Fi, network transmission antennas) could cause humans to feel physical pain via nociceptors,“ stated Dr. Yael Stein, MD, who wrote a letter to the Federal Communications Commission about 5G Spectrum Frontiers.
The Violence-Inducing Effects Of Psychiatric Medication & The Psychiatric Agenda Destroys Creative Children July 15 2017 | From: KellyBroganMD / JonRappoport
On May 17, 2017, we learned that Chris Cornell of Soundgarden had reportedly committed suicide by hanging.
His family reports knowing a different Chris than one who would make this fatal decision, and suspect his anti-anxiety prescription in the altered state he was witnessed to be in the night he died.
Perhaps an “addict turned psychiatric patient”, like so many, Chris Cornell seemed to have left the frying pan of substance abuse for the fire of psychiatric medication risks.
For reasons that remain mysterious, those under the influence of psychiatric medication often specifically choose to hang themselves in their moment of peak impulsivity.
Some, like Kim’s husband Woody who was never depressed a day in his life but prescribed Zoloft by his internist, even verbalize a felt experience of his head coming apart from his body in the days before he was found hanged in his garage.
Then there’s 14 year old Naika, a foster child in Florida who hanged herself on a FB livestream after being treated with 50mg of Vyvanse, a drug treatment for ADHD that leads to a domino effect of diagnoses and psychiatric meds including a 13 fold increase in likelihood of being prescribed an antipsychotic medication and 4 fold increase in antidepressant medications than controls.
Are these just rare anecdotes? Is this just the cost of treatment that is helpful for most? Are we blaming medication for what might have been severe mental illness that was undertreated and/or undiagnosed?
Informed Consent: the Premise of Ethical Medicine
I believe first and foremost in informed consent. If you are informed of the risks, benefits, and alternatives to a given treatment, you will be empowered to make the best decision for yourself based on your personal, family, philosophical, and religious life context.
But the truth is that prescribers are not in a position to share the known risks of medications because we learn only of their purported benefits with a short-tagline of dismissively rare risks that are thought to be invariably outweighed by the presenting clinical concern.
But what about serious risks – including impulsive suicide and homicide – surely we are informing patients of that possibility, right?
In fact, the FDA and the pharmaceutical industry have gone to great lengths to conceal multiple signals of harm so we certainly can’t expect your average prescriber to have done the investigative work required to get at the truth.
In fact, from 1999-2013, US psychiatric medication prescriptions have increased by a whopping 117% concurrent with a 240% increase in death rates from these medications.
So let’s review some of the evidence that suggests that it may not be in your best interest or the best interest of those around you for you to travel the path of medication-based psychiatry.
Because, after all, if we don’t screen for risk factors – if we don’t know who will become the next victim of psych-med-induced violence – then how can we justify a single prescription?
Are we at a point in the history of medicine where random acts of personal and public violence are defensible risks of treatment for stress, anxiety, depression, inattention, psychosocial distress, irritable bowel syndrome, chronic fatigue, and even stress incontinence?
Let the Science Speak
Prescribed specifically to “prevent” suicide, antidepressants now come with a black box warning label of suicide risk since 2010.
Multi-billion dollar lawsuits like the settlement of Study 329 have been necessary to unlock the cabinet drawers of an industry that cares more about profit than human lives.
A reanalysis of study 329 which initially served as a landmark study in 2001 supporting the prescription of antidepressants to children, has now demonstrated that these medications are ineffective in this population and play a causal role in suicidal behavior.
Concealing and manipulating data that shows this signal of harm, including a doubling of risk of suicide with antidepressant treatment, has generated seeming confusion around this incomprehensibly unacceptable risk profile.
In fact, a reanalysis of an influential US National Institute of Mental Health 2007 study, revealed a four-fold increase in suicide despite the fact that the initial publication claimed no increased risk relative to placebo.
According to available data – 3 large meta-analyses – more psychiatric treatment means more suicide. Well, that might seem a hazard of the field, right? Where blaming medications for suicide would be like saying that umbrellas cause the rain.
That’s why studies in non-suicidal subjects and even healthy volunteers who went on to experience suicidality after taking antidepressants are so compelling.
Benzodiazepines (like what Cornell was taking) and hypnotics (sleep and anxiety medications) also have a documented potential to increase risk of completed and attempted suicide and have been implicated in impulsive self-harm including self-inflicted stab wounds during changes to dosage.
We also find the documented possibility that suicidality could emerge in patients who are treated with this class of medications even when they are not suicidal with recent research stating:
“Benzodiazepine receptor agonist hypnotics can cause parasomnias, which in rare cases may lead to suicidal ideation or suicidal behavior in persons who were not known to be suicidal”.
And, of course, these medications themselves provide the means and the method with a known lethal poisoning profile.
Clearly murderers are mentally ill, right? What if I told you that the science supports the concern that we are medicating innocent civilians into states of murderous impulsivity?
When Andrew Thibault began to research the safety of a stimulant drug recommended to his son, he entered a rabbit hole he has yet to emerge from.
After literally teaching himself code to decrypt the data on the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System website, he was able to cull 2,000 pediatric fatalities from psychotropic medications, and 700 homicides.
A Freedom of Information Act and a lawsuit later, he continues to struggle with redacted and suppressed information around 24 homicides directly connected to the use of psychotropics including the homicide by a 10 year old treated with Vyvanse of an infant.
Another case, ultimately recovered, involved statements from a 35 year old perpetrator / patient, who murdered her own daughter, as directly implicating as:
“When I took nortriptyline, I immediately wanted to kill myself. I’d never had thoughts like that before”.
To begin to scientifically explore the risk of violence induced by psychotropic medication, a study sample needs to be representative, the reason for taking the drug needs to be taken into consideration, the effect needs to be controlled for, as do any other intoxicants.
Professor Jari Tiihonen’s research group analysed the use of prescription drugs of 959 persons convicted of a homicide in Finland and found that pre-crime prescription of benzodiazepines and opiates resulted in the highest risk (223% increase) of committing homicide.
Relatedly, eleven antidepressants, six sedative/hypnotics and three drugs for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder represented the bulk of 31 medications associated with violence reported to the FDA.
Now an international problem, a Swedish registry study identified a statistically significant increase in violence in males and females under 25 years old prescribed antidepressants.
Implicated in school shootings, stabbings, and even the Germanwings flight crash, prescribing of psychotropics prior to these incidences has been catalogued on ssristories.org leading me to suspect psychiatric prescribing as the most likely cause in any and all reports of unusually violent behavior in the public sphere.
Is Association Really Causation?
Beyond the cases where violence to self or others was induced in a non-violent, non-depressed, non-psychotic individual, what other evidence is there that speaks to how this could possibly be happening?
The most seminal paper in this regard, in my opinion, was published in 2011 by Lucire and Crotty. Ten cases of extreme violence were committed by patients who were prescribed antidepressants – not for major mental illness or even for depression – but for psychosocial distress (i.e. work stress, dog died, divorce).
What these authors identified was that these ten subjects had variants to liver enzymes responsible for drug metabolism exacerbated by co-administration of other drugs and substances including herbs. All returned to their baseline personalities when the antidepressant was discontinued.
Now referred to as akathisia-induced impulsivity, the genetic risk factors for this Russian Roulette of violence are not screened for prior to psychotropic prescribing.
Akathisia is a state of severe restlessness associated with thoughts of suicide and homicide.
Many patients describe it as a feeling-less state of apathy – and what I would describe as a disconnection from their own souls, their own experience of human connection, and any measure of self-reflection.
The genetic underpinnings of this kind of medication-induced vulnerability are just beginning to be explored with identification of precursor symptoms to violence including severe agitation.
In a randomized, placebo-controlled trial, healthy volunteers exhibited an almost 2 fold increased risk of symptoms that can lead to violence.
A 4-5 fold increased risk was noted in patients prescribed a generic version of the antidepressant Cymbalta, off-label, for stress urinary incontinence (a non-psychiatric indication).
There is Another Way
Perhaps it’s as if we are offering the blade edge of a knife to those falling off the cliff of struggle and suffering. Because the idea of managing a chemical imbalance with chemicals seems to make sense.
We live in a cultural context that makes no room for the relevance, meaning, and significance of symptoms – symptoms are simply bad and scary and they must be managed. We don’t make room for patients to ask why they are not ok.
In fact, every woman I have ever tapered off of psychiatric drugs into experiences of total vitality once believed that she would be a medicated psychiatric patient for life.
If you knew that radical self-healing potential lies within each and every one of us, if you only knew that was possible, you might start that journey today. It’s side effect free…
The Psychiatric Agenda Destroys Creative Children
“Take a child who wants to invent something out of thin air, and instead of saying no, tell him he has a problem with his brain, and then stand back and watch what happens. In particular, watch what happens when you give him a toxic drug to fix his brain. You have to be a certain kind of person to do that to a child. You have to be, for various reasons, crazy and a career criminal.” - The Underground, Jon Rappoport
First, here are a few facts that should give you pause:
According to NAMI (National Alliance on Mental Illness);
“More than 25 percent of [US] college students have been diagnosed or treated by a professional for a mental health condition within the past year.”
NAMI: “One in four young adults between the ages of 18 and 24 have [we claim] a diagnosable mental illness.”
According to healthline.com, 6.4 million American children between the ages of 4 and 17 have been diagnosed with ADHD. The average age for the child’s diagnosis is 7.
BMJ 2016;352:i1457: “The number of UK children and adolescents treated with antidepressants rose by over 50% from 2005 to 2012, a study of five Western countries published in European Neuropsychopharmacology has found.”
Children are being diagnosed and dosed with toxic drugs at a staggering rate. But, as I have shown in many past articles, NO so-called mental disorder is based on a lab test.
No blood, saliva, genetic, brain test. ALL 300 or so official mental disorders are defined by menus of behaviors concocted by committees of psychiatrists.
On that foundation, the diagnoses and the drugs are handed out.
Let’s look at just one of the drugs: Ritalin (or any similar ADHD medicine). After a creative child is seen fidgeting in class, looking bored, studying what he wants to study, ignoring classroom assignments, focusing on what interests him, he is diagnosed with ADHD. Then comes the drug.
In 1986, The International Journal of the Addictions published an important literature review by Richard Scarnati. It was called “An Outline of Hazardous Side Effects of Ritalin (Methylphenidate)” [v.21, pp. 837-841].
Scarnati listed a large number of adverse effects of Ritalin and cited published journal articles which reported each of these symptoms.
For every one of the following (selected and quoted verbatim) Ritalin effects, there is at least one confirming source in the medical literature:
Hypomanic and manic symptoms, amphetamine-like psychosis
Activation of psychotic symptoms
Can surpass LSD in producing bizarre experiences
Effects pathological thought processes
Since Ritalin is considered an amphetamine-type drug, expect amphetamine-like effects
High-abuse potential DEA Schedule II Drug
Decreased REM sleep
When used with antidepressants one may see dangerous reactions including hypertension, seizures and hypothermia
Brain damage may be seen with amphetamine abuse.
Under this chemical assault on the brain, what are the chances that a creative child will go on in life to become an innovator, rather than a victim of psychiatric drugging?
Make a list of your favorite innovators. Imagine them as bored distracted children sitting in classrooms… and then diagnosed, and then hammered with drugs prescribed by a doctor.
This is happening now. The institution of psychiatry is making it happen. What about the consequences of diagnosing clinical depression in larger numbers of young children? What about the antidepressant drugs?
Here is just a sprinkling of information about antidepressants, from a huge body of literature:
Psychiatrist Peter Breggin: February 1990 American Journal of Psychiatry (Teicher et al, v.147:207-210) reports on:
“Six depressed patients, previously free of recent suicidal ideation, who developed `intense, violent suicidal preoccupations after 2-7 weeks of fluoxetine [Prozac] treatment.'
The suicidal preoccupations lasted from three days to three months after termination of the treatment. The report estimates that 3.5 percent of Prozac users were at risk.
While denying the validity of the study, Dista Products, a division of Eli Lilly, put out a brochure for doctors dated August 31, 1990, stating that it was adding `suicidal ideation’ to the adverse events section of its Prozac product information.”
An earlier study, from the September 1989 Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, by Joseph Lipiniski, Jr., indicates that in five examined cases people on Prozac developed what is called akathesia.
Symptoms include intense anxiety, inability to sleep, the “jerking of extremities,” and “bicycling in bed or just turning around and around.”
"May also contribute to the drug’s tendency to cause self-destructive or violent tendencies … Akathesia can become the equivalent of biochemical torture and could possibly tip someone over the edge into self-destructive or violent behavior.
The June 1990 Health Newsletter, produced by the Public Citizen Research Group, reports, ‘Akathesia, or symptoms of restlessness, constant pacing, and purposeless movements of the feet and legs, may occur in 10-25 percent of patients on Prozac.’”
The well-known publication, California Lawyer, in a December 1998 article called “Protecting Prozac,” details some of the suspect maneuvers of Eli Lilly in its handling of suits against Prozac.
California Lawyer also mentions other highly qualified critics of the drug:
"David Healy, MD, an internationally renowned psychopharmacologist, has stated in sworn deposition that `contrary to Lilly’s view, there is a plausible cause-and-effect relationship between Prozac’ and suicidal-homicidal events.
An epidemiological study published in 1995 by the British Medical Journal also links Prozac to increased suicide risk.”
When pressed, proponents of these SSRI antidepressant drugs (Prozac, Zoloft, Paxil, etc.) sometimes say, “Well, the benefits for the general population far outweigh the risk.”
But the issue of benefits will not go away on that basis.
A shocking review-study published in The Journal of Nervous and Mental Diseases (1996, v.184, no.2), written by Rhoda L. Fisher and Seymour Fisher, called “Antidepressants for Children,” concludes:
“Despite unanimous literature of double-blind studies indicating that antidepressants are no more effective than placebos in treating depression in children and adolescents, such medications continue to be in wide use.”
In wide use. This despite such contrary information and the negative, dangerous effects of these drugs.
There are other studies: “Emergence of self-destructive phenomena in children and adolescents during fluoxetine treatment,” published in the Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry (1991, vol.30), written by RA King, RA Riddle, et al.
It reports self-destructive phenomena in 14% (6/42) of children and adolescents (10-17 years old) who had treatment with fluoxetine (Prozac) for obsessive-compulsive disorder.
July, 1991. Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry. Hisako Koizumi, MD, describes a thirteen-year-old boy who was on Prozac: “full of energy,” “hyperactive,” “clown-like.”
All this devolved into sudden violent actions which were “totally unlike him.”
September, 1991. The Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry. Author Laurence Jerome reports the case of a ten-year old who moves with his family to a new location. Becoming depressed, the boy is put on Prozac by a doctor.
The boy is then “hyperactive, agitated … irritable.” He makes a “somewhat grandiose assessment of his own abilities.”
Then he calls a stranger on the phone and says he is going to kill him. The Prozac is stopped, and the symptoms disappear.
For money, for profit, for status, for control, there exists a professional class called psychiatrists. They approach children - particularly creative children who refuse to fall into lock-step with a regimented program of learning - as outliers, as ill, as strange, as maladjusted, as threats to the system.
European Court Issues Common Sense Ruling On The Link Between Vaccines And Disease + Robert Kennedy, Jr. Is Right About Vaccines: A Medically Induced 'Holocaust' Is Now Upon Us July 13 2017 | From: Sott / NaturalNews / VaccineImpact / Various
As the 'anti-vax' movement continues to gain traction across the globe, the EU's top court has ruled that vaccines can be blamed for diseases even when there isn't any proof they are responsible.
The European Court of Justice ruled on Wednesday that a vaccine can be considered defective - and thus the cause of a disease - if there is "specific and consistent evidence" related to when the vaccine was administered, the patient's previous state of health, the lack of family history of the disease, and a significant number of reported cases of the disease occurring following vaccination.
The court went on to state that such factors could lead a court to determine that "the administering of the vaccine is the most plausible explanation" for the disease, and that "the vaccine therefore does not offer the safety that one is entitled to expect, AP reported.
The ruling is related to the case of a Frenchman known as Mr. J.W., who was diagnosed with multiple sclerosis about a year after he was vaccinated against hepatitis B in the late 1990s.
The man and his family sued the vaccine's maker, Sanofi Pasteur, seeking compensation for the damage Mr. J.W. had suffered, allegedly from the hepatitis B vaccine.
However, France's Court of Appeal ruled that there was no causal link between the vaccine and the disease diagnosis, and dismissed the case. The case was then taken to France's Higher Court of Cassation, and later to the European Union, leading to the Wednesday verdict. However, Europe's top court did not rule on the individual case of Mr. J.W., who died in 2011.
The ruling comes amid an 'anti-vax' campaign which is sweeping countries across the globe, with parents claiming vaccines are linked to conditions ranging from autism to cancer.
Earlier this month, 130 Italian families threatened to seek asylum in Austria to circumvent a requirement for all children to have a mandatory 12 vaccinations to enter school.
Italy has seen a huge spike in measles outbreaks this year, with the Health Ministry stating earlier this month that 2,851 cases have already been reported, with 89 percent of those affected being unvaccinated. Those numbers far surpass the 844 measles cases reported in the whole of 2016.
The anti-vax movement has also been blaemd for recent outbreaks of measles in the US state of Minnesota, and health officials also fear the anti-vax movement could lead to a resurgence of polio.
Millions of Italians Proposed Newly Proposed Vaccine Mandate
For over a month Italians have been protesting in every city against a brutal proposed law that if approved will make 53 doses of vaccines mandatory.
In March, the World Health Organization (WHO) reaffirmed its stance that vaccines are safe, and that "most vaccine reactions are usually minor and temporary."
"It is far more likely to be seriously injured by a vaccine-preventable disease than by a vaccine. For example, in the case of polio, the disease can cause paralysis, measles can cause encephalitis and blindness, and some vaccine-preventable diseases can even result in death," it wrote.
Comment: The above is true in a small percentage of cases and it's the standard argument trotted out by vaccine proponents to scare everyone into compliance.
People do get sick and die but there is no legitimate science behind the belief that vaccines are safe and actually prevent the diseases they are allegedly designed to eradicate. The harm that has resulted from worldwide vaccine campaigns far outweigh their mythical benefits.
Robert Kennedy, Jr. Is Right About Vaccines: A Medically Induced 'Holocaust' Is Now Upon Us
At a recent screening of the powerful new documentary film Trace Amounts, which exposes the scientific connection between mercury in vaccines and autism, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. warned an audience of supportive viewers that vaccines are essentially poison vials causing a "holocaust" in our country.
The nephew of former U.S. president John F. Kennedy, RFK Jr. attended the screening in solidarity with California parents who are fighting to stop Senate Bill 277 from eliminating their freedom as Californians to exempt their children from "mandatory" vaccinations. Speaking to the crowd, Kennedy emphasized the proven dangers of vaccines.
"They can put anything they want in that vaccine and they have no accountability for it," stated Kennedy about the vaccine industry, which ironically maintains its own exclusive and unconstitutional exemption from legal liability for vaccines that injure and kill children.
Trace Amounts Helped Kill Anti-Freedom Vaccine Exemption Elimination Bill in Oregon
Both entering and leaving the stage to exuberant standing ovations, Kennedy lauded Trace Amounts for helping persuade lawmakers in Oregon to scrap a bill similar to California's SB 277 that would have eliminated personal vaccine exemptions in the Beaver State.
He also empathized with parents of vaccine-injured children, who often have no support from the legal system, and sometimes even from their friends and family members, in addressing the damage caused by vaccine quackery.
“They get the shot, that night they have a fever of a hundred and three, they go to sleep, and three months later their brain is gone," lamented Kennedy about how vaccine injuries progress.
"This is a holocaust, what this is doing to our country."
Not a Single Invited Politician Shows up to Trace Amounts Screening
California lawmakers were reportedly also invited to the Trace Amounts screening where Kennedy spoke, with three rows specially cordoned off for their convenient viewing. But according to The Sacramento Bee, not a single lawmaker showed up except for a handful of random staffers.
No bother, though, as the film was still shown, and the crowd invigorated to take a unified stand for medical freedom.
89.3 KPCC is now reporting that the proposed legislation SB 277 would unconstitutionally deprive unvaccinated children from receiving an adequate education by preventing them from attending public school. Its supporters, however, are planning to reintroduce it once again in the coming days.
Vaccines are a Scam, and the Government's Revolving Door With the Vaccine Industry Proves it Has No Business Trying to Pass Anti-Exemption Laws
As far as the idea of eliminating vaccine exemptions, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize that those trying to push anti-exemption legislationwork for or are being paid off by the vaccine industry.
“The former head of the CDC, Julie Gerberding, is now the head of the Merck Vaccine Division," wrote one commenter at The Sacramento Bee concerning this issue. "The government is having a dirty little affair with the drug industry."
"They share ownership of patents. They created the unconstitutional 'Vaccine Court' that usurps our 7th Amendment and shields drug manufacturers from liability.
The phony court has no judge, no jury and no justice for most people. They cherry pick cases to keep liability down and lie about the real number of vaccine injuries, yet they have still paid out about 3 billion dollars for the injuries they will admit to."
Check out this vaccine debate that aired on PBS Hawaii, in which the show's producers and hosts failed to mention its sponsorship from Merck, Pfizer and various other vaccine manufacturers: WarOnWeThePeople.com.
Dr. Rachael Ross, MD: “I Am Scared Of The Vaccines”
Medical Doctor who Escaped Vietnam as a Child in the 1970s Explains Why He no Longer Vaccinates
The VAXXED film crew recently interviewed Dr. Anthony Phan in California. Dr. Phan escaped from Vietnam in the 1970s when he was 8 years old. He was separated from his parents and escaped on a fishing boat along with his 2 year old brother.
Making it to the U.S. as a child refugee, Dr. Phan testifies that God led him through college and medical school, and he went on to become a medical doctor at Johns Hopkins.
Dr. Phan talks about how his mentor at Johns Hopkins taught him about the importance of the Hippocratic Oath to “do no harm.”
“Do no harm means your oath is to the patient. Not to the CDC, not to the government, not to the FDA, your oath is to the patient."
His mentor also reportedly stated to him:
“One day Tony, in your career (this was in 1993), when you see these threesome (CDC, FDA, and the government) in bed together, be very careful. When you see pharmaceutical companies being in bed with the government, and being controlled by the health industry, you need to make a decision about where you want to take your medical career.
Either #1 you retire and get out, because it is back to being controlled again, back to where I escaped (from Vietnam) in 1975."
