Monday, December 30, 2013

15 Ways to Naturally Protect Your Family From Fukushima Radiation

Natureal Mom

With recent news of the Fukushima nuclear fallout leaking radioactive materials directly into the ocean, our lives will never be the same. Radiation from this catastrophe has contaminated and continues to contaminate food crops across the entire northern hemisphere and beyond and can cause all kinds of health issues. It has recently been reported that following the Fukushima disaster, California babies have damaged thyroid glands and another recent study shows that babies born after 2010 have some 26% percent higher risks to have cancer and birth defects. I don’t consider myself an alarmist but don’t bury my head in the sand either. Here are some natural ways we can help to protect ourselves and our children—which are good practices to adopt anyway for optimal health.

1. Reduce your radiation exposure. If you live in an area receiving any radiation exposure, remove your shoes and leave them by the door. Use a HEPA air purifier, filter and vacuum to get rid of any excess dust and change filters regularly. Also, during periods of high airborne radiation releases, you may want to stay out of the rain. Radioactive isotopes are constantly spewed from the Fukushima nuclear plant and are easily picked up by the jet stream and transported across the North Pacific in storm systems. When these weather fronts hit the mainland, the rains wash the radioactive particles out of the air and spreads them over everything that receives precipitation. Following the disaster, Los Angeles rainwater was five times over the normal amount of radiation.

2. Eat clean. Our bodies are already working overtime trying to eliminate toxins so the choices we make can either help the process or make it harder for our systems to perform. Consider reducing (or eliminating altogether) your intake of soda, fried and processed foods, artificial sweeteners and refined sugars.

3. Avoid consuming fish caught off the west coast of North America, Canada and Japan. Marine chemist Ken Buesseler found Pacific cesium levels 50 million times higher than pre-disaster levels. The levels tapered off but plateaued at 10,000 times higher than normal. The algae get contaminated and it goes to the little fish, to the big fish and then to you. It is also wise to avoid dairy and meat. The higher on the food chain, the higher the concentration of radioactive materials may be. Dairy products in particular may be the most contaminated item, because radiation is most concentrated and the living creature has eaten the contaminated grass, other foods and water (from contaminated rain that forms from the Pacific and atmospheric particles) the radiation from which is stored it in its body and passed on to whoever eats it. After the Chernobyl disaster in the eighties, there were numerous cases of children becoming severely ill from drinking cow’s milk.

4. Invest in a good water filter. Authorities have been unclear about the level of contamination caused by Fukushima in our water supplies. It may be prudent to have a water filter that not only removes chemical and biological contaminants but also can filter radioactive particles. A filter which includes carbon, reverse osmosis, and ion exchange are the most effective systems available to not only protect you from radioactive particles but also fluoride, heavy metals, pesticides and many other contaminants. Our family uses this under the sink system.

5. Associated with the prevention and/or treatment of at least four of the leading causes of death in Western countries (cancer, diabetes, cardiovascular disease and hypertension), phytonutrients are involved in many processes including ones that help prevent cell damage, prevent cancer cell replication, and decrease cholesterol levels. Phytonutrients in the bloodstream are on constant patrol looking out for bacteria, viruses, parasites, fungi, toxins, cellular debris, pollutants and industrial chemicals—eliminating these toxic accumulated chemicals before you even know they are there. Phytonutrients can be found in:

garlic, onions, scallions, shallots and chives flax, hemp and chia seeds (or their fresh oils)
alfalfa, barley and wheat grasses (freshly juiced or dry powders)
broccoli sprouts, broccoli, cauliflower, brussels sprouts and cabbage kale, swiss chard, spinach, dandelions, watercress
extra-virgin, cold-pressed olive oil and borage oil
green, red, yellow and orange peppers
apples
tomatoes
citrus such as pink grapefruit, lemons, oranges, tangerines, limes (pulp and rind)
colorful berries such as cherries, blueberries, strawberries
long fermented organic/non-GMO soy such as edamame, miso, natto, tempeh apricots, grapes, dark plums, prunes
root vegetables such as yams, sweet potatoes, squash, red beets, carrots
whole, organic, non-salted, raw seeds, nuts, legumes, whole grains and peas
6. In supplement form, citrus and apple pectin have been shown to bind to and remove radioactive materials such as Cesium-137 from the body. Apple pectin is known to draw radiation from the body. Russian doctors have found apple pectin to be among the most effective means for protecting against radiation when consuming contaminated foods is unavoidable. Pectin, along with vitamins and minerals, eliminates radionuclides ingested from foods.

7. Spirulina, chlorophyll and chlorella have all been shown to reduce significantly or even remove radioactive materials in people who were contaminated by the Chernobyl fallout. Additional research found that rats consuming spirulina or chlorella algae eliminated seven times the amount of dioxin when compared to a control diet. However, this blue-green algae superfood should probably not be sourced from the west coast of North America, Canada, Japan or nearby waters. Try adding one or two of these to your water, smoothies or take in pill form daily.

8. Reishi mushrooms have been long used throughout Asian pharmacologies for centuries to increase white blood cells, help fight cancer, tumors, increase longevity, improve liver function and maintain a healthy immune system. The recommended method is slicing the dried mushrooms, simmering for three hours and drinking the concentrated tea.

9. Herbal and homeopathic extracts such as:

Rhodiola, an adaptogenic herb (responds to your body in nonspecific ways to increase resistance to stress and boost overall strength and vitality without disturbing biological functions), is known for treating cancer, tuberculosis and preventing aging and liver damage. It also helps the body resist physical, chemical and environmental stress. Holy Basil (tulsi) is another aptogen, originally from India and used in Ayurvedic medicine for everything from the common cold to mercury poisoning.

Bilberry contains the important nutrients quercetin, anthocyanins and resveratrol which are said to protect against free radical and toxin damage and help to protect against damage from radiation (in a topical form, with the detoxifier glutathione).

Antioxidant extracts of the leaves of the Gingko biloba tree may protect cells from radiation damage, according to a study published in the International Journal of Low Radiation.

Milk thistle supports the liver in removing toxins and may offer some protection from radiation damage, although more research is needed. Aloe vera can be taken orally and applied topically. It has been known to ease side effects from radiation and is a natural laxative with soothing agents.

Herbs high in selenium may protect against DNA damage. These include nettles, burdock root, catnip and ginseng. Cilantro removes heavy metals from the body.

Radium bromatum is a specific homeopathic remedy for radiation poisoning. Acute dose is 3 – 5 pellets of 12X to 30C every 1 – 4 hours until symptoms are relieved.

10. Vitamins D3, K2 and E. Most of us are deficient in Vitamin D3, no matter how much sun we get. Mushrooms are an excellent source of vitamin D. Mycologist Paul Stamets discovered that you can naturally multiply their levels of vitamin D by exposing them to sunlight. Vitamin D-enriched mushrooms are best made from June until September and can be dried as the high vitamin D levels generated will last for more than a year. This is especially beneficial for people living in colder climates. However, our bodies don’t always assimilate it. That is where Vitamin K2 comes in. It acts as an assistant to help get Vitamin D3 directly to your bones. When our bodies do not get the calcium or sufficient nutrients it needs, it pulls from another source and the source could be toxic—such as radiation, lead and mercury. When your body is content and assimilating all that it needs through a healthy diet and supplementation then it is less likely to absorb harsh chemicals. Natural sources of Vitamin K2 include fermented veggies, organic nato and curd cheese. Vitamin E is a fat-soluble vitamin with antioxidant properties that plays a huge role in fighting free radicals that can prevent or delay chronic diseases. Vitamin E is found naturally in avocados, nuts, olive oil and sunflower seeds.

11. It is crucial to get enough calcium, potassium, iron and magnesium. Radioactive strontium is very similar chemically to calcium. Our bodies take up strontium and deposit it into our bones, treating it as if it were calcium. If we’re not getting enough calcium, then our calcium-hungry bodies will more quickly and eagerly absorb strontium. This is the same reason that potassium iodide works to protect against damage from radioactive iodine—by loading up on harmless iodine, our bodies are less eager to absorb the dangerous type of iodine. Similarly, radioactive cesium is treated like potassium by our bodies. The body absorbs it, treats it like potassium, and deposits it in our muscles, heart and other tissues. Plutonium is treated like iron by our bodies. So getting enough iron will help reduce absorption of plutonium. Magnesium has also been shown to provide some protection against radiation and is essential for absorption of calcium and potassium, plus it helps protect your heart and other body tissues.

12. Activated charcoal is charcoal that has been treated with oxygen to open up millions of tiny pores between the carbon atoms. The use of special manufacturing techniques results in highly porous charcoals that have very large surface areas and works to trap toxins through “adsorption.” When a material adsorbs something, it attaches to it via chemical attraction. The huge surface area of activated charcoal gives it countless bonding sites for adsorbing toxins. Because charcoal is not “digested” like food, it may remain inside the GI tract for a period of time, thereby continuing to actively remove toxins via the bowel. We use this brand as it is the most pure I could find. Be sure to drink a lot of water with it as it can cause constipation.

