Sei sulla pagina 1di 730

Eugenics & The Depopulation Agenda

The Illuminati's idea of Population Control falls into two broad categories:

1. Limiting the size of human societies and monitoring/controlling the movement of


individuals within that society, and

2. Intentionally reducing the bulk of the world's population through GENOCIDE via the
introduction of population slaughter, orchestrated conflicts, and lethal bioengineered
disease organisms introduced via vaccines and other means of external transmission.

Eugenics: Population "Control", New World Order Style


From: EducateYourself / ConspiracyArchve / GlobalistAgenda / Various

"Eugenics" is a term coined in the latter part of the 19th century by Englishmen Francis Galton to
describe the "science" of bettering human stock and the elimination of unwanted characteristics...
and individuals.

Galton proposed societal intervention for the furtherance of "racial quality," maintaining that "Jews are
specialized for a parasitical existence upon other nations" and that "except by sterilization I cannot yet see any way
of checking the produce of the unfit who are allowed their liberty and are below the reach of moral control."

Related: Engineering Evolution: The Alchemy of Eugenics


The Illuminati's idea of Population Control falls into two broad categories:

1. Limiting the size of human societies and monitoring / controlling the movement of individuals within that society, and

2. Intentionally reducing the bulk of the world's population through GENOCIDE via the introduction of population
slaughter, orchestrated conflicts, and lethal bioengineered disease organisms introduced via vaccines and other
means of external transmission.

Francis Galton

The very word eugenics is in disrepute in some quarters ... We must ask ourselves, what have we done wrong?

I think we have failed to take into account a trait which is almost universal and is very deep in human nature.

People simply are not willing to accept the idea that the genetic base on which their character was formed is
inferior and should not be repeated in the next generation.

We have asked whole groups of people to accept this idea and we have asked individuals to accept it. They have
constantly refused and we have all but killed the eugenic movement ... they won't accept the idea that they are in
general second rate. We must rely on other motivation. ... it is surely possible to build a system of voluntary
unconscious selection.

But the reasons advanced must be generally acceptable reasons. Let's stop telling anyone that they have a
generally inferior genetic quality, for they will never agree. Let's base our proposals on the desirability of having
children born in homes where they will get affectionate and responsible care, and perhaps our proposals will be
accepted.

- From Galton and Mid Century Eugenics by Frederick Osborn, Galton Lecture 1956, in Eugenics Review, vol. 48,
1, 1956
A survey of eugenics in action begins with isolated incidents such as the sterilization of the mentally ill by American health
officials in the late 1800's and the castration of children at the Pennsylvania Training School for Feebleminded Children in
1889. The movement quickly picked up momentum.

Formerly established as a study at University College in London in 1904, the first laboratory for the study of the subject was
constructed by Charles B. Davenport at Cold Springs Harbor on Long Island (which, perhaps significantly, was also the
location of the estates of both Dulles brothers, as well as the current headquarters of the Human Genome Organization for
DNA mapping).

The institute was funded in excess of $11 million by the Harrimans and Rockefellers.

Supported in America by the Eastern Establishment, eugenics was nurtured in the hotbeds of Round Table-influenced
philosophy, at Harvard, Columbia, and Cornell. The subject was popularized in Germany by Ernst Haeckel, who linked
romantic German nature mysticism and the unity of the Volk with clinical bio-policies later instituted by Hitler.

Haeckel believed that there was no unity among the species of mankind, since:

"The morphological differences between two generally recognized species - for example sheep and goats - are
much less important than those... between a Hottentot and a man of the Teutonic race."

In the Aryan race Haeckel saw a "symmetry of all parts, and that equal development, which we call the perfect
human beauty."

He also believed the "wooly-haired" peoples "incapable of true inner culture or of a higher mental development...
no wooly-haired nation has ever had an important history."

Haeckel felt the purpose of the nation state was to enforce selective breeding, praising the practices of the Spartans who
killed all but "perfectly healthy and strong children" and thus were "continually in excellent strength and vigor."
In 1906 a group of Haeckel's academic followers formed the influential Monist League, agitating for a German government
patterned along social Darwinian lines.

By 1907 in America, Indiana passed compulsory sterilization for the mentally ill and other "undesirables," while 475 males
received vasectomies at the Indiana State Reformatory.

In 1912 the First International Congress of Eugenics was held in London, including among its directors Winston Churchill,
Alexander Graham Bell, Charles Elliot (President emeritus of Harvard University), and David Starr Jordan (President of
Stanford University).

The National Conference on Race Betterment was convened in United States in 1914, while by 1917 fifteen American states
had eugenics laws on the books, almost all of them legalizing the sterilization of habitual criminals, epileptics, the insane, and
the retarded.

H.H. Laughlin, the Expert Eugenics Agent of the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Immigration and
Naturalization presented a Model Sterilization Law in 1922. This was to provide the basis for many state eugenics laws, as
well as for eugenics law in Nazi Germany.
In 1928 the American Eugenics Society sponsored a contest for essays on the caused of decline in Nordic fertility, while Dr.
Robie, at the Third International Congress of Eugenics, called for the sterilization of 14,000,000 Americans with low
intelligence scores.

[Sterilization could] be applied to an ever widening circle of social discards, beginning always with the criminal, the
diseased and the insane, and extending gradually to types which may be called weaklings rather than defectives,
and perhaps ultimately to worthless race types.

- The Passing of the Great Race by Madison Grant, co-founder American Eugenics Society

The Nazi Party in Germany passed in 1933 the "Law for the Prevention of Hereditary Diseases in Posterity," also known as
the "Sterilization Law," written by professor Ernst Rudin, one of the country's leading psychiatrists. "Heredity Health Courts"
were formed, and within three years two hundred and twenty-five thousand German "undesirables" had been sterilized.

Hitler's policies have been characterized as "a rather straightforward form of German social Darwinism." Far from being
original with him, his policies were expansions upon already-extant political and scientific culture.

By 1939 German policies had evolved to include euthanasia upon asylum inmates while eugenics concepts were
implemented to the fullest in Nazi concentration camps during World War II.

In 1942, U.S. psychiatrist Foster Kennedy recommended the killing of retarded children. During the three year period
between 1941-1943 over 42,000 people were sterilized in America.
After World War II the idea of "eugenics" was tainted in the public by its association with Nazism. The term was discarded
and a facelift was performed on its parent study psychiatry, which resulted in the establishment of the World Federation of
Mental Health (WFMH).

www.wfmh.com

Since then, this group has continued to support electroshock, lobotomization, mind control and other activities already
detailed, as well as employing within its ranks many German practitioners who had been happy to further Hitlerian goals
during the Second World War.

What this brief survey shows is something the popular press has chosen to ignore: eugenics programs were not the
inventions of mad Nazi scientists, but that the political climate of Germany allowed a full implementation of programs part and
parcel of international psychiatry and medicine. Eugenics, from its beginning, was encouraged and financed by the rich self-
styled "aristocrats" of the day.

Recent programs aimed at abortion and other methods of depopulation can be traced to essentially the
same Freemasonic / Round Table / Rothschild-spawned crowd; to the studies of the Club of Rome, the Trilateral
Commission, and to the CFR.

These groups influenced a change in U.S. policies specifically during 1966-67, when population control was adopted by the
State Department as a stated goal.

The recent world depopulation push retains the flavor of eugenics bio-policy of the first half of this century in the statements
of advocates such as the Eastern Establishment's Sergeant Shriver, speaking before the Congressional Select Committee
on Population in 1978:
"...this Committee's interest [is] in improving the quality of life and enhancing the biological product of this society;
rather than just controlling or limiting birds."

Jaffe and Dryfoos of the federally-funded Guttmacher Institute have stated that, "With the overall decline in fertility
in the United States, concern has shifted from numbers of births to insuring that those children being born have
fewer physical, social and economic handicaps."

It is odd that little mention of "the overall decline in fertility" finds its way into Rockefeller-subsidized literature of depopulation
activists. Nor was the fact that teenage pregnancy was at its lowest ebb in forty years brought up when federally mandated
family planning and sex education in schools was enacted in 1978.

Studies have shown that sex education classes increase early sexual experimentation while doing nothing to reduce
adolescent pregnancy. It has also been demonstrated that when such classes are discontinued, as in Utah in 1980, the
incidence of teenage pregnancy decreases.

Still, officials insist sex classes should extend from "kindergarten throughout a person's educational career."

Why? Originators and administrators of the programs candidly admit that their agenda includes depopulation and
eugenics.

Lester Kirkendall, a founder of the Sex Information and Education Council, wrote in 1965 that;

Sex education is... clearly tied in a socially significant way to family planning and population limitation and
policy..."

Dr. Jane Hodgson, at the National Abortion Federation conference in 1980, was even more forthright, calling for compulsory
abortion for pregnant teenagers.

The methods of sex education programs in public schools vary, but uniformly emphasize the huge expense and drawbacks
of having kids, providing summaries of methods of contraception, serialization, and abortion. Students are often taken on
tours of birth control clinics, where they meet the staff, fill out patients' forms, and are assured of the confidentiality of
services. Children are also recruited as depopulation activists with pitches informing them, as in widely-used text Meeting
Yourself Halfway:

The population problem is very serious and involves every country on this planet. What steps would you
encourage to help resolve the problem?

...volunteer to organize birth-control information centers throughout the country;

...join a pro-abortion lobbying group;

...encourage the limitation of two children per family and have the parents sterilized to prevent further births.

Much of the sex education literature portrays the nuclear family long a cohesive political and social glue among the
populace as obsolete and statistically insignificant, while the normalcy of homosexuality and bachelorism ("Playboyism") is
stressed.

Children are encouraged to report in detail on conditions at home, to report parental shortcomings, and to divulge
disagreements they have with their parents, opening the door to intervention by "social services."

Davis in Economic Development and Cultural Change says that an effective strategy in lowering the birth rate is to:
Lessen ... the identity of children with parents, or lessen... the likelihood that this identity will be satisfying,"

adding that certain trends that might bring population levels down are "very high divorce rates, homosexuality,
pornography and free sexual unions..."

Davis sees a positive note in "the child welfare services, which have increasingly tended to displace the father as a
necessary member of the family, and the health services which have increasingly flouted parental authority with
respect to contraception and abortion."

This "flouting of parental authority" is a familiar theme in sex education classes, which repeatedly emphasize the child's
independence from their parents and their ability to make decisions for themselves.

The message to children, provided by proponents of sex education without the courtesy of having the parents agree upon it,
is obvious; the world is awash in excess poor population, and something has to be done about it in a hurry, starting
at the nearest abortion clinic.

Educator John Taylor Gatto, voted New York's Top Teacher of 1991, further comments on the mechanisms:

Social machinery to suppress proliferation of systematic families... has two components:

One, a campaign aimed at family-formation before it commences, employing such tactics as encouragement of
personal greed (best enjoyed in bachelor style, of course), public pornographic celebrations of the body parts of
nubile young woman, effortless divorce, mass adoption, tolerance of sexual ambiguity, and many similar tactics.

The second component aims at producing pseudo-families: small households (whether biological or synthetic)
without any overriding loyalty to the common family cause.

Instead, these are associations of expedience wearing the costume of affection and concern, but always on the
lookout for a better deal...

During the childhood phase, parents in pseudo-families are made use of by the state to transmit certain values, to
maintain and discipline a new serf class composed of their own children, and to report radical cases of deviance to
medical, police and re-training authorities...

It is a system infused in many places with such black genius in understanding crowd control it is hard not to stand
in awe of its unseen architects.

Target populations for sterilization in the United States bear noting. According to Michael Garrity in Trilateralism, edited by
Holly Sklar, American Indian women are being sterilized unbeknownst to them or against their wishes in public health clinics
nationwide. Garrity also maintains, "Full blooded Indian woman are the special target of the doctors."

Ruthann Evannoff, in "Reproductive Rights and Occupational Health" in WIN, has said that;

Overall, at least 25 percent of the Native American women of childbearing age have been sterilized,
although the total population numbers less than one million. Recent reports estimate that the percentage sterilized
in one tribe alone, the Northern Cheyenne, is close to 80 percent."
The secret (now declassified) paper NSSM 200, "Implications of Worldwide Population Growth For U.S. Security and
Overseas Interests," also known as the Scowcroft Document (authored by the CFR's Brent Scowcroft), gives insight into U.S.
government plans for population reduction internationally, linking these plans to goals that have very little to do with
alleviating human suffering, and everything to do with the maximization of profit.

Prepared in 1974 for the National Security Council (and remember, this is a government document, although one not likely to
be offered for free in late night Public Service Announcements) NSSm 200 proposes means for the reduction of worldwide
population by "concentration on key [i.e. Third World] countries," with the stated goal of reduction of population growth rate
from an annual 2 percent growth to 1.7 percent.

While this might sound like an altruistic goal proposed by clear-sighted social stewards, intended to reduce suffering in
countries with marginal standards of living, the study makes it clear that government interest in depopulation has nothing to
do with concern for living standards in developing countries. It is because:

"The United States has become increasingly dependent on mineral imports from developing countries" and

"endemic famine, food riots, and breakdown of social order... are scarcely inducive to systematic exploration for
mineral deposits or the long-term investments necessary for their exploration."

Note that the breakdown of "social order" referred to consists of the populace revolting against their living conditions.
One of the conclusions of the study is that "mandatory [emphasis added] population control measures" may be
"appropriate."

Speaking of depopulation programs currently being implemented in the Third World, former Brazilian health minister Carlos
Santana said;

"The World Bank, through their reports of its Presidents, has always made its proselytizing for a rigid birth control
policy explicit,"

Santana reported that included in World Bank credit packages and investment in Third World countries is an implicit agenda
of depopulation, and questioned why Brazil was targeted for birth reduction, with approximately forty per cent of Brazilian
woman having been already sterilized.

What the depopulators omit saying is that in Brazil most of the depopulation programs are being directed toward the native
population, and that they are implementing an alternative program to the pistoleiros hired to attack small landowning families,
appropriating the land for the use of large cash-croppers and the international conglomerates that are stripping the country
bare.

