Sunday, November 20, 2011
Utility meters are breaking the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) rule not to interfere with other radio frequency devices.
The Portland Press Herald reports the Maine Public Advocate’s office released a statement this week saying:
“Smart Meters are interfering with a wide range of household electronic devices, from garage door openers and WiFi devices to security systems."
On Central Maine Power’s FAQ, in answer to the question: “Will the smart meter interfere with my other household appliances such as computer routers, television signal, cordless phones, etc.?” they respond: “Separating interfering devices usually reduces interference, so make sure the wireless device is located as far from the smart meter as possible. Also, adjust the position of the antenna on the device, if possible, and move the wireless device away from any walls that may absorb the signal.” Full story
We know from history that when a country loses its ability to feed its own population, its demise is soon to follow. As a nation we are being systematically, incrementally and intentionally driven to the point where we cannot feed our own people. The quickest way to collapse the economic viability of a nation is to destroy its agricultural sector. It isn’t gold or silver, global investments and markets, or multi-national corporations and illegal agreements that sustain economies. What does sustain and support a vibrant economy is a strong independent agricultural sector.
The underlying backbone to every economic model is agriculture. And that model is not predicated upon anything other than local, hands on, food production in all its forms. Key to undermining and destroying that model is the intentional destruction of the right to engage in agricultural activity using arbitrary regulations, laws, rules and agency police state enforcement actions perpetrated against independent and/or family owned agricultural operations. Creating barriers to entry into agriculture is key to collapsing an independent agricultural sector which is what got us the fake food safety bill passed by “Dirty Harry” Reid, and his merry band of corporate hiney-hugging, US senators.
Brussels bureaucrats were ridiculed yesterday after banning drink manufacturers from claiming that water can prevent dehydration
EU officials concluded that, following a three-year investigation, there was no evidence to prove the previously undisputed fact.
Producers of bottled water are now forbidden by law from making the claim and will face a two-year jail sentence if they defy the edict, which comes into force in the UK next month.
Last night, critics claimed the EU was at odds with both science and common sense. Conservative MEP Roger Helmer said: “This is stupidity writ large.
“The euro is burning, the EU is falling apart and yet here they are: highly-paid, highly-pensioned officials worrying about the obvious qualities of water and trying to deny us the right to say what is patently true.
“If ever there were an episode which demonstrates the folly of the great European project then this is it.”
Thursday, November 17, 2011
The devices, widely criticised because they make passengers who go through them appear naked, emit low doses of radiation.
The EU has now told member states not to install them until a scientific assessment of the risks has been carried out.
However, no new machines will be allowed to ‘protect citizens’ health and safety’.
Wednesday, November 16, 2011
Successive governments have found that the simplest way to end urban poverty is to encourage poor people to live near congested roads. Apart from war and fags, nothing is more certain to shorten human life than to make people breathe a daily dose of poisons, especially sooty particles known as PM10s and nitrogen oxides that largely come from traffic and factories. The minute particles of partially burned diesel fuel and tyres travel deep into lungs and the gases trigger respiratory diseases. If you already have heart disease or asthma, then just living near a main road can be a death sentence.
In Britain, the environment audit committee has just produced a shocking report showing that 200,000 people can expect to have their lives shortened by as much as two years and everyone else have theirs curtailed by seven months for just breathing. In London alone, air pollution has been linked to nearly one in five deaths a year. This is in line with the rest of the US and Europe where last week the European Environment Agency [EEA] reported that air pollutants already lead to 500,000 premature deaths a year and are now a bigger killer than passive smoking, road traffic accidents and obesity together.
In September of 2010, a new genetically modified animal hybrid sparked mass concern as well as nationwide controversy.
The possibility of having genetically modified salmon for dinner did not sit well with many independent scientists, consumer groups, environmental organizations, and especially the healthy consumer.
Although the genetically modified salmon, commonly referred to as “frankenfish”, has not yet been approved for consumption, it seems that certain US organizations are determined to place the fish on your plate.
One can only wonder why an organization like the USDA would fund research to help the frankenfish’s approval while one part of the legislative branch of government shoots it down. The question is, what could possibly cause the USDA to fund Aquabounty while there is so much controversy surrounding the salmon on a government level? Why would the USDA, an organization which stamps organic products with their seal to indicate no use of genetic modification, give money to a company to research and ultimately sell genetically modified salmon? The answers are unclear, but the actions exhibited by the USDA could very well reflect the personal goals of the members. Perhaps USDA members could have vested interest in the approval of genetically modified fish.
Sunday, November 13, 2011
Antibiotics, recently linked to skyrocketing mental illness rates, are now being identified as a player in the soaring obesity rates around the globe.