Dr. Phan explains that his experience with vaccines began in 2000 when he did his fellowship in Integrated Medicine.
He was taught to question the practices of “conventional” medicine that are wrong.
He was practicing in geriatrics at the time, and he noticed that every time he gave the flu shot to his older patients, they would get very sick.
“They would get very sick with upper respiratory tract infections, some would get pneumonia, and some would be admitted to the hospital and die."
So he stopped giving flu shots after 5 or 6 injections. He knew something was wrong. He began doing his own research into vaccines, and encountered the evidence of fraud within the CDC.
He then began looking at what he calls “real data” that was not controlled by the CDC. He challenges the 300,000 plus physicians in the United States to watch the documentary VAXXED.
In a very touching point of the interview, Dr. Phan apologizes to Polly Tommey who is doing the interview, and is one of the co-producers of the VAXXED film.
With tears in his eyes, he apologizes to her on behalf of the medical community, because Ms. Tommey has a 20 year old vaccine injured son.
Watch the entire interview:
Dr. Anthony Phan On Vaccines - Doctor Tearfully Apologizes To Parents
The Truth About Electro Magnetic Frequencies - What The Authorities Don't Tell You July 8 2017 | From: NaturalHealthPerth
A Clinical Trial: In early 1934, Johnson rented premises in San Diego for Royal Rife to begin clinical treatments.
Under his instructions, the University of Southern California arranged formal clinical trials of the Rife Beam Ray device.
They appointed a special committee of top doctors to oversee the project including, apart from Johnson and Kendall:
Dr Rufus Klein-Schmidt (President, University of Southern California)
Dr Edward Kopps (Metabolic Clinic, La Jolla, California)
Dr George Fisher (Children's Hospital, NY)
Dr Kad Meyer (Hooper Foundation, San Francisco, California)
Dr Whalen Morrison (Chief Surgeon, Santa Fe Railway)
Dr George Dock
Dr Alvin G. Foard, a pathologist
Sixteen cancer patients from the Pasadena County Hospital volunteered to be treated with the machine. The brief was for the patients to be treated at Rife's clinic in San Diego and after three months the doctors would perform an in-depth examination of any of the surviving patients at that time.
Rife reportedly treated the patients with three minute exposures to the beam ray device at file career frequencies once every three days.
Rife reasoned that maybe they were infected with a mutated form of the cancer virus and made some slight frequency adjustments. Four weeks later the remaining two patients were examined and also pronounced clinically cured The results were stunning, it was a major breakthrough
There is some discrepancy in the accounts of what happened next, but the most likely explanation is that the members agreed to do further work before publicizing the results.
Johnson then introduced Rife to Dr Mildred Schram of the International Cancer Foundation in Philadelphia. However, on hearing of the work Schram allegedly made demands for experiments that Rife insisted would not and could not work Following much argument; he eventually refused to have anything further to do with the foundation Schram supposedly admitted years later that Rife had been right.
In the meantime (1935) Johnson had set up a clinic in Los Angeles to beat people using the beam ray device and Kendall and others were continuing experiments and treating people with it.
In 1937, the medical committee who oversaw the clinical trials ended up arguing over when and how they should release the results with no actual decision ever being reacted. By now they had plenty of evidence to support Rife's claims but they found themselves pressured by the medical authorities and feared that they would not be believed
A press release went ahead however, and on Friday 6 May 1938, the San Diego Evening Tribune published a front page article entitled "Dread Disease Germs Destroyed by Rays, Claim of S.D. Scientist".
However, the clinical trials were rot mentioned and Rife was cautious not to claim that the device represented an absolute cure for cancer.
Many Electromagnetic Hyper Sensitivity conditions develop slowly and silently over many years while the person is not presenting with any symptoms or complaints:
"People suffering from Electromagnetic Hyper Sensitivity (EHS) should not be treated as simply unfortunate individuals who cannot enjoy the benefits of wireless technology and electrical power like the rest. They should be treated as the "canary in the coal mine" serving as an early warning for the rest of humanity.
For those not familiar with the term "canary in the coal mine" - it originated when miners used to take caged canaries down to the coal mine with them. They positioned the cages on the ground. If dangerous gases (e.g. methane or carbon monoxide) leaked into the mine tunnels, these gases would cause the death of the canaries serving as a warning signal to exit the mine tunnels immediately.
The morbid bio-effects of EMF described in the 2012 Bio-initiative Report may trigger a range of disorders including neurological conditions, infertility, birth defects and cancer. Many of the conditions develop slowly and silently over many years while the person is not presenting with any symptoms or complaints.
And that is why we should treat the Electro-Hyper Sensitivity (EHS) syndrome and EHS sufferers - as a stark warning, alarm bells and sirens going off, that we should all heed to even if we still cannot see or feel the fire (YET)".
- Dr. Jonathan Halpern, PhD | Electromagnetic Survival Radiation Guide
During fids time, a new player emerged. Dr Morris Fishbein was editor of the Journal of the American Medical Association between 1924 and 1949. However, Fishbein was a very rich and powerful man who by that time owned all the stock of the AMA and had extremely powerful political connections. Fishbein approached Rife with an offer to buy the exclusive rights to the beam ray technology.
Rife refused. The details of the offer are unknown but Fishbein had made similar offers to other inventors of medical technologies claimed to cure cancer.
In ore case Fishbein made an offer to the creator of a herbal cancer cure called Harry Hoxey in which Fishbein would receive all profits from the invention for nine years and thereafter, at Fishbein's discretion, he would pay 10 per cent of future profits to Hoxey.
When Hoxey refused, Fishbein effectively destroyed him Hoxey was allegedly arrested 125 times in 16 months at Fishbein's instigation The charges never stuck but Hoxey was ruined
Fishbein then did the same to Rife. AMA officials started visiting doctors who were using Rife's machines and informed them they would be struck from the medical register if they did not stop immediately.
Many gave in and surrendered the machines to AMA investigators or allowed the machines to be destroyed. Others held out aid refused Marty were arrested or had equipment and notes seized and destroyed by FDA (Federal Food and Drug Administration) agents.
Fishbein refused to allow publication of any reference to Rife's work in the AMA journals and also supposedly pressured other medical journals insisting that they should not publish anything about Rife's work because it was all a fraud. A number of doctors actively opposed fids, including Johnson.
But many of the doctors who had attended Johnson's banquet for Rife in 1931, fearing the loss of their medical licenses, started denying that they had ever heard of Rife, even though marry had been photographed with him at the banquet.
Today's Scientists on Dr Royal Rife
“Another doctor and scientist, whose research has been buried for some time but has managed to resurface due to the work of avid supporters, is Dr Royal Raymond Rife M.D, who developed a frequency generator in the late 1920’s. In brief, Rife successfully treated 1,000 patients diagnosed with incurable cancer in the 1930’s. He was honoured with 14 awards and an honorary doctorate.
After the unsuccessful attempt by pharmaceutical companies to buy out his research and equipment, his office was ransacked, his research paperwork was stolen and the machine that healed all those 1,000 “incurable” cancer patients was destroyed.
In 1934, before this destruction occurred, the University of Southern California appointed a Special Medical Research Committee to bring terminal cancer patients from Pasadena County Hospital to Rife's San Diego Laboratory and clinic for treatment.
The team included doctors and pathologists assigned to examine the patients - if still alive - in 90 days. After the 90 days of treatment, the Committee concluded that 86.5% of the patients had been completely cured.
The treatment was then adjusted and the remaining 13.5% of the patients also responded within the next four weeks. The total recovery rate using Rife's technology was 100%.
What Rife had developed was a 100% effective cure for many forms of cancer. So why do we not know about this and why are there so many cancer research foundations in existence?
Put simply, it is due to the economic motives of the orthodox medical community, which relies on funding for cancer research - such funding often coming from pharmaceutical companies - and whose fortunes would be damaged if a cure for cancer was found. (That is, it’s OK to search for a cure but don’t really find one!)
This is a story that illustrates yet another grand attempt by the mainstream medical community to control the lives - and deaths - of so many millions of people today."
“In every culture and in every medical tradition before ours, healing was accomplished by moving energy."
- Albert Szent-Gyorgyi, Nobel Laureate in Medicine (1937) What Rife proved is that every health disorder has a frequency, which in turn responds (resonates) to a specific (optimal) frequency for its dissolving/healing in the body.
Don't mistake Electro Magnetic Frequencies (EMF) as Pulsed Electro Magnetic Frequencies (PEMF). They are absolute opposites. One can kill you! The other can save you.
Has anyone ever wondered why no one has ever had cancer of the heart?
I will tell you why. It is because the heart uses Pulsed Electro Magnetic Frequencies that oxygenate and keep a balanced PH. Electro Magnetic Frequencies are harmful and dangerous to every living organism!
Pulsed Electro Magnetic Frequencies, however, are the counterbalance to this man-made scourge that has now created a prolific smog that covers the entire earth, from microwaves to electronic warfare that readily exists. We can't escape it.
The object you hold against your head every day is one of the worst offenders. It is called the mobile phone. Apart from aging you rapidly, it can kill you. Brain Cancer has increased 10 percent in the last ten years. Imagine 100 years from now!
Dr Alan Back, a Naturopath from the USA who worked on electronic warfare for the US army, used his skills to invent a counter measure system to combat the Electro Magnetic Frequency problem that has now enveloped the earth.
The worst part about it is that your own home is the very place that can make you sick.
I have been a Naturopath for 36 years and every year - and particularly this last year - 83% of people presenting to me for medical scanning have chronic adrenal fatigue symptoms which relate to neurological physical.
Over 95% present with EMF symptoms and clumped Red Blood Cell symptoms, which affect the entire circulatory system as well as the immune system. This is happening right now and is certainly not a passing fad.
EMF Can Harm and Can Heal Using PEMF ( Pulsating Electromagnetic Field Therapy)
Deep Medical Fraud: Logical Insight Cancels Brain Fog & FDA Quietly Bans Powerful Life-Saving Intravenous Vitamin C July 5 2017 | From: JonRappoport / NaturalNews / Various
In the course of an investigation, a clue can turn up that changes everything. It exposes massive falsehoods and fraud.
But the meaning of the clue doesn’t always tap the investigator on the shoulder and reveal its full implications. The force of the rational insight is on a delay mechanism, as it were.
When I was writing my first book, AIDS INC., in the late 1980s, I was surrounded by much confusion. A bewildering number of facts and opinions and lies were being fed to me by various sources. I was taping notes to my walls and trying to sort out the mess of spaghetti.
One day, while I was researching the AIDS antibody test, I spoke to an official at the FDA. He mentioned that, if a vaccine were developed for HIV, anyone who received it would be given a special letter from the government.
The letter would declare that if this person ever tested positive for HIV, the result should be ignored, because the antibodies that made the test turn positive were resulting from the protective vaccine, not lethal HIV in the body.
After I hung up the phone, I tried to think through what I had just heard. Something strange was going on. What was it? About a week later, it hit me. The brain fog was gone.
The official government position implied: if an HIV vaccine were ever developed, it would stimulate antibodies to HIV in the body and thus confer protection against AIDS. But…
If an unvaccinated person, taking an HIV test, registered positive, that result would signal the presence of antibodies to HIV in the body - and THAT would mean the person had AIDS or was on the road to developing it.
However, in either case, THE ANTIBODIES WERE THE SAME. If they were stimulated and acquired through a vaccine, that was a good sign. It meant immunity. But if these same antibodies were acquired naturally, as a response to making contact with HIV, that was a bad sign. It meant AIDS, now, or just up the road.
Vaccine antibodies GOOD. Natural antibodies BAD. THE SAME ANTIBODIES.
Unintentionally implicit in the FDA spokesman’s statements was the logical walkway called reductio ad absurdum; a reduction to absurdity. In other words, if you took the FDA man’s claim about the letter a person vaccinated against HIV would carry with him - and if you thought it through and saw all the implications, you would see the whole proposal was absurd to the highest degree.
A vaccine would produce an effect, X, which would confer immunity. The body, producing the same effect, X, would signal impending disease and even death.
Medical solution GOOD. Body’s natural solution BAD.
Time and time again in my investigations, I’ve found reductio ad absurdum to be a very good friend and ally. Aristotle originally formulated the strategy, and it has stood the time of time quite nicely.
The overall pattern is rather simple: take an assertion; understand what it claims; lay out the chain of implications that follow from the assertion; show that this chain leads to an impossible or absurd consequence. THEREFORE, reject the assertion.
It’s like following a faulty set of directions. You drive through various streets and shift from one highway to another, all in the process of finding your way home from a distant location. But the directions finally lead you to a series of barriers at the desolate end of a highway, beyond which there is no road, only a pile of construction materials and a dank dark river you’ve never seen before.
It’s not home. It’s not useful. It makes no sense. It’s reductio ad absurdum.
The idea that a HIV vaccine would confer immunity, while a person’s own body - producing the same antibodies - wouldn’t confer immunity, is preposterous.
In the years since AIDS INC. was published, I’ve written about the sea-change that has occurred in disease diagnosis and vaccine “protection.” These days, a person receiving an antibody test for ANY given disease is told he is “positive” for the disease if antibodies show up on the test. But if he receives a vaccine that produces the same antibodies, he’s told he’s immune.
It makes zero sense.
Here is a final clue. A positive antibody test is no reason to tell a person he is sick or is going to get sick. A positive test most often indicates the person’s immune system has swung into gear and neutralized the germ in question.
BUT if the medical establishment decides, arbitrarily, to interpret every positive test as a sign of illness, then many, many more people can be diagnosed with diseases. And then…
They can be treated with drugs. And then, pharmaceutical cash registers ring like crazy with profits.
FDA Quietly Bans Powerful Life-Saving Intravenous Vitamin C
It would be naive to think that the FDA endeavors to protect the public’s health as its primary focus. Indeed, that would be a conflict of interest, as it serves its master, the pharmaceutical industry.
Has the Food and Drug Administration engineered a shortage of intravenous vitamin C as part of an overall attack on natural and non-toxic approaches to healing that compete with prescription drugs? An analysis by Natural Blaze would suggest that the answer is yes.
Natural Blaze claims that a critical shortage of IV bags in general followed an FDA ban on the mass production of intravenous vitamin C.
The FDA limited the availability of IV-C and the pharmaceutical industry halted production of injectable vitamins and minerals, after a 60 minute story about the miraculous recovery of a swine flu patient on life support. Because of the shortage of IV-C, doctors called upon compounding pharmacies to produce it.
But the FDA began to limit compounding pharmacies after injectable steroids produced by the New England Compounding Center were contaminated with a fungus that caused a deadly outbreak of meningitis.
Here is an example of an entire industry being punished for the dubious practices of one compounding pharmacy.
Try and follow this convoluted story: Doctors began to source NECC for its more expensive product because cheaper generic versions were in short supply. But it was the FDA’s increased inspection of drug factories that disrupted the supply chain in the first place. So the meningitis deaths were in part caused by the onerous actions of the FDA.
Natural Blaze reports;
“… without anyone noticing, and by many indirect means of banning production of the bags or shutting down those doing the production of the bags and the injectable vitamins and minerals, access to IV solutions for innumerable treatments for diseases, have gone into critical shortage.”
Vitamin C and the Big C
Could the shortage of IV-C be part of an effort to limit alternative cancer therapies? DrWhitaker.com states;
“… vitamin C is a potent antioxidant that has the power to boost immune function, increase resistance to infection, and protect against a wide range of diseases. But there’s an entirely different and largely unknown role of vitamin C, and that is its ability - when administered in very high doses by intravenous (IV) infusions - to kill cancer cells.
Best of all - and unlike virtually all conventional chemotherapy drugs that destroy cancer cells - it is selectively toxic. No matter how high the concentration, vitamin C does not harm healthy cells.”
Dr. Whitaker continues:
“The only way to get blood levels of vitamin C to the concentrations required to kill cancer cells is to administer it intravenously. … For example, 10 g of IV vitamin C raises blood levels 25 times higher than the same dose taken orally, and this increases up to 70-fold as doses get larger.”
Choose Health, Choose Life
When the human body is challenged by pathogens or needs to heal from injuries or surgery, its requirement for vitamin C increases considerably.
If hospitals routinely administered intravenous ascorbic acid, a proven and inexpensive treatment, patient outcomes would improve. When one weighs the risk of infection from deadly superbugs in hospitals today, IV vitamin C as a preventative safeguard makes all the more sense.
To learn how to secure IV-C in advance of a hospital stay for yourself or a family member, check out this very useful advice at DoctorYourself.com. You will learn how to deal with objections from physicians and hospital administrators regarding this “alt-health” remedy. It will require some moxie, but doing so may save a life.
Supporters of Obamacare believe that access to affordable healthcare is the most important consideration. But of even greater concern should be the ability to choose your own treatment modality, such as IV-C. In other words, medical freedom of choice trumps universal access.
Many of us involved in the health freedom movement are outraged by the disregard for our natural rights by unelected federal bureaucracies such as the FDA.
We hope for a day when a critical mass of aware citizens will hold their elected officials accountable to overturn toxic policies that favor Big Pharma’s obscene profits over our health and well-being. And that day is long overdue.
The Ten Most Evil People In The World Today Who Lie About Science, Pharmaceuticals And GMOs July 1 2017 | From: NaturalNews / Various
Are all politicians heartfelt people who only help their countries prosper and who only protect their people from harm? Of course not – so why then would you believe that every doctor only practices honest medicine and only prescribes what is thoroughly tested as “safe and beneficial” for his or her patients?
Does every builder, architect and engineer in the world build perfect structures that never leak, rot, crumble or cave in? Of course not – so why then would you believe that every scientist only formulates vaccines and pharmaceuticals that are thoroughly tested as “safe and beneficial” for adults, children, babies and pregnant women?
Is every plant growing in nature edible and safe for consumption, even ones that are contaminated with industrial pollution and pesticides?
Of course not – so why then would you believe there is a “world consensus” that GMOs (genetically modified organisms) in food are “safe and beneficial,” when most of them contain heavy metal toxins, pesticides and deadly herbicides?
You may be an honest, caring person, but that won’t stop corporations from exploiting your health while taking your money. You may be a religious person who treats others the way you want to be treated, but that won’t stop evil scientists and M.D.s from selling you dangerous chemical-based drugs that slowly poison you and your innocent children until death does you part.
That’s why you need to know exactly who the ten most evil people are in the world today, because they lie about science, pharmaceuticals and GMOs, and the only way to protect your family from them is to never buy, consume or inject what they’re selling.
Meet the 10 Worst Medical Criminals, Profiteers, Insidious Scientists and Corrupt Doctors in America
1. Imagine how many years you would serve in prison if the U.S. government caught you putting a deadly pig virus called circovirus in a vaccine meant to help prevent children and babies from getting a rather benign virus that simply causes diarrhea?
What if ten of those same children and babies injected with the poisoned vaccine containing the deadly pig virus died from intussusception, where their bowels folded in on themselves (like a telescope) and caused a fatal blockage? Is that science terrorism? Would they call it premeditated manslaughter, involuntary manslaughter or insanity?
There is a doctor still practicing medicine today who does exactly that, and he’s made millions from his patent of it. His name is Paul Offit and the vaccine he concocted in his laboratory using two strains of deadly circovirus to treat rotavirus is called Rotateq. He works at the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia. It’s called CHOP for short and for good reason – the insidious Offit is there injecting children with deadly foreign diseases for profit.
2. If you’re an evil doctor who only cares about money and power, how many years would you serve in federal prison for killing folks with chemotherapy who don’t even have cancer?
The answer is 45 years. The psycho doctor Farid Fata was a Detroit area oncologist who defrauded Medicare and private insurance companies for more than $30 million in the biggest health care scheme the world has ever known, and this was just a few years ago.
Working alongside psycho-blogger David H. Gorski (a.k.a. ORAC) at the Karmanos Cancer Center (where Gorski still operates on women’s breasts), Fata was poisoning innocent people, including children, with a deadly dose of chemo he called the “European Protocol.” His patients endured immense pain while Fata claimed it was their only chance of surviving their cancer – a disorder of the cells that they did not even have.
Assault With a Deadly Weapon Other than Guns, Missiles and Bombs?
Ever heard of chemical warfare? Ever heard of bio-terrorism? You don’t have to be engaged in combat on a battlefield to incur health damage and loss of life from deadly weapons. Millions of people are assaulted every single day in doctors offices and hospitals with deadly chemical weapons designed to corrupt the immune system and the central nervous system.
From SSRIs and chemotherapy to mercury and radiation, and from prescription opiates and ADHD drugs to toxic blood thinners and dangerous cholesterol medications, we are inundated and overwhelmed with deadly chemical weapons on a battlefield that requires no more than a little medical coverage in which to participate.
Isn’t it ironic how many people are screaming for health care coverage right now, naive to the fact that most modern chemical-based medicine is corrupted and dished out by the most insidious people on planet earth?
3. “The Joker,” Dr. Richard Pan is the clown who authored California’s force-vaccination bill that ensures all children in the state are injected with mercury, aluminum and formaldehyde in order to boost his own political stage while padding his wallet.
9. and 10. Exactly what lands you in an oncologist’s office faster than vaccines, fluoridated water and prescription medications?
Answer: eating GMOs daily. Who pushes Monsanto’s GMO propaganda and industry-scripted lies on people? Jon Entine and Kevin Folta. Two Monsanto operatives who push everything chemical that causes cancer as “sustainable” and “safe” for human consumption, these two maniacal shills were recently exposed by the U.S. Right-to-Know group.
Could Light From LED Screens Cause Irreversible Eye Damage? June 29 2017 | From: Uncensored / Various
In John Christian’s books, The Light Bulb Mafia and The Light Bulb Mafia Postscript (on the Internet) he mentions how LED light bulbs, LED slit lamps and ophthalmoscopes, LED backlit computer screens, smart phone screens and TV screens are going to severely damage the retina and accelerate early onset macular degeneration leading to premature blindness.
It was Dr Celia Sanchez-Ramos’s previous study exposing rats to white LED light bulbs back nearly 10 years ago that first motivated John Christian to write his books.
Generally, her research is superb, although it has been largely ridiculed by other ophthalmological scientists and doctors throughout the world. Yet she is courageously holding to her carefully researched, honest views.