13. Bentonite clay absorbs toxins (including pathogenic viruses, herbicides, pesticides, free radicals and radiation) similar to activated charcoal. It has a large and varied mineral content, including over 50 minerals, and been used for ages by many cultures for detoxification. When bentonite clay absorbs water and swells, it stretches open like a highly porous sponge. Toxins are drawn into these spaces and bound through electrical attraction. The bentonite is eventually eliminated from the body with the toxins bound to its extremely minute rectangular particles and surfaces.

14. Start increasing your intake of iodine. The incidence of thyroid cancer was off the charts after the Chernobyl nuclear disaster and as I previously mentioned, there have been recent reports of damaged thyroid glands of California babies after the Fukushima nuclear fallout. Sea vegetables such as dulse, wakame, kombu, and nori seaweeds have been shown to neutralize radioactive isotopes in the body and contain a high amount of protective natural iodine protect the thyroid. Just be sure to avoid seaweed from the west coast of North America, Canada and Japan. You can also put a few drops of pure iodine in your water which will make it more difficult for your thyroid to absorb radiated iodine.

15. Detox/cleanse/exercise/massage. It’s always a good idea to try to cleanse and detox at least four times a year. Sweating it out with exercise and infrared saunas is helpful, as are lymphatic drainage massages.

Last, but not least, stay informed. Seek as much information as you can and take control over you and your family’s health and well-being.

Monday, December 23, 2013

Neurologist Warns of Exploding Neurodegenerative Disease Due to Chemtrail Toxins

Natural Society
by Christina Sarich

Chemtrails are real and they are dangerous, yet so many people still deny their existence. Well if a former Airforce veteran, chemicals and bio-environmental engineering whistle blower or other researchers aren’t convincing enough, then perhaps a neurologist will help people wake up to the fact that millions of tons of cancer-causing and brain-debilitating nano-particles are being dumped from the air by our government.

There are still people arguing about whether contrails are chemtrails, and the evidence is incredibly right before our eyes. Michigan is hazed out one week, California, the next, then back down south to hit Texas or Georgia. You can see the pictures others have captured if you don’t see them with your own ocular lenses.

Now, Russell L. Blaylock, M.D., called a hack and a self-promoting sycophant by his detractors, is warning us about what thousands of other average citizens have been for years. He says that the tons of nanosized aluminum compounds being sprayed on us via chemtrails are:

“. . .infinitely more reactive and induce intense inflammation in a number of tissues. Of special concern is the effect of these nanoparticles on the brain and spinal cord, as a growing list of neurodegenerative diseases, including Alzheimer’s dementia, Parkinson’s disease, and Lou Gehrig’s disease (ALS) are strongly related to exposure to environmental aluminum.”

The concerned neurosurgeon is only commenting on one known toxin, too. There are others, like barium and strontium, and a practically endless cocktail of carcinogenic constituents that can possibly cull the global population. Also speaking out against chemtrails is Dr. Edward Group, who explains how chemicals sprayed from chemtrails can “turn on” certain issues such as shingles within your body (under certain circumstances).

Aluminum exposure from chemtrails is helping to lead to aluminum-induced cognitive disorders among the population, as doctor Blaylock, suggests. Aluminum can even affect unborn babies, not just the elderly, since it crosses into the placenta via the blood.

Another toxin being found in chemtrails is Strontium-90. It isn’t any better. Neither is Barium.

The impact of these compounds upon human health is unmistakable. So why is this happening?

There are all kinds of theories, but gaining traction with the overt actions of Monsanto-monopolies, an utter disregard for nature by multiple corporate entities, the ever-present war-mongering that leaves us with tragedies like Fukushima, as well as a general disregard for human life run rampant, some are saying these chemtrails are to kill off most of the population. After all, we are waking up as a worldwide citizenry. But no matter the reason, 2 things are for sure: chemtrails are real, and chemtrails are dangerous.

If you want to learn about chemtrails, regardless of whether or not you agree with the current ‘conspiracy’ theories about why they are taking place everywhere, consider the following for your further edification:

David Keith on Geoengineering
YOU are BEING POISONED with Extensive list of geo-engineering patents



Flavor Enhancer MSG Added to Flu Shot

YouTube

Obamacare Will be the Reason That You Will Never Retire

Activist Post
by Dave Hodges

The elephant in the room is healthcare. The American middle class is in extreme danger because of Obamacare. Obamacare will be the reason that many will never be able to retire or even to live to a ripe old age.

Will Obamacare Be Repealed?

Millions hold out hope that Obamacare will just go away. Could that happen?

The big challenge to Obamacare was the constitutional issue of making participation mandatory. The Supreme Court voted 5-4 in favor of the mandate to force people to pay a penalty for non-payment. As an aside, since when does an entity have to force someone to participate in a program if it is that good?

The other source that promised hope that Obamacare could be stopped is in Congress. The House of Representatives has voted over 30 times to get rid of Obamacare, but it is just a symbolic gesture because they know that it will never pass the Democrat-controlled Senate. And if by some miracle the repeal of Obamacare did pass the Senate, Obama would veto the bill and a two-thirds override would never happen. Obamacare is here to stay.

How Mandatory Is Obamacare?

Corporate friends of the President, such as the employees at General Electric and McDonald's will not be forced to participate. The agency which will enforce the penalty phase of Obamacare, the IRS, was recently issued an exemption from participating as well. In short, if your corporation donated heavily to Obama’s re-election campaign, an exemption to the mandatory phase of Obamacare has been issued. For everyone else, tough luck.

The most incredulous aspect of Obamacare forced compliance is that the mandatory provision does not include the legislators who imposed this monstrosity upon us; namely, the Congress. Are you mad yet? Well, we are just getting started.

Obama Promised We Could Keep Our Insurance

As with most things coming out of this President’s mouth, his promise that we could keep our insurance was only partially true. Because of new federal restrictions, insurance providers will no longer be offering the exact same plan that you now have. Some of this is due to the fact that Obamacare mandates a certain level of quality and a certain number of services to be offered in their insurance packages. Therefore, if your insurance company doesn’t want to bear the increased costs of complying with the Obamacare law, your plan will change and you can bet that your cost will rise dramatically.

The most dramatic aspect of Obamacare, as it relates to maintaining present coverage, is that if you have a life-change event, you will be mandated to be entered into Obamacare against your will. Life-change events include, but are not limited to: marriage, becoming a parent, changing jobs, getting divorced and many more.

Obamacare Will Dramatically Drive Up Taxes

Obamacare mandates the imposition of 19 new taxes which have never existed before including the tax on a home sale which really has nothing to do with healthcare. And if you use an indoor tanning booth, expect to pay a 10% tax.

What About Chronic Health and Pre-Existing Conditions?

It appears that the President originally planned to make good on his promise to not allow treatment exemptions for pre-existing conditions and chronic conditions. However, the federal funds which were to be used to reimburse the state exchanges have already dried up and rate increases are in the works.

What About Cost?

Obama has consistently stated that under Obamanomics, families with incomes under $250,000 would not experience tax increases and would also see their medical costs decline. That statement is a bald-faced lie!

Under Department of Health and Human Services poverty level guidelines, if you’re a single-earning worker making $44,680, or a couple earning a mere $60,520, or a family of four earning a modest income of $92,200, Obama eliminates your subsidy from the government for lower health costs. I do not mean to speak down to anyone, but do you realize that a couple making $60,520 per year is the equivalent of two fast food jobs? These are very modest incomes and the cost aspect of Obamacare should be raising red flags for all middle class income families.

The Kaiser Foundation published an ObamaCare Cost Calculator for you and your family after subsidies. Please be aware this is a basic estimate for the cost of a “Silver plan” (the second tier plan, as opposed to the basic “Bronze plan” on the Exchange). Also note, the total cost is greatly affected by “regional cost factor” (increasing or decreasing the premium by as much as 20%). Yes, Virginia, there are separate plans, consisting of Bronze, Silver, Gold and something called the Cadillac plan.

However, there is an absence of information of what each level of the Obamacare plan entails in terms of cost and treatment. One thing is clear: when the health plan is divided up into differing levels of care and cost, there is indeed a problem because it is apparent that people will not be treated equally under Obamacare.

For a family of four with two dependent children and a $100,000 income, Obamacare insurance costs are nearly $10,000 per year. Such a family could have expected to pay about $400 per month under existing plans such as United Health Care. Under Obamacare, the cost more than doubled.

For the same family listed above making $150,000 per year, they will pay almost $14,000 per year or 350% more than they would expect to pay in today’s health insurance market. This is obviously why the corporate friends of Obama are seeking exemptions from participation. And for those who seek their own exemption through non-participation, they will be fined 2.5% of gross adjusted income and the amount will go up with successive year that they refuse to participate.

The aforementioned numbers are the the government’s numbers as parroted by Kaiser. In other words, these rates represent the best-case scenario. For those of us in the middle and upper middle class, Obamacare represents why most of us will never retire because we will be working to pay off our Obamacare debt.

Conclusion

Obamacare promised affordable healthcare, when in reality what we did was trade managed healthcare for profit for managed healthcare for profit on steroids. Anyone in the middle class and above, are now health care slaves to corporations like United Health Care and Kaiser.

Obamacare was the creation of a 2,300-page document which was passed with Congress without reading what they were passing. This was only the first phase of America’s healthcare enslavement. The next phase of Obamacare consists of creating administrative procedures and regulations in the implementation phase.

