Over 75? Sign here if you're ready for death: GPs to ask ALL older patients if they'll agree to a 'do not resuscitate' order

HAPPY 75th BIRTHDAY.  ARE YOU READY TO DIE?  I GOT MY BAG RIGHT HERE.

Daily Mail

Doctors are being told to ask all patients over 75 if they will agree to a 'do not resuscitate' order.

New NHS guidelines urge GPs to draw up end-of-life plans for over-75s, as well as younger patients suffering from cancer, dementia, heart disease or serious lung conditions.

They are also being told to ask whether the patient wants doctors to try to resuscitate them if their health suddenly deteriorates.

The NHS says the guidance will improve patients' end-of-life care, but medical professionals say it is 'blatantly wrong' and will frighten the elderly into thinking they are being 'written off'.

In some surgeries, nurses are cold-calling patients over 75 or with long-term conditions and asking them over the phone if they have 'thought about resuscitation'.

Read more...

Sweetener Stevia Was Once Hailed As An Anti-Fertility Agent for Population Reduction

Activist Post
Truthstream Media

Maybe it's not so sweet now... If you've thought stevia, the natural alternative to sugar and artificial sweetners with aspartame, et al., is too good to be true, there may be a catch. Check out this textbook written in 1970 by Paul and Anne Ehrlich, the precursor to the textbook Ecoscience they wrote with Obama Science Czar John P. Holdren seven years later. The book advocates all manner of horrors to depopulate what they consider an overpopulated world, including everything from adding sterilants to the water and food to producing a sterilizing virus that requires a vaccine antidote one could apply for... it's a nightmare.

As such, it was pretty shocking to find a passage where the authors excitedly discuss using stevia rebaudiana — the same sweet leaf hailed everywhere today as a wonderful, healthy sugar alternative — as an anti-fertility agent. What's more, it had apparently been used traditionally by indigenous Indian populations in Paraguay for a long time, and rats in studies had shown a large drop in fertility after being administered stevia...

The Great Global Warming Swindle -- Full Movie

YouTube

Novartis flu vaccine suspended in Italy after deaths

The Telegraph
by Denise Roland

Two batches of a flu vaccine manufactured by Swiss drug giant Novartis have been suspended in Italy following the death of three people shortly after they had received the jab.

Two women aged 87 and 79 and a 68-year-old man from southern Italy died following jabs of the Fluad vaccine earlier this month. Another man, 92, is seriously ill in hospital.

Italian health officials stressed that the suspension was a precautionary measure and urged calm, while Novartis said there was no evidence the vaccine shot had caused the deaths.

The Italian Medicines Agency (AIFA) insisted vaccines were "a precious resource and irreplaceable for the prevention of seasonal flu".

Sergio Pecorelli, the head of AIFA, added that 8,000 people die of seasonal flu each year. "We have to have faith in vaccines," he said.

A Novartis spokesman that a review of the two batches in question had shown they conformed to "all production and quality standards" and that the drug maker was working closely with Italian health officials to carry out further tests.

The Fluad vaccine was approved in 1997 and more than 65m doses have been distributed to date. The vaccine has a "robust safety history", the spokesman added.

Fluad is not used in the UK's flu vaccination programme, nor licensed for use in Britain, a spokesman for Public Health England said.

"There are no implications for the safety of flu vaccines licensed and used in the UK, and we advise people to have the annual influenza vaccine as recommended," he added.

Novartis is in the process of selling its flu vaccine division to Australian drugmaker CSL. The deal, which valued the business at $275m (£176m), is expected to close in the second half of 2015. The Swiss drugmaker is also offloading the remainder of its vaccines business to Britain’s GlaxoSmithKline, as part of a three-way deal agreed earlier this year.

CDC Plans To Route Future U.S. Ebola Patients To Specially Trained Hospitals

Huffington Post

In the event that another person in the United States tests positive for Ebola, they could be re-routed to one of a handful of hospitals that are specifically equipped and trained to deal with deadly viruses like Ebola, confirmed Centers for Disease Control and Prevention director Dr. Tom Frieden during a press conference on Oct. 20.

"There’s a need for specialized centers when there is a patient with confirmed Ebola, or a number of patients if that were to happen in the future,” said Frieden, though he did not specify which hospitals would be among the designated group. "We need to increase the margin of safety.”

So far during this outbreak, only four hospitals across the United States have experience treating Ebola patients: Nebraska Medicine, Emory University Hospital, the National Institutes of Health Clinical Center and Texas Health Presbyterian Hospital Dallas.

"There are many hospitals in the country that are already in the process of becoming proficient in care of patients with Ebola,” said Frieden. "We’re focusing first on Dallas, where they’ve been dealing with Ebola, and in case there are additional cases that arise there, they’ll be ready to care for them."

In addition to announcing the hospital plan, Frieden also confirmed significant changes to safety protocol for U.S. health workers who are caring for Ebola patients. The changes were reached by consensus among “all people in the U.S. with experience with Ebola,” as well as Doctors Without Borders (MSF).

The changes include: rigorous and repeated training of the donning and doffing of personal protective equipment (PPE), to the point that the steps become “ritualized," no skin exposure when PPE is worn, and a trained hospital staff monitor that oversees health workers putting on and removing PPE.

The CDC also now recommends that health workers wear a respirator -- either an N95 respirator or powered air purifying respirator (PAPR) -- while with the patient in his or her isolation unit. This doesn’t mean that the virus is airborne, Frieden explained, but that procedures that are undertaken in the U.S., like intubation or suctioning -- procedures that require close contact with the nose and mouth of patients -- may pose a higher risk to health workers than the supportive care measures conducted in West Africa.

The CDC has faced increased scrutiny and criticism over their recommended safety protocols after Texas Health nurses Nina Pham and Amber Joy Vinson contracted Ebola from Thomas Eric Duncan, the first person to be diagnosed with the virus in the U.S. Pham was later transferred to NIH Clinical Center for Ebola treatment, while Vinson was transferred to Emory University Hospital. These changes are in a response to Pham and Vinson’s positive diagnoses, said Frieden.

“We may never know exactly how [transmission] happened, but the bottom line is that the guidelines didn’t work for that hospital,” said Frieden. “Dallas shows that taking care of Ebola is hard.”

Ebola Cases Rise Sharply in Western Sierra Leone

ABC News

by CLARENCE ROY-MACAULAY

After emerging months ago in eastern Sierra Leone, Ebola is now hitting the western edges of the country where the capital is located with dozens of people falling sick each day, the government said Tuesday. So many people are dying that removing bodies is reportedly a problem.

Forty-nine confirmed cases of Ebola emerged in just one day, Monday, in two Ebola zones in and around the capital, the National Ebola Response Center, or NERC, said. Lawmaker Claude Kamanda who represents a western area said more than 20 deaths are being reported daily.

Kamanda told the local Politico newspaper that authorities are experiencing challenges collecting corpses from both quarantined and non-quarantined homes.

Authorities say the uncontrolled movement of people from the interior to Waterloo which is the gateway to Freetown, the capital, has fueled the increase of Ebola cases in the west. There is a strong feeling that people are violating the quarantines elsewhere and coming to Freetown through Waterloo.

There are 851 total confirmed Ebola cases in the two zones, called Western Area Urban and Western Area Rural, the NERC said. In numbers of cases, they may soon surpass a former epicenter of the outbreak in the country, the eastern districts of Kenema and Kailahun where there have been a total of 1,012 confirmed cases.

No new cases were reported Monday in Kenema and Kailahun but a World Health Organization spokeswoman said it is too early to declare that the epidemic has burned itself out in the east.