Previously, it was revealed that excessive antibiotic usage may also be responsible for spawning drug-resistant superbugs that continue to emerge worldwide.
The reason that antibiotics are potentially making you fat, mentally unhealthy, and suffer from gut problems has to do with the way it affects bacteria within your gut. While antibiotics do kill harmful ‘bad’ bacteria as intended, they also destroy ‘good’ bacteria in the gut which help to regulate more than just gut health. In fact, studies are finding that gut bacteria may be responsible for regulating overall health, including mental health and stability.
Dr. Blaser summarized his findings on the subject, revealing how antibiotics actually have a number of long-term side effects that the medial establishment has previously failed to recognize – or at least report:
"They’ve changed health and medicine over the last 70 years. But when doctors prescribe antibiotics, it is based on the belief that there are no long-term effects. We’ve seen evidence that suggests antibiotics may permanently change the beneficial bacteria that we’re carrying."
Labeled as 'cultured meat' by scientists, new meat grown in laboratory Petri dishes utilizing animal stem cells may soon be coming to a grocery store near you - and perhaps even your dinner plate.
The meat is created using harvested stem cells from leftover animal material found in slaughterhouses. Fed a concoction of sugars, amino acids, lipids, minerals and all other nutrients necessary for the stem cells to grow, the cells begin the transformation into full-fledged Petri dish meat.
At the moment, the meat is also quite unpleasing to the taste buds. As Post continues to tweak the lab-grown meat, he plans to utilize lab-grown fat to enhance flavor.
Related: The Cultured Meat Blog
Artificial sweeteners especially aspartame has gotten a bad rap over the years, most likely due to studies showing they cause cancer. But not to worry Ajinomoto the company that makes Aspartame has changed the name to AminoSweet. It has the same toxic ingredients but a nice new sounding name.
And if you or your child happens to be allergic to Aspartame, well don’t take it personally it’s just business.
Despite the evidence gained over the years showing that aspartame is a dangerous toxin, it has remained on the global market . In continues to gain approval for use in new types of food despite evidence showing that it causes neurological brain damage, cancerous tumors, and endocrine disruption, among other things.
Most consumers are oblivious to the fact that Aspartame was invented as a drug but upon discovery of its’ sweet taste was magically transformed from a drug to a food additive. HFA wants to warn our readers to beware of a wolf dressed up in sheep’s clothing or in this case Aspartame dressed up as Aminosweet.
Over 25 years ago, aspartame was first introduced into the European food supply. Today, it is an everyday component of most diet beverages, sugar-free desserts, and chewing gums in countries worldwide. But the tides have been turning as the general public is waking up to the truth about artificial sweeteners like aspartame and the harm they cause to health. The latest aspartame marketing scheme is a desperate effort to indoctrinate the public into accepting the chemical sweetener as natural and safe, despite evidence to the contrary.
Saturday, November 12, 2011
The Obama administration is considering whether scientists should inject healthy children with the anthrax vaccine to see if it would protect them from a bioterrorism attack.
But critics have called the plans unethical, unnecessary and dangerous and children should only be vaccinated in the face of an actual threat.
Daniel B. Fagbuyiof, of the Children's National Medical Center in Washington, told the Washington Post: 'At the end of the day, do we want to wait for an attack and give it to millions and millions of children and collect data at that time? 'Or do we want to say "how do we best protect our children?"
If the NBSB approves the testing, the FDA, National Institutes of Health and other agencies will meet to work out how many children would be studied, at what age and with what dose.
Related: Vaccine to Protect Children from Anthrax: Public Engagement Workshop
Welcome to Meat Glue, a covert and common additive to meat products. Meat Glue is an interesting – if not repulsive – creature. While not a registered product of Mary Shelley, royalties may be due. You might have never thought of resurrecting a hamburger back into steak, but somebody else has, and Activa (transglutaminase) is the enzymatic force of galvanism behind the ritual. Forming covalent bonds between scraps of food, they are so effectively fused together that even professional chefs and gastronomes are typically unable to distinguish veritable sausage from filet mignon once reanimated by this strange product.
The implied reasoning behind the corrosions of our quality of life is almost all equally ludicrous and unnecessary. They reason that we need GMOs and Meat Glue because we don’t have enough food, but burn their own surpluses behind our backs and destroy those who would happily eliminate the shortages they covet. From FAST to fast and furious, from Monsanto to mutant healthcare bills, a cacophony of corruption simply enforces what it cannot justify or deceive people into accepting. Children feed upon McWaste under duress, while organic farmers are terrorized by government and their corporate pillars. The sources of hassle might as well wear neon badges, as they are perceptibly merging into a single unified disease. Can’t we see?