In my opinion she is one of the very few, truly great, honest, medical professionals today. She works at Complutense University of Madrid, in Spain. Well, here is her latest research published by Medical Life Sciences, showing how LED computer screens and tablets seriously damage the retina of rats, which supports John Christian’s previous radical allegations and predictions in his two books:
Note that her study involved exposing pigmented rats with eyes similar to humans. The control group was divided into three, a group (not exposed to LED screen light), a second group (exposed to LED displays) and a third group (exposed to LED displays with an Eye Protector Reticare over the screens cutting out the damaging blue light).
The study was performed for 3 months in daily cycles of 16 hours of light and 8 hours of darkness.
After the study was completed, all of the three groups of rat’s eyes were tested. The eyes of the rats not exposed to any screens at all, and the rats exposed to the screens with the Reticare blue light protectors fitted were all the same and had not been damaged at all.
However, the retinas of rats exposed to the unprotected LED screens showed a 23% retinal cell death rate over the 3 month period.
Even the researchers at the university were totally shocked to observe this level of apoptosis (programmed cell death) in such a short period in animals that have a life expectancy of 10 years.
People who use LED computer screens a lot, such as gamers, for a long while have been complaining of serious problems with their eyesight and now most use blue light screen protectors or yellow tinted spectacles to cut out the excessive damaging blue light. However, unfortunately, this usually distorts colour perception.
Interestingly, PB Technology (a big N.Z. computer retailer) recently opened a new branch here in Tauranga, New Zealand, a few weeks ago. I went to have a look on the opening day and much to my surprise, I saw they had a new range of LCD (Liquid Clear Crystal) computer monitor screens in stock.
I have one myself, and they are good, emitting very little damaging blue light at all, but they do emit a lot of UV, which doesn’t damage the retina but it does damage the eye’s lens.
However, if you wear eye glasses with plastic lenses like I do these lenses cut out virtually all of the UV. These screens had been taken off the market and replaced with LED screens a few years ago.
So I asked the manager; Why the new LCD screens? Answer: More and more gamers are going back to them because they don’t hurt their eyes!
All this going on, while the Global Lighting Association (representing over 5,000 lighting manufacturers) wants to convert the whole world to LEDs by 2020, and virtually all the world’s leading optical and ophthalmological scientists and medical doctors say LED light bulbs and LED screens don’t harm you!
On the front cover of John Christian’s book (on the Internet), THE LIGHT BULB MAFIA published in July 2014, he says, “A history of the secret global light bulb cartel – and why the insidious global transformation to modern LED, OLED, and LD lighting technology, if not soon stopped or radically changed – is going to curse the whole world with BLINDNESS!”
Clearly, Dr Celia Sanchez-Ramos’s latest research here in the article points precisely to the inevitability of this soon happening. Yet still. Very few people including the medical profession are not acknowledging this is even occurring.
Seriously. The evidence now is simply overwhelming. Already, some Asian countries have 90% of their school children by age sixteen suffering from serious eye problems and myopia and will probably be blind by age 50.
So why are very few speaking up and why is nothing meaningful being done about this tyranny?
Virtually all smart phones have LED backlit screens as well. Are the over ten million doctors represented by the World Medical Association, in truth, members of one, giant, global lunatic asylum? Certainly looks like it doesn’t it.
Intermittent Fasting: The Perfect Treatment For Diabetes And Weight Loss June 27 2017 | From: Sott / Various "Everyone has a physician inside him or her; we just have to help it in its work. The natural healing force within each one of us is the greatest force in getting well. Our food should be our medicine. Our medicine should be our food. But to eat when you are sick is to feed your sickness." - Hippocrates
Fasting has not received as much attention as it should when it comes to the world of health and medicine. That's because you can't really make any money off of it. The 'pharmaceutical science' studies used in medical schools to teach doctors about human health simply don't focus enough on fasting for doctors to be knowledgable in the subject.
Doctors also learn very little about nutrition and are trained to prescribe drugs as a result.
Dr. Jason Fung is trying to change all that. A Toronto based nephrologist, he completed medical school and internal medicine at the University of Toronto before finishing his nephrology fellowship at the University of California, Los Angeles at the Cedars-Sinai hospital. He joined Scarborough General Hospital in 2001 where he continues to practice and change peoples lives.
He is one of a growing number of scientists and doctors to create awareness about the tremendous health benefits that can be achieved from fasting. It's one of the oldest dietary interventions in the world and has been practiced for thousands of years.
If properly practiced fasting was bad or harmful in any way, as some doctors suggest, it would have been known by now, and studies would not be emerging showing the health benefits that can be achieved from fasting regularly.
For example, a recent study published in the journal cell shows how a fasting diet can trigger the pancreas to regenerate itself, which works to control blood sugar levels and reverse symptoms of diabetes.
Mark Mattson, one of the foremost researchers of the cellular and molecular mechanisms underlying multiple neurodegenerative disorders, like Parkinson's and Alzheimer's disease, has shown through his work that fasting can have a tremendous effect on the brain, and could prevent or even reverse the symptoms of multiple neurodegenerative disorders.
You can watch a great TEDx talk he gave on the topic here.
Other studies have shown how fasting actually fights cancer and triggers stem cell regeneration. You can read more about that and access those studies in an article we published last year, here.
There is absolutely no evidence, for the average person, that fasting can be dangerous. If you're on prescription medication, or experience other medical problems, then there are obviously exceptions.
But it's quite clear that the human body was designed to go long periods of time without food, and that it's completely natural.
"Why is it that the normal diet is three meals a day plus snacks? It isn't that it's the healthiest eating pattern, now that's my opinion but I think there is a lot of evidence to support that. There are a lot of pressures to have that eating pattern, there's a lot of money involved.
The food industry - are they going to make money from skipping breakfast like I did today? No, they're going to lose money. If people fast, the food industry loses money. What about the pharmaceutical industries? What if people do some intermittent fasting, exercise periodically and are very healthy, is the pharmaceutical industry going to make any money on healthy people?"
- Dr. Mark Mattson (taken from his TEDx talk linked above)
Fung, like 90 percent of doctors out there was conventionally oriented. He is a kidney specialist, and many of his patients had/have type 2 diabetes as a result of that. It eventually became clear to him that something was very wrong with the conventional treatment of type 2 diabetes.
With Type 2 diabetes, patients who take insulin and follow the recommended dietary guidelines would still have several complications, mainly kidney disease. Because of this, they can go blind, require dialysis or even require amputations.
In the interview below with Dr. Joseph Mercola, Dr. Fung addresses multiple myths and issues that are commonly brought up about fasting. And dives into explaining how fasting does not burn muscle, how it can reverse diabetes, addresses the 'Starvation Mode' myth, explains the role of insulin, discusses different variations of fasting and much more.
Be sure to visit his website, where you can find information on him, his practice, results, lectures and article that he continually publishes every month.
"Humans live on one-quarter of what they eat; on the other three-quarters lives their doctor." - Egyptian pyramid inscription.
Recommendation For Beginners
One recommended way of doing it, which was tested by the BBC's Michael Mosley in order to reverse his diabetes, high cholesterol, and other problems associated with his obesity, is what is known as the "5:2 Diet."
On the 5:2 plan, you cut your food down to one-fourth of your normal daily calories on fasting days (about 600 calories for men and about 500 for women), while consuming plenty of water and tea. On the other five days of the week, you can eat normally.
Another way to do it, as mentioned above, is to restrict your food intake between the hours of 12pm and 7pm daily, while not eating during the hours outside of that time.
It's Good To See More And More People Becoming More Conscious About Our Planet, And What Is Happening On It
It's great to see more people take an active role in doing some independent research and critical thinking. Disease rates are skyrocketing and have been for quite some time.
A large portion of this can be attributed to our eating habits and all of the toxic and harmful substances we put into our bodies regularly.
Over the past few years, the food industry has been exposed in several ways, whether it's issues concerning GMOs and the pesticides that go with them, or all of the examples of pharmaceutical fraud. All of it is a result of a massive shift in consciousness that's happening on our planet, where so much is coming to light in all aspects of our every day lives, food and health is just one.
Fasting is also sparking the interest of many because, along with this consciousness shift, comes awareness of a world beyond our physical one. This realm deals with near death experiences, quantum physics, parapsychology, and our overall spiritual nature and the proof that's emerging that we are more than just this body, and that human beings do indeed have a spiritual nature.
The fact that modern day science, in many instances, is catching up to ancient wisdom is quite exciting. Not only in neuroscience and quantum physics, but health as well.
Related Articles on the Health Benefits of Intermittent Fasting:
Dr. Mike explains the amazing health benefits of intermittent fasting and why you should think about incorporating it into your daily routine. Dr. Mike VanDerschelden is an associate doctor at the Bergman Family Chiropractic clinic.
Your Brain Is Not A Computer June 26 2017 | From: Sott / Various
No matter how hard they try, brain scientists and cognitive psychologists will never find a copy of Beethoven’s 5th Symphony in the brain – or copies of words, pictures, grammatical rules or any other kinds of environmental stimuli.
The human brain isn’t really empty, of course. But it does not contain most of the things people think it does – not even simple things such as ‘memories’.
Our shoddy thinking about the brain has deep historical roots, but the invention of computers in the 1940s got us especially confused. For more than half a century now, psychologists, linguists, neuroscientists and other experts on human behaviour have been asserting that the human brain works like a computer.
[Comment: This article takes into account the currently held mainstream of what a 'computer' is - it does not take into account black project technologies that are far more advanced.]
To see how vacuous this idea is, consider the brains of babies. Thanks to evolution, human neonates, like the newborns of all other mammalian species, enter the world prepared to interact with it effectively.
A baby's vision is blurry, but it pays special attention to faces, and is quickly able to identify its mother's. It prefers the sound of voices to non-speech sounds, and can distinguish one basic speech sound from another. We are, without doubt, built to make social connections.
A healthy newborn is also equipped with more than a dozen reflexes - ready-made reactions to certain stimuli that are important for its survival. It turns its head in the direction of something that brushes its cheek and then sucks whatever enters its mouth. It holds its breath when submerged in water.
It grasps things placed in its hands so strongly it can nearly support its own weight. Perhaps most important, newborns come equipped with powerful learning mechanisms that allow them to change rapidly so they can interact increasingly effectively with their world, even if that world is unlike the one their distant ancestors faced.
Senses, reflexes and learning mechanisms - this is what we start with, and it is quite a lot, when you think about it. If we lacked any of these capabilities at birth, we would probably have trouble surviving.
But here is what we are not born with: information, data, rules, software, knowledge, lexicons, representations, algorithms, programs, models, memories, images, processors, subroutines, encoders, decoders, symbols, or buffers - design elements that allow digital computers to behave somewhat intelligently. Not only are we not born with such things, we also don't develop them - ever.
We don't store words or the rules that tell us how to manipulate them. We don't create representations of visual stimuli, store them in a short-term memory buffer, and then transfer the representation into a long-term memory device. We don't retrieve information or images or words from memory registers. Computers do all of these things, but organisms do not.
Computers, quite literally, process information - numbers, letters, words, formulas, images. The information first has to be encoded into a format computers can use, which means patterns of ones and zeroes ('bits') organised into small chunks ('bytes').
On my computer, each byte contains 64 bits, and a certain pattern of those bits stands for the letter d, another for the letter o, and another for the letter g. Side by side, those three bytes form the word dog.
One single image - say, the photograph of my cat Henry on my desktop - is represented by a very specific pattern of a million of these bytes ('one megabyte'), surrounded by some special characters that tell the computer to expect an image, not a word.
Computers, quite literally, move these patterns from place to place in different physical storage areas etched into electronic components. Sometimes they also copy the patterns, and sometimes they transform them in various ways - say, when we are correcting errors in a manuscript or when we are touching up a photograph.
The rules computers follow for moving, copying and operating on these arrays of data are also stored inside the computer. Together, a set of rules is called a 'program' or an 'algorithm'. A group of algorithms that work together to help us do something (like buy stocks or find a date online) is called an 'application' - what most people now call an 'app'.
Forgive me for this introduction to computing, but I need to be clear: computers really do operate on symbolic representations of the world. They really store and retrieve. They really process. They really have physical memories. They really are guided in everything they do, without exception, by algorithms.
Humans, on the other hand, do not - never did, never will. Given this reality, why do so many scientists talk about our mental life as if we were computers?
In his book In Our Own Image (2015), the artificial intelligence expert George Zarkadakis describes six different metaphors people have employed over the past 2,000 years to try to explain human intelligence.
In the earliest one, eventually preserved in the Bible, humans were formed from clay or dirt, which an intelligent god then infused with its spirit. That spirit 'explained' our intelligence - grammatically, at least.
The invention of hydraulic engineering in the 3rd century BCE led to the popularity of a hydraulic model of human intelligence, the idea that the flow of different fluids in the body - the 'humours' - accounted for both our physical and mental functioning. The hydraulic metaphor persisted for more than 1,600 years, handicapping medical practice all the while.
By the 1500s, automata powered by springs and gears had been devised, eventually inspiring leading thinkers such as René Descartes to assert that humans are complex machines. In the 1600s, the British philosopher Thomas Hobbes suggested that thinking arose from small mechanical motions in the brain.
By the 1700s, discoveries about electricity and chemistry led to new theories of human intelligence - again, largely metaphorical in nature. In the mid-1800s, inspired by recent advances in communications, the German physicist Hermann von Helmholtz compared the brain to a telegraph.
The mathematician John von Neumann stated flatly that the function of the human nervous system is 'prima facie digital', drawing parallel after parallel between the components of the computing machines of the day and the components of the human brain
Each metaphor reflected the most advanced thinking of the era that spawned it. Predictably, just a few years after the dawn of computer technology in the 1940s, the brain was said to operate like a computer, with the role of physical hardware played by the brain itself and our thoughts serving as software.
The landmark event that launched what is now broadly called 'cognitive science' was the publication of Language and Communication (1951) by the psychologist George Miller. Miller proposed that the mental world could be studied rigorously using concepts from information theory, computation and linguistics.
This kind of thinking was taken to its ultimate expression in the short book The Computer and the Brain (1958), in which the mathematician John von Neumann stated flatly that the function of the human nervous system is 'prima facie digital'.
Although he acknowledged that little was actually known about the role the brain played in human reasoning and memory, he drew parallel after parallel between the components of the computing machines of the day and the components of the human brain.
Propelled by subsequent advances in both computer technology and brain research, an ambitious multidisciplinary effort to understand human intelligence gradually developed, firmly rooted in the idea that humans are, like computers, information processors.
This effort now involves thousands of researchers, consumes billions of dollars in funding, and has generated a vast literature consisting of both technical and mainstream articles and books.
Ray Kurzweil's book How to Create a Mind: The Secret of Human Thought Revealed (2013), exemplifies this perspective, speculating about the 'algorithms' of the brain, how the brain 'processes data', and even how it superficially resembles integrated circuits in its structure.
The information processing (IP) metaphor of human intelligence now dominates human thinking, both on the street and in the sciences.
There is virtually no form of discourse about intelligent human behaviour that proceeds without employing this metaphor, just as no form of discourse about intelligent human behaviour could proceed in certain eras and cultures without reference to a spirit or deity. The validity of the IP metaphor in today's world is generally assumed without question.
But the IP metaphor is, after all, just another metaphor - a story we tell to make sense of something we don't actually understand. And like all the metaphors that preceded it, it will certainly be cast aside at some point - either replaced by another metaphor or, in the end, replaced by actual knowledge.
Just over a year ago, on a visit to one of the world's most prestigious research institutes, I challenged researchers there to account for intelligent human behaviour without reference to any aspect of the IP metaphor. They couldn't do it, and when I politely raised the issue in subsequent email communications, they still had nothing to offer months later.
They saw the problem. They didn't dismiss the challenge as trivial. But they couldn't offer an alternative. In other words, the IP metaphor is 'sticky'. It encumbers our thinking with language and ideas that are so powerful we have trouble thinking around them.
The faulty logic of the IP metaphor is easy enough to state. It is based on a faulty syllogism - one with two reasonable premises and a faulty conclusion.
Reasonable premise #1: all computers are capable of behaving intelligently.
Reasonable premise #2: all computers are information processors.
Faulty conclusion: all entities that are capable of behaving intelligently are information processors.
Setting aside the formal language, the idea that humans must be information processors just because computers are information processors is just plain silly, and when, some day, the IP metaphor is finally abandoned, it will almost certainly be seen that way by historians, just as we now view the hydraulic and mechanical metaphors to be silly.
If the IP metaphor is so silly, why is it so sticky? What is stopping us from brushing it aside, just as we might brush aside a branch that was blocking our path? Is there a way to understand human intelligence without leaning on a flimsy intellectual crutch?
And what price have we paid for leaning so heavily on this particular crutch for so long? The IP metaphor, after all, has been guiding the writing and thinking of a large number of researchers in multiple fields for decades. At what cost?
In a classroom exercise I have conducted many times over the years, I begin by recruiting a student to draw a detailed picture of a dollar bill - 'as detailed as possible', I say - on the blackboard in front of the room.
When the student has finished, I cover the drawing with a sheet of paper, remove a dollar bill from my wallet, tape it to the board, and ask the student to repeat the task. When he or she is done, I remove the cover from the first drawing, and the class comments on the differences.
Because you might never have seen a demonstration like this, or because you might have trouble imagining the outcome, I have asked Jinny Hyun, one of the student interns at the institute where I conduct my research, to make the two drawings. Here is her drawing 'from memory' (notice the metaphor):
And here is the drawing she subsequently made with a dollar bill present:
Jinny was as surprised by the outcome as you probably are, but it is typical. As you can see, the drawing made in the absence of the dollar bill is horrible compared with the drawing made from an exemplar, even though Jinny has seen a dollar bill thousands of times.
What is the problem? Don't we have a 'representation' of the dollar bill 'stored' in a 'memory register' in our brains? Can't we just 'retrieve' it and use it to make our drawing?
Obviously not, and a thousand years of neuroscience will never locate a representation of a dollar bill stored inside the human brain for the simple reason that it is not there to be found.
A wealth of brain studies tells us, in fact, that multiple and sometimes large areas of the brain are often involved in even the most mundane memory tasks.
When strong emotions are involved, millions of neurons can become more active.
In a 2016 study of survivors of a plane crash by the University of Toronto neuropsychologist Brian Levine and others, recalling the crash increased neural activity in 'the amygdala, medial temporal lobe, anterior and posterior midline, and visual cortex' of the passengers.
The idea, advanced by several scientists, that specific memories are somehow stored in individual neurons is preposterous; if anything, that assertion just pushes the problem of memory to an even more challenging level: how and where, after all, is the memory stored in the cell?
So what is occurring when Jinny draws the dollar bill in its absence? If Jinny had never seen a dollar bill before, her first drawing would probably have not resembled the second drawing at all. Having seen dollar bills before, she was changed in some way.
Specifically, her brain was changed in a way that allowed her to visualise a dollar bill - that is, to re-experience seeing a dollar bill, at least to some extent.
The difference between the two diagrams reminds us that visualising something (that is, seeing something in its absence) is far less accurate than seeing something in its presence. This is why we're much better at recognising than recalling.
When we re-member something (from the Latin re, 'again', and memorari, 'be mindful of'), we have to try to relive an experience; but when we recognise something, we must merely be conscious of the fact that we have had this perceptual experience before.
Perhaps you will object to this demonstration. Jinny had seen dollar bills before, but she hadn't made a deliberate effort to 'memorise' the details. Had she done so, you might argue, she could presumably have drawn the second image without the bill being present.
Even in this case, though, no image of the dollar bill has in any sense been 'stored' in Jinny's brain. She has simply become better prepared to draw it accurately, just as, through practice, a pianist becomes more skilled in playing a concerto without somehow inhaling a copy of the sheet music.
From this simple exercise, we can begin to build the framework of a metaphor-free theory of intelligent human behaviour - one in which the brain isn't completely empty, but is at least empty of the baggage of the IP metaphor.
As we navigate through the world, we are changed by a variety of experiences. Of special note are experiences of three types:
1. We observe what is happening around us (other people behaving, sounds of music, instructions directed at us, words on pages, images on screens)
2. We are exposed to the pairing of unimportant stimuli (such as sirens) with important stimuli (such as the appearance of police cars);
3. We are punished or rewarded for behaving in certain ways.
We become more effective in our lives if we change in ways that are consistent with these experiences - if we can now recite a poem or sing a song, if we are able to follow the instructions we are given, if we respond to the unimportant stimuli more like we do to the important stimuli, if we refrain from behaving in ways that were punished, if we behave more frequently in ways that were rewarded.
Misleading headlines notwithstanding, no one really has the slightest idea how the brain changes after we have learned to sing a song or recite a poem. But neither the song nor the poem has been 'stored' in it. The brain has simply changed in an orderly way that now allows us to sing the song or recite the poem under certain conditions.
When called on to perform, neither the song nor the poem is in any sense 'retrieved' from anywhere in the brain, any more than my finger movements are 'retrieved' when I tap my finger on my desk. We simply sing or recite - no retrieval necessary.
A few years ago, I asked the neuroscientist Eric Kandel of Columbia University - winner of a Nobel Prize for identifying some of the chemical changes that take place in the neuronal synapses of the Aplysia (a marine snail) after it learns something - how long he thought it would take us to understand how human memory works.
He quickly replied: 'A hundred years.' I didn't think to ask him whether he thought the IP metaphor was slowing down neuroscience, but some neuroscientists are indeed beginning to think the unthinkable - that the metaphor is not indispensable.
A few cognitive scientists - notably Anthony Chemero of the University of Cincinnati, the author of Radical Embodied Cognitive Science (2009) - now completely reject the view that the human brain works like a computer.
The mainstream view is that we, like computers, make sense of the world by performing computations on mental representations of it, but Chemero and others describe another way of understanding intelligent behaviour - as a direct interaction between organisms and their world.
My favourite example of the dramatic difference between the IP perspective and what some now call the 'anti-representational' view of human functioning involves two different ways of explaining how a baseball player manages to catch a fly ball - beautifully explicated by Michael McBeath, now at Arizona State University, and his colleagues in a 1995 paper in Science.
The IP perspective requires the player to formulate an estimate of various initial conditions of the ball's flight - the force of the impact, the angle of the trajectory, that kind of thing - then to create and analyse an internal model of the path along which the ball will likely move, then to use that model to guide and adjust motor movements continuously in time in order to intercept the ball.
That is all well and good if we functioned as computers do, but McBeath and his colleagues gave a simpler account: to catch the ball, the player simply needs to keep moving in a way that keeps the ball in a constant visual relationship with respect to home plate and the surrounding scenery (technically, in a 'linear optical trajectory').