"There was a drop in new cases in Kenema and Kailahun and fingers were crossed but there has been a bit of a flare up thanks to a couple of unsafe burials," said Margaret Harris, WHO's spokeswoman in Sierra Leone. "So it's too early to say we have a real decline ... definitely too early to say it's been beaten there."

A local newspaper suggested Tuesday that authorities quarantine Waterloo. The World Food Program over the weekend delivered emergency food rations to people there.

"The growing fear has left the public with no choice but to call on the Government for Waterloo to be quarantined as was done to other places including Kailahun, Kenema, Bombali, Port Loko and Moyamba Districts," the Exclusive newspaper said.

Many residents of the capital note that Ebola has followed the same route across the country as rebels who in 1991 started a savage war in Kailahun district. The war ended in Freetown a decade later where the final battle was fought. Now the enemy is a disease, and the president is putting in place a more military-style response.

President Ernest Bai Koroma last week appointed Defense Minister Alfred Palo Conteh as CEO of the National Ebola Response Center, whose headquarters are being placed at the former War Crimes Tribunal for Sierra Leone in the west end of Freetown together with the United Nations Mission for Ebola Emergency Response.

The West African nations of Sierra Leone, Liberia and Guinea — where the outbreak first emerged 10 months ago — have been hit hard by Ebola with more than 4,500 deaths, according to WHO estimates. A few cases have also emerged in the United States and Spain.

In Guinea on Tuesday, hundreds of residents in the Conakry suburban neighborhood of Kaporo Rail protested the construction of an Ebola treatment center nearby.

"We don't want the hospital here. They want to infect our neighborhood," said Binta Sow, the spokesman of the group. Kaporo Rail has a thriving market for ice cream and milk that employs hundreds of women and youth. There were worries this could harm the local economy.

"No one will buy anything here if they erect the center," said a local ice cream vendor.

On Tuesday the East African nation of Rwanda was singling out travelers from the U.S. and Spain for special screening. A Rwandan Ministry of Health document says all passengers from the U.S. and Spain will have their temperatures taken upon arrival. If the passenger has a fever he or she is denied entry. If there is no fever, the visitors still must report their health condition daily to authorities.

The U.S. Embassy in Rwanda on Tuesday urged Americans who may have a fever or who have traveled to Ebola countries "to weigh carefully whether travel to Rwanda at this time is prudent."

"Please note neither the Department of State's Bureau of Consular Affairs nor the U.S. Embassy have authority over quarantine issues and cannot prevent a U.S. citizen from being quarantined should local health authorities require it," the embassy said.

No Ebola cases have emerged in Rwanda.

Surprise! Ebola Outbreak Connected To Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and George Soros

Rumor Mill News

George Soros’s foundation funds the Kenema bioweapons lab at the focus of the Ebola outbreak, and which is about to be closed, apparently amid an investigation.

At the epicentre of the current Ebola epidemic is the Kenema Government Hospital in Sierra Leone, which houses a US a biosecurity level 2 bioweapons research lab with links to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and Soros Foundation.

 
Published on Jul 27, 2014 
http://www.undergroundworldnews.com

*George Soros’s foundation funds the Kenema bioweapons lab at the focus of the Ebola outbreak, and which is about to be closed, apparently amid an investigation.

* WHO media coordinator Glenn Thomas was highly likely involved in fielding media and other inquries about how WHO view and what it planned to do about the controversial Kenema lab.

Was Glenn Thomas aware of hard evidence showing that the lab was faking positive diagnoses for Ebola — Tulane University? – in order to justify forcing people to undergo treatment which would give them Ebola? Did he refuse to go along with the cover up?

*The mainstream media is silent about the Kenema bioweapons lab closure as well as about the order to Tulane University to stop Ebola testing. So, what other channels are there left for this information to enter the public domain or be spread through social media networks if WHO does not release the information or take action?

*George Soros has links to Sierra Leone President Ernest Koroma

Related: George Soros, his Ebola bioweapons lab and the death of WHO spokesperson
Links to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation at core of Ebola epidemic

Why Is Gut-Wrecking Carrageenan in So Many Organic Food Products?

Truthstream Media

“The common food additive carrageenan (CGN) predictably induces intestinal inflammation in animal models.” — Bhattacharyya S, et al., 2013

“During the past decade carrageenan has become much used experimentally mainly for its ability to induce an acute inflammation.” — Di Rosa M, 1972

“Carrageenan is readily taken up by macrophages and stored in lysosomes, which subsequently swell and rupture, apparently resulting in cell death.” — Catanzaro PJ, Schwartz HJ, & Graham RC, 1971

Carrageenan is a dangerous food additive that causes inflammation of the gut — it has no place in our food, but especially not in organic/natural products. The industry lobbied the USDA Organic Standards Board for its approval, so there it is. Alternatives like guar gum and carob bean gum do not have any of the same risks and side effects.

Dr. Joanne Tobacman has researched carrageenan extensively, and testified before the Organic Standards Board to argue against its approval for organic products, but was ignored. In just one of her many studies, Tobacman covered the risk of this food additive in her research paper Review of harmful gastrointestinal effects of carrageenan in animal experiments, arguing in the abstract:

In this article I review the association between exposure to carrageenan and the occurrence of colonic ulcerations and gastrointestinal neoplasms in animal models. Although the International Agency for Research on Cancer in 1982 identified sufficient evidence for the carcinogenicity of degraded carrageenan in animals to regard it as posing a carcinogenic risk to humans, carrageenan is still used widely as a thickener, stabilizer, and texturizer in a variety of processed foods prevalent in the Western diet. I reviewed experimental data pertaining to carrageenan’s effects with particular attention to the occurrence of ulcerations and neoplasms in association with exposure to carrageenan. In addition, I reviewed from established sources mechanisms for production of degraded carrageenan from undegraded or native carrageenan and data with regard to carrageenan intake. Review of these data demonstrated that exposure to undegraded as well as to degraded carrageenan was associated with the occurrence of intestinal ulcerations and neoplasms. This association may be attributed to contamination of undegraded carrageenan by components of low molecular weight, spontaneous metabolism of undegraded carrageenan by acid hydrolysis under conditions of normal digestion, or the interactions with intestinal bacteria. Although in 1972, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration considered restricting dietary carrageenan to an average molecular weight > 100,000, this resolution did not prevail, and no subsequent regulation has restricted use. Because of the acknowledged carcinogenic properties of degraded carrageenan in animal models and the cancer-promoting effects of undegraded carrageenan in experimental models, the widespread use of carrageenan in the Western diet should be reconsidered.

In fact, an investigative reporter from the Chicago Tribune asked the FDA to turn over even one peer-reviewed independent study — that is, one study not funded by carrageenan manufacturers — which showed that this additive was indeed safe and the FDA did not do it. The carrageenan lobbies, not surprisingly, did not provide any either.

Tons of foods at Whole Foods include this ingredient. We have left the following comments at Whole Foods, including contact info, about this dangerous ingredient that shows up in all kinds of “organic” and “natural” foods – ranging from ice cream, to coconut milk and even meat! It’s even used in infant formula. So far, we have not heard back from anyone (but at least they take the comments).

Here’s the text of the handwritten comment:

Carrageenan! After years of seeing this seemingly benign ingredient on labels on mostly organic products, I finally learned it is connected with gastrointestinal issues and even cancer (high doses used to induce cancer in lab animals). Several days of research (via Cornucopia Institute, etc.) have revealed a backstory of corrupt politics with the USDA National Organic Standards Board — which Whole Foods sits on — regarding carrageenan. This is unappreciated. 