What will that consist of? Nobody knows for sure but the managed care companies are in charge of Obamacare. These monolithic corporations have been given a blank check over our healthcare. And when one couples this with the fact that Obama is making a move on seizing 401K’s, IRA’s and pensions, it is a safe bet that you will be forced to work until you drop. Only the strong will survive. This is eugenics at its best as there is nothing in the bill to prevent the insurance companies from creating infamous death panels and to begin to deny treatment based upon conditions and the age of the patient.

Nineteenth century Fabian Socialism has come to roost in America under Obamacare and it is likely that you will work until you drop in order for the right to be a healthcare slave.

Friday, December 13, 2013

NEJM editor: “No longer possible to believe much of clinical research published”

The Ethical Nag

Harvard Medical School’s Dr. Marcia Angell is the author of The Truth About the Drug Companies: How They Deceive Us and What to Do About It. But more to the point, she’s also the former Editor-in-Chief at the New England Journal of Medicine, arguably one of the most respected medical journals on earth. But after reading her article in the New York Review of Books called Drug Companies & Doctors: A Story of Corruption, one wonders if any medical journal on earth is worth anybody’s respect anymore.

“It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of The New England Journal of Medicine.”

Dr. Angell cites the case of Dr. Joseph L. Biederman, professor of psychiatry at Harvard Medical School and chief of pediatric psychopharmacology at Harvard’s Massachusetts General Hospital. She explains:

“Thanks largely to him, children as young as two years old are now being diagnosed with bipolar disorder and treated with a cocktail of powerful drugs, many of which were not approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for that purpose, and none of which were approved for children below ten years of age.”

Biederman’s own studies of the drugs he advocates to treat childhood bipolar disorder were, as The New York Times summarized the opinions of its expert sources, “so small and loosely designed that they were largely inconclusive.”

In June 2009, an American senate investigation revealed that drug companies, including those that make drugs he advocates for childhood bipolar disorder, had paid Biederman $1.6 million in “consulting” and “speaking” fees between 2000 and 2007.

“Two of Biederman’s colleagues received similar amounts. After the revelation, the president of the Massachusetts General Hospital and the chairman of its physician organization sent a letter to the hospital’s physicians expressing not shock over the enormity of the conflicts of interest, but sympathy for the beneficiaries: “We know this is an incredibly painful time for these doctors and their families, and our hearts go out to them.”

Biederman’s failure to disclose his Big Pharma payments to his employers ar Harvard (as is required for all Harvard employees) has been under investigation* for the past two years by Harvard Medical School, in as journalist Alison Bass describes this: “what must be the longest investigation in that school’s history”).

Dr. Angell’s article contains bombshell after bombshell, all gleaned during her tenure as NEJM editor. For example, on the subject of doctors who are bought and paid for by Big Pharma, she writes:

“No one knows the total amount provided by drug companies to physicians, but I estimate from the annual reports of the top 9 U.S.-based drug companies that it comes to tens of billions of dollars a year in North America alone.By such means, the pharmaceutical industry has gained enormous control over how doctors evaluate and use its own products. Its extensive ties to physicians, particularly senior faculty at prestigious medical schools, affect the results of research, the way medicine is practiced, and even the definition of what constitutes a disease.”

Revelations like this from medical profession insiders cast serious doubt on more than what’s printed on the pages of these medical journals.

Your physician reads these journals, treatment decisions are changed, care is affected, drugs are prescribed – all based on Big Pharma-funded medical ghostwriter-prepared journal articles from physicians who fraudulently claim to be the study authors. Then you walk out of your doctor’s office with a prescription for a drug that may or may not kill you, based on treatment protocols written by doctors like Biederman who are on the take from Big Pharma. A very recent example of the sad reality over at the once-prestigious New England Journal of Medicine is their decision to publish a drug company-funded review article. This review attempts to discredit emerging research suggesting that many years of using Merck’s Fosamax or Procter & Gamble’s Actonel (both osteoporosis drugs in a class called bisphosphonates) could actually result in more leg bone fractures. Not surprisingly, drug manufacturers of bisphosphonates are fighting back ferociously against this emerging (independent) research. A Merck-funded review paper published in the NEJM on March 24, 2010 concludes:

“The occurrence of fracture of the subtrochantericor diaphyseal femur was very rare, even among women who had been treated with bisphosphonates for as long as 10 years.”

Sounds promising for Big Pharma. But if you look very, very closely, the article’s fine print confesses:

“The study was underpowered for definitive conclusions.”

You might justifiably ask yourself why a medical journal would stoop to publishing a meaningless scientific paper that the paper’s own authors admit lacks any conclusion. Even more troubling than a journal article that was itself bought and paid for by Merck, is the conflict of interest disclosure list at the bottom of this NEJM article. It reads like a Who’s Who of Big Pharma.

Of the 12 study authors listed in the NEJM article, at least three are full-time employees of Merck or Novartis. Each one of the other nine admit owning equity interests in or receiving cash, travel expenses, or “consulting and lecture fees” from companies including Merck, Novartis, Amgen, Roche Nycomed, Procter & Gamble, AstraZeneca, GlaxoSmithKline, Medtronics, Nastech, Nestle, Fonterra Brands, OnoPharma, Osteologix, Pfizer, Eli Lilly, Sanofi-Aventis, Tethys, Unilever,Unipath, Inverness Medical, Ortho Clinical Diagnostics, OSIProsidion, or Takeda.

Why is the New England Journal of Medicine or any other credible medical journal accepting for publication articles submitted by paid employees of pharmaceutical companies?

As a cardiac patient, I’m gobsmacked by what appears to be this systemic corruption of not only medical journals who continue to publish what they clearly know is tainted research linked to drug marketing, but of the very doctors whom patients trust to look out for us.

Since my heart attack in 2008, I take a fistful of cardiac meds every day, and I have no clue which of them were prescribed for me based on flawed research or tainted medical journal articles funded by the very companies that make my drugs.

And worse, neither do my doctors.

Happily, there are other decent physicians out there who, like Dr. Angell, are just as outraged as she is. Her targets are not just guilty of unethical conflict of interest – they are criminals who should be charged with endangering our health while padding their wallets.

Read Dr. Angell’s article from the New York Review of Books, called Drug Companies & Doctors: A Story of Corruption.

* NEWS UPDATE: “Massachusetts General Hospital Discloses Sanctions against Three Psychiatrists for Violating Ethics Guidelines”, July 1, 2011: The Boston Business Journal said today that three psychiatrists have been sanctioned for failing to adequately report seven-figure payments they received from drug companies.

Drs. Joseph Biederman, Thomas Spencer and Timothy Wilens disclosed the disciplinary actions against them in a note to colleagues. According to a copy of the note made public upon request by the hospital, the three doctors:

• must refrain from “all industry-sponsored outside activities” for one year

• for two years after the ban ends, must obtain permission from Mass. General and Harvard Medical School before engaging in any industry-sponsored, paid outside activities and then must report back afterward

• must undergo certain training

• face delays before being considered for “promotion or advancement.”

The three doctors have been under the political microscope since June 2008 when Senator Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, began investigating conflicts of interest involving clinicians. Biederman and Wilens have since admitted to accepting $1.6 million from drug companies whose drugs they were promoting; Spencer took $1 million.

Senator Grassley said, according to an online version of the Congressional record:

“These three Harvard doctors are some of the top psychiatrists in the country, and their research is some of the most important in the field. They have also taken millions of dollars from the drug companies.”

Friday, December 6, 2013

Fukushima: Your Days of Eating Pacific Ocean Fish Are Over

Collective Evolution
by Joe Martino

When it comes to environmental disasters, the nuclear fallout at Fukushima has to be amongst the worst that has happened in the past few decades. Andrew Kishner, founder of http://www.nuclearcrimes.org/ has put together a great resource of information that tracks what has been developing over time in Fukushima as it relates to the nuclear incident. You can check out his research further using the links below.

The following is written by Gary Stamper in regards to what has been happening with Fukushima.

“The heart-breaking news from Fukushima continues to get worse -a lot worse. It is, quite simply, an out-of-control flow of death and destruction.

TEPCO is finally admitting that radiation has been leaking to the Pacific Ocean all along and it’s not showing signs of stopping just yet.

It now appears that anywhere from 300 to possibly over 450 tons of contaminated water that contains radioactive iodine, cesium, and strontium-89 and 90, is flooding into the Pacific Ocean from the Fukushima Daichi site everyday.

To give you an idea of how bad that actually is, Japanese experts estimate Fukushima’s fallout at 20-30 times as high as as the Hiroshima and Nagasaki nuclear bombings in 1945.

There’s a lot you’re not being told. Oh, the information is out there, but you have to dig pretty deep to find it, and you won’t find it on the corporate-owned evening news.”

Some Facts From Andrews research.

LATEST: TEPCO says they believe 10 trillion becquerels of strontium-90 (and also 20 trillion becquerels of cesium-137) have leaked into the ocean from the crippled reactor complex since 5/11. (source). This is a ridiculously low estimate. Also, radioactive tritium levels in the sea (seaport) at Daiichi are creeping up and up and up (we knew that was gonna happen).