This might sound complicated, but it is actually incredibly simple, and completely free of computations, representations and algorithms.
Two determined psychology professors at Leeds Beckett University in the UK - Andrew Wilson and Sabrina Golonka - include the baseball example among many others that can be looked at simply and sensibly outside the IP framework.
They have been blogging for years about what they call a 'more coherent, naturalised approach to the scientific study of human behaviour... at odds with the dominant cognitive neuroscience approach'. This is far from a movement, however; the mainstream cognitive sciences continue to wallow uncritically in the IP metaphor, and some of the world's most influential thinkers have made grand predictions about humanity's future that depend on the validity of the metaphor.
One prediction - made by the futurist Kurzweil, the physicist Stephen Hawking and the neuroscientist Randal Koene, among others - is that, because human consciousness is supposedly like computer software, it will soon be possible to download human minds to a computer, in the circuits of which we will become immensely powerful intellectually and, quite possibly, immortal.
This concept drove the plot of the dystopian movie Transcendence (2014) starring Johnny Depp as the Kurzweil-like scientist whose mind was downloaded to the internet - with disastrous results for humanity.
Fortunately, because the IP metaphor is not even slightly valid, we will never have to worry about a human mind going amok in cyberspace; alas, we will also never achieve immortality through downloading.
This is not only because of the absence of consciousness software in the brain; there is a deeper problem here - let's call it the uniqueness problem - which is both inspirational and depressing.
Because neither 'memory banks' nor 'representations' of stimuli exist in the brain, and because all that is required for us to function in the world is for the brain to change in an orderly way as a result of our experiences, there is no reason to believe that any two of us are changed the same way by the same experience.
If you and I attend the same concert, the changes that occur in my brain when I listen to Beethoven's 5th will almost certainly be completely different from the changes that occur in your brain. Those changes, whatever they are, are built on the unique neural structure that already exists, each structure having developed over a lifetime of unique experiences.
This is why, as Sir Frederic Bartlett demonstrated in his book Remembering (1932), no two people will repeat a story they have heard the same way and why, over time, their recitations of the story will diverge more and more.
No 'copy' of the story is ever made; rather, each individual, upon hearing the story, changes to some extent - enough so that when asked about the story later (in some cases, days, months or even years after Bartlett first read them the story) - they can re-experience hearing the story to some extent, although not very well (see the first drawing of the dollar bill, above).
This is inspirational, I suppose, because it means that each of us is truly unique, not just in our genetic makeup, but even in the way our brains change over time. It is also depressing, because it makes the task of the neuroscientist daunting almost beyond imagination. For any given experience, orderly change could involve a thousand neurons, a million neurons or even the entire brain, with the pattern of change different in every brain.
Worse still, even if we had the ability to take a snapshot of all of the brain's 86 billion neurons and then to simulate the state of those neurons in a computer, that vast pattern would mean nothing outside the body of the brain that produced it.
This is perhaps the most egregious way in which the IP metaphor has distorted our thinking about human functioning. Whereas computers do store exact copies of data - copies that can persist unchanged for long periods of time, even if the power has been turned off - the brain maintains our intellect only as long as it remains alive.
There is no on-off switch. Either the brain keeps functioning, or we disappear. What's more, as the neurobiologist Steven Rose pointed out in The Future of the Brain (2005), a snapshot of the brain's current state might also be meaningless unless we knew the entire life history of that brain's owner - perhaps even about the social context in which he or she was raised.
Think how difficult this problem is. To understand even the basics of how the brain maintains the human intellect, we might need to know not just the current state of all 86 billion neurons and their 100 trillion interconnections, not just the varying strengths with which they are connected, and not just the states of more than 1,000 proteins that exist at each connection point, but how the moment-to-moment activity of the brain contributes to the integrity of the system.
Add to this the uniqueness of each brain, brought about in part because of the uniqueness of each person's life history, and Kandel's prediction starts to sound overly optimistic. (In a recent op-ed in TheNew York Times, the neuroscientist Kenneth Miller suggested it will take 'centuries' just to figure out basic neuronal connectivity.)
Meanwhile, vast sums of money are being raised for brain research, based in some cases on faulty ideas and promises that cannot be kept. The most blatant instance of neuroscience gone awry, documented recently in a report in Scientific American, concerns the $1.3 billion Human Brain Project launched by the European Union in 2013.
Convinced by the charismatic Henry Markram that he could create a simulation of the entire human brain on a supercomputer by the year 2023, and that such a model would revolutionise the treatment of Alzheimer's disease and other disorders, EU officials funded his project with virtually no restrictions.
Less than two years into it, the project turned into a 'brain wreck', and Markram was asked to step down.
We are organisms, not computers. Get over it. Let's get on with the business of trying to understand ourselves, but without being encumbered by unnecessary intellectual baggage. The IP metaphor has had a half-century run, producing few, if any, insights along the way. The time has come to hit the DELETE key.
Schools: The New "Animal Farm" June 23 2017 | From: BeyondConformity
In a recent Herald on Sunday was an article about Waitetuna school near Raglan, where the school principal agreed to allow a midwife to show a film about the other side of vaccines on the school premises, but the board of Trustees overturned her agreement, on the basis that the topic was controversial.
I have a question. What are schools for? Education, or social engineering? George Orwell wrote a book called “Animal Farm” Have you read it?
If a parent from Waitetuna school objected to nurses and doctors coming into the school and vaccinating children, would the Board of Trustees agree and stop them coming in because vaccines are controversial?
I somehow doubt it.
But I want to tell you a story of a young child, in a school, who along with some other children, returned a consent form for the HPV vaccine, which said, “No, I do not consent”.
What happened next will illustrate that New Zealand schools are not safe for children, and why the Department of Health vaccination programmes should be barred from schools.
The forms were collected and all the children who had returned “no” consent forms, were gathered in a separate group and the nurses berated the girls telling them that their parents didn’t love them, and that they could consent on their own, without their parent’s permission.
One of the girls caved to that, but then another child who had watched the life of an older sibling be trashed and lead to a quality of life less than desirable, fought back. She refused to sign it. The nurses pushed. But she got angry and told the nurse that she wanted to go now.
The nurse refused. The girl then told the vaccinating nurse that she wanted to call her parents and the police because what they were doing was wrong. Nothing like the experience of your own eyes, to firm up your own convictions!
At this point, she was quickly hustled out of the room in order not to freak out the other girls being pressured into going against their parent’s wishes. How did all this situation come about?
The Department of Health, with school consent, seems to have started using the tactic of not telling the schools when they are coming to vaccinate. Their ostensible reason for this, is so that the children don’t get worried in advance.
The real reason is so that the parents of the non-vaccinators can’t keep their children home for that day, which allows the provaccine including the nurses, teachers and other pupils, to bully and berate children whose parents have chosen differently.
So while parents who don’t consent, would rather not send their children to school on that day, the Department of Health deliberately thwarts that option. This could be called revoking democratic decision making.
Mainstream Media Promotes Chemical VIOLENCE Against Children
A mini-documentary revealing how the pharma-controlled mainstream media promotes chemical VIOLENCE against children, via mind-altering medications, pharmaceuticals and dangerous vaccine ingredients such as mercury, a brain-damaging neurotoxin.
Of course in this mind-numbed unethical climate of bullying, emotional blackmail and … yes … controversy, such tactics are considered to be noble, wonderful and lifesaving.
Vaccinations ARE indeed a controversial topic of discussion. I believe that if schools refuse to allow parents to watch a film at a school, describing another side of vaccination, then schools should ALSO refuse to allow the Department of Health to vaccinate children in schools.
The issue isn’t just “controversy”. It’s one of non-hypocrisy. What is “education”? How do you define learning? Only by hearing one side of a story?
Do you send your children to school, and allow the Department of Health to vaccinate your children in school because you can’t be bothered making the effort to follow through on your own convictions? Shouldn’t parents who chose to vaccinate, be responsible for doing that at their doctors?
Would you like schools to also become places where children can also be prescribed antibiotics, prescription drugs, or even, abortion on demand?
Or should schools SOLELY be places where people are educated and learn to think, in particular to figure out how to make their own decisions without being brainwashed by the school or the state?
Privacy Call To Limit Power Usage Monitoring June 22 2017 | From: RadioNewZealand
Smart meters that relay half-hourly power usage are a potential risk to people's personal security and privacy, and standards should be set to curb data collection, Privacy Commissioner John Edwards says.
The commissioner said about 70 percent of households in New Zealand have smart meters.
The devices automatically record and transmit power usage data in half hourly intervals, but that information can also reveal much about the comings and goings of people in a household at a given time.
The information is collected by electricity retailers like Meridian or Mercury, who use it to prepare their bills. It is then passed on to lines companies under information-sharing pacts.
Mr Edwards said it could indicate when people were out, at home or in the shower - and this could put their security at risk if abused.While this had not yet happened it was important to set standards in advance, he said.
The trend all over the world was to require that collection of data about people's private lives be kept to a minimum, he said.
Click on the image above to open a larger version in a new window
"It's going to be quite easy to figure out whether somebody lives alone, what kind of hours they're most likely to be home, what time they have their shower, what kind of appliances they have in their premises.
So when you're starting to get that level of detail it's time I think to sharpen up your policies on personal information."
He also suggested aggregating data into clusters to cover an entire community, or all the people in a street, rather than recording data on individual homes.
That would be enough to provide information that network companies needed when planning to make economically justified investments.
Lines Companies Defend Data Collection
The electricity retailers' chief lobbyist, Jenny Cameron, said some lines companies had been seeking far more information lately than they usually did, which had caused her group to go to the Privacy Commissioner.
"We see the issue as three-fold," she said.
"One is getting data requests that are large - such as three years of half-hour data at individual level.
The second issue is that we want to be sure that it is legitimately being used for network planning purposes.
The third reason is, how is the data being protected?"
The Electricity Networks Association insisted the data its members gathered was safeguarded.
Chief executive Graeme Peters said there was nothing new in what his members were doing - data on customers has been collected for about a century.
And it was more necessary now than ever because of pending electricity reforms, he said.
"We are looking at more cost reflective pricing and we need to get access to data on customer demand at half-hourly intervals and the peaks [of their usage].
That data will be protected - our companies have got privacy statements - [we want] data around how much power might be consumed in a half-hour interval or the absolute peak of electricity that the customer is using in any one day."
Ten Ways To Easily Boost Your Serotonin Levels And Live A Happier Life June 21 2017 | From: NaturalNews
What makes you happy? The answer to this question could be different for every one because happiness is relative.
But one thing’s certain: Increasing your serotonin levels can boost your mood and keep you from sulking and wallowing because of a bad day.
Most commonly known as the “happy hormone” serotonin does more than boost your mood. It also has other health benefits, which is why having more of this will make you happy and healthy at the same time. Here are ways to boost your serotonin levels:
1. Eat some animal protein –Feelings of sadness oftentimes feel like they’re just in our heads. Sometimes when you feel bad, you think that your brain (or heart) is responsible but know that thoughts and feelings are more than that. These are results of physiological reactions that happen inside your body.
An amino acid called tryptophan help produce serotonin so you can start feeling happy. Animal protein is an excellent source of tryptophan so include more chicken, fish, eggs, beef, dairy, even lamb in your diet. Whey and egg protein are scientifically-proven to increase this amino acid in the brain.
2. Get out and enjoy the sun –Natural light have a positive effect on your mood. Sunlight triggers serotonin synthesis. The brighter sunlight you are exposed to, the more serotonin the body produces.
This is a possible explanation why people feel gloomy on rainy weather.
3. Get enough vitamin D – Vitamin D helps in converting tryptophan into serotonin. You can get this from sun exposure or taking supplements.
4. Add more seafood to your diet – Cod liver oil and marine fat contain vitamin D and long-chain omega-3s that are helpful in boosting the serotonin production in the brain. Ample amounts will also help transport it to the neurons efficiently.
5. Try some more curry – Curry has turmeric, which is considered as a potent anti-depressant.
This natural mood-lifter helps increase serotonin in the brain.
6. Perk up – There’s a reason why most people need coffee to jolt them out of lethargy. Caffeine, according to some research, has a positive effect on the levels of serotonin in the brain.
7. Break some sweat – Exercise is known to be effective in increasing serotonin levels because motor neurons activated during physical activity boost the release of serotonin.
Furthermore, regular exercise will spike tryptophan levels in the brain, which means more serotonin for you.
9. Munch on more nuts – Nuts contain tryptophan, so the more of these you eat, the happier you should be.
Also, nuts can help prevent cancer, heart disease and respiratory ailments.
10. Drink green tea – Drinking green tea is relaxing, no doubt. But it’s also good for the mood. It contains 1-theanine, an amino acid that boosts serotonin levels. It also has a powerful antioxidant that prevents brain damage.
Now that you know that there’s more to feeling happy, you can easily find ways to pull yourself out of a rut and start smiling.
1. Vaccine manufacturers have NO liability (National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986), so CANNOT be sued for injury from their product and they have no incentive to make their product as safe as possible.
Vaccines are not held to the same double blind gold standard of clinical testing as other pharmaceutical drugs because they are considered biological products under the Public Health Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act. They meet the same standards as cosmetics.
Nurse Fired For Sharing Truth About Vaccines Tells All
The per vaccine Federal Excise Tax is used to pay the vaccine injured through the government-created National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (NVICP). $3.1 Billion has been paid to date (through 2015).
Vaccines contain neurotoxins (aluminum and mercury) far exceeding “safe levels” deemed by the EPA.
The concept of herd/community immunity cannot be achieved by vaccines because vaccines are NOT 100% effective. Unlike lifetime immunity afforded by disease, vaccine-induced immunity lasts 2-10 years.
Doctors receive financial rewards from insurance companies for having patients fully vaccinated (~$400 per patient). They are advised NOT to share all the risks or the vaccine package inserts, so 100% informed choices cannot be made in a doctor’s office when vaccinating.
If someone dies from a vaccine, their family will be awarded no more than $250,000. Most cases of vaccine injury are dismissed because doctors and vaccine manufacturers deny a causation link. The statutory time limit for filing a claim is only 2 years after death and 3 years from the time of vaccine injury.
The government plan “Healthy People 2020” has a goal to fully vaccinate all children and adults by 2020. There are 217 new vaccines being created right now.
Nigerian Court Rules Coca-Cola Products Unfit For Human Consumption, Citizens Call For Boycott & You’ll Never Eat McDonald’s French Fries Again After Watching This June 18 2017 | From: TruthTheory / EducateIndpireChange / Various
The Coca-Cola Company is now in deep trouble. Many people have come to realize in recent times that products of the company do more harm to their health. In fact, all Coca-Cola products have no recorded important nutritional value.
According to health experts, people who drink just 330ml of Coca-Cola would have their blood sugar levels increase dramatically within 20 minutes. If they continue to drink Coca-Cola continuously, they are likely to have serious blood pressure problems.
As a soda drink, it also contributes to obesity. In 2016, it emerged that Coca-Cola and Pepsi have been funding up to 96 health groups in the United States to mislead the public that their products have no links to obesity. When this was made public, Coca-Cola issued a statement denying the claim.
What else can the company do than to deny the claim? Coca-Cola has since increased its advertising campaigns in order to continue to poison its consumers to death. We’re not intentionally scaring you, we’re just pointing out the facts. Soda drinks, including Coca-Cola, are nothing but poison.
In the West African country of Nigeria, a court has ruled that two products of Coca-Cola – Fanta and Sprite – are not safe for human consumption.
Nigeria is Africa’s most populous nation with over 173 million citizens. This makes the country a hotspot for many multinational corporations in Africa. But due to widespread ignorance and endemic government and national corruption, many corporations do not follow due process in the country.
All kinds of products and services are sold or rendered to the public without any thorough checks being done by the country’s regulators to ensure standards. In December 2016, Nigeria’s border officials seized fake rice made from plastic, weighing around 2.5 tonnes and intended for distribution to people during the Christmas festivities.
According to officials, the fake and poisonous rice was smuggled into the country by unscrupulous businessmen. That is how corruption enables corporations and individuals to sell dangerous products to the public.
In the Coca-Cola case, presiding judge Justice Adedayo Oyebanji ruled that high levels of benzoic acid and sunset additives in Fanta and Sprite pose a serious health risk to consumers when mixed with ascorbic acid, commonly known as vitamin C.
The court also ordered the Nigerian Bottling Company (NBC) – a member of Coca-Cola Hellenic group which bottles Coca-Cola products in Nigeria – to place written warnings on the bottles of the two drinks, saying the drinks pose a health risk. This means the two drinks would carry warning labels like cigarettes.
The court didn’t stop there. It went further to award financial costs of two million naira ($6,350) against the National Agency for Food and Drug Administration and Control (NAFDAC) for failing to ensure health standards in the country.
“It is manifest that NAFDAC has been grossly irresponsible in its regulatory duties to the consumers of Fanta and Sprite manufactured by Nigeria Bottling Company. NAFDAC has failed the citizens of this great nation by its certification as satisfactory for human consumption products … which become poisonous in the presence of ascorbic acid,”Justice Oyebanji said in his ruling.
In fact, the Nigerian public wouldn’t have had this relief ruling aimed at protecting their lives had something not gone wrong between a businessman and the NBC.
Businessman Dr Emmanuel Fijabi Adebo used to do business with the NBC. He buys NBC products and distributes them across the country. In 2007, he decided to go international. Dr Adebo’ company, Fijabi Adebo Holdings Limited, attempted to export Coca-Cola products (Fanta and Sprite) to the United Kingdom for retail.
But authorities in the United Kingdom seized and subsequently destroyed the whole shipment of drinks. Regulators in the United Kingdom said the drinks contained excessive levels of sunset yellow and benzoic acid. According to United Kingdom regulators, benzoic acid can form the carcinogen benzene when combined with ascorbic acid. This means the drinks cause cancer.
The NBC failed to compensate Dr Adebo for his financial loss. This compelled him to go to court to seek redress. After hearing the full facts of the case, the court held that products considered dangerous in the United Kingdom are also dangerous in Nigeria.
“Soft drinks manufactured by Nigeria Bottling Company ought to be fit for human consumption irrespective of color or creed,”the judge said.
When the ruling was given, Mr Adebo expressed his displeasure, vowing to pursue further damages because the costs the court awarded are not enough. He told CNN in an interview:
“I’m happy that I’m victorious and we’ve alerted Nigerians and the entire world to what is happening in Nigeria. What the court fined NAFDAC is not one tenth of the amount I’ve spent on litigation … We should have been awarded at least the amount that we spent in purchasing that product and in exporting it to UK. We are entitled to special damages for what we have gone through.”
Following the ruling, Nigerian citizens took to social media to express their dissatisfaction of all Coca-Cola products. Many lashed out at NAFDAC for handling consumer safety in the country poorly. They accused the agency of placing more priority on generating revenues than protecting citizens.
Shaving before applying underarm antiperspirants can increase aluminum absorption. Could this explain the greater number of tumors and the disproportionate incidence of breast cancer in the upper outer quadrant of the breast near the armpit?
Some also accused NAFDAC for being responsible for numerous health problems and deaths because it allows corporations to sell poison to the public. The majority of citizens called for a boycott against all Coca-Cola products in the country to serve as a deterrent to other unscrupulous corporations taking advantage of endemic corruption to kill the public.
You’ll Never Eat McDonald’s French Fries Again After Watching This
Renowned activist and author Michael Pollan illustrates how McDonald’s insists on using Russet Burbank Potatoes, a potato in America that is unusually long and difficult to grow.
They further insist that their potatoes have no blemishes at all, which is hard because these potatoes commonly suffer from what is referred to as Net Necrosis, which causes unwanted spots and lines on the potatoes.
If they have this, McDonald’s won’t buy them and the only way to eliminate this is through the use of a pesticide called methamidophos (Monitor) “that is so toxic that the farmers who grow these potatoes in Idaho won’t venture outside and into their fields for five days after they spray.”
When McDonald’s is ready to harvest their potatoes, they have to put them in giant atmospheric controlled sheds the size of football stadiums because they are not edible for six weeks.“They have to off gas all the chemicals in them.”
Lawsuit Could End Water Fluoridation Once And For All By Demonstrating Its Neurotoxicity June 17 2017 | From: HealthFreedoms
The practice water fluoridation in the United States has been under growing scrutiny for years by a public that has become conscious of the fact adding toxic chemicals which are proven to be harmful to human health and children’s development to public water is medication without consent.
Never-the-less, the effort to stop fluoridation of municipal water supplies has been an uphill battle against entrenched financial interests and against dated ideas about health.
While each year we hear news of cities heeding the concerns of their citizens and stopping fluoridation, without a major victory at the national level, people will be fighting this for years to come, all the while consuming toxic chemicals in the one thing we cannot live without, water.
The Fluoride Action Network (FAN) is reporting on a major development to cut the head off of this snake, and an unprecedented lawsuit is now holding promise for a national reversal of municipal water fluoridation.
Based on neurotoxicity studies, the “EPA has been served with a petition that includes more than 2,500 pages of scientific documentation detailing the risks of water fluoridation to human health.”
“This case will present the first time a court will consider the neurotoxicity of fluoride and the question of whether fluoridation presents an unreasonable risk under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA).
And, in contrast to most other legal challenges of Agency actions, TSCA gives us the right to get the federal court to consider our evidence ‘de novo’ - meaning federal courts are to conduct their own independent review of the evidence without deference to the EPA’s judgment.”
The lawsuit has been served along with a petition containing thousands of signatures of concerned and well-informed citizens, and includes more than 2500 pages of documents detailing the harm inherent in poisoning the pubic with fluoride.
In detail, the complaint is an attempt to demonstrate how this practice violates the Toxic Substances Control Act.
“The Fluoride Action Network (FAN), along with a coalition of environmental and public health groups has filed a complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California against the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in response to their denial of our petition under Section 21 of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) seeking a ban on water fluoridation.
We believe this lawsuit is an unprecedented opportunity to end the practice once and for all in the U.S., and potentially throughout the world, based on the well-documented neurotoxicity of fluoride. You may read the official complaint here.”
The negative effects of consuming fluoridated water are well-documented, and the body of evidence continues to grow. In 2012 a major Harvard study presented a study demonstrating water fluoridation lowers IQ.