Bottom line, we shop here and buy organic elsewhere to avoid troublesome ingredients, switched eldest daughter to semi-Paleo diet and things like Coconut milk only to find that carrageenan may be making her GI/IBS disorders worse. Jury’s still out but after a week off carrageenan, she is improving. Please defund carrageenan and offer better/more alternatives. Some public awareness is also in order. Thanks. — Aaron Dykes Phone (XXX)

We call out Whole Foods specifically because they charge a premium for their products while riding on the idea of pure, unadulterated food. Why is carrageenan so widely used in foods — and especially in organic and “natural” foods that people pay more for in order to avoid unhealthy ingredients — despite the known risks from decades of scientific studies?

The Cornucopia Institute addressed the apparent corruption behind this issue, reporting that:

For the past two decades, food industry executives and lobbyists have managed to convince enough members of the National Organic Standards Board (NOSB)—the 15-member citizen panel of organic stakeholders that determines which non-organic ingredients can be used in organic foods—to give carrageenan its stamp of approval. Their tactics have become increasingly more manipulative and ethically questionable as it becomes clearer that scientific evidence is not on their side. 

The NOSB first approved carrageenan in the mid-1990s. As required by law, the USDA had hired three “independent” contractors to perform a thorough scientific and technical review of the additive. 

Their job was to provide an independent review, including any concerns about the additive’s effects on human health or the environment. In their official reports to the NOSB, the three contractors assured the NOSB that no effects on human health had been identified. [Editor's Note: the full Cornucopia Institute report describes the conflicts of interest held by these "independent" contractors] 

Carrageenan came up for periodic review at the May, 2012 meeting with the NOSB debating if it should be “relisted” on the National List of allowed synthetics and non-organics. Industry lobbyists presented misinformation about carrageenan’s safety and questioned the credibility of independent research commissioned by the National Institutes of Health. 

One of the NOSB members took an active role in assisting the carrageenan manufacturers. At one point, she read lengthy excerpts from a document written by the carrageenan manufacturers’ trade lobby group, Marinalg, defending the safety of carrageenan. But before reading these lengthy excerpts, the Board member misidentified the excerpts as “being from JECFA, a United Nations/FAO body” when in fact they were written by the industry’s lobby group. Pretty infuriating, right? How can research from a biased lobby group be mistaken for a United Nations/FAO study? 

The NOSB voted, by a slim one-vote margin, to re-approve the use of carrageenan in organic foods for another five-year period.

The Cornucopia Institute has been the leading advocate on the carrageenan issue, which I think is particularly important given the widespread prevalence of digestive disorders ranging from Irritable Bowel Syndrome to Crohn’s Disease, Celiac Disease, gluten intolerance, leaky gut, colitis, and more, as well as a dramatic increase in food allergies over the past several decades.

CDC: 50% Increase in Food Allergies Over the Last Decade   

Web MD: Food Allergies Have Doubled Among Black Children

ABC News: Food Allergies in Kids On the Rise 

National Center for Biotechnology Information: Time trends in allergic disorders in the UK

The Cornucopia Institute has provided this shopping guide as a resource to avoid carrageenan. Meanwhile, they also have a petition that you can send to the USDA to urge to removal of carrageenan from the list of approved organic ingredients.

While the entire food system in this country needs a complete overhaul, and there are countless dangerous ingredients that need to be reigned in lurking on our grocery store shelves, it is important that the organic label actually means something and provides a viable option for consumers to at least attempt to avoid the downright junk that is passed off as food today. The organic label is one of the last bastions of food safety in America.

As the Cornucopia Institute writes: “Organic foods should be a safe haven from harmful ingredients. In fact, the Organic Foods Production Act of 1990, the law governing organic foods, requires that non-agricultural ingredients must be determined safe to human health and not deleterious to the environment before they can be added to organic foods. After all, if organic food isn’t safer than conventional food, what’s the point, right?”

Update: 
YouTube

We wrote an article up at Truthstream Media on the food additive Carrageenan an emulsifier extracted from seaweed and added to all kinds of foods on grocery store shelves despite the fact that independent studies show it is a powerful digestive inflammatory agent. This stuff was definitely making a child in our home seriously ill with stomach pains to the point she could barely eat; we had no idea it was in a ton of organic foods, too! We removed it from her diet and she almost instantly got better. We wanted to warn people what the science says about this stuff...well...

Apparently some food additives have dedicated people who go around to every post on the web warning about said additive to spread their company's propaganda as truth, as you'll see in this video.

Our favorite part is where the company says: 

"Q. Why the controversy?

A. Self-appointed consumer watchdogs have produced numerous web pages filled with words condemning carrageenan as an unsafe food additive for human consumption." 

We at Truthstream hope to God every single person becomes a "self-appointed consumer watchdog" and uses critical thinking skills to analyze what these megacorporations are passing off as food in the tyrannical, centralized food system we have in this country. 

PS - Yes, we filled a web page with "words". 
(What a box of fail.)

-Truthstream Media

Is Monsanto’s Gene-Silencing Weapon Next?

RINF

As biotech giants move forward with the technology, specialists warn it could be dangerous

News that biotechnology corporations are developing new technology that can allegedly kill insects and pathogens by silencing their genes has some environmentalists and scientists worried.

“To attempt to use this technology at this current stage of understanding would be more naïve than our use of DDT in the 1950s,” the National Honey Bee Advisory Board said in comments submitted to the Environmental Protection Agency before a Tuesday meeting to discuss the risks of this technology, according to the New York Times, which reported on this new development.

Developers of the technology say they are able to target the genetic sequences of specific species and silence them through RNA interference technology.

Yet, some specialists warn that “releasing gene-silencing agents into fields could harm beneficial insects, especially among organisms that have a common genetic makeup, and possibly even human health,” according to the New York Times.

Monsanto is currently seeking regulatory approval for corn that uses gene-silencing to kill the western corn rootworm.

Bill Gates Funding Drone Technology to Deliver Vaccines

VacTruth
by Jennifer Hutchinson

I think everyone knows how I feel about vaccines. My calm, (somewhat) rational opinion is this: They are, for the most part, not necessary, not working, and not safe. The lack of science—not to mention common sense—behind the dozens of vaccines injected into our children is beyond appalling.

There are two things, however, that the vaccine program definitely isn’t lacking. One is money. The other is imagination.

Billions of dollars are being spent on developing new vaccines. Improving vaccination rates worldwide. Ensuring that vaccines are available to everyone on the planet. All through phenomenally creative methods.

We have—or soon will have—needle-free vaccines. Vaccines with micro needles. Sublingual vaccines. Vaccine patches. Inhalable powder vaccines. The old Star Trek type of vaccines. Even mail-order vaccines. Vaccines that are easier and faster to produce.

No more accidental needle sticks and cross-contamination of deadly diseases. No more refrigeration or syringes. No more vaccine phobia. No more pain. No more tears.

BILL GATES AND “BOLD IDEAS”

When it comes to money and imagination, Bill Gates seems to have an endless supply of both. That man is a tough act to follow. In 2010 he announced a $10 billion pledge over the next decade, saying, “We must make this the decade of vaccines.” [1]

One of his latest financial donations is the subject of this article, which is perhaps the most difficult I’ve written for Vactruth. What I read as I was doing my research left me with a lot of unanswered questions and disturbing thoughts.