RECENT: In the latest mess at Fukushima, one or more of the hundreds of storage tanks at the nuclear complex holding EXTREMELY radioactive liquid waste are leaking. The radioactive liquid waste is flowing into the soil and standing puddles are ‘hot,’ measuring, at surface, about 10 Rem/Hr. Even taken out of context of the ongoing ‘level 7′ Fukushima nuclear disaster, these disastrous spills are considered BAD. As it turns out, the leak crisis has received a distinct crisis categorization, classed ‘a level 3′ on an eight point international scale (INES).

Tuesday, December 3, 2013

Massive Bird Die Off from Mid Coast Queensland to New Zealand…5 Million!


YouTube



Sunshine Coast Daily
Related:  Concerns raised over number of dead birds on Coast beaches


Japan Physician: I hope adults will leave Tokyo, not just children — Strange things happening — Medications don’t seem to work — Rare diseases increasing dramatically

ENENews

Source: Mama Revo Magazine (Mom’s Revolution)

Translated by World Network For Saving Children From Radiation

Date: Nov. 11, 2013

Dr. Shigeru Mita, Mita Clinic in Tokyo: Our patients mostly come from Tokyo, Chiba, Kanagawa, Saitama, and other Northern Kanto areas.

The pediatricians’ general textbook says that reference value of neutrophil [the most abundant type of white blood cells, essential part of immune system] for healthy children (6-12 years old) is [...]  4000, but it has shifted to 2500. It is lower than the threshold value of 3000. I think this points at a serious problem. [...]

In the summer of 2011, there were many children with bloodshot eyes; and what we saw most were children with dark circles under the eyes. [...] we are seeing more cases of sinusitis accompanied with mild case of asthma continuing for longer periods. And when these children spend some time in the West, they get better. If at all possible, I would like them to move away from East Japan. [...]

[...] radioactive substances coming from Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant have reached Tokyo, and huge amounts of contaminated waste is being burned here as well, I cannot deny the possibility that we are inhaling radioactive substances contained in the air. Again, let me repeat that after the nuclear accident, enormous amounts of nuclear substances were released in the environment. Therefore, if we see an increase in symptoms that are different from the ones we’ve seen before, we physicians should “first consider the effects of radioactivity.” [...]
Adults

Mita: [...] But my real hope is to have not just children but also adults move away from Tokyo.
[...] [The adult] conditions are definitely different compared to how it was before the nuclear accident.
With elderly people, it takes more time for asthma to heal. The medication doesn’t seem to work. We also see more patients with diseases that had been rare before; for example, polymyalgia rheumatica [...] Before 3.11, we had one or less patient per year. Now, we treat more than 10 patients at the same time. [...]

I think doctors who knew their patients well should become aware of the strange things that were happening to them. [...]

Tuesday, November 26, 2013

What Would Happen if Water Fluoridation Stopped?

Youtube 


What would happen if fluoride was deemed dangerous and was pulled from the water supply? Would lawsuits spring up? What about the large companies that buy the raw product and sell fluoride? Listen to Dr. David Kennedy and what he thinks would be the fallout. 

Saturday, November 23, 2013

The Truth About Obamacare

Youtube
 


Obamacare facts explained by Stefan Molyneux. A comprehensive look at the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) and it's implementation.

Wednesday, November 20, 2013

Look Out, Flu Shot Resistors: The “FLUgitive” Propaganda Campaign Aims to Shame You Into Getting Jabbed

Truthstream Media
by Daisy Luther

This is from the “Believe-It-or-Not-This-Isn’t-Satire” files.

If you don’t get lined up for this year’s lethal injection – ahem – I mean flu shot – you just might get a push from a well-meaning (but brainwashed) friend or neighbor. A national campaign has begun with the intention to shame and peer pressure everyone to get the flu shot.

The campaign was created by Sanofi-Pasteur, the company who makes…you guessed it…a flu vaccine called Fluzone, approved by our good friends at the FDA in 2011. (They also collaborate with the notable eugenicists of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.) You can find out more about the FLUgitive campaign on Facebook.

#FLUgitives live in every town in America; they could be hiding in your workplace, your gym, the grocery store, or even in your own home. Each year in the U.S., 1 in 5 people, or up to 20 percent of the population, gets the flu and an estimated 226,000 people are hospitalized from influenza-related complications. But since the single most important thing adults can do to help prevent spreading the flu is to get their annual flu vaccination, these #FLUgitives should not wait. #FLUgitives are encouraged to come out of hiding, round up other #FLUgitives and turn themselves in to their healthcare provider to learn about the seriousness of influenza and their available vaccine options.

“Because flu season can begin as early as October and last through May, the best prevention for those planning to get their annual flu shot is to get it as early as possible in the season, allowing your body time to build up its immunity,” said Carlos E. Picone, M.D., F.C.C.P., Vice-Chair of the Department of Internal Medicine at Sibley Memorial Hospital in Washington, D.C.

Research has shown that social influences are a primary factor in the adoption of health behaviors. The FLUgitives campaign leverages the positive power of social peer influence to drive more people to help protect themselves against the flu by getting vaccinated and features four #FLUgitives whom everyone might know – or may even relate to themselves. (source)

Check out the mocking video campaign below for your recommended daily allowance of offensive and insulting propaganda.

The Fitness Fanatic

Convinced that exercise and all-protein diet is the key to staying healthy, this gym rat dreads getting the flu vaccine because nothing can get in the way of his workout. Putting his beloved biceps on the back burner is not an option. With big protection and a tiny needle, the Fluzone Intradermal vaccine only goes skin deep so no one has to mess with “lightening” and “thunder” unless they really have to.

The Turbo Mom

A modern day Superwoman, this suburban warrior balances caring for her kids, husband, home and pets on top of a busy job. But her hectic schedule leaves little time for anything else. Fluzone Intradermal vaccine is right on top of that – it’s a simple and quick way to get the protection she needs without missing a beat.

The Latest and Greatest Guy

A self-proclaimed gadget loving playboy, this FLUgitive always wants the newest version of everything.

He should ask about Fluzone Intradermal vaccine- it’s a smart, fast and efficient technology, just like his gadgets.

The Scaredy Cat

This constant worrier is on edge about pretty much everything.

But since his fear of getting sick outweighs his fear of getting a flu shot, Fluzone Intradermal vaccine is right up his alley. It uses a next-generation device to quickly help deliver vaccine just under the skin’s surface, so he can find something else to worry about for a change.

There’s even a dubious little app that allows you to load your photo and see how bad you will look if you don’t get your flu shot. No, I’m not kidding.

Notably, one type of FLUgitive is not represented in the videos – those of us who avoid the shot because we know better. Do your research and make your decision – don’t base it on biased propaganda presented by those who profit from the vaccine.

Monsanto, McDs, Coke and Friends Mis-Educate Registered Dieticians About the “Benefits” of Processed Food


Truthstream Media
by Daisy Luther

 In the most mind-boggling conflict of interest you may have seen in quite a while, the International Food Information Council (IFIC) has put out a “fact” sheet on the “benefits” of processed foods for the members of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics.

First, here’s a little background on the cast of characters in this little propaganda drama.

The Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics

The Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics (AND) is “the world’s largest organization of food and nutrition professionals” and is made up of registered dieticians and dietetic technicians. Their mission states, “The Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics is a multidimensional organization that strives to improve the nation’s health and advance the profession of dietetics through research, education, and advocacy.” The group claims to be ” the public’s and news media’s best source for the most accurate, credible and timely food and nutrition information” and they are committed to the ongoing education of their members and the general public.

The International Food Information Council

The IFIC is “your nutrition and food safety resource”, allegedly committed to helping out both consumers and professionals. According to their website, ”The International Food Information Council Foundation provides food safety, nutrition, and healthful eating information to help you make good and safe food choices.”

The IFIC sounds absolutely awesome until you learn who their sponsors are: ”IFIC receives funding from the usual suspects — including, but not limited to, Cargill, Coca-Cola, Dr. Pepper Snapple Group, General Mills, Mars, McDonald’s, Monsanto, PepsiCo, Red Bull, and Yum! Brands (this last being the parent company of Taco Bell, Pizza Hut, KFC, and WingStreet).”

The Dietitians for Professional Integrity

Finally, we have our heroes, a group of rebel dietetic professionals. Dietitians for Professional Integrity stand for everything that is right about the field of nutrition and dietetics. They promote real food for real health. Their mission:

We are a group of concerned dietetics professionals advocating for greater financial transparency, as well as ethical, socially responsible, and relevant corporate sponsorships within the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics.

This website was created to let you know more about who we are and why we do not think Coca-Cola, PepsiCo, Kellogg’s, and other Big Food giants should sponsor the country’s largest nutrition organization.

Our efforts are guided by professional integrity. We believe the American public deserves nutrition information that is not tainted by food industry interests. Those of us who co-founded Dietitians for Professional Integrity are nutrition experts first and foremost; we went to school to help people achieve better health through food, not to help multinational food companies sell more unhealthy products. (source) 

Hey – The “Experts” Say that Processed Food is Not That Bad!!!!

The IFIC has put together a propaganda handout/”fact” sheet, “What Is A Processed Food? You Might Be Surprised!” for the benefit of the members of the AND. (Read it and weep RIGHT HERE.)