In 2016 a study demonstrated a link between increased diabetes and water fluoridation. In 2015 the EPA had to issue new guidelines for safe levels of fluoride, reducing the amount, citing the potential for fluoridated water damages teeth, which ironically, is the very condition which we are told is the reason we need fluoride in the first place.
Public water fluoridation is slowing being defeated, and this lawsuit may play a major role in this fight.
NZ Media Calls For Compulsory Vaccinations & Sweden Bans Mandatory Vaccinations Over ‘Serious Health Concerns’ June 9 2017 | From: Uncensored / Stuff / HealthNutNews / Various
Somewhere between the leading edge of scientific discovery and the right of people to decide their own medical treatment lies the fate of thousands of defenceless children.
For the last several hundred years, science and, most importantly, the medical profession have been peeling back the dark curtain of superstition, ignorance and profit-driven chicanery which directed the treatment of human illness.
Investigation, experimentation and rigorous testing has slowly replaced guesswork, witchcraft, old wives’ remedies and unmitigated humbug as thinking people sought effective remedies and cures for the many ailments which invaded their lives.
So it was coming wasn’t it? Really hard to read. Whore media doing the cabal’s bidding. The following article was written by someone with cognitive dissonance - oblivious to the dangerous truths about vaccines.
Foremost among these discoveries was the concept of boosting our natural immune systems against invasive disease by vaccination.
I still recall with sadness attending the funerals of two of my young schoolmates who died of tuberculosis more than 50 years ago now. There was also a vivacious and spirited little girl who became horribly twisted and crippled by poliomyelitis (then called infantile paralysis).
She died just before her 16th birthday from complications caused by that terrible affliction. Her bravery in her last hours was inspirational. Then there was the tortured death of a little cousin who died of whooping cough. The unfairness of these very personal and sad events made a huge impression on me in my youth which remains as strong today. Had vaccinations been available back then those children might not have died.
Not all attempts at finding new solutions to old problems were successful and there were not a few tragedies along the way. At each failure, however, lessons were learned, new safeguards put in place and the march of logical scientific investigation slowly loosened the hold of old superstitions on the more vulnerable people in the community.
Sometime after World War II most of those old beliefs, in New Zealand at least, had simply disappeared into history. Those which remained became novelty entertainments at fairgrounds and similar places where so-called Gypsies would tell fortunes with crystal balls, read tea leaves and horoscopes or a dozen other harmless methods for a fee.
Few people were in any doubt that it was harmless fun and entertainment. Most newspapers still carry horoscopes for those bored enough to read their ambiguous messages and few people take them seriously.
Then, about two decades ago, some old superstitions began to reappear, but not simply as entertainments, but as the basis of a lucrative business venture. They were not taken seriously by most people then and most are still not today.
We tolerantly accept that people are free to attend seances, have so-called readings taken by some modern-day medium who claims to be in touch with the dead, play with tarot cards and pay some of these tricksters to clear houses of non-existent evil influences.
It is one thing to observe some of these rituals as part of an inherited culture but something very different when vulnerable, gullible and sometimes frightened people are persuaded to pay for them.
Like a malignant tumour which suddenly reappears after a period of remission, we can no longer ignore some of these practices. They are no longer entertainment or trivial amusements as they have engendered an illogical and very dangerous distrust of modern and proven medical procedures.
The latest and most sinister of these developments is the campaign against vaccinations for children on the spurious accusation that infant vaccinations for measles, mumps and rubella can cause autism. The myth was created by Dr Andrew Wakefield, whose flawed research, published in the Lancet 20 years ago, has been extensively studied, proved to be incorrect and discredited by leading medical professionals many times since.
Adults can engage in almost any form of alternative healing processes they like as they are only putting themselves at risk. They can also refuse any medical treatment for themselves as encapsulated in the New Zealand Bill of Rights. However making those decisions for vulnerable children is a very different and dangerous matter.
We have made huge advances in preventative medicine in the last few decades and it would be simply unforgivable to deny that protection to defenceless children simply because adults are stupid enough to believe obvious misinformation and humbug. Ironically though most of them have probably been protected by the very vaccinations they would deny their children.
Compulsory vaccination may be the only alternative if we are to avoid some of the tragic epidemics of the past.
Sweden Bans Mandatory Vaccinations Over ‘Serious Health Concerns’
Sweden has boldly decided to ban mandatory vaccinations citing both “serious health concerns” and the violation of each citizen’s constitutional rights to choose their own healthcare.
Well done Sweden. To see the full report click here. (Once on the page if your browser will allow it you can translate the page, otherwise, you’ll have to translate chunks of it with Google Translate.)
The Swedish Riksdag (parliament) rejected seven motions on May 10th, that would have locked forced vaccinations into law, stating:
"NHF Sweden sent a letter to the Committee and explained that it would violate our Constitution if we introduced compulsory vaccinations, or mandatory vaccinations as was submitted in Arkelsten’s motion.
Many others have also submitted correspondence and many citizens have called up Parliament and politicians. Parliamentary politicians has surely noticed that there’s a massive resistance to all forms of coercion with regard to vaccinations.
NHF Sweden also shows how frequent serious adverse reactions according to the rate at which FASS specifies in the package leaflet of the MMR vaccine, when you vaccinate an entire year group. In addition, one must take into account that each age group will receive the MMR vaccine twice, so the side effects are doubled. We must not forget that, in addition, similar adverse reaction lists apply for other vaccines.
In the letter, we have even included an extensive list of the additives found in vaccines – substances which are not health foods and certainly do not belong in babies or children. We also included for lawmakers a daunting list of studies that demonstrate vaccination is a bad idea.”
I’m both thrilled and shocked. Swedish families are lucky to have politicians working for their best- not for the best of those hiding behind the vaccines that maim and kill.
But, it’s time we do the same. Thankfully, we have people like Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who recently appeared on the Tucker Carlson Show, on our side to expose the “lawless mafia state” that has become Big Pharma and their “extremely lucrative” vaccines scam.
If you haven’t yet watched the interview, please do, it’s worth your time.
RFK, Jr: My Meeting with Trump on Vaccine Commission
Dr. Peter Gøtzsche Exposes Big Pharma As Organized Crime + Six Ways That The Medical System Makes Us Ill Before Kindergarten June 5 2017 | From: Sott / NaturalSociety / Various
The drug industry buys the professors first, then chiefs of department, then the other chief physicians and so on. They don't buy junior doctors. - Dr. Peter Gøtzsche
Big Pharma drugs kill around 200,000 Americans every year - half of them die while doing what their doctors told them. Sadly, the side effects and medical errors combine to cause the 3rd leading cause of death in America.
In this video interview courtesy of Dr. John McDougall, he exposes how the pharmaceutical companies stealthily act as an organized crime ring unbeknownst to the consumer.
Peter C. Gøtzsche, MD is a Danish medical researcher, and leader of the Nordic Cochrane Center at Rigshospitalet in Copenhagen, Denmark. He has written numerous reviews within the Cochrane collaboration.
Dr.Gøtzsche has been critical of screening for breast cancer using mammography, arguing that it cannot be justified; His critique stems from a meta-analysis he did on mammography screening studies and published as Is screening for breast cancer with mammography justifiable?
In The Lancet in 2000. In it he discarded 6 out of 8 studies arguing their randomization was inadequate.
In 2006 a paper by Gøtzsche on mammography screening was electronically published in the European Journal of Cancer ahead of print.
The journal later removed the paper completely from the journal website without any formal retraction. The paper was later published in Danish Medical Bulletin with a short note from the editor, and Gøtzsche and his coauthors commented on the unilateral retraction that the authors were not involved in.
In 2012 his book Mammography Screening: Truth, Lies and Controversy was published. In 2013 his book Deadly Medicines and Organized Crime: How Big Pharma has Corrupted Healthcare was published.
Six Ways That The Medical System Makes Us Ill Before Kindergarten
What do you think needs to be fixed most?
Mothers of small children ask me about natural health all the time. It happens in the line at my favorite natural grocer, or after a yoga class. Sometimes I receive questions through email or through a friend of a friend.
It’s a universal desire for parents to give their children the best start possible, but our medical system is not set up to do that at all. In fact, in 6 key ways, it is harming our children and damaging their prospects for future health. Here’s how:
1. Higher C-Sections Rates Put Babies at Risk
When I recently was preparing for birth through a Bradley birthing class, I was astounded to find out how high the C-section rates are at most hospitals. I understand that sometimes they are medically necessary, and they have their place, but this invasive, and dangerous procedure is getting out of control.
When a baby is born via C-section, there are numerous issues that cause possible long-term harm. Firstly, when a newborn passes through the vaginal canal, they are exposed to billions of beneficial bacteria which become part of their growing immune system. C-section babies are not exposed to this immune-boosting bacteria, and are more likely to become ill.
A baby’s skull is also designed to shift as it comes through the birth canal, and when they don’t, many mothers report the need for cranial sacral therapy to mimic the natural process of child birth to correct behavioral problems and neurological risks imposed by birth trauma.
2. Formula-Fed Babies are at Higher Risk for Depleted Immunity
Since babies can’t go straight to eating organic, non-GMO food from your plate, they rely on sustenance from another form – and Mother Nature has provided the perfect food – breast milk. A study published in the Canadian Medical Association Journal found that babies born by C-section and that drank formula instead of breast milk were more likely to be obese when they were older.
They were also more prone to inflammatory bowel disease, allergies, asthma, and even cancer.
"Our study addresses an important knowledge gap, since the infant gut microbiota has rarely been characterized with sequencing methods that provide sufficient coverage of the entire bacterial community,” writes Dr. Anita Kozyrskyj, University of Alberta, with coauthors.
“Our findings are particularly timely given the recent affirmation of the gut microbiota as a ‘super organ’ with diverse roles in health and disease, and the increasing concern over rising cesarean delivery and insufficient exclusive breastfeeding in Canada.”
3. Babies Subjected to 6x as Many Vaccines as They Were 40 Years Ago
The billion dollar pharmaceutical industry now thinks your children should be taking 49 doses of 14 different vaccines before your child even reaches the age of 6. By the time your baby is just two months old, they are supposed to have shots for diptheria, tetanus, pertussis, polio, HIB, Hepatitis B, Rotavirus, and PCV.
To put it simply, this is just too much, too soon.
4. We’re Given Antibiotics Instead of Probiotics
How many children are given amoxicillin or other antibiotics when their health care provider could help parents avoid the over-use of antibiotics which is causing super bugs and other medication-resistant disease by simply educating them about probiotics?
I’ve been giving my six-month-old small doses of probiotics in his breast milk since he was just a few days old. When my husband and I came down with a nasty upper respiratory infection recently, we were down for a week, my infant got over it in a day, and his immune system is still in its infancy, as he is.
Pregnant mothers can also boost their own healthy gut flora by making sure they take probiotics themselves to ensure they have sufficient healthy bacteria when it comes time to give birth.
5. Our Kids Don’t Play Outside Anymore
From the time a child can sit in a high chair, they are taught to look at a monitor or a cell phone. By the time they can run and catch a ball, instead of playing outside they’ve been trained to be chained to an electronic device.
Not only does this keep our children from the infinite wonders of the outdoor world – from worms crawling in the soil, to the wind blowing in the trees – but they miss out on numerous health benefits provided by nature.
Pediatricians’ offices have big screen televisions instead of books or tree houses, and the medical establishment rarely tells parents to make sure their kids are spending time in green spaces.
18% of adults do not wash their hands after using the bathroom
23% do not wash up before handling food
25% do not wash after changing a diaper
So how do we still fight disease? It’s simple. Our immune systems.
When given half a chance to do what they were designed to do, our immune systems protect against foreign germs and viruses very well. Medical doctors spend about 1% of their time in school learning about the diet and how important it is to our overall health.
This means that people who are arguably ignorant about how to keep a child healthy by supporting their immune systems naturally through diet, herbs, rest, and time in nature are telling us how to raise our kids.
Forget about the hand sanitizer; your toddler will probably lick the floor. You don’t have to worry though, if you know about the #1-5 keys outlined in this article and do all you can to boost their natural immunity. Then, those nasty germs don’t stand a chance.
Cover Stories Are Used To Control Explanations & Medical Propaganda Headlines For Gullible Minds May 31 2017 | From: JonRappoport / PublicIntelligence / Various
Years ago James Jesus Angleton left me with the impression that when an intelligence agency, such as the CIA, pulls off an assassination, bombing, or any event with which the agency does not wish to be associated, the agency uses the media to control the explanation by quickly putting into place a cover story that, along with several others, has been prepared in advance.
The fact that it made no sense did not stop many from believing it. It did not occur to people more gullible than thoughtful that a gangster would simply get another woman and not take the risk of assassinating the US president over a woman. The last thing the Mafia would want would be for Attorney General Robert Kennedy to bring the law down on the Mafia like a ton of bricks.
Another cover story was that Castro did it. This made even less sense. JFK had nixed the Joint Chiefs/CIA plan to invade Cuba, and he had refused air cover to the CIA’s Bay of Pigs invasion. JFK would certainly not be on Castro’s hit list.
Another cover story was that Lyndon Johnson was behind Kennedy’s assassination. As I wrote, there is no doubt that LBJ covered up the Joint Chiefs/CIA/Secret Service plot against JFK, as any president would have done, because the alternative was to destroy the American people’s confidence in the US military and security agencies.
The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court also covered up the plot, as did the Warren Commission, the media, and the Congress.
The “Johnson did it” story is the most preposterous of all. The Joint Chiefs, CIA, Secret Service, Chief Justice, Congress, and Media are not going to participate in the murder of a President and its coverup just for the sake of the VP’s personal ambition. The idea that so many strong institutions would permit a VP to murder a President for no reason other than the personal ambition of the VP is beyond absurdity.
Speaking of cover stories, I wonder if that is what we are witnessing in the leaked information to the New York Times about the Manchester Bombing. The only point of the leak is to set the story in place. The British complaints about the leaked information serve to disguise the leak’s purpose.
Setting a story in place early crowds out other explanations. Remember, the government claims to have had no warning of 9/11 but knew instantly who did it and set the story in place. The same for the Paris events, the Nice event, the Boston Marathon bombing, and I think all the others.
Authorities quickly come up with a story and names of those responsible. The alleged perpetrators or patsies, take your choice, are always dead and, thereby, unable to deny that they did it or say who put them up to it. The only exception that comes to mind is the younger brother who has been associated with the Boston Marathon bombing.
Despite two police attempts to shoot him to death, he inconveniently survived, but has never been seen or heard from. At his orchestrated trial, his court appointed attorney confessed for him, and the jury convicted on her confession.
Remember, Oswald was shot dead by Jack Ruby before Oswald was questioned by police. There is no explanation for an armed private citizen being inside the jail with Oswald and positioned to shoot him at close range. Clearly, Oswald was not to be permitted to give his story. And no patsy since has either.
Aside from filling space, their main function is to assure the public that “advances are always being made” and “good things are right around the corner.” It’s much better, for example, than, “Well, this month we didn’t discover a single important datum. Here’s hoping for better luck in June.”
A brief examination of medical-story headlines reveals that these stories are lacking in a little thing called reality; or they announce something so obvious it hardly merits mention, much less a full-blown study to establish what any person with a few working brain cells already knows.
Here are a few such headlines from a popular medical site (medicalnewstoday). They represent a mere few days’ worth of vital…baloney:
HOW DOES POOR SLEEP AFFECT OUR ABILITY TO LEARN? A STUDY INVESTIGATES.
Well, poor sleep makes it harder to concentrate the next day. End of study. Thanks. We’re newly enlightened. Where’s my check?
LONELINESS MAY HARM SLEEP QUALITY FOR YOUNG ADULTS.
Another stunning revelation. The boy is lonely. He doesn’t sleep well. We never would have imagined such a connection without a meticulous study.
CHRONIC PAIN AMPLIFIES THE BRAIN’S REACTION TO NEW INJURIES.
The insights keep coming. A person already in a state of chronic pain reacts more severely to new pain than a person who isn’t suffering from chronic pain. Give the researchers a Nobel and a trip to Disneyland.
RESEARCHERS PINPOINT HOW DIESEL FUMES COULD CAUSE ‘FLARE-UP’ OF RESPIRATORY SYMPTOMS.
Someone with respiratory disease could experience trouble when breathing diesel fumes. Wow. A mind-bending correlation. And we need to know the exact mechanism of the flare-up because…?
Researchers are going to develop a drug that will eliminate the problem? “Do you have TB? Now you can walk through diesel fumes without a reaction.” Sure. The drug is called Thorazine. You’ll still have a severe reaction, but you won’t know it. Or anything else.
LARGE META-ANALYSIS IDENTIFIES NEW GENES ASSOCIATED WITH INTELLIGENCE.
GENES RESPONSIBLE FOR SEVERE CONGENITAL HEART DISEASE IDENTIFIED BY RESEARCHERS.
I love stories about “breakthroughs” in gene research. First of all, try to find one version of gene therapy for any disease that works across the board. Good luck. But you can find thousands of articles about “advances” in the research. They hint at glorious innovations coming to your neighborhood soon.
So let me know when this genetic discovery about heart disease results in a treatment that actually reverses the condition. And as for genes associated with intelligence, it’s easy as pie to make claims, as long as you don’t have to try to increase IQ with an injection.
Getting the point? Researchers can obtain all sorts of money to do studies that then posit some correlation between a condition and various gaggles of genes - as long as they don’t have come up with an actual gene therapy that works. It’s a great con. Nice work if they can get it, and they can.
THE SECRET TO COMBATING PANCREATIC CANCER MAY LIE IN SUPPRESSION OF A COMMON PROTEIN.
Yes, it may. Or it may not. Who can say? We’ll have to wait and see. Give the researchers another decade. Meanwhile, read about lots of “maybes.” It’s possible that a steady diet of “maybe” articles will increase your intelligence, help you sleep better at night, reverse heart disease, and decrease your reaction to diesel fumes.
It’s also possible the articles will turn you into a creature with the IQ of a tree-dwelling sloth.
A Smart Home Mega Sensor Can Track What Goes On In A Room + EKG Evidence That Smart Meters Negatively Affect The Human Heart May 27 2017 | From: Enadget / WakingTimes / Various
The concept digests all environmental data in a space to trigger IoT routines.
Creating a smart home currently requires either linking every connected device one-by-one or adding sensor tags to old appliances to make a cohesive IoT network, but there might be an easier way.
Researchers at Carnegie Mellon developed a concept for a hub that, when plugged into an electrical outlet, tracks ambient environmental data -- essentially becoming a sensor that tracks the whole space. With this in hand, savvy programmers can use it to trigger their own connected home routines.
Synthetic Sensors: Towards General-Purpose Sensing
We explore the notion of general-purpose sensing, wherein a single, highly capable sensor can indirectly monitor a large context, without direct instrumentation of objects.
Further, through what we call Synthetic Sensors, we can virtualize raw sensor data into actionable feeds, while simultaneously mitigating immediate privacy issues. We deployed our system across many months and environments, the results of which show the versatility, accuracy and potential of our approach.
The researchers introduced their sensor nexus -- dubbed Synthetic Sensors -- this week at ACM CHI, the human-computer interaction conference. As the video demonstrates, just plug it into a USB wall port and it automatically collects information about its surroundings, uploading it to a cloud back-end over WiFi.
Machine learning on the device parses results into recognizable events, like recognizing a particular sound pattern as "dishwasher is running" -- making them "synthetic" sensors. Folks can use them as digital triggers for other IoT behaviors. For example, one could use "left faucet on" to activate a room's left paper towel dispenser -- and automatically schedule a restock when its supply runs low.
There's one sensor missing from the device's suite, though: A camera. Its creators are sensitive to privacy issues, which is also why raw environmental data isn't uploaded to the cloud -- just the analyzed results.
The Synthetic Sensor is still in a prototype phase, but it's a promising replacement for the jumble of individual tags needed to hook up old appliances or proprietary smart devices.
Ever wondered why your energy supplier and governments are so keen to give you a smart meter?
We lay out some not-so-good reasons in this 4 minute animation. Your private data, lifestyle and behavioural
choices can be amalgamated into a data-set that is monetised and sold to 3rd party companies. Our usual
satire of dark subjects aim to entertain and inform you.
EKG Evidence That Smart Meters Negatively Affect The Human Heart
There have been numerous whistleblowers to warn of the negative effects of smart meters on human health but perhaps none has been so successful in scientifically proving this claim as Warren Woodward of Sedona, Arizona.
He recently put AMI ‘smart’ meters to the test, and using EKG technology, has proven that smart meters throw the human heart off its balanced beat.
A smart meter digitally sends information about your energy usage to utility companies, ostensibly, so that they can monitor your home remotely. Aside from giving companies access to a trove of information (which can then be used to manipulate energy prices, etc.), these meters infringe on our privacy, and have been said to cause numerous adverse health conditions.
In a first-of-its-kind, video-taped, scientifically documented presentation, Woodward shows how a smart meter adversely affects the human heart in the YouTube video below.
Woodward sits next to a smart meter that is used in Arizona, but that are also commonly used in many countries.
Many people have complained of adverse health conditions, among them:
Ringing in the ears
EMF exposure has been documented as being harmful before, but this is the first time someone has shown what EMF in the form of smart meters do to the human heart directly.
Woodward points out that in his rural location there is cell phone coverage, but that the EMF from cell towers is low intensity. Due to his location, there are no other forms of EMF that he is being exposed to.
Triggering Agents of Electromagnetic Sensitivity
Dr. Rea presented his compelling evidence and recommendations for a healthier world at Creating Safe Havens in a Toxic, Electromagnetic World, a conference hosted by the International Institute for Building-Biology & Ecology.
He also attempts to do a controlled test by hooking himself up to the EKG while not knowing when the smart meter is on or off, so that his body cannot anticipate a response, nor can he affect his heart rhythm with his own free will.
He has no health conditions, and is on no medications, however, when he is exposed to the smart meter, his heart skips beats – literally.
Any device that affects the functioning of the heart should be of profound concern. To wit, Pao L. Chang writes:
“The heart is one of the most important organs in the human body, because it is one of the main mediums for connecting us to each other and the Universe. Conventional science has taught us that the main role of the heart is to pump blood to all the systems of our body.
This definition of the heart is not very accurate. Besides pumping blood, the heart also has an intelligence of its own.
According to neurocardiologists, 60 to 65 percent of heart cells are neuron cells, not muscle cells. This discovery has helped them develop experiments that have proved the heart works similar to the brain and in some ways is even superior to the brain.