Depopulation programs run worldwide are directed and funded by major international money interests, including McGeorge
Bundy of the CFR, the architect of nuclear Mutual Assured Destruction policy; Warren E. Buffet, the second wealthiest man
in the United States; and, ubiquitous when it comes to eugenics funding, the Rockefellers.
Planned Parenthood Federation of America and International Planned Parenthood Federation are Buffett-funded and run a
huge abortion and sterilization network worldwide, with one subsidiary, the Brazilian Society for Family Welfare, having over
2,500 outlets in that country.

Bill Gates, Monsanto, and Eugenics: How one of the World's Wealthiest Men is
Actively Promoting a Corporate Takeover of Global Agriculture
February 20 2012 | NaturalNews
After it was exposed that the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the philanthropic brainchild
of Microsoft founder Bill Gates, purchased 500,000 shares in Monsanto back in 2010 valued at more than
$23 million, it became abundantly clear that this so-called benevolent charity is up to something other than
eradicating disease and feeding the world's poor. It turns out that the Gates family legacy has long been
one of trying to dominate and control the world's systems, including in the areas of technology, medicine,
and now agriculture.

The Gates Foundation, aka the tax-exempt Gates Family Trust, is currently in the process of spending billions of
dollars in the name of humanitarianism to establish a global food monopoly dominated by genetically-modified (GM)
crops and seeds.

And based on the Gates family's history of involvement in world affairs, it appears that one of its main goals besides
simply establishing corporate control of the world's food supply is to reduce the world's population by a significant
amount in the process.

William H. Gates Sr., former head of eugenics group Planned Parenthood

Bill Gates' father, William H. Gates Sr., has long been involved with the eugenics group Planned Parenthood, a
rebranded organization birthed out of the American Eugenics Society.
Gates Sr

In a 2003 interview with PBS' Bill Moyers, Bill Gates admitted that his father used to be the head of Planned
Parenthood, which was founded on the concept that most human beings are just "reckless breeders" and "human
weeds" in need of culling.

Gates also admitted during the interview that his family's involvement in reproductive issues throughout the years
has been extensive, referencing his own prior adherence to the beliefs of eugenicist Thomas Robert Malthus, who
believed that populations of the world need to be controlled through reproductive restrictions.

Though Gates claims he now holds a different view, it appears as though his foundation's initiatives are just a
modified Malthusian approach that much more discreetly reduces populations through vaccines and GMOs.

Gates Foundation has invested heavily in converting Asian, African agricultural systems to
GMOs

William Gates Sr.'s association with Planned Parenthood and continued influence in the realm of "population and
reproductive health" is significant because Gates Sr. is co-chair of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. This long-
time eugenicist "guides the vision and strategic direction" of the Gates Foundation, which is currently heavily
focused on forcing GMOs on Africa via its financing of the Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA).
The Gates Foundation has admittedly given at least $264.5 million in grant commitments to AGRA, and also
reportedly hired Dr. Robert Horsch, a former Monsanto executive for 25 years who developed Roundup, to head up
AGRA back in 2006. According to a report published in La Via Campesina back in 2010, 70 percent of AGRA's
grantees in Kenya work directly with Monsanto, and nearly 80 percent of the Gates Foundation funding is devoted
to biotechnology.

The same report explains that the Gates Foundation pledged $880 million in April 2010 to create the Global
Agriculture and Food Security Program (GAFSP), which is a heavy promoter of GMOs. GAFSP, of course, was
responsible for providing $35 million in "aid" to earthquake-shattered Haiti to be used for implementing GMO
agricultural systems and technologies.

Back in 2003, the Gates Foundation invested $25 million in "GM (genetically modified) research to develop vitamin
and protein-enriched seeds for the world's poor," a move that many international charities and farmers groups
vehemently opposed. And in 2008, the Gates Foundation awarded $26.8 million to Cornell University to research
GM wheat, which is the next major food crop in the crosshairs of Monsanto's GM food crop pipeline.

If you control agriculture, you control the populations of the world

The Gates Foundation's ties with Monsanto and corporate agriculture in general speak volumes about its real
agenda, which is to create a monopolistic system of world control in every area of human life. Vaccines,
pharmaceuticals, GMOs, reproductive control, weather manipulation, global warming - these and many other points
of entry are the means by which the Gates Foundation is making great strides to control the world by pretending to
help improve and save it.

Rather than promote real food sovereignty and address the underlying political and economic issues that breed
poverty, Gates and Co. has instead embraced the promotion of corporately-owned and controlled agriculture and
medicine paradigms that will only further enslave the world's most impoverished. It is abundantly evident that GMOs
have ravished already-impoverished people groups by destroying their native agricultural systems, as has been
seen in India.

Some may say Gates' endeavors are all about the money, while others may say they are about power and control.
Perhaps it is a combination of both, where Gates is still in the business of promoting his own commercial
investments, which includes buying shares in Monsanto while simultaneously investing in programs to
promote Monsanto.

Whatever the case may be, there is simply no denying that Gates now has a direct interest in
seeing Monsanto succeed in spreading GMOs around the world. And since Gates is openly facilitating Monsanto's
growth into new markets through his "humanitarian" efforts, it is clear that the Gates family is in bed with Monsanto.

"The World Bank, through their reports of its Presidents, has always made its proselytizing for a rigid birth
control policy explicit,"

"Although Bill Gates might try to say that the Foundation is not linked to his business, all it proves is the
opposite:

Most of their donations end up favoring the commercial investments of the tycoon, not really "donating"
anything, but instead of paying taxes to state coffers, he invests his profits in where it is favorable to him
economically, including propaganda from their supposed good intentions,"

- wrote Silvia Ribeiro in the Mexican news source La Jornada back in 2010.

"On the contrary, their 'donations' finance projects as destructive as geoengineering or replacement of
natural community medicines for high-tech patented medicines in the poorest areas of the world ...

Gates is also engaged in trying to destroy rural farming worldwide, mainly through the 'Alliance for a Green
Revolution in Africa' (AGRA).

It works as a Trojan horse to deprive poor African farmers of their traditional seeds, replacing them
with the seeds of their companies first, finally by genetically modified (GM)."

While, at first glance depopulation programs may seem like a good idea to promote the reduction of mouths-to-feed
worldwide, what they ignore are the root causes of overpopulation. High birth rates are the direct result of poor living
standards of he areas, and in countries where malnutrition has been reduced and the incidence of child-death lowered, birth
rates have also lessened.

The Third World (in particular) is being forcefully relieved of natural resources and exploited for cheap labor, and is
in fact no doubt seen by elite landowners and major corporations as only maintaining maximum profitability as long
as it is kept in abject poverty.

"The strategy of underdevelopment" is the term used by agriculture economist Harry Cleaver. Rather than offering the people
in rich countries such as Brazil, in actuality one of the richest countries in the world, an equitable portion of profits made
through the use of their resources, they are manipulated (when not killed outright) and kept at the razor edge between
starvation and profitability.

Depopulation organizations propagandize that we are experiencing a crisis of epic proportions; that the world is reaching the
point where it can no longer support the number of people living on it. In many instances population may in fact be
economically beneficial, and tending to a long-term increase of arable land and per capita (rather than per corporation)
income.

"No woman shall have the legal right to bear a child without a permit for parenthood."
- Margaret Sanger (founder of Planned Parenthood) in her proposed The American Baby Code, intended to
become law.

Also noted is a current usage of approximately three-tenths of one percent of the planet's surface for human habitation, an
amount sustainable with no limit to growth on sight.

United Nations and U.S. Department of Agriculture statistics show that world food production has increased more rapidly
than population growth in recent years, while Colin Clark, former director of the Agriculture Economic Institute of Oxford
University has stated that farmers could currently support seven times the current population of the Earth, or twenty-one
times the current population at Japanese standards of food consumption.

Roger Revelle, former director of the Harvard Center for Population Studies estimates that current agricultural resources
could provide an adequate diet for eight times the current populace, i.e. forty billion individuals, and has estimated that Africa
is capable of feeding ten times its current population. Revelle quotes Dr. David Hopper, another agricultural expert:

"The world's food problem does not arise from any physical limitation on potential output or any danger of unduly
stressing the environment. The limitations on abundance are to be found in social and political structures of nations
and in the economic relations among them. The unexploited global food resources are there, between Cancer and
Capricorn. The successful husbandry of that resource depends on the will and actions of men."

Hopper pronounces "world fascism" very politely.


Francis Moore Lappe of the Institute for Food and Development Policy maintains:

"If the cause of hunger is neither scarcity of food, nor scarcity of land, we've come to see that it's a scarcity of
democracy. That may sound rather contrived, because in the West we tend to think of democracy as a political
concept.

But democracy is really a principle of accountability; in other words, those making the decisions must be
accountable to those who are affected by them.

Once we understand hunger as a scarcity of democracy, what we are saying is that from the village level to the
level of international commerce, fewer and fewer people are making decisions, and more and more anti-
democratic structures are being entrenched. This is the cause of hunger."

And, it should be repeated, the cause of overpopulation.

The Illuminati's idea of Population Control falls into two broad categories:
1. Limiting the size of human societies and monitoring/controlling the movement of individuals within that society, and

2. Intentionally reducing the bulk of the world's population through Genocide via the introduction of population slaughter,
orchestrated conflicts, and lethal bioengineered disease organisms introduced via vaccines and other means of
external transmission.

The Illuminati's current plan to reduce the world's population was set into motion at a 1957 symposium on future world
development. The astonishing 'conclusion' of this seemingly benign symposium was that over-population and excessive
exploitation of the environment would result in the self- destruction of the earth by the year 2,000 or shortly thereafter

(Note:Illuminti front organizations for New World Order propaganda, like Cornell University, continue to "illuminate" us, to
this very day, with this over-population point of view).

President Eisenhower secretly commissioned a group of scholars, known as The JASON Society to review the conclusions
of the '57 symposium. The members of the JASON Society are in fact part of a secretive Illuminati group known as the Order
of the Quest. The same individuals who formed the JASON Society were also key members on the Council on Foreign
Relations known as the Wise Men. (1)

Not surprisingly, the Jason Society agreed with the symposium's conclusions and drafted three proposals for Eisenhower's
consideration. The three proposals were labeled Alternative 1, Alternative 2, and Alternative 3. Eisenhower rejected
Atlernative 1 because it involved the use of nuclear weapons. However, Eisenhower did approve the implementation
of Alternative 2 and Alternative 3 (as did the Soviet Union).

Alternative 2

In order to preserve the 'best' of humanity when the supposed 'self-destruction' of the earth takes place around the year
2,000, the JASON Society proposed that a vast network of underground cities be built in order to secure living quarters for
the chosen Illuminati elite, high level cooperative politicians, and selected military elements.

Underground cities are also co-habitated by extraterrestrial alien groups that the secret government has made treaties with
for technology exchange and human-alien hybrid breeding programs. The idea of the earth 'self destructing' around the turn
of the century due to overpopulation was perhaps an early cover story for the justification of the underground cities.

In the 1950's and 60's, the American public was led to believe that the contiuance of government, in the event of worldwide
nuclear war, was a logical reason for undeground facilities, but we now know that the entire Soviet / American cold war and
MAD (Mutual Assured Destruction) scenario was an orchestrated Illuminati deception to bleed both Russian and
American citizens of their wealth in order to finance black budget operations, secret technology developments, underground
city construction, genetic engineering projects, time & space travel research, and anti-gravity, flying saucer spacecraft
development.
Another possible reason may have to do with information that the Illuminati obtained from aliens in 1947, following the
Roswell crash. The aliens may have warned the secret government of the inbound trajectory of a huge planet named Nibiru,
causing earthquakes, volcanoes, tidal waves, and earth movements of cataclysmic and Bibrical proportions.

The American public, kept in the dark about these inderground construction plans, would have to fend for themselves on the
surface when the Bad Times came (it's also possible that the inbound Nibiru / cataclysm scenario is (was) a disinformation
ploy ).

Based on 1989 information, it was claimed that there were at least 75 underground cities in existence below the soil of
America interconnected by high speed, frictionless trains called Maglev trains (Magnetic Levitation). The former Atomic
Energy Commission had also constructed 22 seperate underground cities for their own use.
In 1995, Phil Schneider said that there were 129 underground cities and in May of 2001, Stewart Swerdlow, former mind
controlled "Montauk Boy" , claimed that there now exists 133 underground cities in North America. Al Bielek also claims that
there are many hundreds of underground cities and bases built worldwide]

Alternative 3

Due to the access to certain alien technologies-including interplanetary space flights-which became available to the
American government as a result of the Greada treaty signed by President Eisenhower and aliens in 1954, the JASON
Society proposed that operational bases should be set up on the Moon and Mars - which would alsoprovide a safe
sanctuary for the highest of the elites when the 'self-destruction' of the earth was going to take place a little after the turn of
the new century.

Bases on the Moon and Mars have indeed been built and have been in operation since the late1950's.

All three Alternatives included recommendations for population "control". They included:

1. Birth control
2. Sterilization, and
3. The introduction of deadly microbes to reduce of otherwise slow the growth of the earth's population.

Bioengineered Diseases

AIDS, Ebola, Gulf War Illness (GWI), and many other "new" diseases were intentionally bioengineered in
laboratoriesthat are mostly found in the United States and include the Army's secretive facilities at Ft. Detrick Maryland

Drs. Nancy and Garth Nicholson have done a great deal of research and investigation into the cause and treatment of Gulf
War Illness, since they and their daughter (who was a helicopter flight nurse in the 1991 Gulf War) ALL came down with
GWI. In 1996, the Nichols published a paper which states their deep suspicions that GWI is due to bioengineered
pathogens and that a hidden population control agenda appears to be in place.
Some bioengineered pathogens were designed to target certain ethnic groups for elimination. These groups likely
include blacks, hispanics, Black Africans, Native Americans, and homosexuals. The preferred Iluminati method to
introduce disease is via vaccinations.

Dr. Len Horowitz firmly established in his 1995 book, Emerging Viruses, that the HIV virus which causes AIDS was
introduced and spread throughout the majority of black populations in Africa via the World Health Organization (WHO)
during their mandatory smallpox vaccine campaigns of 1976-1980.
The pathogens which produced Gulf War Illness were introduced to a limited number of Gulf War troops via "special"
vaccinations (not recorded on the troop's official vaccination records) for Anthrax and other supposed dangers posed by
Saddam Hussein.