The professional watchdog group, Dietitians for Professional Integrity, points out the blatant dishonesty of the flyer.

[The "fact" sheet] … perfectly demonstrates how food industry front groups spin science in an attempt to assuage public concerns about their clients’ products.

Titled “What Is A Processed Food? You Might Be Surprised!”, this ‘fact sheet’ mentions that breakfast cereals, like frozen vegetables and roasted nuts, are processed. They conveniently fail to mention that, unlike most breakfast cereals, the freezing of vegetables and roasting of nuts does not obliterate nutrients. Nor do frozen vegetables and roasted nuts contribute artificial dyes, artificial flavors, chemical additives, or partially hydrogenated oils to people’s diets.

IFIC also relies on a familiar food industry tactic — absurdly tying modern-day processing techniques to traditional ones. “Food processing began about 2 million years ago, when our ancestors put flame to food”. Of course, heating food has nothing in common with partially hydrogenating oils, making aspartame, or turning corn into high fructose corn syrup. The food industry is aware that people are increasingly concerned with hyper-processed products, and trying to link the term “processed food” to chopping a carrot or cooking a piece of fish is one way of perpetuating deception. (source)

The flyer is also quick to laud the many wonders of corn (one of the major sources of toxic GMOs in the North American food supply) and to patronizingly try to convince us that we completely misunderstand the noble purposes of the food industry. They are trying to actually serve up food that is fresher by processing it until it is chemically unrecognizable as food.

Back in January, the AND received harsh criticism from another industry watchdog, Eat Drink Politics, because of corporate conflicts of interest.

Public health attorney and author Michele Simon asks: Are America’s nutrition professionals in the pocket of Big Food? While the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics’ 74,000-member trade group partners with the likes of Coke and Hershey’s, the nation’s health continues to suffer from poor diet.

The largest trade group of nutrition professionals—the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics—has a serious credibility problem. In a damning report released today, industry watchdog Eat Drink Politics examines the various forms of corporate sponsorship by Big Food that are undermining the integrity of those professionals most responsible for educating Americans about healthy eating.

The report details, for example, how registered dietitians can earn continuing education units from Coca-Cola, in which they learn that sugar is not a problem for children and how NestlĂ©, the world’s largest food company can pay $50,000 to host a two-hour “nutrition symposium” at the Academy’s annual meeting. (source)

This is a clearcut case of the foxes telling the chickens how to best build their henhouses. The Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics can maintain no credibility whatsoever when they are being “educated” by Big Food, who is not at all interested in consumer health, but only in health of their bottom line. AND likely started out as a positive organization dedicated to good health, but they were sidetracked along the way by all of the money that Big Food threw in their path.

If you wonder why the public is so confused about what constitutes good nutrition you need look no further than the propaganda being spouted by these so-called “experts” and beacons of ”continuing education.” There is a real problem when the people sponsoring the nutrition lessons are the very purveyors of GMO crops, potato chips, soda pop, and fast food.

Many people are out there trying valiantly to make the best possible choices for their families on limited budgets, but they must combat the constant disinformation on product labels that herald phrases “all-natural”, “heart-healthy”, and “low-fat”. These folks are being deliberately deceived by food manufacturers, but even worse, by professional societies like the American Medical Association, the American Heart Association, and the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, all so the rich can get richer while the poor get sicker.

Can honey bees really be trained to detect cancer in ten minutes?

Daily Mail

A Portuguese designer has created a contraption which she says can detect cancer using trained bees.

The bees are placed in a glass chamber which the patient exhales from. If the bees fly into a secondary chamber, then that means the bees have detected the disease, according to Susana Soares.

Miss Soares, who presented her Bee's project at Dutch Design Week, in Eindhoven last month, said: 'Trained bees only rush into the smaller chamber if they detect the odour on the patient's breath that they have been trained to target.

'The bees can be trained within 10 minutes.'

Scientists have discovered that honey bees have an excellent sense of smell which is better than a sniffer dog.

Bees can be trained to detect bombs and one company called Insectinel is training 'sniffer bees' to work in counter-terrorist operations.

A bee is trained by exposing it to certain odours before feeding them a solution of water and sugar.

The bees then remember the smell for the rest of their lives if they are always rewarded with sugar.

The glass object has a big chamber and a small chamber where the bees go if they detect the disease.

Research carried out by scientists has suggested that bees can accurately diagnose diseases such as tuberculosis, lung and skin cancer as well as diabetes.

Monday, November 18, 2013

Obama administration seeks to reduce cases of cancer in US…by changing the definition of cancer

Poor Richard's News

If you needed another reason to oppose government run health care here’s one to make your blood boil.

From Forbes:

The federal government wants to reduce the number of Americans diagnosed each year with cancer. But not by better preventive care or healthier living. Instead, the government wants to redefinethe term “cancer” so that fewer conditions qualify as a true cancer. What does this mean for ordinary Americans — and should we be concerned?

On July 29, 2013, a working group for the National Cancer Institute (the main government agency for cancer research) published a paper proposing that the term “cancer” be reserved for lesions with a reasonable likelihood of killing the patient if left untreated. Slower growing tumors would be called a different name such as “indolent lesions of epithelial origin” (IDLE). Their justification was that modern medical technology now allows doctors to detect small, slow-growing tumors that likely wouldn’t be fatal. Yet once patients are told they have a cancer, many become frightened and seek unnecessary further tests, chemotherapy, radiation, and/or surgery. By redefining the term “cancer,” the National Cancer Institute hopes to reduce patient anxiety and reduce the risks and expenses associated with supposedly unnecessary medical procedures. In technical terms, the government hopes to reduce “overdiagnosis” and “overtreatment” of cancer.

read the rest here 

And why would the Obama administration want to re-define cancer? Because starting tomorrow, Obamacare will begin subsidizing millions of Americans’ health insurance, and cancer tests and treatments are expensive.

This is nothing more than a back-door, roundabout form of rationing. It has nothing to do with improving health care or saving lives and everything to do with bureaucrats picking and choosing who gets what tests and treatments.

Fukushima: Worst Case Scenario Reached According To Japanese Professors – A ‘World-Ends-Scenario’

Before It's News

According to Professors in Japan, the ‘worst case scenario’ for Fukushima has been reached, the nuclear rods have melted and went through the reactor floors. This story released today from ENENews is disheartening and shares that this situation will continue to be THE major story for world health for humans, fish, bird and animal life across the entire world for decades if not longer. According to the newly released video below, the worst case scenario for Fukushima is also a ‘world-ends-scenario’, an “extinction level event if this mess is not cleaned up, fast.”

Japan Professors: Worst case scenario at Fukushima, nuclear rods melted and went through reactor floors; Contamination is impacting rest of world; Likely that entire Pacific will be affected — Farmer: Gov’t doesn’t have any idea about status of fuel

Kyoto University’s Okada Norio, Yoshio Kajitani, Hirokazu Tatano & Beijing University’s Tao Ye, Peijun Shi: [T]he nuclear accident gradually became a level 7 nuclear event, which is a major accident and the highest level on the International Nuclear and Radiological Event Scale (INES), equivalent to the Chernobyl disaster in April 1986. The radiation in the vicinity of the reactor rose steeply, becoming a deadly threat to the local residents […] three units were exposed to level 7 accidents and one unit was exposed to a level 3 incident.

The critical issue in the crisis became the cooling systems failures. […] The high temperature turned most of the internal coolant water into steam, which in turn exposed the fuel rods to air. […] Fuel would escape away from control rods, intensify decay, melt through the reactor floor, and consequently induce a massive release of radioactive isotopes, a worst case scenario. […] Radioactive isotopes released from Fukushima were later detected in North America and other regions in the world. […] The long-term impact of the nuclear crisis to Japan, the Asia-Pacific region, and the entire world is still not fully revealed. […] The radioactive contamination caused by the nuclear accident following the earthquake and tsunami is affecting the rest of the world through atmospheric circulation. The polluted water released by the Tokyo Electric Power Company is likely to affect the entire Pacific Ocean in the coming decades.

 

Sunday, November 10, 2013

HPV Vaccines Exposed: Subterfuge in a Syringe?


SaneVax
By Norma Erickson

The Nationwide Liaison Association of Cervical Cancer Vaccine Victims and Parents in Japan, assisted by some of Japan’s best medical scientists, and a few politicians with strong morals are doing everything they can to get HPV vaccines banned from their country. These people see Gardasil and Cervarix as vaccines with an unacceptable safety profile and very little proven benefit.

Japanese safety advocates have already succeeded in getting their government officials to order both manufacturers (Merck and GlaxoSmithKline) to change the HPV vaccine package inserts to include stronger safety warnings to medical consumers regarding the possibility of ADEM, Guillain-Barre and neurological problems.

Unfortunately, that is not enough. The citizens of Japan are tired of watching their young girls suffer from convulsions, seizures, partial paralysis, severe pain and a host of new medical conditions after being subjected to HPV vaccinations.

Consequently, the Nationwide Liaison Association of Cervical Cancer Vaccine Victims and Parents has started a public petition to ban HPV vaccinations in Japan. An English language version of the same petition is here.

Why are Japanese citizens against HPV vaccinations?