This may be the reason that the heart is the first organ to function after conception. Within about 20 days after conception, the heart starts to function, but the brain does not function until after roughly 90 days. This information tells us that the brain is secondary to the heart.”
Knowing what we do now about the intelligence of the heart, and how intimately it is linked to the endocrine system, the nervous system, and even to the signaling of the brain and gut – how would you imagine smart meters might be affecting your neuro-psycho-biology? Is this yet another (attempted) way to control the innate intelligence of the population at large?
EKG Proof That "Smart" Meters Affect the Human Heart
Everyone's health is being affected by "smart" meters. The evidence in this video is a world first, and shifts the debate from whether anyone should have to pay a fee to refuse a "smart" meter to: When does the safety recall start?
We now know that even if people are not showing outward symptoms, their bodies are being unnecessarily and involuntarily stressed by "smart" meters. There must be a complete safety recall of all "smart" meters at once.
According to the Edison Foundation, there are more than 70 million smart meters currently installed, with 90 million expected to be up and running by 2020.
Need another reason to go off-grid?
Heartbreaking Letter From Dying EPA Scientist Begs Monsanto “Moles” Inside The Agency To Stop Lying About Dangers Of RoundUp (Glyphosate) & Monsanto Funneled Money To Front Groups To Attack Anti-GMO Activists, Court Documents Reveal May 26 2017 | From: NaturalNews / Various
The following letter from EPA scientist Marion Copley (now deceased from cancer) has surfaced in the unsealed court documents originally uncovered by U.S. Right to Know and posted in plain text at this Glyphosate.news document page.
In this letter, EPA scientist Marion Copley begs Monsanto “mole” Jess Rowland to do his job and protect the public rather than protecting Monsanto’s profit interests, saying:
"For once in your life, listen to me and don’t play your political conniving games with the science to favor the registrants. For once do the right thing and don’t make decisions based on how it affects your bonus.”
She also accuses Rowland and another EPA scientist Anna Lowit (still with the EPA) of engaging in science intimidation tactics to force EPA scientists and bureaucrats to change their conclusions in favor of Monsanto.
"You and Anna Lowit intimidated staff on CARC and changed MI ARC and IIASPOC final reports to favor industry,” says Copley.
This tactic, by the way, is 100% aligned with the deeply evil corporate culture at Monsanto, which routinely engages in intimidation legal tactics, science intimidation and character assassination campaigns against anti-Monsanto activists.
Copley further warns that EPA scientists are likely being bribed by Monsanto, saying:
"Your Nebraska colleague took industry funding, he clearly has a conflict of interest. Just promise me not to ever let Anna on the CARC committee, her decisions don’t make rational sense. If anyone in OPP is taking bribes, it is her.”
Marion Copley signs off with a plea for humanity, knowing that she is nearing death but wanting to help save humanity from the toxic chemical “holocaust” being pushed by Monsanto and a criminal EPA:
I have cancer and I don’t want these serious issues in MED to go unaddressed before I go to my grave. I have done my duty.
Read the full letter to Jess Rowland (the “Monsanto mole” inside the EPA) from Marion Copley (now deceased, former EPA scientist) to get the full picture. Read the entire unsealed court document that includes this letter at this page on Glyphosate.news.
Letter from Marion Copley to Jess Rowland, March 4, 2013
Since I left the Agency with cancer, I have studied the tumor process extensively and I have some mechanism comments which may be very valuable to CARC based on my decades of pathology experience. I’ll pick one chemical to demonstrate my points.
Glyphosate was originally designed as a chelating agent and 1 strongly believe that is the identical process involved in its tumor formation, which is highly supported by the literature.
Chelators inhibit apoptosis, the process by which our bodies kill tumor cells
Chelators are endocrine disruptors, involved in tumorigenesis
Glyphosate induces lymphocyte proliferation
Glyphosate induces free radical formation
Chelators inhibit free radical scavenging enzymes requiring Zn, Mn or Cu for activity (i.e. SODs)
Chelators bind zinc, necessary for immune system function
Glyphosate is genotoxic, a key cancer mechanism
Chelators inhibit DNA repair enzymes requiring metal cofactors
Chelators bind Ca, Zn, Mg, etc to make foods deficient for these essential nutrients
Chelators bind calcium necessary for calcineurin-mediated immune response
Chelators often damage the kidneys or pancreas, as glyphosate does, a mechanism to tumor formation
Kidney/pancreas damage can lead to clinical chemistry changes to favor tumor growth
Glyphosate kills bacteria in the gut and the gastrointestinal system is 80% of the immune system
Chelators suppress the immune system making the body susceptible to tumors
Previously, CARC concluded that glyphosate was a “possible human carcinogen”. The kidney pathology in the animal studies would lead to tumors with other mechanisms listed above. Any one of these mechanisms alone listed can cause tumors, but glyphosate causes all of them simultaneously.
It is essentially certain that glyphosate causes cancer. With all of the evidence listed above, the CARC category should be changed to “probable human carcinogen”. Blood cells arc most exposed to chelators, if any study shows proliferation of lymphocytes, then that is confirmatory that glyphosate is a carcinogen.
Jess, you and I have argued many times on CARC. You often argued about topics outside of your knowledge, which is unethical. Your trivial MS degree from 1971 Nebraska is far outdated, thus CARC science is 10 years behind the literature in mechanisms.
For once in your life, listen to me and don’t play your political conniving games with the science to favor the registrants. For once do the right thing and don’t make decisions based on how it affects your bonus. You and Anna Lowit intimidated staff on CARC and changed MI ARC and IIASPOC final reports to favor industry.
Chelators clearly disrupt calcium signaling, a key signaling pathway in all cellos and mediates tumor progression. Greg Ackerman is supposed to be our expert on mechanisms, but he never mentioned any of these concepts at CARC and when I tried to discuss it with him he put me off.
Is Greg playing your political games as well, incompetent or does he have some conflict of interest of some kind? Your Nebraska colleague took industry funding, he clearly has a conflict of interest. Just promise me not to ever let Anna on the CARC committee, her decisions don’t make rational sense. If anyone in OPP is taking bribes, it is her.
I have cancer and I don’t want these serious issues in MED to go unaddressed before I go to my grave. I have done my duty.
Recently obtained court documents have revealed that Monsanto has been secretly feeding money to “think tanks,” such as the infamous Genetic Literacy Project. From the document obtained by US Right To Know:
Monsanto quietly funnels money to “think tanks” such as the “Genetic Literacy Project” and the “American Council on Science and Health,” organizations intended to shame scientists and highlight information helpful to Monsanto and other chemical producers.
For example, the American Council on Science and Health has recently published articles accusing the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) of ignoring the “science” on glyphosate.
Sources say that these allegations are backed up by a string of emails which were used in court as evidence.
Some of these exchanges even involved Monsanto executives instructing their staff to “ghost write” material on their products and then have some phony “independent scientists” sign their names to cut back on costs. One such exchange occurred between Monsanto’s William Heydens and his colleagues:
"A less expensive/more palatable approach might be to involve experts only for the areas of contention, epidemiology and possibly MOA (depending on what comes out of the IARC meeting), and we ghost-write the Exposure Tox & Genetox sections.
An option would be to add Greim and Kier or Kirkland to have their names on the publication, but we would be keeping the cost down by us doing the writing and they would just edit & sign their names so to speak. Recall that is how we handled Williams Kroes & Munro, 2000."
In addition to the emails and evidence of Monsanto’s collusion with government agencies and “think tank” organizations, there is also reason to believe that Monsanto has been hiring “trolls” to defend the company on the web - and to attack anyone who dares speak out against them.
Evidence presented in the pretrials of Monsanto court cases at the US District Court in San Francisco has revealed that under their ever-so-aptly titled “Let Nothing Go” program, Monsanto reportedly hired individuals who appeared to have no relation to the company for the sole purpose of trolling the internet with positive comments, defend Monsanto, and praise their toxic chemicals and GMO crops.
The goal of the “Let Nothing Go” program is “to leave nothing, not even Facebook comments, unanswered…” and the plaintiffs say that Monsanto has been targeting all forms of social media and other online materials under this initiative.
Anti-GMO activists like Mike Adams, have been particularly susceptible to these attacks. Unsurprisingly, Adams has been a prime target for GMO trolls: The Genetic Literacy Project and other shills have published hit pieces on him and other activists - all with the goal of trying to discredit them and silence journalists who expose Monsanto’s nefarious operations.
The evidence revealed in these court documents certainly leaves Monsanto with a lot of explaining to do. But it seems that they are already losing in the court of public opinion.
Mainstream Media Insults The Public's Intelligence On Vaccines & Vaccinated Vs. Unvaccinated Pilot Study: Early Vaccination Sees Exponential Increase In Chronic Disorders + Lies, Vaccines And The New Zealand Media May 26 2017 | From: Sott / GreenMedInfo / WavesNZ / Various
Mainstream media and medical groups, typically funded or backed by Big Pharma, cast parents who are skeptical about vaccines as conspiracy theorists whose backward beliefs put the public at risk.
Vaccine skeptics cast vaccine promoters as paid shills, hired by Big Pharma to cover up documented vaccine-related injuries.
In mainstream and progressive media coverage (Mother Jones, Alternet, Huffington Post, Truthout, Progressive, The Nation) there is zero tolerance for critical debate about vaccine safety. Question why the hepatitis B vaccine is routinely given to babiesat birth - for a disease mainly transmitted through sex and I.V. drug use - and you're labeled "anti-science."
Suggest that some vaccines, including those such as the highly promoted HPV Gardasil and Cervarix (both of which have been linked to adverse reactions and death) are not exactly "life-saving," and you might as well yell "bring back polio."
The media routinely discredits parents of vaccine-injured children, accusing them of not knowing anything about medicine (except raising their own challenged child of course) and of "imagining" or even causing their child's deficits.
Progressive news sites that would never defend corporate media coverage of Monsanto or GMOs drink the vaccines-are-safe Kool-Aid. Last month, Jezebel ran this headline: "Robert De Niro and Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Call Vaccines Dangerous, Which They Are Not."
In a 2015 article, the Atlantic sneered that "Vaccines Are Profitable, So What?" And the Daily Beast has gone so far as to praise Paul Offit, perhaps the nation's most extreme vaccine promoter.
Comment: According to Robert F, Kennedy Jr: Dr. Offit is a "thorough charlatan, a snake oil salesman and he has everyone flimflammed. That made me angry. After that, I learned that he was also venal."
RS: What do you mean "venal"?
RFK, JR: Well, my original assumption was that he was lying in service to the vaccine program. I later learned that vaccines were a lavishly profitable enterprise for Dr. Offit.
RS: How so?
RFK, JR: He is on permanent retainer to Merck to "right vaccine wrongs". And, both Merck and the CDC have rewarded his service with extraordinarily lucrative opportunities. In 1999, the CDC allowed him to sit on the committee that voted the rotavirus vaccine onto the schedule, even though he was working on his own rotavirus patent.
Electing not to recuse himself, he cast his vote to add rotavirus to the schedule. That version of the rotavirus vaccine caused so many agonizing childhood deaths from intussusception that the CDC had to withdraw it a year later, making room for Offit's version, a turn of events that made him a vaccine tycoon.
His rotavirus vaccine patent sold for $182 million; his cut was at least $29 million. When I learned about this caper and his other money schemes, I just thought, "Well, he's a hoodlum."
RS: He's also a misogynist and a bully.
RFK, JR: It's disturbing because the media treats him like a deity. And, like all bullies, he's a coward. He dismisses women who question him as superstitious hysterics.
He lobs vicious bombs at the mothers of vaccine-injured children from the editorial pages and national TV shows which give him a platform for his poison. But, he refuses to debate me or anyone else who knows what they are talking about.
RS: Do you think, when Paul Offit says that babies could safely be given 10,000 vaccines at the same time, that he really believes that?
RFK, JR: I don't feel competent to psychoanalyze Offit. It's hard to look into another person's mind. And Offit's brain has got to be a really dark and scary zip code where I don't really want to spend time. In his defense, we all have some capacity for self-deception and it's possible that Offit is as gifted at deceiving himself as he is at deceiving the public.
Upton Sinclair observed that, "It's difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it." But I do think it's more likely that he knows that what he's saying is dishonest. For years, he claimed Bill Thompson's 2004 study was "the definitive proof" of thimerosal safety.
He's been silent about that since Thompson disavowed his own study. That suggests a purposeful mendacity. Like a lot of other people, Offit seems to have made the self-serving calculation that all of the dead and damaged children are just collateral damage - unfortunate sacrifices in a program that serves the greater good.
RS: Is that even a legitimate moral calculation?
RFK, JR: You mean to kill one child in order to save fifty? Ethicists and theologians could argue the point. But that isn't Offit's real moral dilemma.
Offit's moral Donnybrook is his absolutist defense of the industry position that all vaccines are always safe for all people and that the safety of thimerosal is unassailable. That approach has unnecessarily damaged vulnerable subgroups that could easily have been protected and sacrificed millions of kids, not for the greater good but for the bottom line.
As the vaccine industry's lead pitchman for thimerosal, Offit's been extraordinarily successful at crafting a persuasive alternative to fact-based reality and selling it like a carnival barker. He has made himself the high priest of the weird dogma that it's somehow safe to inject mercury into babies.
One wants to ask these progressive sites: Do you really think Pharma has never steered us wrong, just for the sake of profit? What about all the drugs that had to be pulled from the market, after Pharma insisted they were safe?
The fact is vaccines are not all safe. That's why the National Vaccine Injury Compensation (VICP) program, established to provide monetary compensation to victims of vaccine injuries, exists. The VICP website states:
"Most people who get vaccines have no serious problems. In very rare cases, a vaccine can cause a serious problem, such as a severe allergic reaction.
In these instances, the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) may provide financial compensation to individuals who file a petition and are found to have been injured by a VICP-covered vaccine."
"It's true that there have been 24,000 reports of adverse events with Gardasil" and "106 deaths." But the author of the Forbes article rationalizes:
"There have also been 60,000 reports of adverse events with the mumps, measles, and rubella vaccine, and 26,000 following vaccination with . . . Prevnar, for pneumococcus bacteria."
We ask: Do two wrongs make a right, Forbes?
The CDC maintains a Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) where people can see for themselves the adverse effects and deaths related to a particular vaccine. A search for people who have died from the measles vaccines MEA, MER, MM, MMR or MMRV revealed 416 deaths. Last summer, the mainstream science outlet
EurekaAlert submitted that reading VAERS info "may not build public trust or adherence."
That is an understatement.
Profiteering and Conflicts of Interest Not Even Hidden
There is no question vaccines are profitable. In some states, Blue Cross Blue Shield gives doctors bonuses for the vaccines they give patients. And an increasing number of drugstore chains now offer vaccines.
There are brazen and unhidden conflicts of interest between mainstream media and vaccine makers who influence reporting and discourage healthy debate about vaccine safety. Mike Papantonio, of the America's Lawyer TV show, reports:
"According to a 2009 study by Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting, with the exception of CBS, every major media outlet in the United States shares at least one board member with at least one drug company. These board members wake up, they go to a meeting at Merck or Pfizer, and then they have their driver take them over to a meeting at a TV station."
The Gates Foundation is deeply entangled with vaccine makers, as are our own government agencies, including the CDC.
It's clearly a fox-guarding-the-henhouse situation. The vaccine industry also "gives millions to the Academy of Pediatrics for conferences, grants, medical education classes and even helped build their headquarters," reports CBS.
In 2013, the Journal of Epidemiology and Community Healthreported that the seriousness with which academics portrayed the 2009-2010 swine flu outbreak was shaped proportionately by how much funding they had received from Pharma.
What Does the Science Say?
When you read the scientific papers published about vaccine safety - and especially about links to childhood autism - it seems as if they are all written by four scientists who know each other and who work for Big Vac.
Despite overwhelming evidence that the mercury used in vaccines, thimerosal, is harmful to children and to pregnant women and the elderly, the official position of pro-vaccine scientists is "it was totally safe but we took it out anyway."
Robert F. Kennedy Jr., chairman of The World Mercury Project, disagrees. Vaccines containing thimerosal are neither safe, nor is thimerosal gone from vaccines he claims.
Kennedy offers $100,000 to anyone who can find a published study indexed in PubMed proving mercury levels in vaccines are harmless for infants and developing fetuses at the levels they are given.
Though they are scientists, pro-vaccine researchers use embarrassing non-logic in their vaccine defenses - they actually employ the "Raven Paradox" which many of us learned in Logic 101.
It declares that "all ravens are black; that bird is black; it must be a raven." In other words, according to logic-challenged researchers: "Mercury is safe - and it doesn't cause autism - so all vaccines are safe."
Meanwhile, the pro-vaccine scientists seldom, if ever, address the more complicated scientific questions surrounding vaccines - such as other metals used in them, like aluminum.
Or whether the current series of multiple vaccines administered to children today could overwhelm their immune systems. Or whether live vaccines or disease antibodies could paradoxically cause the disease they're intended to prevent.
According to published articles, it's not just the thimerosal but metals in general, such as the currently used aluminum in vaccines, that are under suspicion. Such metals can cross the child's blood brain barrier and set off increased oxidative stress which is linked to autism, say journal reports.
Oxidative stress is an imbalance between the production of free radicals and the ability of the body to counteract or detoxify their harmful effects through neutralization by antioxidants.
Too many vaccines given too closely together to children that are too young also increases the stress, say those who question vaccines and vaccine schedules.
When a scientific paper appears to clearly show a link between childhood vaccines recommended in the U.S. and impaired neurodevelopment, pro-vaccine scientists savage it.
A 2010 paper published in Acta Neurobiologiae Experimentalis, a quarterly peer-reviewed scientific journal covering neuroscience, found that "rhesus macaque infants receiving the complete U.S. childhood vaccine schedule" did not "undergo the maturational changes over time in amygdala volume that was observed in unexposed animals."
Why does the amygdala matter? The researchers wrote:
"Neuropathological and neuroimaging studies of individuals with an ASD [autism spectrum disorder] . . . have provided growing evidence of a central role for the amygdala." Specifically, it is enlarged in such children "compared with neurotypical controls."
Pro-vaccine scientists pounced. Not enough monkeys were used to establish a scientific finding, said one scientist. Opposite findings about the amygdala have been reached, which invalidate the study, said another scientist.
One angry scientist was even willing to discredit the monkey study by claimingthat monkeys are not a valid model for human disease - thus annulling millions of experiments including the ones on which human drugs are approved! Of course, many in the animal welfare community have questioned the validity of animal "models."
On behalf of Pharma, mainstream science and media set up a strawman called "vaccines cause autism." Then they knocked it down and declared vaccines safe.
It is an insult to the public's intelligence, especially in light of clear injuries that exist, including those documented in the VAERS database - not to mention injured people, especially parents of injured children.
The National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program alone has awarded $3.18 billion in 16,000 claims since 1988.
Do vaccine injury cases prove that vaccines are always unsafe and should always be avoided? Of course not. But those cases do prove that vaccines are not "completely safe" as the well-funded vaccine dogma continues to insultingly tell us.
Vaccine Dangers Being Hidden From the Public
Dr. Suzanne Humphries explains how vaccines became the norm in modern medicine. She also explains why you rarely hear about any risks or dangers associated with them. Find out how those issues are being kept from the public.
Vaccinated Vs. Unvaccinated Pilot Study: Early Vaccination Sees Exponential Increase In Chronic Disorders
The move towards mandatory vaccination is no longer a conspiracy theory. California Senate Bill 277 snapped families into a reality where informed consent and health freedom do not apply.
Presently, the American people are facing 173 vaccine-related bills in 40 states. The language of many of the new bills aims to increase tracking, target non-vaccinating families, force vaccine schedules, and further persecute families who choose not to accept vaccines; the private products of for-profit, legally protected pharmaceutical companies.
The corporate media and medical industries have thrown their full influence behind Big Pharma’s transparent ‘safe and effective’ messaging. At the same time, both industries are simultaneously censoring discussions around the fraud, dangers, mounting injuries, and criminal behavior inherent within the vaccine industry and those pushing for mandatory vaccination.
A central point of contention, and human rights violation, is the fact that historically, no true study has been conducted between vaccinated versus unvaccinated populations. However, such a study has now come to fruition.
Since long-term health outcomes of the current vaccination schedule haven’t been studied, Dr. Mawson and his coauthors set out to compare vaccinated and unvaccinated children across a broad range of health outcomes.
The study was designed as a cross-sectional survey of homeschooling mothers on their vaccinated and unvaccinated biological children ages 6 to 12. It included mothers of 666 children ranging from fully vaccinated, partially vaccinated and unvaccinated.
The mothers were asked to indicate on a list of more than 40 acute and chronic illnesses all those for which her child or children had received a diagnosis by a physician among other questions.
“DIRECT ORDER” An Award-Winning Documentary Tells the Story of Members of the Military who were Ordered Against their Will to Take the Controversial Anthrax Vaccine.
Federal regulators approved a plan by biotechnology company, VaxGen to test its experimental anthrax vaccine on about 100 people.
The vaccinated children were significantly more likely than the unvaccinated to have been diagnosed with the following: allergic rhinitis, other allergies, eczema/atopic dermatitis, a learning disability, autism spectrum disorder, any neurodevelopmental disorder (NDD) (i.e., learning disability, ADHD or ASD) and chronic illness.
The following is a breakdown of the specific results for vaccinated children:
Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) was 4.7-fold higher in vaccinated children
ADHD risk was 4.7-fold higher
Learning disability risk was 3.7-fold higher
Vaccinated children in the study were 3.7 times more likely to have been diagnosed with some kind of (NDD).
Preterm birth and vaccination was associated with 6.6-fold increased odds of NDD
Vaccinated children were also significantly more likely to be diagnosed with an immune-related disorder. The risk of allergic rhinitis (commonly known as hay fever) was over 30 times higher in vaccinated children, while the risk of other allergies was increased 3.9 fold and the eczema risk was increased 2.4 fold.
Given the current global climate as described in this article’s introduction, the study highlighted three extremely noteworthy conclusions as follows:
“…the strength and consistency of the findings, the apparent “dose-response” relationship between vaccination status and several forms of chronic illness, and the significant association between vaccination and NDDs all support the possibility that some aspect of the current vaccination program could be contributing to risks of childhood morbidity.”