Thanks to a sizable grant from the Gates Foundation (with oversight from WHO and UNICEF), $100,000 is being provided to 17 different initiatives, for a total of $1.7 million. [2] The purpose is—and I quote Michel Zaffran, Director of project Optimize and Senior Adviser for WHO’s Department of Immunization, Vaccines, and Biologicals—“to ensure new vaccines reach the millions of people in the poorest countries. The time for ‘business as usual’ has passed—it’s time for bold ideas.” [3]

One “bold idea” is unmanned aerial vehicles to quickly and inexpensively deliver vaccines to hard-to-reach areas. The vehicles will be deployed remotely by healthcare workers. The winner of this project is the Harvard-MIT Health Sciences and Technology Division, with five students under the direction of Professor George Barbastathis. [4] Projects that are successful may be eligible for another grant of $1 million. [5]

A LITTLE BACKGROUND ON TECHNOLOGY

If you’re wondering how aerial vaccines are possible, all you have to do is consider the technology that is already in place. Let’s look at three examples.

Military drones

Since the Vietnam War, the U.S. has been using modern drones that are operated by a remote control and monitored through a live-streaming screen thousands of miles away from the target area. The vehicles hover silently, undetectable by radar. For more information on the use of drones and their controversy, see Michael Hastings’ article in Rolling Stone. [6] Rabies bait

The oral rabies vaccine is nothing new. In this country, 12+ million doses of Raboral V-RG are dropped from unmanned aircraft every year. Worldwide, more than 100 million doses since the late 1980s. [7] The cost? In the U.S. and Canada, approximately $130 million in a decade. [8]

The ketchup-sized packets, usually dipped in fish oil and coated with fish meal, have been dropped in numerous states. The Texas Department of State Health Services claims to have virtually annihilated rabies in coyotes and foxes, which provides protection for other wildlife, livestock, and domestic animals. Texas has not had a case of human rabies since they began aerial drops in 1995. [9]

If you poke around the Internet a little, you’ll find some “safety” instructions. Basically, the claim is that the bait isn’t harmful for humans or pets (although wildlife is less likely to eat a packet that’s been touched by humans). A few precautions for pet owners: Keep pets inside or tied in the backyard for a week after the bait is dropped. If a domestic animal like a cat or dog eats the bait, avoid coming in contact with the saliva for 24 hours. [10] If you handle the bait, use paper towels or wear gloves. If the vaccine liquid gets on your skin, wash with soap and water, and call the local health department (or the number on the packet). [11]

Sounds relatively safe, right? I thought so, too—until I read the Merial Material “Safety” Data Sheet. It states that the RABORAL V-RG is “potentially hazardous to health if any of the following should occur: ingestion, parenteral inoculation, droplet or aerosol exposure of mucous membranes or if broken skin is exposed to infectious fluids or tissues. All people should avoid contact, but young children, pregnant women, individuals with immune deficiencies or those on steroids should avoid contact with this vaccine.” It also says: “Do not allow undiluted product or large quantities of it to reach ground water, water course or sewage system.” [12]

After further research, I found some adverse side effects. Side effects backed up by lab tests, including “vaccinia virus DNA and rabies virus G protein DNA in papule material and serologic evidence of rabies virus neutralizing antibodies” as well as Simian Green Monkey virus, Epstein-Barr virus capside, and Cytomeglia virus. [13]

South Wales microbiologist Doug Dorst says: “For every fear that biotech propaganda proliferates about deadly diseases and how vaccines prevent them, it is one more lie to incrementally convince the masses that vaccines are effective. … There is a real potential risk to exposure from aerial exposure to aerial DNA virus vaccines. The risk certainly exceeds any benefits …” [14]

If you’ve read my story, you know that the RabAvert rabies vaccine given to my grandson in 2006 wasn’t safe. (Actually, several batches used in that same year were recalled because of a partially inactivated virus.) Many people think “it’s just a rabies vaccine.” My daughter and I know from personal experience that there’s no such thing.

QUESTIONS

Is an oral rabies vaccine that’s safe for coyotes and raccoons, for example, safe for other animals, such as birds? Does “one size fit all?” How long does the vaccine last?

What about the packets that aren’t consumed? Where do they end up? In our water? In our food? Is that safe?

If the packet ruptures, can it harm plant life and crops?

Can the vaccine create resistance to the rabies virus?

What if a hunter kills an animal, such as a squirrel, who has ingested the bait, and eats it?

West Nile Virus spray

Aerial spraying of pesticides has been going on for decades, especially for the West Nile Virus (WNV). This year the virus has been more prevalent, with half the cases in Texas. WNV can be deadly, but most people who contract it never have any symptoms. Between 1999 and 2008, out of almost 30,000 cases, there were approximately 1,100 deaths. [15]

The financial cost? Spraying one county in Texas cost $1 million. [16] Throw in the cost of testing the safety of a pesticide for years at a price of up to $200 million … well, the financial fallout is unfathomable. [17]

The pesticide kills between 60 and 90 percent of mosquitoes in sprayed areas (depending on which article you’re reading). [18] But there are more than a few people who don’t believe these numbers. A former EPA employee and Director of New England Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility Kyla Bennett attempted to acquire the data proving the 60 percent effectiveness rate for mosquitoes carrying eastern equine encephalitis in Massachusetts. She did not get the information she asked for.

The Huffington Post, after being told by the state health department that no one was available to speak, also filed a formal public records request for the data. I don’t know for sure, but I doubt they got the “proof” either. [19]

“Dirt Doctor” radio show host Howard Garrett says the pesticide doesn’t work. His suggestion? Organic pesticides on the ground to kill mosquito eggs and larvae. [20]

All the pesticides, even though they come in different combinations, contain known toxins that don’t just kill mosquitoes. They cause serious damage to fish and other aquatic animals and pets. They’ve been linked to breast and liver cancer and endocrine disruption. They’ve been blamed for the “die off” of bees and potentially disrupting “our natural ecosystem.” [21]

One chemical, according to a study that appeared in the journal Pediatrics, can disrupt brain development in the womb. Another, a weapon used during WWII and described by its manufacturer as “a possible carcinogen,” can damage a child’s nervous system. [22]

“The cure is worse than the disease,” says Organic Sacramento, a nonprofit organization. “You’re spraying poison over thousands of people for the potential of maybe helping a handful of people.” [23]

I can’t help but think of one of the recently proposed causes of autism. Household dust while the baby is in the womb—a cause that is the subject of an NIH-funded research study. I don’t understand how that can possibly be a concern to a government that maintains it’s perfectly safe to inhale aerial pesticides that are sprayed into the environment.

QUESTIONS

Is a 60 percent effectiveness rate—if that’s indeed true—“effective?” That leaves almost half of the mosquitoes alive and potentially spreading the virus.

What if the spray kills mosquito predators? Wouldn’t we end up with more mosquitoes?

What does the spray do to our crops?

Can mosquitoes and other exposed creatures develop resistance to the virus? Could the WNV spraying be responsible for pertussis outbreaks? [24] After all, cases have doubled in the last year—a year in which a lot of spraying has been going on. [25] If it’s so safe, why, when the Dallas area was going to be sprayed in August, were the pilots instructed to avoid the home of former President Bush? [26]

AERIAL VACCINES ARE ON THE WAY—BUT WHY?

You could read about drones, the aerial delivery of rabies bait, and pesticide spraying and learn something new with every article. I’ve explored the current technology because the information is relevant to the aerial spraying of vaccines.

I’m certainly not minimizing rabies, but why spend all that money and go to so much trouble for a disease that kills one or two humans a year? It just doesn’t make sense. Not coming from a government that claims far more deaths from childhood diseases, like measles and whooping cough—not to mention the flu.

Would they really do this for rabies for almost 20 years and not have already come up with a similar scheme for these other diseases? I can’t believe that their concern is for wildlife, livestock, and domestic animals. There has to be another reason, another explanation. Maybe …

The rabies virus has been eliminated. Safely. Quickly. Or so we’re told. Assuming that our ketchup packets (or some other food or our water) don’t already contain vaccines, the only obvious next step is using the drones to spray all kinds of vaccines. The MMR, DTaP, flu … No one will even know. There will be no informed consent. No declining vaccine rates—they would literally explode overnight. I’m extrapolating here, but when you think about it, it’s really not that much of a stretch.