It was a CIA test run to see how many Gulf troops would succumb to the disease and how quickly they might die off.
The results have been somewhat disappointing for the CIA / Illuminati planners. They thought their new little bugs would wipe
out a lot more people, a lot faster than it has.

Eventually, the US military has to be eliminated because they are seen as a threat by Illuminati planners when they kick in
their plans to dissolve the United States and incorporate the former United States into the New, 10 Region States
of America which will include Canada and Mexico.

Retired Army flight nurse Joyce Riley presented damning Department of Defense classified "Secret"documentation to an
audience at the Granada Forum in Tarzana, CA on July 1, 1999 which supported the contention that the
military intentionally innoculated Gulf War troops with the pathogens that eventually caused Gulf War Illness as part of
an insideous program directed by the CIA called MK Ultra.
Domestically, the strategy is to make the public believe that bio attacks by foreign terrorists (like Osama bin Laden-who
seems to be the government's latest incarnation of Hitler; he having replaced former title holders like Kadaffi, Hussein, and
Milosevic for the honor) is inevitable and when it happens the government will say that they have tried to warn us all along.

A similar tactic is being used by the government to accilimate the public to the notion that these new, bugs are showing
up everywhere-birds in New York, wild deer and antelope in national parks, etc. and that they are being spread by
international travel, etc. (same set of lies they used when AIDS started showing up in 1983-85).

Starting in December of 1997, this administration of Illuminati puppets have been seeding stories into print and electronic
outlets about the "growing fear" of Anthrax attack and the need to "protect" the troops. When it comes to the public,
however, former CIA director John Deutch told CNN in July of '99 that the government wasn't prepared for that task, so
further preparations need to be taken. I guess we're suppose to believe that the military's staging of mock battles in US
cities is also part of the government's "protection" plans for us against those nasty foreign terrorists.

9-11 Attack of America

The staged and planned attacks of the World Trade Center and Pentagon buildings were deliberate acts orchestrated by
Illuminati planners using naive arab dupes (the "terrorists") to pull off a suicide mission in which they were allowed, guided,
and facilitated by hidden intelligence agents and operatives.
They are using this orchestrated ruse to stampede the public into accepting Big Brother control and ID programs, along with
the sweeping away of constitutional guarantees and liberties under the guise of anti-terrorists legislation.

The dessimination of biowarfare agents in America to reduce population needed a convenient cover and the "terrorists"
scenario provided it. I'm simply astonished at the gullibility of so many Americans in accepting this poorly covered up
orchestration.

The growing number of web sites and well written aritlces that are exposing the details of this deception-from the planted
bombs in the WTC towers to the stand down of military air defence forces while the hyjacked planes were enroute-makes it
abundantly clear that the attacks of Sept 11, 2001 were a ruse, a charade, a set up that even a child should recognize.

33 Disturbing But True Facts About Eugenics

What do the SAT, the Kellogg Company, Woodrow Wilson and Adolf Hitler all have in common? They are all connected by
the practice of eugenics in the first half of the 20th century.

From 1904 until shortly after the close of WWII, the United States aggressively engaged in a scientific quest to create a
master race. This radical new science, dubbed eugenics by Sir Francis Galton in 1883, called for selective breeding
between those deemed fit for existence (i.e. generally those of Nordic descent), with sterilization, marriage prohibition and
even euthanasia aimed at those deemed unfit.

Those least fit to carry on the race are increasing most rapidly... Funds that should be used to raise the standard
of our civilization are diverted to maintenance of those who should never have been born.

- From The Pivot of Civilization quoted in Margaret Sanger (founder of Planned Parenthood), by Elsah Droghin.
Based on an extreme view of social Darwinism, eugenics permeated the scientific and academic elite, securing funding
through such notable organizations as the Carnegie Institute and the Rockefeller Foundation. The Supreme Court eventually
came to sanction eugenic practices, and 27 U.S. states enacted incredibly racist laws enforcing its doctrines.

Overseeing these laws and heinous practices presided a virtual army of scientists and doctors steeped in the desire to
eradicate anyone seen as a threat to society. These included immigrants flooding in from Europe, Native Americans,
epileptics, alcoholics, Jews, Mexicans, Blacks, small-time crooks, the mentally ill, and even those unfortunate enough to be
caught unemployed and homeless at the wrong time.

Related: The Depopulation Bomb

Spreading from Long Island to across the whole United States, from the Liberty Bell to the Golden Gate Bridge, eugenics
wormed its way overseas to England and the whole of Europe before it ultimately landed, like a kind of lamp containing an
evil genie, into the lap of Adolf Hitler.

Here are 33 disturbing but true facts about eugenics, a pseudoscientific belief that began in the cradle of the land of liberty
and ended in the clutches of a genocidal regime:

1. Even with concentration camps, euthanasia campaigns and sterilization wards public knowledge in both
Germany and America, early eugenic founders looked on with approval as Nazi Germany enacted brutal racial campaigns
against its own citizens.
Joseph DeJarnette, superintendent of Virginias Western State Hospital even complained in 1934, Hitler is beating us at our
own game.

2. The term social Darwinism never came from Darwin himself. It was a term distilled around the notion that in the
struggle for survival, some humans were not only less worthy but were actually more or less supposed to die away. Merely
acting to help the weak and needy within society became itself an unnatural act. This thinking helped propel the eugenic
movement forward during its embryonic stages at the start of the 20th century.

3. On July 15, 1911, the American Breeders Association, or ABA, an organization comprised of eugenic-minded
scientists and doctors, met in Manhattan to identify ten groups classified as socially unfit and deserving of
elimination. These included, in order of priority: the feebleminded, the pauper class, alcoholics, criminals of varying degrees
such as petty thieves and those imprisoned for not paying fines, epileptics, the insane, the constitutionally weak class, those
genetically predisposed to specific diseases, the deformed, and finally, the deaf, blind and mute.

4. In 1907 Indiana became the first state to legalize forced sterilization on its mentally impaired patients and
poorhouse residents. Known as Sharps Bill (named after a Dr. Harry Clay Sharp who was already sterilizing and castrating
men and women in Indianas prisons well before it became legal) it passed the Indiana House 59 in favor, 22 opposed, and
passed in the Senate with 28 ayes and 16 nays.

5. New Jersey passed its own sterilization legislation in 1911. It allowed for the creation of a three-man board that
would determine whether procreation is inadvisable for the reams of prisoners and children living in poor houses and other
charitable organizations.
The governor who signed the bill into law was Woodrow Wilson, who was elected president of the United States the following
year.

6. The term moron comes from the eugenic movement. Coined by Henry Goddard, an early eugenic founder, it
comes from the Greek word moros, meaning stupid and foolish. We use the term lightly these days as a kind of vague,
almost teasing insult. For Goddard and the eugenic community, a moron was anyone deemed unfit for life and indeed a
target to be eliminated.

7. The IQ Test also emerged from eugenics. In 1916, using an intelligence test created by a Dr. Binet of Stanford
University, eugenic activist Lewis Terman devised a simple way to score an individual.
By dividing mental age by chronological age and multiplying by 100, Terman created what he nicknamed IQ score, or
intelligence quotient.

8. In 1917, as America entered WWI, eugenic psychologists devised an intelligence test for the armed forces
known as the Army Alpha Test. Carl Brigham adapted the test as part of a college entrance exam. The College Board
later asked Brigham to create another qualifying test for other colleges in the country. Eventually, Brighams efforts produced
the Scholastic Aptitude Test, or the SAT. [It is also known that in New Zealand that entry testing for the Police is designed to
weed out any applicant over a certain IQ level - they do not want independent thinkers in the Police - only those who will
blindly follow orders]

9. Dr. John Harvey Kellogg of Battle Creek, Michigan served as a member of the state board of health and
operated a sanitarium known for its unorthodox food regimens. He developed for his patients a natural product made of
wheat flakes.

In 1898 his brother, Will Kellogg, invented the corn flake and began selling it commercially through a company that would
ultimately become the cereal behemoth the Kellogg Company. In the same year as the founding of the company, Dr. Kellogg
founded the Race Betterment Foundation to help stop the propagation of defectives.

10. President Theodore Roosevelt long held eugenic views. After he left office, he wrote Charles Davenport, the man
considered the father of the American eugenic movement, and said:

Society has no business to permit degenerates to reproduce their kind. Some day, we will realize that the prime
duty, the inescapable duty, of the good citizen of the right type, is to leave his or her blood behind him in the world;
and that we have no business to permit the perpetuation of citizens of the wrong type."
Such a statement certainly takes the old snarky phrase white mans burden a step further.

11. Virginia may be for lovers these days, but shortly after WWI, the state was well known for sweeping its
social outcasts into homes for the feebleminded and epileptic. While those two terms meant virtually the same thing in
practice, they also equaled another kind of diagnosis: shiftlessness. Shiftlessness, a term that could easily be applied from
unruly boys to legitimate mental patients, generally meant worthless or unattached in life.

12. On May 2, 1927, with only one justice dissenting, the Supreme Court officially sanctioned eugenic sterilization
in the case of Buck v. Bell. Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, a man revered throughout the nation as a voice of reason and
justice, wrote the opinion for the majority that could have sprung from the Third Reich:

It is better for all the world, if instead of waiting to execute degenerate offspring for crime, or to let them starve for
their imbecility, society can prevent those who are manifestly unfit from continuing their kind. The principle that
sustains compulsory vaccination is broad enough to cover cutting the Fallopian tubes.

Three generations of imbeciles are enough.

13. The Beach Boys sang about the girls in California. The state is known for its pristine beaches and laid back
populace. But the Golden State also is famous for something else: leading all states in the U.S. in eugenic
sterilization. From 1907 to July of 1925, at least 4,636 sterilizations were performed. All mental patients and those deemed
feebleminded were allowed to have their procreative powers removed. The threat of asexualization even included criminals
found guilty of any crime three times, at the discretion of a consulting physician.

14. Although not wholly related to the eugenic movement, the birth control campaign as orchestrated by Margaret
Sanger emerged from the conjoined spirits of womens rights and population control.

However, before the term birth control reached the American consciousness, it had many prior variations that included:
voluntary parenthood, voluntary motherhood, the new motherhood, constructive generation, the new generation, Neo-
Malthusianism, Family Limitation, Conscious Generation, population control, race control, and finally, birth rate control. It was
only when someone suggested dropping the word rate from the previous term that birth control became the name of
Sangers growing movement.

Is it any surprise that a campaign designed to eliminate the weakest within the population aborted so many undesirable
names before finally choosing its correct moniker?
15. In its quest to find and identify anyone of mixed blood and separate them from those of pure, Nordic stock, the
state of Virginia enacted the Racial Integrity Act on March 8, 1924. Falsely registering your race in the subsequent
consensus and questionnaires was considered a felony and punishable by a year in prison.

16. Following the Racial Integrity Act, Virginias registrar encountered a problem. Some citizens of Indian descent
were registering as white but actually had African ancestry in their genes as well. To remedy this intolerable snafu,
the registrar devised used a highly scientific and accurate method to differentiate a person of Indian or African
stock: a hair comb.

Walter Plecker, health officer of Elizabeth City County, wrote of the comb solution, If it passes through the hair of an
applicant he is an Indian. If not, he is a negro. If those Guinness Ad guys had been around when Plecker devised his comb
strategy, they would have surely declared Brilliant!

17. America was not alone in the growing field of eugenics. Britain passed its own legislation against the unfit in
the form of the Mental Deficiency Act of April, 1914. The Act defined four classes of undesirables: idiots, imbeciles, the
feebleminded and moral defectives. If you had the misfortune of having a doctor identify you as any one of those, you could
then be carted off to a special colony, sanitarium, or hospital designed to house your kind.

18. Switzerland passed its own eugenically spirited law in 1928 that targeted a poorly defined class of unfit.
While concrete numbers have never been ascertained concerning Switzerlands eugenic conduct, some estimates say that
90% of sterilization procedures were performed on women.

19. Norway had its own forced sterilization legislation on the books for 43 years. After passing a law legalizing it in
1934, it wasnt until 1977 that the law was amended to make sterilization voluntary. In the interim, 41,000 operations we
performed, with almost 75% done on women.

20. But even if you managed to escape Britain, Germany, and Norway, you still had Sweden to worry about. Known
throughout the world for its mostly blonde-haired, blue-eyed populace, Sweden passed its own sterilization law in 1934 as
well.
Similar to laws in other countries at the time, the new law targeted pretty much anyone classified as having a mental illness
or having mental defects in any way. It even targeted those who had an anti-social way of life. Again, as with Norway, the
largest victim group was women, who suffered forced sterilization at the rates of 63% to 90% over their male counterparts. In
all, over 63,000 government-approved sterilizations were performed on the unfit individuals who had the misfortune of living
within Swedens borders.

21. George Bernard Shaw, the renowned Irish playwright who has the distinction of being the only person to
receive both a Nobel Prize for Literature and an Oscar, was also a eugenic extremist. Speaking at Londons Eugenic
Education Society in 1910, the scribe had this to say regarding the use of lethal gas chambers on the unfit:

"A part of eugenics politics would finally land us in an extensive use of the lethal chamber. A great many people
would have to be put out of existence, simply because it wastes other peoples time to look after them."

22. However, while lethal gas chambers werent employed on the weak until the rise of Nazi Germany, there were
many instances of euthanasia performed by doctors of eugenic persuasion. On November 12, 1915, a woman named
Anna Bollinger gave birth to a baby with severe intestinal abnormalities at German-American Hospital in Chicago. But rather
than fighting to keep the baby alive, the hospital chief of staff, Dr. Harry Haiselden, decided it was not fundamentally worth
saving. A friend of the mothers pleaded for him to save the babys life, but Dr. Haiselden only laughed and said, Im afraid it
might get well. The baby died shortly thereafter. A health commission investigation later questioned the doctor for his
decision, but he was ultimately exonerated of any wrongdoing and allowed to continue practicing.