Merck and GlaxoSmithKline marketing experts have done an outstanding job of creating a universal fear of being ‘infected’ with HPV, Human Papillomavirus. Unfortunately, the promotional materials for Gardasil and Cervarix as cervical cancer preventatives are filled with half-truths at best – perhaps even out and out lies.

Gardasil and Cervarix are promoted as cancer vaccines. They are not! Both vaccines are designed to combat two HPV types associated with cervical cancer. Even if these vaccines do exactly what they are meant to do – eliminate the two high risk types of HPV, no one will know if the vaccines have any impact on cervical cancer for decades.

Prior to the marketing push for HPV vaccines, CIN1/2/3 were known as abnormal cells – something that needed to be observed until treatment was required. Now, they are almost always referred to as ‘pre-cancerous’ lesions. This serves no purpose other than to strike fear into the heart of almost any woman on the face of the planet. The nature of the abnormal cells has not changed, simply the terminology. No mention is made of the fact that CIN1, CIN2 and often CIN3 abnormal cells revert to normal cells without medical intervention.

The following chart illustrates these facts perfectly. There is no doubt major pharmaceutical manufacturers such as Merck and GlaxoSmithKline stay abreast of information released by the World Health Organization, particularly if that information pertains to one of their top revenue producing products. If they do, then both companies are well aware of the information in the following chart.

Pay close attention to the numbers below. You will see the figures at the bottom of the pyramid quoted all over the place. You will not see the number at the top quoted, particularly by HPV vaccine manufacturers. This is the number medical consumers need to know – it clearly shows the virtually non-existent risk posed by being ‘infected’ with so-called carcinogenic HPV.

Keep in mind this is a World Health Organization estimate which clearly states that only 0.15% of those infected with carcinogenic HPV (high-risk HPV) will ever develop cervical cancer – much less die from it. It certainly doesn’t make a good argument for universal HPV vaccination programs, does it?


This was originally published on a women’s health site which is jointly sponsored by Japan Vaccines Co. Ltd and GlaxoSmithKline – and can be viewed here. The site is of course in Japanese, but you can clearly see the chart on the bottom left-hand side of the page.

It’s easy to see why everyone so afraid of being ‘infected’ with HPV. The pharmaceutical companies’ marketing experts have done their job so well that no one is able to see the simple truth.

The truth is 99.85% of those exposed to carcinogenic HPV will never develop cervical cancer!

In light of this revelation, why would anyone subject themselves or their child to the potential risks of vaccination? Consider the adverse event analysis below for those in the age group 7 to 18:


This chart compares the percentage of reports to the US Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System after HPV vaccines versus the 13 other vaccines used in the same age group.

Why do HPV vaccines account for such a high percentage of the total reports? What is so different about Gardasil and Cervarix?

Pap Screening versus HPV vaccines

Pap screening and the prompt treatment of abnormal cervical cells has never caused convulsions, partial paralysis, severe neurological damage, autoimmune disorders, seizures, chronic fatigue syndrome or death.

The Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) was established in 1990. There are 80 vaccines FDA-approved for use in the United States. HPV vaccines account for 25% of the entire VAERS database despite the fact they have been on the market for less than seven years. This is no small ‘accomplishment’ considering Gardasil and Cervarix have been on the market less than seven years?

Why add the risk of using Gardasil or Cervarix to a cervical cancer prevention program when pap screening has been proven safe and effective, particularly when the need for pap screening is not eliminated by HPV vaccine administration?

Your Choice: Medical Consumer or Guinea Pig

We live in a world where few women, if any, need ever die from cervical cancer. Why don’t governments simply concentrate on providing the already proven safe and effective means of controlling cervical cancer?

Are you willing to put pharmaceutical manufacturers and government health officials in the driver’s seat when it comes to your health or that of your children? Are you willing to trust the words of advertising campaigns built on half-truths and questionable research? Are you willing to blindly trust government health officials who get their advice from ‘experts’ with a financial stake in the vaccine game? Are you willing to put your life in the hands of people other than yourself?

If the answer to any one of the above questions is “no,” then it is high time to let the world know that you are a medical consumer – not a guinea pig.

Show the pharmaceutical companies you are willing to be an educated medical consumer. Let health officials know you and your family are not guinea pigs for the vaccine industry! Sign one, or all, of the petitions below:

Help Japan halt HPV vaccinations (Japanese version)
Help Japan halt HPV vaccinations (English version)
End HPV Vaccine Approval, sponsored by KP Stoller, MD
Lift the ban shielding drug companies from lawsuits related to vaccine-related injuries or death Gardasil, the human papillomavirus vaccine: Demand Justice!

Monday, October 28, 2013

The Truthseeker: ‘Casualty catastrophe’ – Cell phones & child brains


RT

Insurers stop covering for cell phone use, called the next ‘casualty catastrophe’ after tobacco and asbestos; phone manufacturers hit with a class action and personal lawsuits; and the warning deep inside your mobile. Seek truth from facts with Ellie Marks, whose husband Alan is suing the industry for his brain tumor, ‘cell phone survivor’ Bret Bocook, leading radiation biologist Prof. Dariusz Leszczynski, Microwave News editor Dr. Louis Slesin, Storyleak editor Anthony Gucciardi, and former senior White House adviser Dr. Devra Davis

Sunday, October 20, 2013

Need health care coverage? Just dial 1-800-F**KYO to reach Obamacare’s national hotline

This is not satire. -Ed.
Daily Caller

Need health insurance? The Obama administration has you covered. Simply dial 1-800-FUCKYO to reach the next available health-care provider. Far from being a mistype, that’s the official number that Health and Human Services wants Americans to dial when seeking health care.

Obamacare’s national call center really did list its number as 1-800-318-2596, helpfully spelling out President Barack Obama’s tendency to blatantly flip the bird in plain view.

After allowing for the lack of letters attached to 1 on a traditional American telephone keypad, the number spells out a clear message. For every duped voter, every young invincible weighing the cost of a penalty versus a newly tripled yearly deductible, every ailing old granny in a wheelchair (whom, remember, Paul Ryan wants to push off a cliff) who needs adequate and affordable health care, Obama’s message is:

1-800-3(F) 8(U) 2(C) 5(K) 9(Y) 6(O).

That’s 1-800-FUCKYO. Sadly, the Obama administration failed to swap the useless 1 for a more functional 8 to complete the heartfelt message, perhaps in consolation to former White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel’s tragically shortened middle finger.

Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius launched a media campaign this week to propagandize the transformative health-care overhaul. She compared the sweeping, coercive law that gives government huge power over the health-care industry to an iPhone system update.

“Everyone just assumes, “Well, there’s a problem, they’ll fix it, we’ll move on,’” Sebelius said about Apple’s iOS updates. “And like many of their customers, I put the ‘new’ system on my phone and went on my merry way, but it was just a reminder that we’re likely to have some glitches. We will fix them and move on. Is this a sign that the law is flawed and failed? I don’t think so. I think it’s a sign that we’re building a piece of complicated technology. We want it to work. We want it to work right. We’ve got an incredible team working 24/7 to do just that.”

“Hopefully they’ll give us the same slack they give Apple,” Sebelius said, according to the Wall Street Journal.

Tuesday, October 15, 2013

Save Our Supplements: “Do You Believe in Paul Offit?”

by Alison Rose Levy

The Medical Establishment’s “Favorite” Doctor and His Crusade Against Supplements and Alternative Medicine

Paul Offit’s new book and media blitz pretend to be objective, but really offer one-sided bashing of natural healthcare.

Dr. Paul Offit, chief of the Division of Infectious Diseases at
 Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia has authored a new book, Do You Believe in Magic? The Sense and Nonsense of Alternative Medicine (Harper, 2013 ). Now on the stump, he encourages thinking more critically about healthcare treatments. Too bad his is a one-sided view. And that his intended audience is unlikely to be convinced because health information has been increasingly available over the last 25 years. Nor do many physicians and prominent medical organizations subscribe to his views (although a few legislators do).

“People are systematically choosing to manage their own health in a way that is unprecedented,” points out James S. Turner, chairman of Citizens for Health, a health advocacy group with over 100,000 members. “The conventional treatments that Offit champions are often very helpful. The problem is that the industry has oversold them, and more and more people see that now.”

If Offit’s book had aimed to explore all health options even-handedly for their upsides and their downsides, it might have truly advanced the conversation about how to better health and lower healthcare costs. (And ranking below 16 developed nations across the lifespan and for all income levels, while stuck in the midst of a polarized debate over costs and coverage, the U.S. sorely needs that conversation.) But instead, in his book and media tour, Dr. Offit plays the predictable role of debunker, single-mindedly championing his own medical brand. Unfurling an arch skepticism about the use of herbs and other nutritional supplements, for example, Offit presents himself as the stalwart for science. But it’s instructive to see what happens when he encounters someone conversant with the health literature.

In a radio exchange with NPR reporter Ira Flatow and Victoria Maizes, MD on Science Friday, Offit targeted St John’s wort. Based on a single study, he dismissed its efficacy. Maizes, the executive director of the Arizona Center for Integrative Medicine and a professor of medicine and public health
at the University of Arizona countered with a 2008 review of 29 trials—including 17 that compared SWJ to standard antidepressants, and found it just as effective for moderate depression, with fewer side-effects.