“Vaccination also remained significantly associated with neurodevelopmental disorders after controlling for other factors…”
“…preterm birth coupled with vaccination was associated with an apparent synergistic increase in the odds of neurodevelopmental disorder above that of vaccination alone.”
While all three conclusions should be, and are, resonating deeply within the masses of health professionals and parents, the study’s third conclusion is especially timely and relevant beyond its stated assertion.
Over the last year, numerous medical whistleblowers and scientific research papers have warned and demonstrated that routine vaccine injury to preterm infants in hospital neonatal intensive care units (NICU) is occurring. Whistleblower nurses Michelle Rowton James and Joanne [last name unavailable] publicly spotlighted how inhuman and commonplace NICU vaccine injury have rooted in the culture of establishment medicine.
While three major studies ,, have corroborated the nurse’s whistleblowing admissions. Meanwhile, in April 2017 The Institute for Pure and Applied Knowledge (IPAK) released a statement asking for all Americans to join them in their call for a ban on vaccination of infants in the NICU. Speaking on the call to action Dr. James Lyons-Weiler, PhD, CEO, and Director of IPAK, stated:
"We’ve asked the biomedical community to produce studies that show ill effect of vaccines on neonates, and they have not produced them.”
There is currently a clash happening between religious-like vaccine dogma and increasingly aware segments of the public, research, and medical communities. In the balance hangs the opportunity for a truly open discussion on vaccines and a rare chance to reform a pharmaceutically-dominated medical community that has lost its way.
Giving the current trend, the consequences of not seizing the opportunity for open dialogue appears to lead down a road of mandatory medicine and censorship of exponentially mounting human injury and mortality.
Put simply, the battle now rages between openness and transparency versus the protection, through omission and overt censorship, of Big Pharma’s business model and need for ever-expanding bottom lines at all costs.
Bombshell: Study Proves Unvaccinated Children Are Healthier
Studies put to question the safety of current vaccination practices.
Celeste McGovern joins Rob Dew and Owen Shroyer to discuss the first ever study comparing the health levels of vaccinated and unvaccinated children.
Another day, another poorly-written and ill-advised scare story in New Zealand’s fabulous ‘print media’. This time, a piece in the Dominion Post claiming measles ‘could have been eradicated by now if it were not for anti-vaccine campaigners and conspiracy theorists’. Nothing to do with faulty live-virus vaccines, is it?
According to the article, posted on Stuff.co.nz, the measles vaccine is safe, and the reason people are refusing it is because of a ‘study’ by Dr Andrew Wakefield that was ‘discredited’ and led to him being struck off the register by the GMC. That or because they listen to ‘conspiracy theorists’.
No mention, of course, that it wasn’t a study – it was a small case series – or that his co-author who was also struck off the register, Dr John Walker-Smith, was exonerated and the case overturned two years ago, following an appeal.
The entire trial against the doctors was dismissed as faulty and the General Medical Council admonished for a trial that was full of ‘inadequate and superficial reasoning and, in a number of instances, a wrong conclusion’.
The Dominion Post piece states that we were struck off the charities register for promoting a view that vaccination was ‘ineffective and dangerous’ – again, this is not true. The reason for our removal from the register was that we were viewed as promoting a viewpoint rather than advancing education (one of the categories for being on the register).
While we disagree with the basis of the decision, the reality is that it makes little difference to who we are and what we do – we are still a charitable organisation and still work hard to ensure parents have the information necessary to make an informed decision about vaccination.
Click on the image above to open a larger version in a new window
The Ministry of Health tell us that New Zealand has a 93% uptake of vaccination by age two. This is worth remembering when reading the following paragraphs.
According to the article, there were 274 cases of pertussis (whooping cough) in Auckland in 2012, and a further 328 on the West Coast in the same year. In reality, according to the Public Health Surveillance Report for the year on pertussis, there were a total of 5,389 cases reported up until the 7th December 2012 for that year, the majority of which were in vaccinated persons.
According to the report, 252 cases were reported in Auckland up until that date for the year, and the West Coast had just 139 cases. Of the over 5,000 cases reported for the year, there were just two deaths – one in a premature infant too young to be vaccinated, and one in a child with ‘underlying health conditions’.
The data is also available online for the year 2013, so why 2012 was highlighted in the article is something of a mystery…
On to measles. According to Helen Petousis-Harris of the Immunisation Advisory Centre, measles could be eradicated in New Zealand if it weren’t for us pesky ‘anti-immunisation’ groups.
This statement is laughable for a number of reasons (not least that WAVESnz is not an ‘anti-immunisation’ group, but a group lobbying for informed choice and freedom of choice in health decisions).
Firstly, we have 93% uptake of vaccinations in this country by age two, which includes MMR at 15 months. Given the theoretical ‘herd immunity threshold’, or number of vaccinated persons needed to eliminate the disease amongst a population is generally accepted as being somewhere around 92-94%, it’s somewhat astonishing we’re still seeing these outbreaks, don’t you think?
Sounds to me that it’s less a case of rogue families making their own minds up about the health of their families, and more a case of a vaccine that simply does not work the way the media and government would have us believe.
Yes, those naughty parents who think for themselves and decide not to vaccinate make a very convenient scapegoat for a vaccine that simply does not work the way we’re told it does.
According to the 2012 report, the latest available, there were a total of 68 cases of measles reported for that year. Of those, 21 were in children aged under 15 months, which we will discount when assessing vaccination efficacy as they aren’t eligible for vaccination according to the New Zealand schedule (though one was reported to have had a single dose anyway!).
That leaves us with 47 cases of measles in persons aged 15 months and over, 17 of whom had had at least one or two doses of a measles vaccine, with 20 reporting no vaccination and 10 with unknown vaccination status.
Surely, if the vaccine worked so well, we’d see the vast majority of those cases in unvaccinated people, rather than an almost 50/50 split? And while it could be argued that this does lean towards better odds being vaccinated than not given the higher population of vaccinated individuals, one has to question how exactly that works given the vaccine datasheet claims 95% efficacy against measles…
Despite the claims of the pro-vaccine lobbyists, vaccination does not guarantee you won’t get the virus in the first place, as those vaccinated individuals who contract the disease have discovered. Nor does not getting vaccinated guarantee you will get it – and if you do, the chances of it being a serious disease in a healthy individual replete with Vitamin A are extremely low.
It’s worth noting now that the vaccine contains live attenuated measles virus (as well as live rubella and mumps).
The datasheet itself contains warnings about not vaccinating immune-compromised individuals due to risk of infection, notes that the rubella component can be ‘shed’ and spread by recently-vaccinated individuals, and while it states that there are ‘no reports’ of transmission of the measles component from recent vaccinees, it doesn’t mean that it can’t happen.
What it does mention, however, is that a common side-effect is fever or a ‘measles-like rash’ or both (which of course can’t be measles, it’s all a coincidence, it just looks like measles!). Very interesting… could it be that the vaccine itself is responsible for some of these outbreaks?
Next, to call organisations such as ourselves as ‘anti-immunisation’ is misleading to say the least – we have no problem with immunisation. In fact, it is something we actively encourage. Immunisation simply means to ‘make immune’, not ‘to vaccinate’, which often doesn’t lead to any significant ‘immunity’ at all.
We actively advocate for and encourage long-term breastfeeding, good nutrition, healthy lifestyles, sleep, exercise, and generally supporting the body’s natural immune system so that we can all live happy, health lives. All of which can be classed as a form of ‘immunisation’ and protection against these diseases the media love to hype so very much.
Lastly, it’s worth pointing out the glaringly obvious part that the fear-and-blame piece has left out: what to do if your child DOES contract either measles or pertussis (the terror illnesses du jour), and how to prevent them becoming the terrible diseases they’d have us believe…
So, what is really to blame for an uptick in measles cases lately? Is it, despite very high rates of vaccination that should be buoying us up with the mythical ‘herd immunity’ we hear so much about, the naughty few who choose to think for themselves and opt out of vaccination?
Is it terrible organisations such as WAVESnz who promote freedom of choice in healthcare? Is it a nearly 16-year-old case series written by an English doctor who has been thrashed in every media outlet globally since that time, who most people haven’t even looked at and most believe is a fraud?
Or could it be a failing live-virus vaccine that simply does not work the way we’re told it does, which is causing illness throughout the community, and which parents are beginning to question despite the poorly-written anti-choice propaganda churned out by the corporate-owned media on a near daily basis?
New Zealand Has The Highest Rate Of Teen Suicide In The Developed World May 21 2017 | From: Stuff / Various New Zealand has the highest rate of teen suicide in the developed world, an OECD report reiterates. Despite the alarming information the report revealed nothing new.
New Zealand continuously ranked among the worst in the world for our levels of teen suicide.
After 31 years working for Youthline, which operates a crisis line for young people considering self-harm, Bell doesn't think we've got any better. Looking back at when he started, he said the situation was just as bad.
"If you take the hardcore facts, last year there were well over 100 young people who killed themselves. We've gone down and come back. So no. I don't think it's really improved.
There are some good people and good services, but we really haven't made a change."
Bell said the only way to really reduce New Zealand's suicide rate would be to change communities on an individual basis.
"Suicide is the ultimate way of leaving a community. If you want to turn that round we've got to make sure that we've got communities that young people want to be a part of and feel safe and secure," he said.
At any given time, Youthline was working with 30 young people at immediate risk of suicide, Bell said. Ministry of Health mental health director John Crawshaw said improving youth mental health was a priority.
The ministry would focus on "collaboration with communities," he said. A cross-sector approach to improving youth mental health was essential, Crawshaw said.
Programmes to reduce child abuse, family violence and helping "vulnerable families" were just as important as health initiatives, he said.
The Government was spending about $5 million on suicide prevention strategies each year, he said. The funding was announced in 2013 and included education schemes for targeted communities to learn about suicide prevention and mental health.
0800 WHATSUP children's helpline - phone 0800 9428 787 between 1pm and 10pm on weekdays and from 3pm to 10pm on weekends. Online chat is available from 7pm to 10pm every day.
Kidsline (open 24/7) - 0800 543 754. This service is for children aged 5 to 18. Those who ring between 4pm and 9pm on weekdays will speak to a Kidsline buddy. These are specially trained teenage telephone counsellors.
Your local Rural Support Trust - 0800 787 254 (0800 RURAL HELP)
Alcohol Drug Helpline (open 24/7) - 0800 787 797. You can also text 8691 for free.
For further information, contact the Mental Health Foundation's free Resource and Information Service (09 623 4812).
Milk Wars Battle On: Farmer’s Raw Milk Versus Big Dairy's Pasteurized May 20 2017 | From:BlacklistedNews
As more and more people wake up to health there is an increasing demand for raw milk in recognition of its nutritional benefit. It is nutritionally superior to pasteurized milk. However, our freedom to choose raw milk is seriously under threat. The CDC and the FDA are imposing their oppressive views.
To consolidate and favour Big Dairy’s current monopoly of the industry through pasteurized milk sales, the CDC have been using unjust fear-mongering tactics based on questionable claims to quash raw milk interests.
Sadly, this has been quite successful. Through shady science the CDC asserts that raw dairy products including milk and cheese have caused significant numbers of microbial infections leading to illnesses and hospitalizations.
In retrospect, this is the basis for the war on dairy farmers: Governmental authorities are attempting to prevent the unregulated selling of raw milk directly to consumers because the food is deemed ‘unfit for consumption.’ Indeed, this threatens the livelihood of the dairy farmers.
But the shady science supporting the CDC’s so-called ‘unfit for consumption’ claims due to illnesses and hospitalizations is to put it mildly a long way from exacting:
The claimed microbial infections and hospitalizations taken from various U.S public outbreak data only had small numbers and were merely used as estimates. In the report, the CDC stated that on average, 760 illnesses and 22 hospitalizations in a year were due to dairy consumption. Of these cases, the CDC claimed that 96% were due to raw milk contamination.
In the report the CDC said that the lessening of regulatory procedures had allowed easier access to raw (unpasteurized) milk and the illnesses and hospitalizations will further increase. –This is merely an assumption, but it may well serve as cannon fodder to ‘justify’ tight government regulations used to quash raw milk sales, favouring Big Dairy.
The study claims that the microbes’ campylobacter, E. coli (Escherichia coli), listeria and salmonella were the causes of the infections. Of these microbes, the bacteria campylobacter is now the number one cause of airborne food infection outbreak, overtaking salmonella.
However, campylobacter is normally associated with infections from animals fed in overcrowded farming environments, as in the case of those reared by mega-corporations: Mass-produced poultry is a good example. The contaminated poultry spreads its infection when consumed in the undercooked or raw state. It can also cross-contaminate other foods or utensils.
So why single out raw dairy foods produced by small-time farmers who don’t keep their animals in unnatural overcrowded environments?
There is far less susceptibility to infection and illness from small farms, such as those producing organic raw dairy.
Further, ALL foods when sampled at random can sometimes test positive for bad bugs. In line with the governmental authorities’ absurd flawed logic, not just raw milk, why not vilify and ban all foods?!
Pasteurized Versus Raw
Mega-food corporations are under pressure to come up with large produce volumes for profitability. However, the larger the food production, the greater the risk of outbreak infection: So extra-precautionary measures are needed to prevent infection.
In the case of Big Dairy, for efficiency, farmers are obligated to treat their herds with an artificial hormone-based drug used for growing herds and increasing milk production.
Other chemicals are also used, such as antibiotics, which also find their way into the milk. Thus, milk consumers may find themselves developing illnesses such as allergies from the transferred chemicals…
Because the milk is pasteurized to reduce the risk of contamination and preserve the product longer than unpasteurized, enabling it to travel greater distances over time for sales, the nutrition value becomes greatly compromised. For instance, vitamins and enzymes present in the pasteurized milk get destroyed…
Don’t get fooled, this milk is not the highly nutritious and healthy product it has been made out to be. For more on this go, here.
Chemical-free raw milk tastes nicer than the pasteurized option. It is healthier, having superior nutrition because unlike pasteurized milk, its vitamins and enzymes are intact, among other qualities.
Having said that, even when it’s raw, the truth of the matter is that all dairy, including milk, shouldn’t be recommended to everyone. A number of people develop allergies from its proteins. If you’re a diabetic then it would make your insulin resistance even worse as it contains lactose sugar…
However, many healthy people do benefit. With a number a hitting-the-nail-on-the-head points, this video nicely summarizes the comparisons:
Benefits of Raw Milk
Food Freedom and Our Right to Chose
Pasteurized or raw milk, above all, we should have the basic right to chose what we want and where it comes from. Taking a stand on the right to chose to consume raw milk represents a larger picture.
It represents a stand for food freedom. No governmental agency tied to corporate cronies having moneyed interest should ever be allowed to tell you what you should eat or drink.
If the FDA is allowed to get away with banning raw milk on the false pretence that it’s ‘unfit for consumption,’ where will they go next? Will they somehow go on to ban all local or organic farm foods? Will we have no choice other than to eat nutrient-nuked, pasteurized, toxic irradiated or genetically engineered, chemical-laden foods..?
It is greatly encouraged that you get active in the fight for food freedom. For educating yourself, how to take part in the stand for food freedom and where to get good quality raw milk and some useful tips, here are a few highly recommended websites:
So many of the factors that are negatively influencing public heath could easily be prevented or removed from society, yet the decisions of the ruling class continue to ensure that our food supply is toxic, that our environment is compromised, and that our exposure to chemicals and industrial waste is total. Why?
With the stroke of a pen carcinogenic poisons like Monsanto’s Roundup could be banned. Industrial disasters like Fukushima or the Deepwater Horizon could easily get the attention they deserve from world powers, but the will to intervene on behalf of human and environmental health is zero, while the will to intervene militarily in corporate and political affairs is guaranteed.
People are suffering more than ever from a host of chronic conditions and illnesses that can wreck even the healthiest and strongest of us. To be sick is the new normal, and to be healthy is outstanding and unusual.
Concerned citizens are battling grass roots struggles on all fronts, yet, at the top levels of society the corruption, gross negligence, and seeming incompetence continue unabated, ensuring that important decisions always favor the health of corporations and special interests.
With such obvious disregard for life, it would be naive to presume that our national and global leadership have our best interests at heart, and also to assume that any of this could be accidental.
And when we look at comments and statements from some of the world’s most influential people, a dark philosophy is uncovered, and a shocking agenda to depopulate planet earth is revealed. See for yourself:
"The world today has 6.8 billion people. That’s heading up to about nine billion. Now if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that by perhaps 10 or 15 percent.”
– Bill Gates
“Frankly I had thought that at the time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don’t want to have too many of.” – U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg
“In order to stabilize world population, we must eliminate 350,000 people per day.”
– Jacques Coustea
“If I were reincarnated I would wish to be returned to earth as a killer virus to lower human population levels.”
– Prince Phillip, the Duke of Edinburgh
“My three main goals would be to reduce human population to about 100 million worldwide, destroy the industrial infrastructure and see wilderness, with it’s full complement of species, returning throughout the world.”
– Dave Foreman, Earth First Co-Founder
“This planet might be able to support perhaps as many as half a billion people who could live a sustainable life in relative comfort. Human populations must be greatly diminished, and as quickly as possible to limit further environmental damage.”
– Professor of Biology at the University of Texas at Austin Eric R. Pianka
“Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature.”
Make what you will out of these statements, but the fact remains that globally, human health and the environment are in critical condition and there is no sign of relief in sight.
Couple this with the fact that many of the world’s elite do publicly fantasize of culling the human population, and the realization is harsh: we are targets.
Our world simply does not have to be poisoned with chemtrails, radiation leaks, GMO’s, electro-magnetic pollution, frack wells, fluoride, mercury, vaccine adjuvants, depleted uranium, oil spills, antibiotics, endocrine disrupting chemicals, toxic food additives, agro-chemicals, pharmaceuticals, and so much more.
The aggregated, generations long effect of such total contamination is the explosion of a host of bizarre and life-altering illnesses and ‘conditions,’ that chronically sap our energy and vitality, slowly debilitating us, separating us from our power and putting us into the doctor’s office.
The following 11 common symptoms are signs that the global depopulation slow kill is in play and is effective, and that within a couple of generations the human race will no nothing of health, wellness and vitality.
1. Gut and Digestive Issues
The primary attack on the body’s immune system takes place in the digestive system where the body’s natural bacterial defenses live.
Chronic poor digestion, leaky gut syndrome, gastritis, colitis, inflammatory bowel syndrome, candida overgrowth, food sensitivities and other serious issues are become increasingly common, resulting from the consumption of denatured foods laden with chemicals and sugars, GMO poisoning and so on.
Roundup herbicide is known to kill healthy bacteria in the body after being ingested in only residual amounts. Antibiotic overuse and contamination in the water supply means that building a health but biome is nearly impossible.
2. Chronic Fatigue and Low Energy
The body’s natural store of energy is the first thing to become depleted when the body and mind are over-exposed to pollution and stress. The persistent exposure to toxic foods, poisoned spaces, electromagnetic radiation, psychological attacks, continually forces the body and psyche to be in a state of crisis.
The regular amount of energy needed to perform the ordinary rigors of life is not available, and as a result we become chronically tired, low-energy, lethargic and generally slowed down.
Even when we balance diet, exercise and meditation, maintaining personal energy is difficult, so many people are having to constantly dose themselves with caffeine and so-called energy drinks just to accomplish an ordinary day.
3. Dietary Diseases Like Obesity And Diabetes
Dietary illnesses such as the sweeping obesity and diabetes epidemics are a sign that the soft kill is greatly impacting public health. Public relations and social engineering have changed the public’s understanding of what food actually is, and as our consumption of crap corporate foods increases, so do our wastelines and our chances for getting getting chronic disease like diabetes.
Of course, both of these conditions are entirely curable with a proper diet, but in a country where raw milk is illegal, the truth about food and health is rarely spoken in the mainstream.
The maintenance of chronic illness is very profitable for the medical establishment, and obesity is a gateway to many chronic and life-threatening illnesses.
4. Disorientation and Brain Fog
Many people these days suffer from spells of disorientation and fogginess of the mind, without any clear cause or reason as to the mind should be functioning so poorly. Brain fog is a difficult to identify chronic condition where a person feels disconnected, confused and distant, almost an illness of consciousness.
A spell can last for a day, or it can last for years, often persisting until a person finally isolates the primary cause. Candida overgrowth, a condition where negative bacteria is being over-produced within the body, is the result of poor diet and a compromised gut biome, and is thought to cause disorientation and brain fog.
5. Chronic Inflammation
Chronic inflammation is part of a biological response to harmful stimuli and is increasingly being recognized as a serious silent killer because of the health problems it trigger.
The purpose of inflammation is to rid the body of any causes of damage or injury and to initiate repair. It is a defense mechanism that being constantly activated primarily consuming by inflammatory foods.
Modern wheat is an example of a food that has been so genetically altered that it now no longer provides nutrition, but rather instead irritates the tissues of the body, causing chronic inflammation, leading to bigger health problems.
People suffer more seriously from seasonal and random allergy attacks than ever before, and some attacks can be severe enough to temporarily disable a person. Everyone is watching pollen counts on the nightly news, but allergies simply weren’t this serious a generation ago.
Something has changed in the body and in the environment, and with the omnipresence of chemtrails and geo-engineering projects in the sky, suspicion that the respiratory system is being attacked is warranted.
Autism in children is rising frighteningly and without a precise indication of exactly what is causing it, we should be dramatically erring on the side of caution. It could be environmental, it could be vaccines, GMO’s, or household chemicals, but something is taking our children. Will autism rates have to get to one-in-two before a Manhattan Project like effort is initiated to end this?
It is predicted that soon at least 1 in 3 adults will have some form of cancer, which, as we know, has become a booming industry.
Alternative cures, treatments and therapies are targeted for extermination by the state, and the sick are corralled into risky, expensive treatments that fail to address the root causes of cancer and promote healthier living.
9 . Morgellon’s
This strange and scary disease appears to be an infection of sorts by some still unknown type of organic material. Manifesting as tiny living threads or worms that surface at the skin, irritating the patient, it is believed that no Morgellon’s patient has ever been able to undergo an autopsy due to an attempted global cover up.
With no clear answers available from science, many point to geo-engineering and chemtrail spraying as the source.
10. Dental Fluorosis
The public fluoridation of water in the US and other nations is medication without consent and without controlling dosages. This is a form of torture. The US government just admitted that Americans are overdosed on fluoride when they lowered the recommended amounts to put in public water supplies.