23. Haiselden persisted in his eugenic euthanasia over the years, and justified it by declaring that public
institutions used to house the unfit in effect acted as lethal chambers anyway. He secretly visited the Illinois Institution
for the Feebleminded where he discovered that windows were left open to allow the flies to cover the patients, and the
inmates were given milk from a herd of cattle infected with tuberculosis.

24. Eugenics has its own movie. In 1917, Hollywood produced The Black Stork, a story about a mismatched couple who
are counseled by a doctor against having children. However, the couple become pregnant anyway and the woman gives
birth to a defective child that she allows to die.

The deceased babys spirit then ascends into the arms of


Jesus Christ. Hailing it as a eugenic love story in publicity
ads, the eugenic movement had its own propaganda film at
last, and it promoted The Black Stork throughout the
nation.

Its catch-phrase: Kill Defectives, Save the Nation and See


The Black Stork.

Not quite Save the Cheerleader, Save the World, but


close.

Dr. Haiselden, then famous in eugenics circles for his


baby-killing ways in Chicago, played himself as the
doctor in the film.

25. Even during WWI the American eugenic movement strengthened its ties with Germany. The book credited with
planting eugenics throughout Germany was Madison Grants The Passing of the Great Race. Published in 1916, Grants
tome asserted that the white Nordic race was destined to rule the planet. It inspired thousands of German scientists, allowing
them to mask their already racist feelings under the guise of objective science. It also galvanized the countrys future dictator,
Adolf Hitler.

26. Not content to produce books and films extolling the virtues of eugenics, followers of the new pseudoscience
in Germany introduced a series of race cards in 1927. Coming ten in a package just like baseball cards today, the cards
profiled every racial variation from the Tamils of India to the Baskirs of the Ural Mountains.

27. Eugenic sterilizations began literally the moment Hitler assumed power in Germany. Starting on January 1,
1934, the Reich Interior Ministrys eugenic expert declared that children as young as ten and men over the age of fifty were
all able targets for the scalpel. Quickly, this mass program became known as Hitlerschnitte, or Hitlers cut. In the first year
alone, at least 56,000 Germans were sterilized, or almost 1 out of 1200 citizens.

28. While Germany savaged Poland in the beginning of the Second World War, the Reich also committed
euthanasia against elderly German citizens to conserve its valuable wartime resources. Starting in 1940, between
50,000 and 100,000 Germans were taken from old age homes, mental institutions, and other places and exterminated in gas
chambers.

29. Dr. Edwin Katzen-Ellenbogen presided over the extermination practices at the concentration camp
Buchenwald. He was also a founding member of the Eugenics Research Association and chief eugenicist of New Jersey
under then-governor Woodrow Wilson.

30. The rare brain disease Hallervorden-Spatz Syndrome is named after two Nazi doctors who discovered the
condition in 1922.

31. For years one of eugenics greatest crusaders, Harry Hamilton Laughlin, fought to sterilize the feebleminded
and people diagnosed with epilepsy. He was well known for believing that people with epilepsy did not belong in society.
Laughlin was also known among colleagues for his occasional seizures. It turned out the doctor kept a tightly held secret for
most of his life: Harry Laughlin, the attacker of the unfit and eugenic co-founder, himself had epilepsy.

32. Even though they have not been used for years, eugenic sterilization laws are still officially on the books in
North Carolina. Chapter 35, Article 7 permits the state to perform them for moral as well as medical improvement.

33. Despite post-war Germany denouncing its Nazi past, investigators discovered that some universities still
house body parts taken from prisoners used in eugenic experiments and later killed in concentration camps. The
University of Viennas Institute of Neurobiology still houses four hundred Holocaust victims brains. In addition, tissue
samples and skeletons have also been found in Tubingen and Heidelberg.

The 'Oligarchs', the 'Nobility and Aristocrats', Liken Themselves as Superior in Every Respect

Blue blood is considered pure or free from inferior lines. The very origin of the word eugenics itself stems from the Greek
words good and generation or wellborn.

[In-breeding is a great idea, which explains why the "elite" are all retarded, delusional and incompetent.]
Charles Darwin, an illuminati tool and concocter of the Darwinism farces

Francis Galton coined it himself, to denote controlled breeding for the purification of the human race. As mentioned, Galton
was a cousin of Darwins; they shared the same grandparent: Erasmus Darwin (1731-1802), a Freemason and one of the
founding members of the elite-scientific Lunar Society.

Erasmus was the author of Temple of Nature and Zonomia, or, the Organic Laws of Life, in which the basic outline of the
theory of evolution can be discerned.

It is important to remember that evolutionary theory was originally couched in white race / Anglo-Saxon terms and gained
acceptance through a western literate audience.

The dominance and intelligence of the white race over the whole circumference of the earth, to them, was the single greatest
sociological proof by which western man had demonstrated to the world its superiority and god-given right to rule.

Combined with Malthusian population control, the power elite utilize evolution and eugenics as a weapon against the
undesirables: the morons, imbeciles and lesser races.
Eugenics became a well-funded industry. As you know, seed money for research was heavily supplied by the Rockefeller
Foundation, the Ford Foundation, prominent Skull and Bones families such as the Harrimans and Kelloggs, and most of the
eastern WASP (White, Anglo-Saxon Protestant) establishment.

In England, those who would advance the study of eugenics were family names such as Darwin, Huxley, Dodge, Osborn,
Keynes and Downs.

Charles Darwins own son, Major Leonard Darwin (1850-1943), was the Eugenics Society President from 1911-1928, an
Honorary President from 1928-43, and an attendee of the 1921 Second International Congress of Eugenics in New York.

In turn, Major Leonard Darwins niece, Ruth Darwin, was on the 1931 Brock Committee, which came to the conclusion that
compulsory sterilization was the right course of action for undesirables.

Nothing has changed today. Frederick Osborn - founding member of the American Eugenics Society and co-founder with
John D. Rockefeller III of the Population Council in 1953 - famously said:

"Eugenic goals are most likely to be attained under a name other than eugenics.

- The Future of Human Heredity, 1968, p. 104

Thus, the names of the various organizations have dispensed with the eugenic moniker in favor of more palatable titles.

The American Eugenics Society (1926-1973) changed its name to the Society for the Study of Social Biology (1973-
present).
The American Eugenics Society had also published the journals Eugenical News (1939-53) and Eugenics Quarterly (1953-
68); afterwards, the publication was conveniently renamed as Social Biology (1969-95).

Ostensible family planning organizations, such as the


Rockefeller-funded Population Council, still operate in much
the same manner as originally intended though, the
undesirables are now represented by the over-populated
poor in Africa, Asia, and Latin America.

Birth control, abortion, and sterilization are still the tools of


the eugenical trade. Its used strategically to reduce
population, along with war, disease and famine.

The "Elite's" Belief System / Values

Related: Eugenics Quotes: From lofty ideals to centralized population control and mass death

The elite believe they are a more advanced form of human. In order to justify their belief they grafted Darwin's theories of
biological evolution onto social organization to create Social Darwinism.

Over the centuries they have referred to the public variously as cattle, sheep and "its" (as Plato did in The Republic) and
Social Darwinism is merely the modern expression of this attitude and their elitist belief system. Under this belief system only
those that have proven their worth over many generations of dominance and control are worthy of entrance into high elite
circles.

Eugenics / Selective Breeding

The elite throughout history in support of belief in their own superiority over the common person have practiced interbreeding
among themselves. They do this to preserve intelligence, love of power and above all the ruthlessness and willingness to kill
as required.
Related: The Actual Structure And Bloodline Families Comprising The Leadership Of The Illuminati

They still practice this today. Also, along similar lines they believe in and practice of eugenics on the public to control the
population and to make them more docile, controlled, stupid and compliant. Having been exposed by Hitler's atrocities the
elite went underground - for example by renaming Eugenics Quarterly to Social Biology in 1969.

Psychopathy Among Elites

This is not a belief but more of a sobering fact that must be considered when evaluating the values and actions of the elite. It
has been well established, as shown by Andrew Lobaczewski in his book "Political Ponerology", that the elite and those
that are most capable of rising to the top of a system based on money are psychopathic. This includes leaders in all centers
of power including business and politics. As psychopaths they have no conscience, lust for power and control and are literally
capable of anything.
Related: Understanding The Thinking Of The Globalist Cabal: An Analysis Of Conscience, Morality, Ethics And
Psychopathy

The Ends Justify the Means

Because the elite truly believe that the ends justifies the means and the fact that they are for the most part psychopathic,
they have absolutely no problem lying to the public. This is also known as the ethics of war where the only morally
abhorrant act is losing.

Mystery Religions / Occult

As hard as it is to imagine, the elite practice a form of pagan religion based on the mystery school religions of Sumer and
Babylon under which they seek to achieve godhood. Equally important is the use of religion to control the masses and to that
end they create exoteric (visible) religions for the masses while embedding in those religions esoteric (hidden) meanings that
only those that and enlighted, or illumined as they call it, are able to understand.

Consequently, the ancient symbols used thousands of years ago can still be seen in religion, business and the media today.

Collectivism as Social Control

After experimenting for hundreds of years with different forms of social organization, the elite have concluded that
collectivism is the best form of social control. For this reason, and according to the United Nations, totalitarian China is
considered the model state for the future.

Related: Obama Calls For Collectivised New World Order

Overpopulation

The elite have long viewed a rising population as a threat to their dominance. They realized that eventually a large number of
people will inevitably overthrow and remove them from power. They are particularly concerned with the middle class whose
intelligence and capacity to organize makes them the biggest threat.
Consequently, the elite plan to destroy the middle class and make all the of public equally poor and thus incapable of
rebelling. As written on the Georgia Guidestones, they want a global population of just 500 million. This means 6+ billion
people must die over the coming century.

Multi-generational Planning

The evolution of society is not something the elite can leave to chance since society could evolve in thousands of different
and unpredictable ways. If they were ever to allow this they might lose their control and dominance over us. In order to
continue their position as the dominant minority, they plan decades and even centuries in advance.

Revelation of the Method

The elite's do tell us through their books and publications, movies and news releases what they are doing - this is called
Revelation of the Method. If you are too stupid to recognize it for what it is that is your problem from their point of view. It is a
form of ritual mocking of the victim.

The Prestige (2006) A Film About Revelation of the Method:


Further Reading & Research

The Roots of Racism and Abortion: An Exploration of Eugenics

THE MEN BEHIND HITLER: A German warning to the world

THE SCIENTIFIC BACKGROUND OF THE NAZI RACE PURIFICATION PROGRAM, US & German Eugenics, Ethnic
Cleansing, Genocide, Population Control

Population Control, Nazis, and the U.N: ROCKEFELLER AND MASS MURDER

The Population Control Agenda

Human Genome: Hi-Tech Eugenics

British Psychiatry: From Eugenics to Assassination

The Negro Project: Margaret Sanger's Eugenic Plan for Black Americans

Robbing the Cradle: The Rockefellers' Support of Planned Parenthood

Funding the Eugenics Movement

Population 'Control', New World Order Style

THE NEW AMERICAN: Issues in Focus - Population Control

Malthus Was Wrong; So Were William Vogt and Paul Ehrlich [October 22, 2001]

In China Bush Must Extricate U.S. From Crimes Against Humanity: Eugenics and Forced Abortion [Feb. 22, 2002]

Major class action suit filed against Planned Parenthood [April 2, 2002]

The Remastered Race [April 11, 2002]

PRI Weekly News Briefing Archive

Outspoken Vaccine Skeptic, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. To Head Federal Vaccine


Commission
January 13 2017 | From: TheFreeThoughtProject / Various

President-elect Donald Trump has undoubtedly ruffled feathers in staffing his administration, but
the choice of Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. - known for his skepticism on the safety of vaccines - to chair
a commission tasked with studying the efficacy of and issues concerning vaccinations, will
undoubtedly raise eyebrows from both sides of the issue.
Kennedy, according to USA Today, will chair the presidential commission to make sure we have scientific integrity
in the vaccine process for efficacy and safety effects, the environmental activist and politician told reporters after
meeting with Trump on Tuesday.

Related: Trump Asks Critic of Vaccines to Lead Vaccine Safety Panel

Kennedy noted the incoming president requested the meeting, as he has some doubts about the current vaccine
policies and he has questions about it. His opinion doesnt matter, but the science does matter and we ought to be
reading the science and we ought to be debating the science.

While advocates of the heavy vaccination schedule might find the choice of Kennedy - who has been castigated as an anti-
vaxxer - quite startling, he insisted Trump remains very pro-vaccine, as am I, and only seeks to ensure theyre as safe as
they can possibly be.
Related: Robert F. Kennedy Jr On Vaccines: Big Pharma Has Captured The Scientific, Regulatory, Law-Making
Processes

Corporate media hastily attacked the appointment of a skeptic to such an important commission; however, Kennedy insisted
in the press conference public health and safety remains the topic of concern.

President-elect Trump has some doubts about the current vaccine policies and he has questions about
it, Kennedy said, as reported by NBC News. He says his opinion doesnt matter but the science does matter,
and we ought to be reading the science and we ought to be debating the science.

Vaccination has frequently been a topic of bitter public dispute over the last few years, as parents of autistic children have
pegged the ingredient thimerosal - which, in part, contains notoriously toxic mercury - as the culprit for the affliction.

President-elect Trump has, himself, spoken out about blindly supporting a medical practice without thorough and long-term
investigation, as he stated in 2015 during a Republican primary debate;

I am totally in favor of vaccines. But I want smaller doses over a longer period of time. Same exact amount, but
you take this little beautiful baby, and you pump - I mean, it looks just like its meant for a horse, not for a child, and
weve had so many instances, people that work for me. [in which] a child, a beautiful child went to have the
vaccine, and came back and a week later had a tremendous fever, got very, very sick, now is autistic.

Countless anecdotal cases of the onset of autism coincidentally following a certain round of vaccinations have left a growing
population of parents excoriating the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for failing to diligently investigate effects of
contents of certain vaccines.
Related: Vaccine efficacy: Junk science at its worst

For its part, the CDC scoffs at such comparisons and has painted the anti-vaxx movement - and anyone daring to question
vaccination - under the broad brush of hysterics.