Upon hearing this key finding, Offit never paused for breath before he redirected to attack some other hapless herb. There is an extensive scientific literature on St. John’s wort (and other nutrients available in supplements) but Offit cherrypicks the few studies that validate his concerns that supplements are dangerous.

Say your body needs lycopene and the lycopene content typically found in tomatoes has been depleted by conventional agriculture practices. If you get lycopene from eating a tomato, or even five tomatoes, you’re not trespassing onto the sacred ground of medicine. But if you take a lycopene capsule, you have stepped over a line, Offit and company claim. If conventional medicine were producing such terrific results, perhaps more people would be eager to see what pharmaceutical research would do with that lycopene, beyond spending millions on a special extraction of the active ingredient to make it available only by prescription at skyhigh prices.

The 1994 battle for the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act (DSHEA) was fought to protect the public right to access low harm supplements. It is one of the most successful citizen-driven movements of the late 20th century, which activated nearly two million people to contact their legislators. The popular will has thus far opposed and defeated Big Pharma in its ongoing campaign to regulate supplements as drugs.

The Rationale for Supplement Use

With an obesity epidemic and millions of people eating sweets, soda and fast foods, there’s little reason to pretend that all Americans consume a healthy diet. Moreover, USDA data reveals that the nutrient quality in even healthy foods has declined due to depleted soils. A comparison of nutrient values in food grown in the years 1950 and 1999 reveals declines of key nutrients and protein in 43 foods.

This is due in part to conventional agricultural practices. “In hundreds of studies, scientists have shown that incrementally higher levels of fertilizer negatively impact the density of certain nutrients in harvested foodstuffs, hence the name, the ’dilution [of nutrients] effect,’” said Preston Andrews of Washington State University in a 2009 presentation on the impact of conventional agricultural practices on food quality.

Alan Gaby, an expert on supplementation and the author of The Natural Pharmacy: Complete A-Z Reference to Natural Treatments for Common Health Conditions, says that “people who consume foods grown on deficient soils may not obtain sufficient amounts of trace minerals like selenium, iodine, chromium, or manganese in their diet.”

Gaby further points out that many common foods contribute to nutritional depletion. (So do drugs.) According to several studies, caffeine consumption can contribute to calcium loss. which can be mitigated by calcium supplementation other research found.

High sugar consumption prompts urinary excretion of chromium, one study found, while a USDA study found that chromium intake helped to improve glucose tolerance in people with diabetes.

These are just a few examples of the extensive literature that reveals both the reasons many may have nutritional deficiencies, and the benefits of using micronutrients from foods to correct them.

Who Takes Supplements

In 2008, the CDC and the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine (NCCAM) found that that natural nutritional products are the most commonly used “integrative” health approach. A 2007 Council for Responsible Nutrition (CRN) survey found that 68 percent of adults (over 150 million Americans) report taking nutritional or dietary supplements.

Medical opinion has converged on some supplementation as essential. “For women of childbearing age, every single national medical organization agrees,” says Maizes. “The US Preventive Task Force, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Academy of Family Physicians, and the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology all advise that women of childbearing age should be taking a multivitamin with folic acid to prevent neural tube defects, heart defects, skeletal defects, and cleft palate.”

According to Maizes, who is also the author of Be Fruitful: The Essential Guide to Maximizing Fertility and Giving Birth to a Healthy Child (Scribner, 2013), “The Nurses’ Health Study found that among those taking a multivitamin six times per week, there was 41% less infertility, fewer miscarriages, and less cancer in their children.” She points out that, “The CDC says that 75% of Americans don’t get enough folate. Dr. Offit is out there countering a science-based public health message.”

What causes Offit’s disquiet? He quotes Yale neurologist Steven Novella on herbal remedies: “Herbs are drugs and can be studied be studied as drugs.” He would like to see supplements studied and regulated as drugs.

The FDA does regulate supplements as food products, and they are currently the most highly regulated food products. The FDA cannot regulate either BPA or mercury because they are “grandfathered” into use. The FDA chooses not to regulate personal care products or cosmetics. The FDA does not bother to study the safety of GMOs, or the chemicals used in fracking, but according to Offit’s book, certain FDA officials are miffed that they can’t regulate vitamin C, a component of food found in many fruits and vegetables, as a drug.

Before conferring the special status of drug-hood on an herb (or other food ingredient), it’s fair to ask whether drugs and nutrients are equivalently dangerous and therefore require the same extensive and costly drug trials to assure their safety for use.

Take too much vitamin C and you might get a loose bowel movement. Take too much of a statin drug and you might get liver damage or kidney failure. That’s just one example of the difference in risk between high-harm and low-harm ingredients. Drugs are heavily studied and regulated because they are high harm— highly toxic single novel chemicals devised in a lab for a high-potency targeted use with mechanisms of action and side effects new to the human organism. Basic nutrients from foods and plants are low-harm because they are natural complexes of ingredients with long histories of biological compatibility with humans.

It’s therefore not surprising that the number of adverse events reported to the FDA due to the use of pharmaceuticals number a total of 2,739,254 for the years 2008 through 2011, while those for supplements number 6,307 for the same years, according to a March 2013 report by the General Accounting Office. (This data cannot tell us what any given report was about, or its validity.)

Nevertheless, in an apparent quest to reassert the conventional monopoly on health authority, Offit wants every nutrient to be vetted like a drug by an RCT—the randomized controlled double-blind trial considered the gold standard of evidence-based medicine. In his view, just like drugs, vitamins, minerals and herbs are dangerous until proven innocent. There are three key problems with Offit’s caring caution. What he’d like to see is:

1. Impossible. Conducting an RCT of every edible component in nature will never happen because going through the FDA study and review process typically costs $100 million per component. No one with the money to spend has the incentive to study natural substances that cannot by law be patented.

2. Unnecessary. RCTs came into use to assess the benefits/risk ratio of novel highly toxic chemicals, namely drugs. An existing and growing body of literature studies nutritional supplements for their utility and efficacy in less costly ways.

3. It’s colonial. Unless every edible natural substance in existence, many safely consumed or used by humans for millennia, can be colonized and vetted by a recently devised process designed to test drugs, they are assumed to be harmful? That’s empire building, not empirical science.

According to Jim Turner, “Dr. Offit’s form of science is like taking a flashlight into the attic and shining it on an old photo album. That’s good. But Dr. Offit goes off track when he contends that there’s nothing else up there in the attic. It’s a specific belief system: He believes that all that exists is that which falls into the range of his flashlight.”

According to Maizes, many kinds of health levers will never be visible within the range of that flashlight. “We can’t do a double blind study on the effects of yoga. People know if they are doing yoga or not. We can’t expose one group to toxic chemicals in order to study the effects on them. Nor can we put people into a nutrition lab for decades to see if eating a specific diet makes a difference. Therefore, we need observational trials and that means we have to be open to other kinds of scientific data.”

Maizes maintains that it makes sense to use a hierarchy of evidence—the more harmful the ingredient the stricter the assessment of safety for use. Offit claims that he accepts all health treatments that work and even deigns to dub those that do “medicine.” Nevertheless, he devotes an entire book chapter to deploring the inclusion of integrative medicine into medical centers nationwide. He chides the public for influencing their doctors to consider integrative approaches, and is piqued by doctors listening to patients.

Some of the most prominent medical institutions don’t share his view. When the Consortium of Academic Health Centers for Integrative Medicine first formed in 2000, there were eight centers with active programs. Over a dozen years later, there are 56, nearly half of the nearly 125 medical schools in North America, which belong to the Consortium and have integrative programs. Harvard, UCLA, Duke, Michigan, Albert Einstein and more, all have programs with the strong support of their medical college deans. Hardly a rejection of integrative health approaches. Moreover, many doctors use these approaches themselves.

A 2007 study conducted by the Council for Responsible Nutrition (CRN) found that 72 percent of physicians and 89 percent of nurses personally use vitamin, mineral, herbal, and other supplements. Eighty-five percent of these providers recommend supplements to their clients. Among the 28 percent of physicians who don’t personally use supplements, 62 percent recommend them to their patients.

With or without RCTs, both the scientific and clinical evidence— and their own health experiences— appear to be persuasive. Are the parameters for evidence-based medicine expanding, even though some holdouts (like Dr. Offit) haven’t gotten the memo?

“There are no guarantees in medicine. You can do every aggressive treatment for cancer and still die. No one would tell anyone that they have a 100% chance of survival with any treatment,” Maizes says. “There’s a multibillion-dollar industry implanting stents in people when studies show it does not enhance survival.”

Despite the recurrent rallying call to evidence based medicine, less conventional practice is based upon it than people realize. A 2009 study published in JAMA  found that only 19 percent of the most basic cardiovascular treatments (or devices) are based on RCTs.

“There’s a double standard when it comes to integrative approaches, bolstered by the myth that everything in conventional medicine is proven and nothing in integrative medicine is. But the reality is subtler,” says Maizes. “In healthcare, we always need more study. If a study only goes up to people aged 65, is it relevant for an 80-year-old? We can’t say for sure. For years we only had studies on men and told women to do the same thing even though women respond differently. We will never have all the evidence.”