Activa is but one of many legitimate concerns regarding the integrity of our food; and there are doubtlessly more serious issues to confront as well. The imperative matter is that of transparency and choice, and our current government has proven a treacherous and pitiful ally in this bizarre struggle. We have a right to know what we eat, and no one has the right to intentionally deceive us. With help from the FDA, deception has been made the divine right of corporations.
Baxter Healthcare Corp. has announced it is recalling around 300,000 doses of its Preflucel flu vaccine due to an ‘excessive’ amount of adverse reactions. Recalled from thousands of pharmacies and surgeries across Europe, the 300,000 units are to be immediately withdrawn. With seasonal flu vaccines already linked to nerve disease Guillain-Barre Syndrome and narcolepsy and still being given out liberally to citizens worldwide, the adverse reactions must be quite serious in order to prompt a recall.
Even more concerning is the fact that vaccine makers actually have been given legal immunity thanks to a law signed by Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius.
Of course Baxter representatives are urging the public to stay calm, while also downplaying the risks associated with the shot. In the past NaturalSociety has revealed how Merck uses similar tactics to downplay the true side effects of the Gardasil vaccine, listing only minor side effects and ignoring the death link completely.
“The vaccine is being recalled because these side effects have been reported more frequently with this specific batch,” said a Baxter spokesmen. This spokesman also attempted to reassure the public that those who have already been vaccinated with Preflucel “should not be concerned (for their safety).”
Only time will tell what serious reactions are associated with this batch of Preflucel. In response to why the vaccine was recalled, Baxter states that “most of the side-effects are those usually associated with flu vaccines – they have started shortly after the vaccination and have been mild and short-lived.”
The problem with this statement is the fact that the seasonal flu shot has been repeatedly tied with serious adverse reactions. Therefore, it is not very reassuring that ‘most of the side-effects’ occur in the regular seasonal flu shot as well. Furthermore, it seems unlikely that Baxter would not recall flu vaccines, or at least investigate them further, after it was found that they are virtually ineffective and linked to nerve disease if they truly cared about your health. Therefore, it seems reasonable that despite the reassuring language of the Baxter spokesmen, this batch of Preflucel must be linked to something quite nasty.
Related: Immune System Protects Against Flu, Not Vaccines
Wednesday, November 9, 2011
Dr. Andreas Carrasco remained in the locked car and watched with fear as the crowd beat the vehicle and shouted at him — for two hours. His friends who didn’t make it into the vehicle were not so lucky. One ended up paralyzed. Another unconscious. The angry crowd of about 100 were likely organized by a local rice grower who was furious at Carrasco for what he was trying to do that day. Carrasco’s crime? Telling people that Roundup herbicide from Monsanto causes birth defects in animals, and probably humans.
Carrasco is a leading embryologist at the University of Buenos Aires Medical School and the Argentinean national research council. He had heard the horrific stories of peasant farmers working near the vast fields of Roundup Ready soybeans — plants genetically engineered to withstand generous doses of Monsanto’s poisonous weed killer. The short-term impact of getting sprayed was obvious: skin rashes, headaches, loss of appetite, and for one 11 year old Paraguayan boy named Silvino Talavera, who biked through a fog of herbicides in 2003, death. But Carrasco also heard about the rise of birth defects, cancer, and other disorders that now plagued the peasants who were sprayed by plane. He decided to conduct a study.
In previous articles here, here and here, I wrote about the dangers of an environmental toxin called bisphenol-A (BPA). BPA is a chemical that is found in several plastics and plastic additives. It's in the water bottles some folks carry to gyms, the canned tomatoes and coconut milk they cook with, and in the baby bottles moms use to feed their infants.
We've known for decades that BPA has estrogenic activity. In vivo animal studies and in vitro cell-culture research has linked low-level estrogenic activity associated with BPA exposure to all kinds of fun stuff, like diabetes, ADHD, heart disease, infertility and cancer.
There is now significant evidence suggesting that even low levels of BPA-exposure can cause harm, and this is particularly true in vulnerable populations like pregnant women, infants and the chronically ill. (1)
Tuesday, November 8, 2011
Pesticides threaten our health, yet we still use them in America today. In the Vietnam War, herbicides (a subclass of pesticides) and their deadly effects created a dark legacy that still lingers.
Many Americans have heard about Agent Orange and are aware that the Veterans Administration has recognized numerous ill effects it had on people who were exposed to it. Not so well known is that nine of the 12 most dangerous and persistent organic chemicals are pesticides, according to the 2001 Stockholm Convention findings (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stockholm_Convention) on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs).