Research does not show any link between thimerosal in vaccines and autism, a neurodevelopmental
disorder, the CDCs website advises - and the conglomerate agency has ostensibly debunked the autism link
numerous times.

A vocal movement of parents whose childrens autism abruptly took hold after immunization, however, find grave fault with
the CDCs failure to at least address their concerns.

Autism Speaks, an advocacy organization for individuals with autism, which aligns with the CDC, told NBC News in a
statement, Over the last two decades, extensive research has asked whether there is any link between childhood
vaccinations and autism. The results of this research are clear: Vaccines do not cause autism.

Kennedy stated about vaccines at a documentary screening on the subject in 2015;

They get the shot, that night they have a fever of a hundred and three, they go to sleep, and three months
later their brain is gone. This is a holocaust, what this is doing to our country.

Coming under intense backlash for the capricious use of that term, Kennedy later apologized, stating,
I employed the term during an impromptu speech as I struggled to find an expression to convey the catastrophic tragedy of
autism which has now destroyed the lives of over 20 million children and shattered their families.

Indeed, with the growing pandemic of autism - and the increased number of immunizations deemed necessary through
childhood - it would seem the appointment of someone who finds safety and study relevant would be crucial to the interest
of public health.

Related: The Shaken Baby Martyr: Top brain doctor who was struck off for controversial claims speaks out on how
jailed parents could be innocent

Kennedy is not, as the mainstream portrays, an unabashed anti-vaxxer - rather, he would like further study to prove or
disprove either side in the issue.

After all, as the new chair of the presidential commission to study vaccines, Kennedy said in 2015;

They can put anything they want in that vaccine and they have no accountability for it.

Perhaps more imperative than sounding alarms over skepticism, it would behoove the public to give Kennedys commission
a chance to either prove vaccinations safe and viable - or deleterious to the children theyre supposed to immunize from
disease.

Related Articles:

A New Billboard Reminds Parents Vaccines Can Kill Their Baby

Vaccine court confirms healthy 13 year-old boy was made tetraplegic by the chicken pox vaccine

Bill Gates quietly funding effort to develop thousands of new vaccines that conveniently might become
pandemics

SIRVA: A Risk With Every Vaccine

Cleveland clinic doctor goes full anti-vaccine

10-month-old suddenly suffers 14 seizures a day after receiving new meningitis vaccine, video spreads
awareness
Head Holistic MD at Cleveland Clinic Threatened By Hospital For Writing Vaccine Danger Piece

Pharmaceutical Company Misleads Consumers, Caught In Painkiller Scam + Painkiller


Drugs More Fatal Than Heroin Or Cocaine
January 10 2017 | From: NaturalSociety / AustralianNationalReview

Drug giant Reckitt Benckiser was ordered by the Australian Federal Court to pull its so-called
targeted ibuprofen products off the shelves after the company admitted that these were identical
to the standard tablets.

Marketed under the name Nurofen, all products contained 200mg of ibuprofen, whether they were labelled as
standard, migraine, period pain, or back pain.

Related: DA Deliberately Conceals Fraudulent Studies Regarding Drugs

The specific products are about double the price of standard Nurofen. Fortunately, the court ordered that the specific
tablets be removed from Australian shops within 3 months, with a subsequent hearing planned to decide on a possible
fine. This ruling followed legal action by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission in a rare victory
over the pharmaceutical industry.

The Nurofen line is also sold in the UK and New Zealand, but the British governments MHRA said there was no concern, as
it is not involved in the control over pricing. The company has also been ordered to pay the ACCCs legal costs, explain
itself to the public, and implement a consumer protection compliance program.

5 Alternative Pain Solutions

But what are some natural alternatives to ibuprofen?

In one clinical trial involving 150 female students, different groups were prescribed either 250mg of ginger powder, 250g of
mefenamic acid, or 400mg of ibuprofen, 4 times daily for the first 3 days of their menstrual period. Check out other health
benefits of ginger here.
The severity of their pain decreased in all groups, and there was no difference between the three groups in severity, pain
relief, or satisfaction with the treatment. Ginger is an anti-inflammatory as well as a circulatory stimulant, and has not been
associated with the side effects caused by ibuprofen.

Another study involving 204 patients with osteoarthritis compared the benefits of arnica (one of 5 natural pain
relievers we mentioned before) and ibuprofen, both as gel preparations, prescribed for 21 days.

In terms of pain and hand function, there were no differences between the two treatment groups, but there were slightly less
adverse effects reported by the arnica group, at 5 patients instead of 6.

Additionally, fish oil can be an alternative to pharmaceutical painkillers. Over three months, 250 patients with osteoarthritis
took either 1200mg (78% of participants) or 2400mg (22%) of the omega-3 fatty acids found in fish (EPA and DHA).

Fifty-nine percent of all patients stopped taking their prescription NSAID drugs for pain, while 60% said their overall pain
improved, and 60% again said their joint pain improved.
Eighty percent said they were satisfied with their improvement and 88% stated they would keep taking the fish oil. No
significant side effects were reported from the fish oil either.

While still illegal in most areas, cannabis is an increasingly popular natural alternative to pain of all levels of severity. In fact,
standardized extracts of cannabinoids such as Sativex have been approved in some regions for pain conditions including
neuropathic pain from multiple sclerosis and intractable cancer pain.

THC, which is responsible for the high of cannabis, has many anti-inflammatory mechanisms of action which contribute to
pain relief, including PGE-2 inhibition and decreased platelet aggregation.

It has 20x the anti-inflammatory potency of aspirin, and twice that of the steroid hydrocortisone, but without the horrible,
disfiguring side effects. CBD, which is antipsychotic and gives no high, relieves pain by the same mechanism as capsaicin,
as well as being anti-inflammatory by inhibiting TNF-alpha and by its antioxidant abilities.
Other cannabinoids, such as CBG and CBC, have their own painkilling properties.

With all of these alternatives and others, why support a dishonest corporation and aid them in paying for their well-deserved
legal costs?

Related: Big Pharma Dangerous Drugs and Drug-Injured Patients - Confessions of a "Medical Heretic"

Painkiller Drugs More Fatal Than Heroin Or Cocaine

A research conducted by a reputed pathologist has revealed that a prescription painkiller is taking
more lives than Class A narcotics like Heroin and Cocaine.
Prof Jack Crane of Ireland has said that the Tramadol painkiller is killing more people than any other drug and will
therefore be included in the Class A category.

Related: Non-Addictive Natural Pain Killer Kratom Relieves Chronic Pain, Depression - Leave Rx Drugs Behind

The UK has Tramadol listed in Class C drugs, which are considered the least harmful. If Tramadol is taken with alcohol or
other drugs, it can have life threatening effects. Tramadol is prescribed for medium to severe pain for patients.

Crane emphasises on the risks of Tramadol and suggests that it needs strict regulation. While many people in the UK are
illegally trying to acquire the drug, Crane feels that if Governments and law enforcement do not actively try to regulate illegal
Tramadol sales, it could cost many lives.

The report by Crane is revealed in opportune time with cannabis activists trying to legalise medicinal cannabis use and
growth under license.
A West Briton report revealed that Tramadol had claimed 20 lives in the UK in 2014.

In the USA, many patients have opioid addictions. A recent report by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health
Administrations revealed that a large number of Americans abused prescription painkillers.

1 out of 20 Americans above the age of 12 used psychotherapy drugs at some point. Many people blame Obamacare
policies for such drug and opium usage. The laws of Obamacare reimburse the fees of the patients depending on the
satisfaction the patient had during his or her stay at the hospital.

It is a rather tough choice for doctors and hospitals where on the one hand your reimbursement is on the line and on the
other hand you are fuelling psychotherapeutic drug addiction among your patients.

The Top 10 Most Outrageous Science Hoaxes Of 2016


January 2 2017 | From: NaturalNews

Science hoaxes were running rampant throughout 2016, pushed by the fakestream media (CNN,
WashPost, NYT, etc.) alongside complicit government organizations working in collusion with
dishonest corporations steeped in scientific fraud (Monsanto, Big Pharma, etc.).
2016 saw more science hoaxes than a typical year, with the media placing special emphasis on the Zika virus terror
campaign (rooted in total scientific hucksterism) and more climate change propaganda (all based on fraudulently
altered data).

Related: Seeding Doubt: How Self-Appointed Guardians Of Sound Science Tip The Scales Toward Industry

In every case, those pushing the science frauds claimed to have a divine monopoly on science while declaring all opposing
views to be unscientific.

In this way, much of the science in todays corrupt society has really become nothing more than a cult of scientism,
complete with faith in the correctness of socially-reinforced beliefs while exercising instant rejection of evidence that
contradicts the fairy tale narratives of the science elite.

Sadly, science in 2016 functioned more like a priesthood of dogmatists fervently demanding the obedient worship of
their unassailable assumptions. On every issue that matters, data were thrown out the window and replaced with fraud.
Related: The Cult Of 'Scientism' Explained: How Scientific Claims Behind Cancer, Vaccines, Psychiatric Drugs And
GMOs Are Nothing More Than Corporate-Funded Science Fraud

To drive home the fraud, the scientifically illiterate lamestream media catapulted the propaganda to new heights, even
while remaining completely oblivious to the laughably false science they were promoting.

Here, I offer a summary of the most outrageous science hoaxes of 2016, along with a few links where you can explore more.
By the way, the video on the Cicret bracelet invention that claims to turn your arm into a mobile device touchscreen is
also a complete fraudulent hoax that has fooled millions of people, and I cover that in detail at the bottom of this article.

My primary message for 2017 is to stop believing in all the fake science being pushed by media, governments, academia
and corporate liars.

Science Hoax #1: Scientific Political Polling

Through the entire year, we were all subjected to an endless onslaught of so-called scientific political polls that almost
universally showed Hillary Clinton would win the election.

All the scientific polls were wrong, it turns out. (And yes, I called all this well before the election, on the record.)

What we now know is that the word scientific was slapped onto these fraudulent polls to try to give them an aura of
credibility when, in reality, they were all fabricated or distorted to give Hillary Clinton the appearance of certain victory.
But guess what? All the experts were wrong. But how is that possible if all these polls were scientific as claimed? Are the
pollsters now telling us that science is broken?

Or maybe, just maybe, they were making s##t up all along and there wasnt any real science behind the
scientific claim in the first place.

Science Hoax #2: The Zika Virus Terror Campaign

2016 saw the rolling out of an elaborate media-fronted Zika terror campaign designed to scare the entire country into
ridiculously believing that mosquito bites would cause millions of women in America to give birth to babies with shrunken
heads.

Yeah, I know, it sounds like something a Batman villain would threaten to unleash in Gotham City. Pay me one million
dollars or all your babies will be born with shrunken heads! Mwuah hah hah!
Related: Whos Behind The Zika Virus Outbreak & Fearmongering?

But, alas, the American sheeple bought the medical science hoax hook, line and sinker. Belief in the Zika virus microcephaly
hoax was so deeply embedded in the psyche of the nation that even when the Washington Post published a story admitting
there was no link after all, the vast majority of so-called scientists and doctors still believe the hoax!

So, for the record, Ill say it again in the hopes of educating all the scientifically illiterate scientists who still dont understand
actual facts: The original wave of shrunken heads in Brazil was caused by a larvacide chemical that was dumped into
the water supply, not by the Zika virus alone.

The Zika apocalypse predicted by all the doctors, scientists and TV talking heads simply did not materialize. And when
evidence contradicts your theory, you have to start questioning your theory. Otherwise, you arent a scientist. Youre just a
petty fool.

Science Hoax #3: The Flint Michigan Lead Poisoning Cover-Up

In order to poison a million black children with brain-damaging lead, the U.S. EPA masterminded a large-scale science fraud
that deliberately altered heavy metals testing results for the Flint, Michigan water supply.

Eventually, a few of the science scapegoats were charged with felony crimes for engaging in a conspiracy to alter water
quality test data, but no one from the EPA was ever charged or prosecuted for their role in the scheme. (This also proves, by
the way, that conspiracies are quite real and very much alive in our society right now.)
The result of all this was the mass poisoning of mostly African-American children with a toxic heavy metal thats well known
to damage cognitive function and impede learning.What a great way to raise more democrats!

Its all part of the new science of keeping the sheeple dumbed down so they will keep voting for corrupt criminals
like Hillary Clinton.

Instead of let them eat cake, the new progressive Jon Podesta version is, Let them drink lead!

Science Hoax #4: The Banning of GMO Labeling Nationwide by Scientifically Illiterate
Republicans

In the name of science, Republican lawmakers passed the so-called DARK Act to outlaw honest food labeling of
genetically engineered foods.

Apparently, Republicans believe that knowledge is a dangerous thing in the hands of consumers, therefore preventing
people from knowing what theyre eating is the best solution.
Related: Monsanto Promoting Worldwide Infertility? + Academic GMO Shills Exposed: Fraud & Collusion With
Monsanto

This was all accomplished via an unholy alliance among biotech corporate giants (like Monsanto) and right-leaning
lawmakers, most of whom have never met a toxic chemical they didnt absolutely love.

Notably, while Democrats are passing local laws that criminalize Big Gulp sodas, Republicans are blocking labeling laws as
a way to say, If you dont SEE the poison on the label, it doesnt actually count!

Keeping consumers in the dark is now the official science policy of the federal government.

Hows that for transparency?

Science Hoax #5: Climate Change Data Fraud

Democrats have their own science fraud, of course, and theres no better example than global warming / climate change.

An analysis of climate data reveals that 100% of U.S. warming has been faked by altering temperature data.
Related: Climate Scare Declared Officially Over- Error In Model Calculations Discovered

To the great frustration of celebritards like Matt Damon, the data dont show any warming at all unless you cook the
numbers first.

This means climate change science is actually more like climate change alchemy, which isnt science at all. Its more like
Tarot cards mixed with voodoo blended with AlGoratotalitaritopian idiocy.

Note to intelligent people: If the world were really warming, they wouldnt have to alter the temperature data, would
they?

Science Hoax #6: Abortion Organ Harvesting for Scientific Research

According to leftists, chopping up living human babies who have just been forcibly birthed in order to harvest their organs
and brains isnt unethical at all. Nope, its a tremendous advancement for scientific research, you see.