What I can’t figure out—what is keeping me awake at night—is why? What’s in it for “them?” Where’s the money? The vaccine industry as we know it is a $2 billion a year business. Will aerial spraying make it even more lucrative? The grant winners got a small piece of the pie. What about the people who remote-control the drones? The people who actually manufacture them? Or those who outfit the drones with the vaccine spray? Is this really about money?

Where’s the quality control? I realize those are words we don’t usually connect with vaccines, but who will be in charge of this program? We all remember past problems—failed freezers, reused syringes, accidental needle sticks, and, of course, the time Baxter Pharmaceuticals shipped live avian flu virus (mixed with vaccine material) to medical distributors in 18 countries. [27] So many opportunities for dangerous, if not fatal, mistakes.

Could this be about power? Control? It’s so easy to scare people. Fear is powerful and controlling. You know, we have this deadly pertussis outbreak. Everybody better get a pertussis vaccine. That is, if they don’t decide to spray them on us. Or maybe they’ll encourage both methods of delivery.

If you do as much research as I’ve done, you’ll end up with your head spinning. Some of my thoughts are unthinkable. Not impossible. Just unthinkable. I used to think that people who suggested vaccines as a means to population control were crazy. Now I’m not so sure.

Take Bill Gates, for instance. At the 2010 TED (Technology, Entertainment, Design) conference, he stated: “The world today has 6.8 billion people. That’s headed up to about 9 billion. Now if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that by perhaps 10 or 15 percent.” [28]

AND A FEW MORE “WHAT IF’S?”

What if one exposure to a toxic chemical isn’t too bad, but after a few years, it might be deadly?

What if combining different pesticides together could add up to a “toxic tipping point?”

What if some effects of vaccine spraying don’t show up immediately but, like the cancers caused by the 9/11 World Trade Center toxins, surface years after exposure?

How many times in the past have we been told that something is safe, but years later we learn that it wasn’t true?

Help me out here. What do you think is behind the aerial spraying of vaccines?

REFERENCES

1. http://forumblog.org/2010/01/bill-and-melinda-gates-pledge-us-10-billion…
2. http://www.grandchallenges.org/ImproveVaccines/Topics/Pages/…
3. www.who.int/immunization/newsroom/newsstory_grants_optimize_imm_systems/en/index.html
4. www.gatesfoundation.org/global-health/Pages/gce-round8-winners.aspx#image=4
5. www.grandchallenges.org/Explorations/Pages/GrantsAwarded.aspx
6. http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-rise-of-the-killer-drones-how-america…
7. http://preventdisease.com/news/12/011712_Look-Up-The-New-Age…
8. http://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/15/8/08-1061_article.htm
9. http://remixxworld.blogspot.com/2012/01/texas-department-of-state-health.html
10. www.cleveland.com/sun/all/index.ssf/2012/08/distribution_of_oral_rabies_va.html
11. http://www.hurherald.com/cgi-bin/db_scripts/articles?…
12. www.raboral.com/pdf/RABORAL_V_RG_w_bait_2005%28USA%29.pdf
13. http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5843a2.htm
14. http://preventdisease.com/news/12/011712_Look-Up-The-New…
15. www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/ss5902a1.htm
16. www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/17/dallas-west-nile-virus_n_1791551.html
17. www.abctlc.com/courses/aerialapplication.pdf
18. www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/17/dallas-west-nile-virus_n_1791551.html
19. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/18/pesticide-spray-west-nile-mosquitoes_n_1895014.html
20. http://articles.latimes.com/2012/aug/16/nation/la-na-nn-dallas-west-nile-spray-20120816
21. www.naturalnews.com/036877_aerial_spraying_West_Nile_virus_chemicals.html
22. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/14/pesticide-spraying-west-nile-toxic…
23. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/14/pesticide-spraying-west-nile-toxic…
24. www.omsj.org/blogs/whooping-con-outbreak
25. http://www.wfaa.com/news/health/State-issues-advisory-after-Dallas-whooping…
26. http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57495136/dallas-begins-aerial-assault-on-west-nile-virus/
27. www.naturalnews.com/025760.html#ixzz2A2kOorS4
28. www.youtube.com/watch?v=T9vZLlJhI7o&feature=related

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.

Planned Parenthood Exposed – James Corbett

Youtube

Although the likes of Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and Bill Gates are happy to sing its praises (or perhaps because they are), Planned Parenthood has a racist eugenicist past that it would prefer to sweep under the rug. The bigger problem for the organization, though, is that the past isn’t over and the public is beginning to discover the real driving force behind this globalist institution. Join us this week on The Corbett Report as we pull back the curtain and expose Margaret Sanger’s monstrous offspring: Planned Parenthood.

7 Reasons Why Genetically Modified Foods Will Never Be Labeled And Why It Won’t Matter In The Future

Waking Times
by Natasha Longo


There are many arguments in favor of mandatory labeling of genetically modified organisms (GMO). However, corporate lobbyists have been very effective in preventing any GMO labeling legislation from being enacted into law. The public is in favor of the idea, but politicians are only on board until voting polls close after which point they revert back to the corporate ideology preventing people from ever knowing the truth about what’s in their food. In the west, the probability of such laws ever being passed are very unlikely. Hate to be a party pooper, but here are 7 reasons why GMO foods will never be labeled.

At least 21 countries and the European Union have established some form of mandatory labeling, but the food industry in the EU and US are two different beasts.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration currently requires labeling of GMO foods if the food has a significantly different nutritional property; if a new food includes an allergen that consumers would not expect to be present (e.g., a peanut protein in a soybean product); or if a food contains a toxicant beyond acceptable limits.

Even though it does exist, the generally accepted science of GMO foods does not clearly distinguish between its nutritional properties and those of non-GMO foods. Allergens are also known to be present in GMO foods, but this is largely ignored by the FDA. Also, now that the EPA has allowed Monsanto’s glyphosate herbicide at levels 60 times above toxic exposure for canola, soy, sunflower, flax and peanuts, it’s a free pass to chemically spray most GMO foods beyond acceptable limits.

To government scientists, it’s all the same and they don’t see a difference, not because one doesn’t exist, but because they refuse to acknowledge it.

Monsanto writes “There is no need to test the safety of GM foods”. So long as the engineered protein is safe, foods from GM crops are substantially equivalent and they cannot pose any health risks.” The US Food and Drug Administration waived all levels of safety testing in 1996 before approving the commercialization of these crops. Nothing more than voluntary research is necessary, and the FDA does not even want to see the results. And there is certainly no need to publish any of it. If you remember 1996, the year that the first crops were commercialized, the research scientists of the US FDA all predicted that transgenic crops would have unpredictable hard to detect side effects, allergens, toxins, nutritional effects, new diseases.

Unless you are geographically located in a dozen or so countries in the world who have declared GMO (genetically modified organism) bans, then you’re likely eating GMO. It’s almost impossible to avoid all GMO foods, however educating yourself can make a big difference in the percentage of GMO foods you purchase as a consumer. Although consumers have a right to know what’s in their food, especially concerning products for which health and environmental concerns have been raised, there are 7 reasons why they are unlikely to be be identified on any labeled food products:

1. Mandatory labeling would allow consumers to identify and steer clear of food products that cause them problems. This would cause a ripple effect on the entire food industry causing information campaigns on some of the largest and most successful brands in the world, effectively removing their popularity through incremental education. 2. For religious or ethical reasons, many people want to avoid eating animal products, including animal DNA. More GMO foods are now being engineered with insect DNA and more experiments are taking place with animal DNA. If consumers were more informed through labeling initiatives, it would cause a massive backlash on well known brands of processed foods by these groups. Transgenic animals and crops would also come under fire.