In today’s world, smart and diligent consumerism will take you a long way. There are scores of products that all hold fast to claims of quality and integrity. The truth about purchasing most products however is that you must be privy to the meaning of health subtitles.
In the realm of health foods and supplements, products are pushed in many different ways. Advertising techniques can range from pointing out unique vitamins or minerals to branding the product as ‘all natural’ or ‘certified organic.’ The Food and Drug Administration’s regulations make the guidelines for authenticity rather lenient, and so companies capitalize on the lack of awareness in the average buyer often by using deceptive advertising and marketing tactics.
The average person on a base level acknowledges that there are dangerous additives like aspartame and high fructose corn syrup in many products. In an attempt to avoid these harmful ingredients, a product with an ‘all natural’ label will be picked up instead. Many products that are labeled as such, however, often don’t contain all natural ingredients and are simply the result of deceptive advertising and marketing tactics.
Monday, November 7, 2011
During his presentation on the status of the nation’s new country-of-origin labeling (COOL) law, and on behalf of the R-CALF USA COOL Committee, R-CALF USA member and Kansas cattle feeder Mike Callicrate was asked a non-COOL question that set convention goers on their heels during the 12th Annual R-CALF USA Convention held August 26-27 in Rapid City, S.D.
“Has the Environmental Protection Agency declared hay a pollutant?” an audience member asked. Callicrate responded affirmatively and explained that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) recently initiated a formal enforcement action against his Kansas feedlot for, among other things, failure to store his hay in a pollution containment zone. “Now that EPA has declared hay a pollutant, every farmer and rancher that stores hay, or that leaves a broken hay bale in the field is potentially violating EPA rules and subject to an EPA enforcement action,” Callicrate said. “How far are we going to let this agency go before we stand up and do something about it?”
Callicrate said the EPA does not appear to be going after the corporate feedlots. “EPA is turning a blind eye toward the mega-feedlots that are a real risk for pollution and, instead, is antagonizing small to mid-sized family operations in an effort to help their packer-partners capture the entire live cattle supply chain away from family farm and ranch operations.”
Four years ago, a coalition of agribusiness companies and industry groups, including Monsanto, the American Farm Bureau, the Midwest Dairy Council, and the National Pork Producers Council, got together to start the Center for Food Integrity (CFI), a nonprofit organization whose mission is "to build consumer trust and confidence in today's food system."
CFI fulfills its mission by performing market research and then concocting spinmeister Frank Luntz-style message testing to come up with ways Big Food can convince Americans to stop worrying and love industrial agriculture.
But perhaps it's Big Food that has reason to worry: There's new evidence that eaters are rapidly losing confidence in the food industry.
Wednesday, November 2, 2011
Federal officials announced they were funding the development of five drugs designed to protect people from the horrors of radiation poisoning. The government's also financing studies to develop an improved version of another drug to treat people exposed to radioactive particles that could be released during a so-called dirty bomb attack.
Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority, or BARDA, a division of the Department of Health and Human Services, announced the roughly $60 million in funding in a series of releases Wednesday and Thursday.
About $56.3 million will go toward five contracts for a variety of drug companies and scientists working on countermeasures for acute radiation syndrome, or radiation sickness. When exposed to high doses of ionizing radiation -- such as from a nuclear bomb blast -- fast-reproducing cells in the gut, bone marrow, and lungs can be destroyed, which can in turn lead to internal bleeding, a depressed immune system and death over the following days or even weeks.
Winners of contracts include Neumedicines Inc., which got a $17 million award to study recombinant human interleukin-12 (rhuIL-12). Also called HemaMax, a 2008 BARDA-funded study showed it might be able to protect bone marrow from radiation.
Related stories: Protectan is a pill to cure radiation sickness
Companies that market influenza vaccines in the United States are reacting cautiously to last week's meta-analysis that highlighted gaps in the evidence for the efficacy of the vaccines, with officials stressing that vaccines are still the best preventive tool and that the firms are working to improve them.
The meta-analysis, published last week in The Lancet Infectious Diseases, showed that evidence from the best randomized controlled trials (RCTs) indicates that flu vaccines have an efficacy of about 59% in adults aged 18 to 65. The authors emphasized that vaccines remain the best defense against flu, but that better vaccines are needed.
"The authors have written a good and rigorous paper that does support the use of current influenza vaccines while new vaccines are developed," said Darryl Maher, MD, vice president, medical and research [of CSL Biotherapies]. "It would be disappointing if those most at risk from influenza complications were to lose confidence in influenza vaccination on the basis of the paper."
Related stories: Misconceptions Surrounding the HPV Vaccine Could Undermine Disease Prevention