Fluoride is linked to many health problems including cancer and lowered IQ in children, yet the government still forces into just about everyone. Dental fluorosis is a sign of overexposure to fluoride, and a sign of deliberate poisoning.
11. ‘Chemical Imbalances’
Some will disagree, but mental health issues like ADD/ADHD, anxiety, insomnia, and depression can all be cured with proper diet, exercise and supplementation. In fact, these conditions are fairly new to the human population, and are on the rise, or at least diagnoses are on the rise.
Of course the medical establishment benefits greatly from having more and more patients consuming drugs to remedy mental health issues.
The soft kill is about distracting you from life, debilitating you, and getting you out of the game and into the pharmacy.
It would take very little to eradicate so much of the toxicity from our modern world, but the initiative of the ruling elite is to destroy, contaminate and compromise all that which is most fundamental to life on planet earth. A deliberate soft kill.
Is this an accident, or the global depopulation soft kill strategy working effectively for the world’s elite? What do you think?
Fluoride Officially Classified As A Neurotoxin In World’s Top Medical Journals & Former EPA Senior Scientist Confirms Fluoride Lowers Children’s IQ May 17 2017 | From: HealingLifeIsNatural / WakingTimes
Ostensibly, the purpose of adding the fluoride to public drinking water supplies is to improve dental health in the community, yet even the U.S. Government had to modify this claim by lowering the national fluoride levels in 2015, citing increases in dental fluorosis.
In 2012, a major Harvard study found that public water fluoridation poses a risk to the developing intelligence of children, essentially lowering the IQ of those in communities with public water fluoridation. This study invigorated the public debate on this issue, yet, fluoridation continues, despite the known risks, and all the while, scientific evidence continues mounts in the case against fluoride.
"The information now available supports a reasonable conclusion that exposure of the developing brain to fluoride should be minimized, and that economic losses associated with lower IQ’s may be quite large. ”
The research team involved in the study was headed by William Hirzy, PhD, a former US EPA senior scientist who specialized in risk assessment. He offers the following explanation of the significance of this particular study:
"The significance of this peer reviewed risk analysis is that it indicates there may be no actual safe level of exposure to fluoride.
Groups of children with lower exposures to fluoride were compared with groups having higher exposures. Those with higher exposures performed more poorly on IQ tests than those with lower exposures.
Applying two different, standard risk analysis techniques used by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to published data on the impact of fluoride exposure in children shows that daily intakes in excess of about 0.05 mg of fluoride may result in depressed intellectual capability. This calculation involved using safety factors designed to protect the most vulnerable child.
One well-conducted Chinese study indicated that children exposed to 1.4 mg/day had their IQ lowered by 5 IQ points. Current average mean daily intakes among children in the United States are estimated by EPA to range from about 0.80 mg/day to 1.65 mg/day.
Fluoride may be similar to lead and mercury in having no threshold below which exposures may be considered safe.”
The study can be read in its entirety, here, and is worth sharing with anyone still on the fence about the so-called benefits of fluoridated drinking water.
Water fluoridation is medication without consent, yet people tolerate this abuse from government in many parts of the world without a full understanding of the negative effects of fluoride toxicity. The struggle to stop public water fluoridation is winnable at the community level, though, and every year, the grassroots movement against it grows.
Former EPA Senior Scientist Confirms Fluoride Lowers Children’s IQ
Evidence of how negatively fluoride can impact our health has been increasing in rapid pace throughout the past few years. People are hoping that by bringing awareness to this that somehow we can get sodium fluoride removed from the world’s water supply.
A big step has been made here recently. In the most prestigious medical journal. One known as The Lancet. fluoride has been at last classified as a neurotoxin one hundred percent. This puts it in the same category as things like lead, arsenic, and mercury.
This news was released by the author Stefan Smyle who actually cited a report that had been published in The Lancet Neurology, Volume 13, Issue 3 to be exact in the March of 2014 edition. In this, the authors stated that many more of these neurotoxins remain undiscovered throughout the world.
They noted that many children are now being affected by neurodevelopmental disabilities caused by these neurotoxins. These authors have found that while fluoride in our water supplies is a major cause and issue there is another major cause as well, fluoride can actually also be found in heavily processed brands of tea that are grown in most likely overly polluted areas.
Sodium Fluoride is what is added to our water - a toxic insecticide
These authors have found that while fluoride in our water supplies is a major cause and issue there is another major cause as well, fluoride can actually also be found in heavily processed brands of tea that are grown in most likely overly polluted areas.
Most parents have been avoiding fluoridated toothpaste altogether and are jumping on the natural bandwagon in order to help ensure their families safety. A good natural go-to brand is known as Earthpaste for those who may not be aware of it. If you want to get away from fluoridated toothpaste I suggest using it or making your own. I will include a video at the end on how to make natural fluoride free toothpaste.
Fluoride is added to our water supply throughout North America but in most other countries fluoride is banned. Why is this? Because fluoride is extremely dangerous for our health. Fluoride in our drinking water has been linked to many different kinds of cancer. If you haven’t already filtering out the fluoride in your water is a must if you want to help yourself and your family stay healthy.
How To Make Your Own Natural Fluoride Free Toothpaste
Empathy Is Killed By Popular Painkiller Found In 600 Different Drugs May 16 2017 | From: Spring
Acetaminophen - commonly known as Tylenol in the US and paracetamol elsewhere - reduces people’s empathy for the pain of others, new research finds.
Acetaminophen is an ingredient in over 600 different medications, including being the main constituent of Tylenol.
"We don’t know why acetaminophen is having these effects, but it is concerning. Empathy is important.
If you are having an argument with your spouse and you just took acetaminophen, this research suggests you might be less understanding of what you did to hurt your spouse’s feelings.”
The research was carried out on 80 college students. Half were given a dose of 1,000mg of acetaminophen and the other half a placebo. They then read a series of stories about people who had been hurt and were asked to rate their pain.
The results showed that those who had taken the acetaminophen consistently gave lower pain ratings for the people in the story. The researchers carried out a couple of other variations to test people’s’ empathy for physical and social pain.
Dr Way explained the results of the experiment on social pain:
"In this case, the participants had the chance to empathize with the suffering of someone who they thought was going through a socially painful experience.
Still, those who took acetaminophen showed a reduction in empathy. They weren’t as concerned about the rejected person’s hurt feelings.”
The researchers are now moving on to ibuprofen to see if the findings are the same. The study was published in the journal Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience (Mischkowski et al., 2016).
The Body Is Not A Computer, So Stop Thinking Of It As One May 15 2017 | From: Gizmodo
When former DARPA chief Regina Dugan announced on stage last month that Facebook planned to build a brain computer interface to allow users to send their thoughts directly to the social network without a keyboard intermediary, it had all the Silicon Valley swagger of Facebook circa "move fast and break things".
With the same audacity with which any other Facebook product might be announced, Dugan explained that the company hopes to have this revolutionary brain-hack ready to ship "within a few years".
It's an admirable goal, but there's a problem. The body is not a computer. It cannot be hacked, rewired, engineered or upgraded like one, and certainly not at the ruthless pace of a Silicon Valley startup.
Over the past decade, science has made some notable progress in using technology to defy the limits of the human form, from mind-controlled prosthetic limbs to a growing body of research indicating we may one day be able to slow the process of ageing. Our bodies are the next big candidate for technological optimisation, so it's no wonder that tech industry bigwigs have recently begun expressing interest in them. A lot of interest.
Facebook's announcement that it plans to build a brain-computer interface that types at 100 words-per-minute came on the heels of Tesla-founder Elon Musk's announcement that he was forming a new venture, Neuralink, to develop a brain implant capable of telepathy, among other things.
Take the most computational part of the body, the brain. Our brains do not "store" memories as computers do, simply calling up a desired piece of information from a memory bank. If they did, you'd be able to effortlessly remember what you had for lunch yesterday, or exactly the way your high school boyfriend smiled.
Nor do our brains process information like a computer. Our grey matter doesn't actually have wires that you can simply plug-and-play to overwrite depression a la Eternal Sunshine.
The body, too, is more than just a well-oiled piece of machinery. We have yet to identify a single biological mechanism for ageing or fitness that any pill or diet can simply "hack". Research into some of these things is underway, but so far much of what it has uncovered is that the body and brain are incredibly complex.
Scientists do hope, for example, that one day brain computer interfaces might help alleviate severe cases of mental illnesses like depression, and DARPA is currently funding a $US65 million ($88 million) research effort aimed at using implanted electrodes to tackle some of the trickiest mental illnesses.
After decades of research, it's still unclear which areas of the brain even make the most sense to target for each illness.
But as Silicon Valley has begun to dip its toes in the realm of biology, it has brought along its hacker ethos. All you need to achieve ambitious feats of technological innovation are a few all-night hackathons, right?
Within a mere two years, Facebook thinks it will know whether its plan to send 100-word-per-minute status updates from our brains to our screens is possible. The current record for typing with a brain-computer interface, by the way, is somewhere around eight words-per-minute with an implant placed inside the brain.
And Musk, famous for taking on seemingly impossible moonshots with no clear deadline, said he imagines Neuralink's brain-computer interface making its debut within a decade. This is despite the fact that the brain-reading technology it relies upon is, at this point, little more than a fanciful blueprint.
The technology available today can only measure a fraction of the neural activity necessary to link someone's entire brain to a computer, or allow them to communicate with another person without speaking.
In 2009, University of Wisconsin-Madison biomedical engineer Justin Williams oversaw an effort that successfully used a brain-computer interface to send messages from the brain to Twitter.
"Ten years later have we gotten much further? I'm not sure."
"It was both a small and a big step," he told Gizmodo. "Ten years later have we gotten much further? I'm not sure."
Something like an email or a Facebook post, he noted, is infinitely more complicated than a 140-character, text-only tweet.
Just last spring, for the first time a man was able to not only control a prosthetic arm with his mind, but "feel" the arm move, too. That, however, is still a long way off from understanding all the brain's 100 billion neurons and their 100 trillion interconnections, then developing technology good enough to connect every single one of them to a machine. The issue isn't in the technology - it's in the approach to it.
"Twitter is about as simple as you can get," he said. "Sending an email sounds easy, but take a minute to think about all the processes that are involved - filling out the subject, the address field, the body. From a biological and technological standpoint, that's really complicated. There are a lot of moving parts."
Startups like Nootrobox and Halo Neuroscience claim that they are already delivering consumer-ready products to make us smarter, faster and stronger. But with so much of this science still so uncertain, it's hard to either prove or disprove their claims.
The complexity of human biology means that this research doesn't always move at the pace of Moore's Law, and yet when the tech industry approaches these problems, said Williams, "there is a get-it-done kind of attitude that's pretty pervasive."
Over time, as technology has changed, so have the metaphors, but the gist is the same: The body is but a fancy machine.
Conflating machines with the body is a very old human habit. In the 1500s, automata powered by springs and gears led thinkers like René Descartes to suggest that humans are simply complex machines.
In the 1800s, German physicist Hermann von Helmholtz compared the brain to a telegraph. In his 1958 book The Computer and the Brain, the mathematician John von Neumann stated explicitly that the human nervous system is "prima facie digital".
Over time, as technology has changed, so have the metaphors, but the gist is the same: The body is but a fancy machine.
This mode of thinking has spawned a philosophical doctrine, generous research funding, and misleading jargon in both the realms of biology and computing (see the brain's "circuits" or deep learning's "neural networks", which have more in common with classical computational models than anything neurobiological).
But this point of view becomes especially troubling when the realms of biology and computing merge. We risk starting to treat the human body - in all its complexity, fragility, resilience and mystery - like the machines we compare it to.
We risk over-promising on the deliverables, wasting time, money and public patience on far-out research we suggest we can hack together in a few years. And we risk compromising our health and well-being in the process.
Both Facebook and Neuralink have hired top scientific minds to tackle their respective projects. Facebook hired Dugan, and has partnered with UC Berkeley, Johns Hopkins Medicine and other leading academic research institutions. Likewise, Neuralink has brought on high-profile academic researchers.
A flush of Silicon Valley funding into basic research at a time when funding is scarce could very well wind up doing more for scientific progress than every NIH grant combined.
At the same time, many scientists are sceptical that the "move fast and break things" approach will work very well when applied to us. After all, we are living, breathing organisms, not inanimate machines. That's something we should try to remember.
New Leaks Reveals How Facebook Targets Emotionally Vulnerable Youth May 13 2017 | From: MintPressNews
The secret document was put together by two Australian Facebook execs and includes information about when young people are likely to feel excited, reflective, as well as other emotions related to overcoming fears.
Facebook has come under fire over revelations it is targeting potentially vulnerable youths who “need a confidence boost” to facilitate predatory advertising practices.
The allegation was revealed by The Australian which obtained internal documents from the social media giant which reportedly show how Facebook can exploit the moods and insecurities of teenagers using the platform for the potential benefit of advertisers.
The confidential document dated this year detailed how by monitoring posts, comments and interactions on the site, Facebook can figure out when people as young as 14 feel “defeated”, “overwhelmed”, “stressed”, “anxious”, “nervous”, “stupid”, “silly”, “useless”, and a “failure”.
Such information gathered through a system dubbed sentiment analysis could be used by advertisers to target young Facebook users when they are potentially more vulnerable.
But Facebook is not one to rest on its laurels. The leaked document shows it has been honing the covert tools its uses to gain useful psychological insights on young Australian and New Zealanders in high school and tertiary education.
The social media services we use can derive immense insight and personal information about us and our moods from the way we use them, and arguably none is more fastidious in that regard than Facebook which harvests immense data on its users.
The secret document was put together by two Australian Facebook execs and includes information about when young people are likely to feel excited, reflective, as well as other emotions related to overcoming fears.
"Monday-Thursday is about building confidence; the weekend is for broadcasting achievements,” the document said, according to the report.
Facebook did not return attempts by news.com.au to comment on the issue but was quick to issue an apology and told The Australian that it will conduct an investigation into the matter, admitting it was inappropriate to target young children in such a way.
The data on which this research is based was aggregated and presented consistent with applicable privacy and legal protections, including the removal of any personally identifiable information,” Facebook said in a statement issued to the newspaper.
However, there is a suggestion that the research could be in breach of Australian guidelines for advertising and marketing towards children.
Many commentators have suspected Facebook engaged in this sort of cynical exploitation of the data it gathers but the leaked document is scarce proof.
Mark Zuckerberg’s company has not been shy about exploring ways it can manipulate the data it collects on users.
For one week in 2012, Facebook ran an experiment on some of its users in which it altered the algorithms it used to determine which status updates appeared in the news feed of nearly 700,000 randomly selected users based on the post’s emotional content.
Posts were determined to be either negative or positive and Facebook wanted to see if it could make the selected group sad by showing them more negative posts in their feed. It deemed it could.
The results were published in a scientific journal but Facebook was criticized by those concerned about the potential of the company to engage in social engineering for commercial benefit.
Facebook’s Data Use Policy warns users that the company “may use the information we receive about you … for internal operations, including troubleshooting, data analysis, testing, research and service improvement.”
Currently information about your relationship status, location, age, the number of friends and the manner and frequency with which you access the site is sold to advertisers. But according to the report, Facebook is also seeking to sell ads to users concerned with insights gleaned from posts such as those concerned with body confidence and losing weight.
Leaked: Facebook Targeted Insecure Children & Vulnerable Trendies
People within Facebook have leaked information that exposes how the social media giant uses its power to weaponize useless idiots.
Famous Medical-Journal Editor Torpedoes Medical Journal + Why Isn’t There A Medical Edward Snowden? May 6 2017 | From: JonRappoport / Various “There is a system designed to affect every human on the planet, from cradle to grave. For each person, I’m talking about 30 or 40 diagnoses of physical and mental conditions, many of which are false; and treatment with toxic chemicals that progressively debilitate, confuse, weaken, and destroy health and life. What would you call this system? Who would you blame?” - The Underground, Jon Rappoport
Her name is Dr. Marcia Angell. During her 20 years of work, she looked at, perused, and analyzed more medical studies than all mainstream science bloggers in the world put together.
You want to listen to an actual pro? Listen to her. Marcia Angell, former editor of The New England Journal of Medicine, in the NY Review of Books, January 15, 2009, “Drug Companies & Doctors: A Story of Corruption”:
"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.”
Before you count Dr. Angell as a hero, consider this: why didn’t she blow the whistle loud and clear while she was editing The New England Journal? Why didn’t she burn her own Journal down to the ground? After all, she was publishing studies of clinical trials of new drugs, and those fake studies were praising the drugs as safe and effective.
And therefore, The New England Journal was aiding and abetting a crime - unleashing dangerous and ineffective drugs on the public. Her Journal was responsible for that.
Yes, the dreaded R word. Responsibility. In many circles these days, it’s not a popular term.
Take drug companies, for example. As I wrote in a recent piece, when lawsuits are launched against these companies for making drugs that kill and maim, the standard defense is:
“Don’t blame us. The FDA approved our medicine as safe and effective. We’re off the hook. We’ve discharged our responsibility.”
Really? Who created the drug in the first place? Who did the clinical trials? Who sells the drug?
There’s an either-or situation here. It needs to be exposed. It goes this way: Either the pharmaceutical company or the FDA is responsible for people dying. You can’t accuse both. Pick one.
That’s a fool’s game. Both entities are responsible; the company that created the drug and the FDA who approved it and certified it as safe and effective. (And the medical journals that published the crooked studies of clinical trials are also responsible.)
The FDA seal of approval doesn’t automatically exonerate the company. “Well, the government said our company’s drug was fine.” So what? Since when does the government have the last word?
Would you say the US military-industrial complex is solely the responsibility of the government, and the defense contractors play no role in launching endless wars? That would be naïve to the extreme.
As my readers know, because I’ve cited the key review dozens of times, pharmaceutical drugs kill 106,000 Americans every year. That’s a conservative mainstream estimate. (See Dr. Barbara Starfield, Journal of the American Medical Association, July 26, 2000, “Is US Health Really the Best in the World?”)
All those drugs are approved as safe and effective by the FDA. They’re also created, developed, tested, and sold by drug companies. Anyone with a shred of understanding of RESPONSIBILITY would correctly point to the FDA AND the drug companies. (And medical journals.)
Therefore, a company arguing in court that they’re off the hook for killing people with their drugs, because the FDA approved them, is evading responsibility and trying to shift it to the government. And an honest judge and a reasonably intelligent jury would recognize that in a minute.
From the drug company’s point of view, there is a game going on. The company is doing whatever it can to please and satisfy the FDA, and if it can, then it can walk away without shouldering blame.
Obscuring one’s own responsibility is one of the major industries in any nation you care to examine. The numbers of people involved, the amount of money, the time, energy - this is a field of endeavor that expands every year.
A simple law would go a long way toward righting the ship:
“A government certification of a product does not exempt the creator, developer, and seller of the product from facing legal action in criminal and civil court.”
From the street thug, to the highest corporate boardroom, to professional academic fabricators, the theme is the same: “It wasn’t me.” Oh yes it was. And is.
Let’s break down the word-origin of “responsible.” “Respond” comes from the Latin. “Re”=“again.” “Spondere”=“to pledge.” This construction eventually morphed into: pledging again for one’s actions, standing behind one’s actions, re-affirming one’s actions. And finally, “responsible” also means “legally accountable.”
As opposed to attributing the cause of one’s action to someone else.
“I defend my actions by claiming: ‘it wasn’t me’, someone else was in charge, someone else decided my actions were correct.” No. Not even close.
Of course, the US Dept. of Justice isn’t interested in any of these matters. If they were, they would be arresting drug company executives and researchers, FDA executives and drug-reviewers, and medical-journal editors who permit the publication of obviously fake studies of new drugs.
Understand: When you have medical drugs killing 106,000 Americans a year, this necessarily implies that published studies of clinical trials of those drugs - studies that praise those drugs as safe and effective - are a rank fraud.
Medical journals, the FDA, drug companies (and doctors) - a club. And each member of the club is responsible. Accountable. Culpable.
The next time a doctor, or some “science blogger” who loves mainstream published studies, sounds off about “real science,” show them this piece. And if they say that Dr. Marcia Angell is just one medical-journal editor, point them to the following:
Richard Horton (another pro’s pro), editor-in-chief, The Lancet, in The Lancet, 11 April, 2015, Vol 385, “Offline: What is medicine’s 5 sigma?”:
"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…
The apparent endemicity of bad research behaviour is alarming. In their quest for telling a compelling story, scientists too often sculpt data to fit their preferred theory of the world. Or they retrofit hypotheses to fit their data. Journal editors deserve their fair share of criticism too. We aid and abet the worst behaviours.
Our acquiescence to the impact factor fuels an unhealthy competition to win a place in a select few journals. Our love of ‘significance’ pollutes the literature with many a statistical fairy-tale... Journals are not the only miscreants. Universities are in a perpetual struggle for money and talent…”
Two famous editors (Angell and Horton) of two of the most prestigious medical journals in the world torpedo their own corrupt practices.
And if that isn’t enough to put a dent in some potato-head, conventional, medical devotee, then just keep going with this, by the same Richard Horton, editor of the Lancet (from the same piece I just quoted:
Horton makes reference to a recent symposium he attended at the Wellcome Trust in London. The subject of the meeting was the reliability of published biomedical research. His following quote carries additional force because he and other attendees were told to obey Chatham House rules - meaning no one would reveal who made any given comment during the conference.
‘A lot of what is published is incorrect.’ I’m not allowed to say who made this remark [at the conference] because we were asked to observe Chatham House rules. We were also asked not to take photographs of slides.
Those who worked for government agencies pleaded that their comments especially remain unquoted, since the forthcoming UK election meant they were living in ‘purdah’ - a chilling state where severe restrictions on freedom of speech are placed on anyone on the government’s payroll.
Why the paranoid concern for secrecy and non-attribution? Because this symposium - on the reproducibility and reliability of biomedical research, held at the Wellcome Trust in London last week - touched on one of the most sensitive issues in science today: the idea that something has gone fundamentally wrong with one of our greatest human creations [biomedical science]”.
Conventional science bloggers, take notice. You’re working in a field where studies supporting the general consensus are tainted and stained.
Starting sentences with “the FDA approves” or “the CDC confirms” or “a study published in The New England Journal established” isn’t a ticket to the truth. Far from it.
You’re wading in a stench-ridden swamp, and you don’t know it; or you do know it and you don’t care, because you want to be part of the club; or someone is paying you to make absurd assertions. One way or another, you’re doomed if you follow the party line.