3. Labels on GMO foods would imply a warning about detrimental health effects, which would stir controversy among millions who strive daily to maintain or advance their levels of health and wellness through dietary strategies. There are significant differences between GMO and conventional foods in terms of side effects, allergens, toxins, nutritional effects, and new diseases. Although no nutritional or allergenic differences are acknowledged by the FDA, labeling foods as GMO would immediately place the decision making process back into the hands of the consumer by-passing the regulatory agency’s control.

4. Labeling of GMO foods to fulfill the desires of health conscious consumers would come at a consequence to all food manufacturers who use GMO ingredients. Experience with mandatory labeling in the European Union, Japan, and New Zealand has not resulted in consumer choice. Rather, retailers have eliminated GMO products from their shelves due to perceived consumer aversion to GMO products. Can you imagine what the effect would be in the US?

5. Consumers who want to buy non-GMO foods currently have an option to purchase certified organic foods, which by definition cannot be produced with GMO ingredients. Labeling GMO ingredients would also affect the entire organic foods industry now generating hundreds of millions in revenue. Many consumers would revert back to conventional foods if they learned they did not contain GMO ingredients. This would cause a loss in profits to some large food manufacturers who have organic divisions within their brands.

6. If GMO foods were segregated from non-GMO foods, the food system infrastructure (storage, processing, and transportation facilities) would need to change drastically in a short period of time to accommodate the need for this change. The cost of labeling involves far more than the paper and ink to print the actual label. Accurate labeling requires an extensive identity preservation system from farmer to elevator to grain processor to food manufacturer to retailer. Either testing or detailed record-keeping needs to be done at various steps along the food supply chain. It would be very chaotic and the expense would go down the tubes if the majority of consumers avoided foods labeled as containing GMO ingredients. It’s a process the food industry knows would be extremely painful if it were to ever materialize.

7. If anti-GMO activists won the fight to pass GMO labeling legislation, it would set a precedent to every other highly controversial health topic in the hands of regulatory agencies. What next? Public health agencies would then be at risk at losing their credibility on other hot topics of debate such as fluoride in drinking water or vaccination. If populations were to win one huge battle that would free them from being incrementally poisoned, all government policy would be then be scrutinized and consumer advocate groups would stop at nothing to ensure all toxic public health policy would be dumped. It’s a loss of control and that’s something the cartels of the world are not interested in.

What’s The Solution and What Does The Future Hold?

If you haven’t figured out yet that our governments are not our best health and safety advocates, you haven’t been paying attention. We need to take the control away from the government and put it back into the hands of the people.

Content-based verification requires testing foods for the physical presence of foreign DNA or protein. A current application of this type of procedure is the analysis and labeling of vitamin content of foods. Methods for detecting the presence of GMO components in crops and processed foods are being discussed all over the world.

As the number of transgenes in commercialized crops increases, the techniques for detecting an array of different transgenes are becoming more sophisticated and even portable.

In the not too distant future, consumers will be able to run on-the-spot tests for environmental toxins, GMOs, pesticides, food safety and more with their smartphones and other hand-held devices.

“Modern biological research is also allowing an extension of laboratory devices on to small computer chips to detect biological information within DNA sequences,” said biotech specialist Dr. Marek Banaszewski. “Bioinformatic algorithms within programs will aid the identification of transgenes, promoters, and other functional elements of DNA, making detection of genetically modified foods on-the-spot and real-time without transportation to a laboratory.”

In a paper published in the journal Lab on a Chip, the team demonstrated sensing of an immune system protein, but the slide could be primed for any type of biological molecule or cell type. The researchers are working to improve the manufacturing process for the iPhone cradle and are working on a cradle for Android phones as well. They hope to begin making the cradles available next year.

Other handheld devices currently in development are portable chemiluminescence detectors, but based on enzyme-catalyzed reactions emitting light. The detection devices for nucleic acids, biotin associated with the target DNA provides the handle for the chemiluminescent detection. The non-radioactive DNA detection chemistry will be able to readily identify single-copy genes in transgenic plants making them suitable for GMO detection.

JAPAN NUCLEAR CRISIS: THE DANGERS OF RADIATION - Helen Caldicott

Collapsing Into Consciousness

PLEASE NOTE: BLOGGER HAS BLOCKED MY POSTING OF THIS HELEN CALDICOTT PRESS CONFERENCE - click here to see what you're not supposed to find out
PRESS CONFERENCE, GLOBAL RESEARCH, MONTREAL, MARCH 25, 2011

Quick Update on Recent Bird Flu Vaccine

Activist Post

by Catherine J. Frompovich

According to The Himalayan online newspaper, August 10, 2013, and its story “US vaccine may be behind bird flu”:

“…the unauthorized use of vaccines meant to fight bird flu, especially a USA-made vaccine, may have caused bird flu outbreak in Bhaktapur...”

in Nepal, a lovely and peaceful country between China to the north and India to the south.

Interestingly, the chairman of the Poultry Farmers’ Association, Tulsiram Dhukkhwa, said that many farmers complained that the bird flu broke out after the unauthorized use of those vaccines. That doesn’t seem to be anything new. Consider what happened recently in India when the oral polio vaccine was given: 47,500 vaccinees became paralyzed!

Furthermore, there is great belief that other countries are using poorer countries like Nepal as a laboratory! What’s new about that? Hasn’t that been going on for a long time and no one has the gumption to stand up to the practice, the medical profession, Big Pharma, or the World Health Organization (WHO)?

Additionally, PFA chairman Dhukkhwa said, If Nepal has been used to test vaccine developed against bird flu in the USA, it is a misfortune.

Destroying a poor nation’s food source ought to be criminal – no matter who does it or how it’s done, either by deliberate use of vaccines or genetically modified engineering of food crops.

When will the human race wake up to what’s going on to eliminate it, and take back our unalienable right to have non-contaminated, chemical-free and poison-free air, food, and water? Good question?

Related:  Bill Gates’ Polio Vaccine Program Caused 47,500 Cases of Paralysis Death

Cancer in a Can: The Shocking True Story of how ‘Pringles’ are Made

Mercola . com
By Dr. Mercola

To understand the nature of Pringles and other stackable chips, forget the notion that they come from actual potatoes in any recognizable way.

The Pringles Company (in an effort to avoid taxes levied against “luxury foods” like chips in the UK) once even argued that the potato content of their chips was so low that they are technically not even potato chips.

So if they’re not made of potatoes, what are they exactly?

The process begins with a slurry of rice, wheat, corn, and potato flakes that are pressed into shape.

This dough-like substance is then rolled out into an ultra-thin sheet cut into chip-cookies by a machine.

According to io9:

“The chips move forward on a conveyor belt until they’re pressed onto molds, which give them the curve that makes them fit into one another. Those molds move through boiling oil … Then they’re blown dry, sprayed with powdered flavors, and at last, flipped onto a slower-moving conveyor belt in a way that allows them to stack. From then on, it’s into the cans … and off towards the innocent mouths of the consumers.”

I suspect nearly everyone reading this likely enjoys the taste of potato chips. However, they are clearly one of the most toxic processed foods you can eat—whether they’re made from actual potato shavings or not.

Potato Chips are Loaded with Cancer-Causing Chemical

One of the most hazardous ingredients in potato chips is not intentionally added, but rather is a byproduct of the processing.