Organ harvesting isnt just limited to places like Communist China and North Korea: The practice is alive and well in
America, too. But in the U.S., it takes on a genocidal milestone because most abortions are carried out on black babies
yep, the very same black babies that were also intentionally poisoned by the EPA in Flint, Michigan (see above).
Hmmm there seems to be a pattern in all this, but I cant quite put my finger on it but it definitely seems to have
something to do with killing as many black babies as possible while labeling it all science.

Its noteworthy to remember that Adolf Hitlers eugenics programs were also conducted under the umbrella of
science.

It seems not that much has changed in almost 80 years except that instead of Jews being exterminated by the millions,
its now black babies being exterminated by the millions while democrats demand an open borders human blitzkrieg to
replace them all with socialist-leaning illegal aliens who are uninformed enough to vote for leftists.

Science Hoax #7: The California Vaccine Mandate

Another large-scale science hoax that also happens to place a disproportionate burden on African-American babies is the
California medical police state vaccine mandate pushed by Californias own Mercury Joker Dr. Richard Pan.

After receiving bribes from vaccine makers, the medical child molesting California state senator Richard Pan took part in a
media-backed medical terrorism campaign against Californias citizens, attempting to scare everyone into falsely
believing that the best way to protect the health of children is to inject them with mercury (instead of, I dont know,
maybe feeding them nutritious foods and vitamin D).
Related: Doctors Who Discovered Cancer Enzymes In Vaccines All Found Murdered

The entire vaccine mandate was founded on blatantly fraudulent quack science claims fronted by the child-murdering
vaccine industry, which continues to absurdly insist that vaccines pose zero risk to children (i.e. claiming they do not harm a
single childever). The claim is, of course, rooted in sheer delusion. But thats also what passes for legislation in
California.

We can only hope Californias #Calexit effort succeeds soon, so we can build a wall around California and stop the
contagious epidemic of lunacy from spreading Eastward.

Science Hoax #8: Janet Yellens Libtardtopia Economics Science

No summary of science quackery would be complete without bringing in the subject of economics. Yes, it qualifies as a
science at least if you ask the economists. (If you ask non-economists, it qualifies mostly as voodoo.)

Nevertheless, according to Janet Yellen and the decrepit wizards of collapse who are currently steering the global debt
Titanic directly into an array of large shards of icebergs, the best way to keep a global economy in balance is to create
endless new money until the whole thing explodes, at which point the system collapses to equilibrium where
everybody starves roughly the same amount (i.e. Venezuela).

To demonstrate this brilliant hypothesis, Yellen and her crotchety academic cohorts have been busy pumping trillions of fiat
currency dollars into the pockets of their bankster pals while raising interest rates to accelerate the debt avalanche
apocalypse timetable.
Ideally, they hope to trigger the whole thing to come crashing down sometime during Trumps first term. Then, theyll all
express total shock and dismay while pleading to the press that we should all Bring back Obama because he was a
monetary genius! (Or perhaps a radical Muslim sleeper cell working for the communists to subvert America, but thats
another hilarious satire article altogether.)

As a cherry on top, Obama also doubled the national debt in just eight years, all while handing Iran a path to nuclear
weapons, dissing Israel, subverting American culture, gutting the U.S. military and secretly telling his Russian counterparts
he would drastically reduce U.S. nuclear capabilities.

Yes indeed, the dream team of Obama, Clinton and Yellen has pulled off what Americas worst enemies could not: The
near-complete financial paralysis of the U.S. economy all while claiming Everything is awesome!

Thank God all the pensions across the country are fully funded, huh? Or that would be a real disaster.

Science Hoax #9: Transgenderism and the Lunatic Liberal Theory of Spontaneous Genetic
Transmutation

2016 also saw many gullible people being convinced to believe that a biological man can instantly transform himself into a
biological woman by declaring himself to be a woman.

At least one journalist even claimed that a transgendered man could become pregnant after declaring himself to be a
woman. Yes, science education in America has utterly collapsed at this point, replaced with liberal P.C. insanity and
delusional college lesson plans rooted in feelings rather than physical reality.

Across most of todays gender-confused college-educated youth, belief in the laws of genetic expression have been
replaced by belief that a persons sex is a choice. Its no longer permutations, phenotypes and genotypes its now
metrosexual, generation snowflake, pu##ified blathering idiocy with a diploma, safe space cry rooms and $100K in student
debt.
Sorry to burst their bubble of stupid, but sex classification isnt a personal choice. A simple genetic test shows you either
have XY chromosomes, XX chromosomes, or the far more rare extra-X-or-Y chromosome defect which typically leads to
serious physical and mental defects (including infertility).

Somebody please direct gender confused college snowflakes to the National Human Genome Research Institutes fact sheet
page on chromosomes.

According to todays college snowflakes, the National Human Genome Research Institute is a purveyor of HATE because
their fact sheet page says all these mean things about chromosomal defects:

Inheriting too many or not enough copies of sex chromosomes can lead to serious problems. For example,
females who have extra copies of the X chromosome are usually taller than average and some have mental
retardation.

Males with more than one X chromosome have Klinefelter syndrome, which is a condition characterized by tall
stature and, often, impaired fertility. Another syndrome caused by imbalance in the number of sex chromosomes is
Turner syndrome. Women with Turner have one X chromosome only. They are very short, usually do not undergo
puberty and some may have kidney or heart problems.

Thus, there are only two sexes in the biology of all mammals: Male and female. And no, you dont get to change them up
just because you think its trendy to be a gender-confused metrosexual snowflake.

This doesnt mean you cant be gay, by the way. Gay men still realize theyre men. They just choose male partners
instead of female partners. On the spectrum of personal freedom, I say people should be able to partner with
whomever they want.

Gay or straight, its all a personal choice as far as Im concerned, because its none of my business and stop shoving
your sexual preferences in my face, all you militant gay mafia activists.

Just be gay and be done with it. The gay rights war is over, and you already won it. Stop being bullies and thinking
youre still oppressed victims.
Marry whomever you want, but just #STFU about it already. Obama already lit up the White House with rainbows, for Gods
sake.

But to say that yesterday you were a male, but today youre a female now thats just technically bonkers. Youre not really
a female. Youre a male impersonating a female and thats it. Bruce Jenner, take note: You are not a woman, no matter
how much you want to impersonate one.

The greatest insult in all this was when some fashion magazine voted Bruce Jenner Woman of the Year, instantly
declaring that this guy who impersonates a woman is a better woman than all the other women. Dudes with dongs
out-women the women?

And thats celebrated by the women? Yeah, its insane. And all these same progressive women also insist that pervs with
dongs should be able to invade womens restrooms, too, because thats embracing gender identity and inclusiveness
blabbity blah blah.

Get a grip, people. Check your drawers and briefly fondle your hardware. If its junk, youre a dude, and stop playing with it
already. If it isnt, youre a woman. If you have both, go ask a doctor to run a genetic test and find out if you have ovaries.

Science Hoax #10: Every Science Journalist Working for the Fakestream Media

This is more of a collection of hoaxes rather than a single hoax. It all centers around the hilarious fact that most science
journalists are scientifically illiterate morons who only think they understand science.

I remember reading a science column in a major U.S. publication that claimed cell phones could run on water. (Yeah, I
know. I tried that by dropping my cell phone into a glass of water, but it turned off all the power for some strange reason.
Maybe I need special water?)
There has also been a wave of hilariously stupid media coverage for this bracelet computing project called Cicret that
ridiculously claims to turn your arm into a touchscreen.

The entire video promoting this Cicret bracelet is a complete fraud. Racking up almost 25 million views on Youtube, the
video shown here is accomplished purely with special effects overlays. The bracelet does not exist and cannot exist as
depicted in the video for the simple reason that light cannot bend around the curvature of your arm.

Incredibly, countless journalists across the mainstream media fell for this total hoax, stupidly believing that a hi-res
touchscreen rendition can be projected onto your skin from a bracelet that barely sits just a few millimeters above your skin
in the first place.

Question for brain dead science journalists: Do you really believe light rays from the Cicret can bend around your wrist and
then magically bounce off skin that isnt in a direct line of sight with the bracelet projector?

Seriously, you have to be incredibly stupid (or scientifically illiterate) to think the Cicret bracelet, as depicted in the videos,
can actually function. But that sure didnt stop publications from all across the world pushing the hype and convincing their
readers that this cool tech was real.
Related: Western Media Credibility In Free Fall Collapse: Case In Point: UN Peace Council: The US Media Is Lying
To The American people. The War In Syria Is Not A Civil War, It's A Proxy Invasion By The United States

And yes, the younger people are on social media these days, the more gullible they are, too. So special effects viral videos
can be very successful at raising millions of dollars in Kickstarter funds for devices that cannot ever exist because they
violate the laws of physics.

Its a whole new kind of financial scam thats legal because it only extracts money from people who are too stupid enough to
believe the viral videos. In summary, Kickstarter viral videos are a tax on stupid progressives the same way that the lotto
is a tax on stupid conservatives.

And now that Ive thoroughly offended everyone, lets wrap all this up

2016 Was a Bad Year For the Credibility of Real Science Lets Hope 2017 is Better

In summary, 2016 saw the pushing of numerous science hoaxes by the fakestream media, governments, academic
institutions and corporate propaganda whores like Forbes.com. (Oh, and we cant leave out the actual whores running
SNOPES, who were exposed as prostitutes and fetish bloggers.)

So how do we rescue science in 2017? Its simple: We start using science to tell the truth instead of allowing
governments and corporations to use science to lie.

A few fundamental scientific truths Id like to see finally embraced in 2017 would include:

Yes, there is extraterrestrial intelligence in the universe.

Yes, there is (or was) microbial life on Mars.

Yes, human consciousness is non-material and not located in the physical brain.

Yes, vaccines cause autism.


Yes, flu shots still contain mercury.

Yes, there are many anti-cancer foods that can help prevent cancer.

Yes, transgenderism is a mental disorder, not a choice.

Yes, glyphosate causes cancer.

Yes, DEET is toxic to human neurology.

Yes, genetically engineered crops seeds are a genuine threat to the environment and the food supply.

Yes, water can retain non-physical properties that subtly alter its interactions with living systems.

No, carbon dioxide is not the enemy of mankind.

No, chemotherapy does not cure cancer. It often makes it worse.

No, harvesting organs from living human babies is not ethical science.

No, science journals are not unbiased, objective arbiters of truth.

No, scientific political polls are not reliable. They are bunk.

No, the experts are not as smart as they think they are. Mostly, theyre idiots who have attained high positions
of persistent idiocy in academia or government, and their job is to protect the idiocy for as long as possible,
making sure no one overthrows idiocy with intelligence.

Why Are Public Officials Protecting GMO And The Pesticides Industry? Digging Down
Into The Cesspool Of Corruption
December 29 2016 | From: GlobalResearch

It is based on a cesspool of corruption that is most probably responsible for more death and
disease than the combined efforts of the tobacco companies ever were. It is sheer criminality that
hides behind corporate public relations, media misrepresentations and the subversion of
respectable-sounding agencies which masquerade as public institutions.
The agrochemicals-agritech industry should not be regarded as some kind of faceless concept because that lets
individuals off the hook. It is run by identifiable individuals who sell health-and environment-damaging products,co-
opt scientists, control public institutions and ensure farmers are kept on a chemical treadmill.

Related: Bayer and Syngenta knew: Ag giants discovered in secret tests that pesticides severely harmed bees

From CEOs and scientists to public officials and media/PR spin doctors, specific individuals can be identified and at some
stage should be hauled into court for what amounts to crimes against humanity.

In her numerous documents, Dr Rosemary Mason has described the devastating effects of agrochemicals and has singled out
certain individuals who, in a different world, would probably be standing in the dock to answer for their roles they have played
in poisoning the environment and damaging public health.

Mason has supplied ample, strong evidence to highlight how agrochemicals are killing us and how public institutions and
governments collude with the industry to frame legislation and polices to ensure its business as usual.
However, individuals act within circumstances not of their choosing; capitalism corrupts and it is not the concern of the
managers of private corporations to look after the interests of the public at large. A CEOs obligation is to maximise profit,
capture markets and defeat the competition.

The naive hope by many is that corporate social responsibility and consumers perception of a company will oblige
corporations to act in a manner that in some way serves the wider public interest. The other hope is that public officials and
institutions will safeguard this interest by holding private interests to account.

But in the cold, cynical world of free market capitalism, an interlocking directorate of state-corporate interests have for a long
time ensured that state institutions in liberal democracies are shaped and manipulated to facilitate the interests of private
capital.
The free market only exists in the warped delusions of those who churn out clichs about its sanctity. We need look no
further than the billions of taxpayer dollars that prop up US agriculture and agribusiness profits, for example, or, more
generally, how the state facilitates taxpayer-funded corporate welfare across the board.

The bottom line is to maximise profit for private corporations and, in Monsantos case, by all means possible, including the
unflinching defence of the health- and environment-damaging (but massively profitable) product glyphosate. Through political
influence and co-option, policies are put in place on Monsantos behalf, and the public is expected to sit back and take the
poison.

Its for their own good! And the relentless message is that there is no alternative, when, in reality, there are genuine
alternatives to a pesticide-drenched food and agriculture that is both commercially and politically motivated.
Related: Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) and the Mentality of Propaganda Control

Within the cesspool created, corporations bank on their political influence, media hacks, bogus science, lobbyists and public
relations departments and firms to churn out the message that they are serving the public interest, while clearly acting against
it.

And this leads us back to Dr Rosemary Mason and her new open letter to the European Chemicals Agency. As with her many
other open letters to officialdom, Mason takes us on a journey by naming names and shedding light on how corporate power
works to encourage scientific fraud and subvert public watchdogs and policy-making institutions with the aim of getting toxic
agrochemicals, especially glyphosate, onto the market and ensuring they remain there.

She addresses the letter directly to European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) Executive Director Geert Dancet.

Key Points From Masons Open Letter

Readers are urged to consult Masons 5,000-word open letter (open-letter-to-the-european-chemical-agency-about-scientific-


fraud-and-ecocide), where they can find all the relevant links, charts and references to support the points below.