In this context, with plenty of standard medicine used in practice failing to meet this exalted RCT standard, Offit’s demand for it sounds much more like a call to brand loyalty. And if he’s truly interested in seeing more science on nutrients, he can always look into the existing literature.

Monday, October 14, 2013

Magic trick: promoting diseases that don’t exist

No More Fake News
by Jon Rappoport

The disease/treatment/profit machine requires more and more diseases, even if they aren’t real.

Here is an unspoken but largely accepted medical notion of what a disease is:

A group of physical symptoms shared by many people, which has a single cause.

For example, take the flu. Wikipedia lists the common symptoms: chills, fever, muscle pains, headache, coughing. For each type of flu, there is single virus announced as the cause. E.g., Swine Flu; H1N1 virus.

Drug companies develop medicines and vaccines to kill the virus or prevent it from gaining a foothold in the body. They sell the drugs and vaccines. Profits soar. Nice and neat.

Of course, many doctors don’t bother to test patients to see if they have a disease like seasonal flu. It’s too time consuming to take a blood sample and send it to a lab and wait for the results.

So the doctor makes an eyeball diagnosis based on symptoms and the season of the year.

As I explained in my previous article, “What happens when only 16% of flu patients have the flu?”, a cursory investigation of this practice can lead to embarrassing results.

Every year, many blood samples from patients are, in fact, sent to labs, and only a small fraction of these “flu cases” turn out to reveal any flu virus at all.

But this fact is blithely ignored.

You have hundreds of thousands of people in the US who display the general “flu symptoms,” but it turns out most of them don’t have the flu. They have a variety of other problems.

But admitting this is bad for business. How can drug companies justify making flu drugs and vaccines when most “flu cases” don’t have the flu?

The solution? Fake it. Pretend all people diagnosed with the flu actually have it.

Bottom line? Just because you have a group of people who have the same general symptoms…that doesn’t mean they have the same disease…and it doesn’t mean the same germ is causing their symptoms.

Consider Autism. If you were to Google “Diagnostic Criteria for 299.00 Autistic Disorder,” at autreat.com you would read through a whole menu of behaviors. These behaviors are, in fact, the definition of Autism. They are the entire definition.

There is NO cause listed. There is no single cause. No germ or fungus or mold or errant gene or neurological defect.

So in this instance, the medical cartel pretends they already somehow know Autism (the collection of behaviors) is a single disease, and “they will eventually find the single cause.”

But again, just because you have a great many children who have the same GENERAL symptoms (behaviors)…that doesn’t mean they have the same disease…that doesn’t mean the cause of disease is the same across the board.

Nowhere in the definition of Autism will you find a single cause or any sort of bottom-line physical explanation. You will only find lists of behaviors.

So…how do they know Autism (or each sub-category in the so-called spectrum) is a single disease?

THEY DON’T KNOW.

YES, the children are suffering. YES, they have serious problems. Yes, they are not like other children. YES. But is Autism a single disease? Is it even a spectrum of different types of “developmental disorder,” as advertised? No persuasive evidence exists to affirm that.

I chose Autism for a special reason: the vaccine connection.

I’ll try to boil it down. The medical bosses assert that vaccines COULD NOT be the cause of Autism. On what basis do they say this?

Follow closely. There are diagnosed cases of Autism where the child did not receive any vaccines. Or the child didn’t receive any vaccine containing the neurotoxin mercury.

And since vaccines are demonstrably not the cause IN EVERY CASE OF AUTISM, vaccines are not the cause at all.

You might want to read that last sentence again.

Single cause of a single disease means: the cause is the same in every case of the disease.

This is how the medical bureaucrats refute vaccines as the cause of Autism. This is their “proof.” “Okay. We know (pretend) Autism is a single disease. So it has to have one cause across the board, in every case. Let’s see. Can we find any diagnosed cases where the child didn’t receive vaccines with mercury in them? Yes. We can. All right, end of story. Vaccines couldn’t cause Autism.”

But is Autism (or any sub-type of Autism) a single disease? Is there any convincing proof? Is there a single cause in all cases?

No. If there were, you would find it in the official definition of Autism, and it isn’t there.

At this point, people repeat familiar medical-propaganda slogans: “We’re on the cusp of a breakthrough in finding a genetic cause.” “We’re closer than ever.” “It could turn out to be a virus.” “It might relate to early childhood infections.” “Its roots are neurological, and these days we understand that system at a deeper level than ever before.” “We’re seeing similar patterns in brain scans.”

All supposition. All speculation.

No reason under the sun to accept the idea that what is called Autism is one thing with one cause.

In many cases of what is called Autism, we are looking at vaccine damage, pure and simple. Then CALL IT VACCINE DAMAGE, NOT AUTISM.

In other cases, the cause would be chemical poisoning from a variety of non-vaccine sources. SO CALL IT CHEMICAL POISONING, NOT AUTISM.

In other cases, a severe oxygen deficit. CALL IT OXYGEN DEFICIT.

In other cases, major nutrient deficiencies. CALL IT NUTRITIONAL DEFICIENCY.

In other cases, all four of these. CALL IT ALL FOUR OF THESE.

Call “it” what it is found to be, in that given child.

Look into the life and body of each unique child.

Stop using the generalized label, Autism.

Ah, but if that happened, doctors would be forced to do things they aren’t trained to do. And drug companies, the last time I looked, don’t have a safe and effective drug to reverse vaccine damage.

These companies wouldn’t be able to make billions on a drug aimed at some single mythical cause for “Autism.”

If Autism isn’t one disease with one cause, there is no single way to treat all children diagnosed with Autism.

The diagnosis itself is a misnomer and a deception. The label is a deception. A lie.

“Then what’s wrong with my child?” a parent says. “If it isn’t Autism, what is it?”

The answer could only come with a truly honest and competent and skillful examination of the child. That unique child.

Holding out for one grand solution to a problem that isn’t one general problem is doomed.

Many children are waiting for a successful universal treatment that will never come.

There are reports that, in some of cases of “Autism,” hyperbaric oxygen has shown good results.

But what about cases where the real problem is severe nutritional deficit?

It comes down to this: do parents want a solution to what their unique child is really suffering from? If so, then someone has to discover what that is. And then that practitioner has to come up with an answer that truly helps.

Calling all children who have similar generalized symptoms “Autistic” doesn’t help.

But it does provide an avenue of profit for drug companies. Their paid researchers can announce “breakthroughs” and “partial answers” and come in behind that with new drugs.

And then they can even say, “We’ve found the cause,” when they haven’t. They can market a whole raft of drugs that “alleviate the cause.” And make billions of $$, while children still suffer.

Here’s a real-life illustration. The parents of a young boy are at their wit’s end because he has withdrawn from the world. He can’t communicate. His physical coordination is lacking. He has other problems.

The doctor says: Autism.

But another doctor, someone who practices medicine but also has human instincts and a genuine desire to go the distance and help that boy, investigates.

And he finds several crucial things. The boy, who has never had vaccines, has severe nutritional deficiencies. On top of that, he’s extremely sensitive and reactive to certain artificial colors and dyes in processed foods. He has bowel problems, debilitating gastrointestinal infections. He almost strangled on the umbilical chord at birth.

Suppose the the doctor can prepare a comprehensive non-drug program to correct these problems. And after a time, the boy begins to emerge from his isolation. Into the world.

Did he have Autism?

This is like asking whether the victim of an automobile accident had Broken Bone Syndrome.

There is a simplicity at the bottom of all this. When the doctor says, “Your son has VCR$#S or some other label, the parent can say, “Do you have a treatment that will correct the situation?”

If the answer right now is no, there is no reason to buy the label and walk down the tortuous path the label implies.

If later on, the doctor says yes, we definitely do have a cure, then the parent can look at it through a high-power magnifying glass of intelligence and justified skepticism, to find the fine print, and understand what the doctor is really talking about.

Is he telling the truth? Is he lying? Does the supposed cure have such dire adverse effects the child is merely trading one set of crises for another? Are the new crises just masking the old ones?

Here is the rule: if someone claims that a cluster of symptoms adds up to a disease label for many people with that cluster, but the doctor has in his hands no cause for the cluster, there is no reason to assume the label means anything.

Yet still, the parent says, “All right, but the doctor said my son is Autistic. What am I supposed to do?”

Yes, and the doctor probably also says Autism is a neurological disorder and much research is underway, and the prospects are looking better…

But does the doctor have the cause of Autism? Does he have a treatment that really works? Is the parent in better shape by assuming her boy has “Autism,” whatever that is supposed to mean? Is the boy helped in any way by this?

Or is the mother of that child simply assuaged and relieved, because the doctor has put a label on her child who, up to now, was a troubling mystery?

I know people are going to write me with alt. solutions for Autism. They are going to assume there is such a thing (across the board) as Autism and it has a single cause, and there is a brilliant treatment for all of it.

To them I would suggest reading this article again and thinking about what it actually means.

People are also going to say, “But Autism researchers are making progress. They may not have the single cause yet, but they’re getting closer.”

Really? They SAY they’re getting closer. That’s different. What do you expect them to assert? They’re getting farther away?

Related:  What happens when only 16% of flu patients have the flu?