Acrylamide, a cancer-causing and potentially neurotoxic chemical, is created when carbohydrate-rich foods are cooked at high temperatures, whether baked, fried, roasted or toasted. Some of the worst offenders include potato chips and French fries, but many foods cooked or processed at temperatures above 212°F (100°C) may contain acrylamide. As a general rule, the chemical is formed when food is heated enough to produce a fairly dry and brown/yellow surface.

Hence, it can be found in:

Potatoes: chips, French fries and other roasted or fried potato foods
Grains: bread crust, toast, crisp bread, roasted breakfast cereals and various processed snacks


Coffee; roasted coffee beans and ground coffee powder. Surprisingly, coffee substitutes based on chicory actually contains 2-3 times MORE acrylamide than real coffee

How Much Acrylamide are You Consuming?

The federal limit for acrylamide in drinking water is 0.5 parts per billion, or about 0.12 micrograms in an eight-ounce glass of water. However, a six-ounce serving of French fries can contain 60 micrograms of acrylamide, or about FIVE HUNDRED times over the allowable limit.

Similarly, potato chips are notoriously high in this dangerous chemical. So high, in fact, that in 2005 the state of California actually sued potato chip makers for failing to warn California consumers about the health risks of acrylamide in their products. A settlement was reached in 2008 when Frito-Lay and several other potato chip makers agreed to reduce the acrylamide levels in their chips to 275 parts per billion (ppb) by 2011, which is low enough to avoid needing a cancer warning label.

The 2005 report “How Potato Chips Stack Up: Levels of Cancer-Causing Acrylamide in Popular Brands of Potato Chips,” issued by the California-basedEnvironmental Law Foundation (ELF), spelled out the dangers of this popular snack. Their analysis found that all potato chip products tested exceeded the legal limit of acrylamide by a minimum of 39 times, and as much as 910 times! Some of the worst offenders at that time included:

Cape Cod Robust Russet: 910 times the legal limit of acrylamide
Kettle Chips (lightly salted): 505 times

Kettle Chips (honey dijon): 495 times

Beware: Baked Chips May Be WORSE than Fried!

If you think you can avoid the health risks of potato chips by choosing baked varieties, which are typically advertised as being “healthier,” think again. Remember that acrylamide is formed not only when foods are fried or broiled, but also when they are baked. And according to U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) data on acrylamide levels in foods, baked chips may contain more than three timesthe level of acrylamide as regular chips!

Interestingly, the same trend holds true for other foods, too, which suggests that baking processed potatoes at high temperature may be one of the worst ways to cook them. For instance, according to the FDA’s data, Ore Ida Golden Fries contained 107 ppb of acrylamide in the regular fried version and 1,098 when baked. So remember, ALL potato chips contain acrylamide, regardless of whether they are natural or not; baked or fried. Likewise, they will ALL influence your insulin levels in a very negative way.

Acrylamide is Not the Only Danger

Acrylamide is not the only dangerous genotoxic compound formed when food is heated to high temperatures.

A three-year long EU project, known as Heat-Generated Food Toxicants (HEATOX), whose findings were published at the end of 2007, found there are more than 800 heat-induced compounds, of which 52 are potential carcinogens. In addition to their finding that acrylamide does pose a public health threat, the HEATOX scientists also discovered that you’re far less likely to ingest dangerous levels of the toxin when you eat home-cooked foods compared to industrially or restaurant-prepared foods.

Additionally, the HEATOX findings also suggest that although there are ways to decrease exposure to acrylamide, it cannot be eliminated completely. According to their calculations, successful application of all presently known methods would reduce the acrylamide intake by 40 percent at the most—which makes me wonder whether chip manufacturers have really succeeded at this point in reducing acrylamide levels to within legal limits… There’s no updated data as of yet, so there’s no telling whether they’ve been able to comply with the 2005 settlement.

For more in-depth information about acrylamide, I recommend reading the online report Heat-generated Food Toxicants, Identification, Characterization and Risk Minimization. In general however, just remember that cooking food at high temperatures is ill advised. A few of the most well-known toxins created in high-temperature cooking include:

Heterocyclic Amines (HCAs): These form when meat is cooked at high temperatures, and they’re also linked to cancer. In terms of HCA, the worst part of the meat is the blackened section, which is why you should always avoid charring your meat, and never eat blackened sections.

Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs): When fat drips onto the heat source, causing excess smoke, and the smoke surrounds your food, it can transfer cancer-causing PAHs to the meat.

Advanced Glycation End Products (AGEs): When food is cooked at high temperatures (including when it is pasteurized or sterilized), it increases the formation of AGEs in your food. When you eat the food, it transfers the AGEs into your body. AGEs build up in your body over time leading to oxidative stress, inflammation and an increased risk of heart disease, diabetes and kidney disease.

The Search for a “Healthful” Chip Continues…

Like a modern-day search for the Holy Grail, chip manufacturers keep searching for methods to improve the image of their health-harming but profitable snacks. For example, by the end of 2011, about half of Pepsi’s Frito-Lay brand snacks will be reformulated with all-natural ingredients. The switch is part of PepsiCo’s master plan to tap into the healthy foods market share. The Wall Street Journal recently reported the company hopes to boost their nutrition business from $10 billion to $30 billion by 2020. The company will remove dietary hazards like monosodium glutamate (MSG), replacing it with natural seasonings, such as molasses and paprika.

Artificial colors will be replaced with beet juice, purple cabbage and carrots. All in all, about different 60 snacks are scheduled to get an all-natural makeover.

This is certainly a good example of how consumer demand can alter the direction of food manufacturers in a positive way.

The reformulated chips may end up being less bad for you than the original formulations. However, chips will never be truly healthful. All-natural chips may be the lesser of two evils, but if consumed regularly, they will still push your health in the wrong direction… There’s no getting away from the fact that modern plagues such as cancer, heart disease, obesity, and diabetes have a dietary component, and potato chips and French fries will always be a losing bet if you want to avoid becoming another disease statistic.

How to Avoid Heat-Induced Toxins in Your Diet

Ideally, you should consume foods that are raw or minimally processed to avoid these types of toxic byproducts—the more raw food, the better. My nutrition plan emphasizes the need for at least one-third of your foods to be consumed raw. Personally, I consume about 80 percent of my food raw, and I find it is one of the most important factors that help keep me healthy. It may take you awhile to switch over to a less processed diet, but throwing out the most obvious culprits would be a great start.

These would include: French fries and potato chips, All sodas (both regular and diet, as artificial sweeteners may be more problematic than fructose, Doughnuts

Healthy Eating Made Easy

Aside from creating potentially toxic byproducts, cooking and processing also depletes the food of valuable micronutrients, which is another reason for eating as much raw food as possible. This includes protein sources such as eggs. Raw whole eggs from organic, pastured chickens are an incredible source of high-quality nutrients that many are deficient in. Raw milk is another good example of a food that is beneficial in its raw state but becomes harmful after it is pasteurized. By opting for foods that will benefit your health, such as raw, preferably organic and/or locally-grown vegetables, organic grass-fed meats, healthy oils, raw dairy, nuts and seeds, you can change your health for the better. These are the foods that are truly natural, and quite easy to prepare once you get the hang of it.

For a step-by-step guide to make the transition to a healthier diet as simple and smooth as possible, simply follow the advice in my optimized nutrition plan.

Remember, eating fresh whole foods is the “secret” to getting healthier, losing weight and really enjoying your food. It’s unfortunate that so many are under the mistaken belief that it’s “next to impossible” to create a meal without processed foods. Bruce Weinstein and Mark Scarbrough tackle this issue head-on in their book Real Food Has Curves, which is a great starting point to “relearn” the basics of how to enjoy and prepare real food.