1. Scientific fraud and glyphosate. The German government has accused the German Rapporteur Member State Federal
Institute of Risk Assessment (BfR) and the European Food Safety Agency (EFSA) of scientific fraud for using Glyphosate
Task Force (GTF) statistics that for some considerable time claimed them to be BfRs own work.

Mason demands that the ECHA must act to ban glyphosate immediately and asserts that human health and the environment
are being totally destroyed by it as well as the hundreds of other chemicals that have been registered illegally.

Mason writes:

The current EU legislation was originally set up to protect the pesticides industry. Monsanto and other
agrochemical corporations helped the EU to design the regulatory systems for their own products and chose which
country should be appointed as Rapporteur Member State.
Regulation 1107/2009, Article 63 specified that: All confidential data shall be deleted or redacted. Much of the
industry data submitted to the German RMS was redacted.

2. Glyphosate, conflicts of interest and PR masquerading as science. By naming names (Alan Boobis, Angelo Moretti,
Chris Wolf, Michael Pragnell and others), Mason notes how key positions are held by individuals with proven links to the
agrochemicals industry. As a result, crucial decisions and documents are slanted accordingly.

Related: Verdict: Monsanto Guilty Of Crimes Against The Planet And Humanity

Mason mentions Critical Reviews in Toxicology and how, in 2016 Volume 46, Monsanto commissioned five reviews published
in a supplement to Critical Reviews in Toxicology. Monsanto also funded them. The whole point was to raise serious doubts
about the adverse effects of glyphosate by using junk science and to confuse the whole issue. Mason says that this is what
Monsanto paid the scientists for.

3. The ECHA might be preparing itself to support EFSA, the European Commissioners and the Glyphosate Task
Force (GTF) to re-license glyphosate in 2017. This is despite the fact that, of the 293 responses to ECHAs consultation, an
overwhelming majority supported the International Agency for Research into Cancer (IARC) position that glyphosate is
probably carcinogenic for humans.

4. The German government summoned Prof Dr Andreas Hensel before the Committee on Agriculture and Food
where he accused BfR of scientific fraud. BfR stands accused of endangering the population and of intentional falsification
of the content of scientific studies. In addition, Prof Dr Eberhard Greiser, a retired epidemiologist at the University of Bremen,
says of BfRs actions, Id say this is an intentional falsification of the content of scientific studies.

5. Evidence given to the International Monsanto Tribunal. Toxicologist Dr Peter Clausing:


Ample evidence has been provided above showing that European Authorities twisted or ignored scientific facts
and distorted the truth to enable the conclusion that glyphosate is not to be considered a carcinogen, thereby
accepting and reinforcing the false conclusion proposed by the Monsanto-led GTF.

The German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR) and the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA)
committed scientific fraud.

In his evidence to the tribunal, Clausing systematically demolished arguments that the EU authorities used to dismiss the
significant findings of glyphosate-induced malignant lymphoma in mouse carcinogenicity studies.

Mason then goes on to discuss the wide-ranging evidence presented to the tribunal, including Lawyer Koffi Dogbevis
discussion of Monsanto and ecocide (destruction of the environment), which is a crime against humanity that is likely to be
subject to prosecution in the International Criminal Court.

She notes the vicious media campaign mounted against Professor Seralini and his team that was instigated by interested
circles from the chemical industry as well as the industry-financed British Science Media Centre.

6. Industry pressure on the EPA. The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), having concluded that glyphosate is
not a carcinogen, invited public comments.

Public comments were invited on 16/09/2016 to the Scientific Advisory Panel of FIFRA (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and
Rodenticide Act) on US EPA Glyphosate Issue Paper: Evaluation of Carcinogenic Potential. However, only four days before
the meeting it was suddenly delayed.
Related: Transgenic Wars - How GMOs Impact Livestock and Human Health Around the Globe

Why did US EPA delay the FIFRA SAP meeting at such short notice? Mason provides compelling evidence indicating the
industrys hand in trying to remove certain scientists from being included on the panel. The suggestion is that the EPA bowed
to intense industry lobbying from CropLife America (a US trade association representing the major manufacturers, formulators
and distributors of crop protection and pest control products).

7. EPA collusion with Monsanto. In 1991, an archival document showed that the US EPA Health Effects Division colluded
with Monsanto: glyphosate was to be changed from a Group C carcinogen to Group E (evidence of non-carcinogenicity for
humans).

Members of US EPAs Toxicology Branch of the Hazard Evaluation Division Committee, in a consensus review on March 4
1985, had classified glyphosate as a Group C carcinogen, based on the incidence in rats/mice of renal tumours, thyroid C-cell
adenomas and carcinomas, pancreatic islet cell adenomas, hepatocellular adenomas and carcinomas in males, but on June
26 1991 the Health Effects Division Carcinogenicity Peer Review Committee met to discuss and evaluate the weight of
evidence on glyphosate with particular emphasis on its carcinogenic potential.
In a review of the data the committee concluded that glyphosate should be classified as Group E (evidence of non-
carcinogenicity for humans). However, three of the Committee refused to sign and wrote: DO NOT CONCUR.

8. Monsantos sealed secret studies from the US EPA obtained under Freedom of Information. US Scientist Anthony
Samsel analysed Monsantos sealed secret long-term studies (15,000-20,000 pages) from the US EPA (on mice, rats, rabbit
and beagles) and showed that Monsanto knew that glyphosate was carcinogenic from the 1970s.

9. Glyphosate causes cataracts and interstitial damage and a range of diseases. Among Monsantos long term studies,
an unpublished study on albino rats in 1990 showed that glyphosate entered the eye and caused cataracts and tissue
damage.

The rate of cataract surgery in England increased very substantially between 1989 and 2004 from 173 (1989) to 637 (2004)
episodes per 100,000 population.

A 2016 study by the WHO also confirmed that the incidence of cataracts had greatly increased: A global assessment of the
burden of disease from environmental risks. says that cataracts are the leading cause of blindness worldwide. Globally,
cataracts are responsible for 51% of blindness an estimated 20 million individuals suffer from this degenerative eye disease.
In the US, between 2000 and 2010 the number of cases of cataract rose by 20% from 20.5 million to 24.4 million.
It is projected that by 2050, the number of people with cataracts will have doubled to 50 million.

Mason then goes on to describe in some detail how the municipalitys spraying of glyphosate effectively destroyed her nature
reserve near Swansea, Wales, and is responsible for cancers, neurological diseases and cataracts, just as Monsanto found
in long-term studies before it gained illegal registration with the US EPA.

10. The UK State of Nature Report 2016. One of the reports authors, Mark Eaton, says:

The report includes a new biodiversity intactness index, which analyses the loss of species over centuries. The
UK has lost significantly more nature over the long term than the global average with the UK the 29th lowest out of
218 countries.

It is quite shocking where we stand compared to the rest of the world, even compared to other western European
countries: France and Germany are quite a way above us in the rankings. The index gives an idea of where we
have got to over the centuries, and we are pretty knackered.

Mason provides a great deal of statistical evidence to highlight the massive increase (by crop type) in use of pesticides over
the years, not least glyphosate.
And she also provides a great deal of shocking data that highlights the increase in major diseases and the loss of biodiversity,
as set out in the State of Nature Report.

In finishing her open letter, Mason asks the various agencies responsible for protecting health and the environment:

Why are you all protecting the pesticides industry?

Then she adds:

Monsanto has been lying to you for the sake of money. They wanted to control the food CEO Hugh Grant and
the US EPA knew that glyphosate caused all of these problems. The corporation concealed the carcinogenic
effects of PCBs on humans and animals for seven years.

They have no plans to protect you and your families from the tsunami of sickness that is affecting us all in the UK
and the US.

Related: Maryland To Become First State In U.S. To Ban Bee-Killing Pesticides


Exxon Mobil Is Fighting To Keep It's Dangerous Chemicals In Childrens Toys
December 26 2016 | From: TheIntercept

Most of us know Exxon Mobil Corp. as an energy giant, which makes sense given that it is the
worlds largest publicly held oil and gas company.

Rex Tillerson, the companys CEO, has spent his entire professional life prioritizing Exxon Mobils corporate
interests over human rights, the environment, and the diplomatic interests of the U.S., all of which has prompted
many journalists and commentators to point out that his appointment as secretary of state is not just a terrible
idea but a joke seemingly ripped from the pages of a Marxist comic book. [Comment: Blah blah blah, if you aren't
properly informed neither will your judgements be from afar].

Related: Yes, women are being poisoned by toxic chemicals from feminine hygiene products

Whats less well known is that Exxon Mobil is also one of the worlds biggest chemical companies, and that its chemical
interests also sometimes run counter to those of people in the U.S. and beyond.

Petrochemicals accounted for more than a quarter of Exxon Mobils $16 billion in net profits last year and wound up in wide
range of consumer products such as plastics, tires, batteries, detergents, adhesives, synthetic fibers, and household
detergents.

Among Exxon Mobils chemical products are phthalates, a family of chemicals widely used to make plastic pliable. Phthalates
are in everything from food containers and plastic wrap to rattles, pacifiers, bottle nipples, and teething toys for babies. More
than 75 percent of Americans have at least five of the chemicals in their body, according to a 2000 study by the Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention.
Exxon Mobil insists its products pose no harm. In response to inquiries for this story, the company emailed a statement to The
Intercept saying that:

Exxon Mobil phthalates have been thoroughly tested, and evaluations by multiple government agencies in the
U.S., EU, and Australia show they are safe in their current applications.

(The email also included a link to the companys webpage on the health and environmental impacts of phthalates.)

But numerous independent studies have linked the chemicals to health problems, including cancer, neurodevelopmental
effects, endocrine disruption, and adverse harm to the male reproductive system.

Given the risks, Congress permanently banned several phthalates in 2008, temporarily banned a few others, and directed the
Consumer Products Safety Commission (CPSC) to study whether several other phthalates should also be removed from kids
products. The law required the CPSC to act within 180 days of its final decision.

An expert committee appointed by the CPSC came out with its final report on phthalates in 2014. After years of meetings,
public comments, and peer review, the panel of scientists decided that eight phthalates should be banned from use in
childrens toys.
Related: Warning: USDA allowing over 20 synthetic substances in organic foods

The report cited studies showing that babies who were exposed to higher levels of some phthalates in utero tended to have
smaller anogenital distances and other reproductive tract problems, effects that were also seen in animals exposed to
phthalates.

Despite the clear directive of the scientific experts and the Congress-mandated timeframe, the CPSC has yet to finalize its
ban. During the almost two years since the deadline passed, Exxon Mobil has been working hard to slow and reverse the
commissions decision, drafting at least one legislative rider designed to keep some of their phthalates on the market and
submitting lengthy comments and objections to the ban.

Exxon has been sending letters, having meetings, theyre just constantly in CPSCs face in a way designed to
suggest that, if you go the wrong way on this, were going to sue you, said Eve Gartner, an attorney with
Earthjustice.
Related: Artificial turf fields linked to cancer in young athletes

Gartner and a few other environmental advocates try to attend these meetings whenever possible, but they describe being
outgunned by the big companys lobbying efforts.

I dont have the time to attend all Exxons meetings, but they have the time to attend all of ours, said Jennifer
Sass, a senior scientist at Natural Resources Defense Council. Theres a lot more of them and they have a lot
more resources.

As a political force, kids are no match for one of the worlds biggest chemical companies, and theyll suffer for the lack of clout.
While the CPSC fails to finalize its own rule, more and more kids are exposed to phthalates.

The inaction speaks to the power of Exxon to frighten federal agencies away from doing their jobs, as Earthjustices Gartner
put it. And that was before the companys CEO had a top government job.

Related: McDonalds Engages in Massive Fast-Food-Is-Nutritious Propaganda in US High Schools

Top Doctors Reveal Vaccines Turn Our Immune System Against Us + Study Pulled
From Publication After Proving Truth Of Vaccinated Versus Unvaccinated Children
December 24 2016 | From: NaturalBlaze/ NaturalNews

The research is hard to ignore, vaccines can trigger autoimmunity with a laundry list of diseases to
follow. With harmful and toxic metals as some vaccine ingredients, who is susceptible and which
individuals are more at risk?
No one would accuse Yehuda Shoenfeld of being a quack. The Israeli clinician has spent more than three decades
studying the human immune system and is at the pinnacle of his profession.

Related: Nursing student expelled for questioning directives to use threats, lies to coerce patients to vaccinate

You might say he is more foundation than fringe in his specialty; he wrote the textbooks. The Mosaic of
Autoimmunity, Autoantibodies, Diagnostic Criteria in Autoimmune Diseases, Infection and Autoimmunity, Cancer and
Autoimmunity the list is 25 titles long and some of them are cornerstones of clinical practice.

Hardly surprising that Shoenfeld has been called the Godfather of Autoimmunology the study of the immune system turned
on itself in a wide array of diseases from type 1 diabetes to ulcerative colitis and multiple sclerosis.

But something strange is happening in the world of immunology lately and a small evidence of it is that the Godfather of
Autoimmunology is pointing to vaccines - specifically, some of their ingredients including the toxic metal aluminum as a
significant contributor to the growing global epidemic of autoimmune diseases.
Related: Trump: Vaccines Cause Autism And Will Be Investigated

The bigger evidence is a huge body of research thats poured in in the past 15 years, and particularly in the past five years.
Take for example, a recent article published in the journal Pharmacological Research in which Shoenfeld and colleagues
issue unprecedented guidelines naming four categories of people who are most at risk for vaccine-induced autoimmunity.

On one hand, vaccines prevent infections which can trigger autoimmunity, say the papers authors, Alessandra Soriano, of
the Department of Clinical Medicine and Rheumatology at the Campus Bio-Medico University in Rome, Gideon Nesher, of the
Hebrew University Medical School in Jerusalem and Shoenfeld, founder and head of the Zabludowicz Center of Autoimmune
Diseases in the Sheba Medical Center at Tel Hashomer.

He is also editor of three medical journals and author of more than 1,500 research papers across the spectrum of medical
journalism and founder of the International Congress on Autoimmunology.

On the other hand, many reports that describe post-vaccination autoimmunity strongly suggest that vaccines can
indeed trigger autoimmunity.