Once you get used to it, you’ll find you can whip up a healthful meal from scratch in the same amount of time it would have taken you to drive down the street to pick up fast food. The main difference will be greater satisfaction, both physically and mentally, and perhaps even financially, as processed foods typically end up being more expensive than cooking from scratch.

Modern Medicine by Itself is an Epidemic

War is Crime
by Bill Sardi

More than two-thousand years ago Hippocrates was the first physician to issue a word of caution about the over-use of medicines. Hippocrates invoked an oath to “first do no harm” before doctors reach for the latest nostrum.

In 1976 Austrian philosopher and Catholic priest Ivan Illich, in his book Medical Nemesis, launched what was then considered “the gravest health hazard we face today: our medical system.”

Illich was unforgiving. The first sentence in his text reads: “The medical establishment has become a major threat to health.” His second sentence: “The disabling impact of professional control over medicine has reached the proportions of an epidemic.” Readers needn’t have read another sentence but to obtain the details.

Illich went on to say: “The public has been alerted to the perplexity and uncertainty of the best among its hygienic caretakers…. the pioneers of yesterday’s so-called breakthroughs warn their patients against the dangers of the miracle cures they have only just invented.”

Illich didn’t suggest the public panic over this revelation but rather that public discussion ensue. Illich thought “the layman and not the physician has the potential perspective and effective power to stop the current iatrogenic (physician-caused) epidemic.”

Illich concluded that the misdirection of modern medicine “can be reversed only through a recovery of the will to self-care among the laity, and through the legal, political and institutional recognition of the right to care, which imposes limited upon the professional monopoly of physicians.”

That self-care revolution never happened. Ivan Illich’s urgent plea for the public to back away from “cut, burn and poison” medicine was not heeded. The practice of medicine has become more complex and more beyond the reach of the laity to understand it. Just run to the doctor for what ails you is the order of the day.

Confessions of a Medical Heretic

Then in 1979 came Dr. Robert S. Mendesohn’s memorable text: Confessions Of A Medical Heretic.

It took a lot for Dr. Mendelsohn to become a medical heretic. He says he failed to be suspicious of oxygen therapy for prematurely born infants even when 90% of all low birth-weight infants became partially or totally blind (in less advanced hospitals where oxygen therapy was not practiced, the incident of blindness among preemies was ~10%).

He dutifully prescribed Terramycin for respiratory infections which was said to produce no side effects until it was realized this antibiotic did little for this type of infection and left thousands of children with yellow-green teeth and tetracycline deposits in their bones.

Dr. Mendelsohn confessed to his belief in the irradiation of tonsils under the mistaken assumption doses of radiation used were harmless. A decade later thyroid tumors were cropping up among those irradiated patients.

Over time Dr. Mendelsohn became a full-blown medical heretic. He said: “Despite all the super technology and elite bedside manner that’s supposed to make you feel about as well cared for as an astronaut on the way to the moon, the greatest danger to your health is the doctor who practices modern medicine.”

Mendelsohn went on to boldly say “that more than ninety percent of modern medicine could disappear from the face of the earth – doctors, hospitals, drugs and equipment – and the effect on our health would be immediate and beneficial.”

How prophetic Dr. Mendelsohn was. His words are so descriptive of the present predicament.

“If you make the mistake of going to the doctor with a cold or the flu, he’s liable to give you antibiotics, which are not only powerless against colds and flu but which leave you more likely to come down with worse problems.”

“If your child is a little too peppy for his teacher to handle, your doctor may go too far and turn him into a drug dependent.”

“If you’re foolish enough to make that yearly visit for a routine examination… the doctor’s very presence could raise your blood pressure enough so that you won’t go home empty handed. Another life ‘saved’ by antihypertensive drugs. Another sex life down the drain, since more impotence is caused by drug therapy than by psychological problems.”

Dr. Mendelson launched a war against modern medicine and said “you can tell when you’re winning this war when you influence those closest to you.”

That war has been lost. Most people who embrace natural medicine and shun doctors are outcasts in their own families.

Other Books

Other books followed that cited the ongoing horrors of modern medicine:

1988: Medicine on Trial, by Charles B. Inlander.
1988: Worse Than The Disease, by Diana B. Dutton.
1992: Racketeering in Medicine, by James P. Carter, MD.
1993: Making Medicine, Making Money, by Donald Drake & Marian Uhlman.
1994: Bitter Medicine, by Jane Kassler, MD.
1994: Why I Left Orthodox Medicine, by Derrick Lonsdale, MD.
2007: Overtreated, by Shannon Brownlee.
2008: Overdosed America, John Abramson, MD.
2010: Overdiagnosed, H. Gilbert Welch, MD.

The result: only more caskets were being sold.

Does the Written Word Make an Impact Any Longer?

Does the written word change the course of humanity? Certainly the Bible has. Martin Luther’s 95 Theses did. But none of the texts cited above made even a dent in the “progress” of modern medicine’s assault against humanity.

A few years back someone cited these facts about book reading:

One-third of high school graduates never read another book for the rest of their lives.

58% of the US adult population never reads another book after high school. 42% of college graduates never read another book.

80% of US families did not buy or read a book last year.

70% of US adults have not been in a bookstore in the last five years.

The pervasiveness of electronic methods of communication and the dissemination of propaganda and distorted reality of television has changed the course of history itself.

For example: “Television news” said the Gulf of Tonkin happened (no, there was never any North Vietnam boat that shot at a US Navy ship), but off to war America went against a tiny nation the size of the State of Georgia and a population of just 16 million against a country of 200 million with advanced military weapons. Vietnam won.

The news media helped to fabricate the public’s perception of the assassination of John F. Kennedy. Investigators who dared to stray into what really went occurred on that November day in 1963 suddenly died.

And so too, American news media, whose boards of directors are often laced with executives of pharmaceutical and health insurance companies and hospital chains, continues to almost copy word-for-word press releases issued by the National Institutes of Health, Centers for Disease Control, Food & Drug Administration that serve as a front for the racketeering going on in medicine today.

For example, the 2009 flu epidemic was never an epidemic. It was all fabricated by the Centers for Disease Control to help sell flu vaccines.

Belittle the Competition

A secondary agenda is to use the news media to demean and belittle any competition posed by healthy diets or dietary supplements. Why promote a low-carbohydrate diet when the next prescription diet pill garners millions of advertising dollars for TV networks? A spate of recent news reports are now scaring Americans away from vitamin and herbal supplements at a time when millions of Americans suffer from conditions that are simply nutrient deficiencies. It is an orchestrated effort against self-care.

CODEX, a regulatory body assembled by the United Nations and the World Health Organization, has just voted to water down vitamin requirements in foods, thus ensuring a certain level of disease to treat.

We Need Diseases to Create Jobs

Government sees the medical industry as a source of jobs as the population ages. Why cure or prevent any chronic age-related diseases when a certain level of disease is needed to maintain jobs? Health care costs are not deemed to be an expense but rather an industry that contributes to the Gross Domestic Product. In reality, it is a $3 trillion drag on the economy that has not produced greater life expectancy (US life expectancy ranks 27th out of 34 countries deemed to be economic peers). Life expectancy in some US counties is no better than some third-world countries.

The masses have little choice because they have no money. An estimated 53% of American workers make no more than $30,000 a year and the growth in part-time jobs is soaring above full-time employment. A $30,000 annual salary may have been adequate in 1980 but due to inflation one would have to make $85,000 to have the same purchasing power today. The people have no money to make choices outside those served up by the health insurance/ physician/ Big Pharma/ hospital chain cabal. Fascist (industry-controlled) medicine prevails.

For now, it’s every man for himself.