Defined autoimmune diseases that may occur following vaccinations include arthritis, lupus (systemic lupus
erythematosus, SLE) diabetes mellitus, thrombocytopenia, vasculitis, dermatomyosiositis, Guillain-Barre syndrome
and demyelinating disorders. Almost all types of vaccines have been reported to be associated with the onset of
ASIA.
Related: Herd immunity is a myth: Why un-vaccinated children are not a threat to others

ASIA or Autoimmune/inflammatory Syndrome Induced by Adjuvants (also known as Shoenfelds syndrome) - first appeared
in the Journal of Autoimmunology four years ago.

It is an umbrella term for a collection of similar symptoms, including Chronic Fatigue Syndrome, that result after
exposure to an adjuvant an environmental agent including common vaccine ingredients that stimulate the immune
system.

Since then an enormous body of research, using ASIA as a paradigm, has begun to unravel the mystery of how environmental
toxins, particularly the metal aluminum used in vaccines, can trigger an immune system chain reaction in susceptible
individuals and may lead to overt autoimmune disease.

Autoimmune disease results when the bodys system meant to attack foreign invaders turns instead to attack part of the body
it belongs to (auto is Greek for self). If the immune system is like a national defence system, antibodies are like drones
programmed to recognize a certain type of invader (a bacteria say) and to destroy them or mark them for destruction by other
special forces.
Autoantibodies are like drones that are misidentifying a component of the human body and have launched a sustained attack
on it. If they mistakenly target a component of the conductive sheath around neurons, for example, nerve impulses stop
conducting properly, muscles go into spasm and coordination fails; multiple sclerosis results.

If autoantibodies erroneously focus on joint tissue; rheumatoid arthritis results. If they target the islets of Langerhans in the
pancreas, Type 1 diabetes, and so on

Throughout our lifetime the normal immune system walks a fine line between preserving normal immune reactions
and developing autoimmune diseases, says the paper.

The healthy immune system is tolerant to self-antigens. When self-tolerance is disturbed, dysregulation of the
immune system follows, resulting in emergence of an autoimmune disease. Vaccination is one of the conditions
that may disturb this homeostasis in susceptible individuals, resulting in autoimmune phenomena and ASIA.

Who is susceptible is the subject of the paper entitled, Predicting post-vaccination autoimmunity: Who might be
at risk? It lists four categories of people:

1. Those who have had a previous autoimmune reaction to a vaccine

2. Anyone with a medical history of autoimmunity

3. Patients with a history of allergic reactions

4. Anyone at high risk of developing autoimmune disease including anyone with a family history of autoimmunity,
presence of autoantibodies which are detectable by blood tests and other factors including low vitamin D and
smoking.

Previous Reaction
Regarding those who have had a previous adverse reaction to vaccines, the paper cites five relevant studies including the
case of a death of a teenage girl six months following her third Gardasil injection against HPV virus.

Related: Gardasil Fully Exposed: HPV Vaccine Being Tested on Infants Has Killed, Permanently Injured Thousands

She had experienced a range of symptoms shortly after her first dose, including dizziness, numbness and tingling in her
hands, and memory lapses. After her second injection, she developed intermittent arm weakness, frequent tiredness
requiring daytime naps, worse tingling, night sweats, chest pain and palpitations.

A full autopsy was unrevealing but blood and spleen tissue analysis revealed HPV-16 L1 gene DNA fragments - matching the
DNA found in vials of the Gardasil vaccine against cervical cancer - thus implicating the vaccine as a causal factor.

The DNA fragments had also been found to be complexed with the aluminum adjuvant which, according to the report, have
been shown to persist for up to 8 to 10 years causing chronic immune system stimulation.

Although data is limited, Shoenfeld and his colleagues concluded, it seems preferable that individuals with prior
autoimmune or autoimmune-like reactions to vaccinations, should not be immunized, at least not with the same
type of vaccine.

Established Autoimmune Condition

The second group which the paper cites for vaccine exemption is patients with established autoimmune conditions. Vaccines
dont work so well in them, say Shoenfeld and his colleagues, and they are at risk for flares following vaccination.

Inoculations that contain live viruses including chickenpox, yellow fever and the measles, mumps and rubella triple vaccine
(MMR) are generally contraindicated for people with autoimmune conditions because of the risk of uncontrolled viral
replication. But inactivated vaccines are not such a good idea either because they usually contain the added ingredient
aluminum, linked to autoimmunity.

The immunologists describe recent studies in which patients with autoimmune rheumatic disease given the influenza vaccine
(without aluminum) suffered more joint pain and fever than controls and whose levels of autoantibodies (the drones that attack
self) increased after receiving the flu vaccine.
Related: How The CDC And Vaccine Court Create An Epidemic Of Autism

Whats more, they developed new types of autoantibodies that werent present before the vaccines, and those persisted. As
the presence of autoantibodies can be predictive of developing autoimmune disease in patients without symptoms, even
years ahead of disease onset, this is troubling to those who understand immunology.

A number of studies claim vaccines are safe for the overwhelming majority of patients with established autoimmune
diseases, the study allows, but they only looked at rheumatoid arthritis and lupus and not at severe and active cases so the
potential benefit of vaccination should be weighed against its potential risk, they cautioned.

Patients With a History of Allergy

Vaccine trials have usually excluded vulnerable individuals - only extremely healthy individuals with no allergies are
recruited. Its a selection bias, say Soriano and Shoenfeld, and has likely resulted in serious adverse events being
considerably underestimated in real life where vaccines are mandated to all individuals regardless of their susceptibility.

The true incidence of allergic reactions to vaccines, normally estimated at between one in 50,000 to one in a million doses, is
probably much higher and particularly where gelatin or egg proteins are on the ingredients list, they say.

Theres a long list of vaccine ingredients that are potential allergens: besides the infectious agents themselves, there are
those from hens egg, horse serum, bakers yeast, numerous antibiotics, formaldehyde and lactose, as well inadvertent
ingredients such as latex.
Related: New Study Confirms That Mercury Is Linked to Autism

Peoples allergic histories have to be taken before vaccination say the researchers. But some signs of reaction dont
show up until after the shot.

The public health nurse or GP might tell patients that a long-lasting swelling around the injection site after a vaccine is a
normal reaction, for example. But that is not what the immunologists say. [A]luminum sensitization manifests as nodules [hard
lumps] at the injection site that often regress after weeks or months, but may persist for years. In such cases, they say, a
patch test can be done to confirm sensitivity and to avoid vaccination.

According to a growing body of research, though, allergy may be only the beginning of many dangerous aluminum-induced
phenomena.

The Trouble With Aluminium

Aluminum has been added to vaccines since about 1926 when Alexander Glenny and colleagues noticed it would produce
better antibody responses in vaccines than the antigen alone. Glenny figured the alum was inducing what he called a depot
effect slowing the release of the antigen and heightening the immune response.

For 60 years his theory was accepted dogma. And over the same time, the vaccine schedule grew decade on decade, but few
ever questioned the effects of injecting aluminum into the body, which is strange considering its known toxicity.

A PubMed search on aluminum and toxicity turns up 4,258 entries. Its neurotoxicity is well documented. It affects memory,
cognition, psychomotor control; it damages the blood brain barrier, activates brain inflammation, depresses mitochondrial
function and plenty of research suggests it is a key player in the formation of the amyloid plaques and tangles in the brains of
Alzheimers patients.
Related: The WHO's condescending tips for EU healthcare workers to convince informed patients that vaccines are
safe

Its been implicated in Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis and autism and demonstrated to induce allergy.

When kidney dialysis patients were accidentally infused with aluminum, the dialysis-induced encephalopathy (DAE) they
developed neurological symptoms: speech abnormalities, tremors, memory loss, impaired concentration and behavioural
changes. Many of the patients eventually went into comas and died. The lucky ones survived: when the source of toxicity,
aluminum, was removed from their dialysis they recovered rapidly.

With these new observations, researchers began investigating the adjuvant effects of aluminum and in the past decade there
has been a flurry of research. Far from being a sandbag that holds the antigen for a while and then gets excreted, it turns out
that aluminum salts trigger a storm of defence action.

Vaccines: A Violation of Human Rights


The video below is a rational discussion about vaccines with Christina Hildebrand, President of A Voice For Choice,
Inc. where she explains why mandatory vaccines are a violation of your human rights and how they are potentially
dangerous to you or your child's health.

Christina is passionate about ensuring people know what they are putting into their bodies - be it food, air, water or
medications. For the past 12 years, Christina has spent many thousands of hours researching and sharing her knowledge
within her local community.

However, with the growth of the Big Ag and Big pHARMa's influences on US politics, Christina realized that she needed to
take this to a different level and educate the masses on their right to informed choice and transparency of what goes into their
bodies.
Within hours of injection of the same aluminum oxyhydroxide in vaccines into mice, for example, armies of specialized
immune cells are on the move, calling in grid coordinates for more specialist assault forces. Within a day, a whole host of
immune system commandos are in play - neutrophils, eosinophils, inflammatory monocytes, myeloid and dendritic cells,
activating lymphocytes and secreting proteins called cytokines.

The cytokines themselves cause collateral damage but they send out signals, directing cell-to-cell communication and
recruiting other cells into action. If the next phase of the attack is launched: fibroblast growth factor, interferons, interleukins,
platelet derived growth factor, transforming growth factor and tumour necrosis factor might all be engaged.

Theres evidence that poorly understood and pesky inflammasomes, (currently a topic of cutting- edge cancer causation
research) such as the Nod-like receptor 3( NLRP) are activated too, but its all still too early to say exactly what theyre doing.

Related: The most evil people in medicine today

New research emerging from University of British Columbia has found that aluminum adjuvant injected into mice can alter the
expression of genes associated with autoimmunity.

And in their recent study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, immunologists at the University
of Colorado found that even host DNA is recruited into the aluminum assault, that it rapidly coats injected alum, triggering
effects that scientists have barely scratched the surface of understanding.

The Significance of Macrophagic Myofasciitis

This mobility or translocation of aluminum in the body is perhaps the most disturbing of the mounting evidence in current
aluminum research. In 1998, French researcher Romain Gherardi and his colleagues observed an emerging condition of
unknown origin which presented in patients post-vaccination with Chronic Fatigue like symptoms including swollen lymph
nodes, joint and muscle pain and exhaustion.

Tissue biopsies of the patients deltoid revealed lesions up to 1 cm in diameter and unique from similar lesions of other
diseases. They went to the lab for analysis and to Gherardis astonishment, they mainly consisted of macrophages large
white blood cells in the immune system whose job is to swallow up foreign invaders in the body. Enclosed in the cellular fluid
of these phagocytes were agglomerates of nanocrystals of aluminum.
Related: Cannabis Oil Cured Girls Leukemia After HPV Vaccine Broke Down Her Body: Hayley Willar

Gherardi and his colleagues began injecting mice with aluminum to see what happened. Their research published in 2013
revealed that the metal particles were engulfed by macrophages and formed MMF-like granulomas that dispersed to distant
lymph nodes, spleen, liver and eventually brain.

This strongly suggests that long-term adjuvant biopersistence within phagocytic cells is a prerequisite of slow
brain translocation and delayed neurotoxicity, writes Gherardi in his February 2015 review of the relevant
research in Frontiers in Neurology.

A more frightening animal study of aluminum is that of Spanish veterinary researcher Lluis Lujans study of ovine ASIA.

After huge numbers of sheep in Spain died in 2008 in the wake of a compulsory multiple vaccine campaign against
bluetongue in Spain in 2008, Lujan set out to find out what killed them and he began by inoculating them with aluminum.

His 2013 study found that only 0.5% of sheep inoculated with aluminum vaccines showed immediate reactions of lethargy,
transient blindness, stupor, prostration and seizures

Characterized by a severe meningoencephalitis, similar to postvaccine reactions seen in humans.

Most of them recovered, temporarily, but postmortem exams of the ones who didnt revealed acute brain inflammation.
The delayed onset chronic phase of the disease affected far more of the sheep - 50-70% of flocks and sometimes virtually
100% of animals within a given flock, usually including all of those who had previously recovered.

The reaction was frequently triggered by exposure to cold and began with restlessness and compulsive wool-biting, then
progressed to acute redness of the skin, generalized weakness, extreme weight loss and muscle tremors, and finally, entered
the terminal phase where the animals went down on their front quarters, became comatose and died.

Related: Cancer industry profits 'locked in' by nagalase molecule injected into humans via vaccines... spurs tumor
growth... explains aggressive vaccine push

Post-mortem examinations revealed severe neuron necrosis and aluminum in the nerve tissue.

The immune systems reaction to aluminum represents a major health challenge, Gerhardi declares in his recent review, and
he adds that;

Attempts to seriously examine safety concerns raised by the bio-persistent character and brain accumulation of
alum particles have not been made A lot must be done to understand how, in certain individuals, alum-
containing vaccines may become insidiously unsafe.

Back to the problem of which certain individuals should avoid vaccination to avoid autoimmune disease.

People Prone to Develop Autoimmunity

Soriano and Shoenfelds identify a final category: anyone at risk of developing autoimmune disease. Since a number of them
have been shown to have genetic factors that would include anyone with a family history of autoimmune disease.

It also includes anyone who has tested positive for autoantibodies which can indicate disease years before symptoms show
up. Vaccinations, the doctors say, may trigger or worsen the disease.

Smokers too, have an exceptionally high risk of developing an autoimmune disease, says the report. The American Cancer
Society estimates that about 18% of Americans smoke. That means about 42 million Americans have an elevated risk of
developing an autoimmune disease and theyre stacking the odds with every vaccine.
Related: Vaccinations: An analysis of the health risks

And finally, factors that Shoenfeld and Soriano associate with high risk of developing autoimmunity are high estrogen and low
vitamin D - which means anyone taking birth control or hormone replacement therapy and, according to one 2009 study of
vitamin D status, about three quarters of American teens and adults should be wary of vaccines.

Shoenfeld doesnt seem to mean to exclude all of these people from immunization, however. The paper concludes that for
the overwhelming majority of individuals, vaccines carry no risk of systemic autoimmune disease and should be administered
according to current recommendations.

Which is in stark contrast to the body of the paper. The final word is cautionary about weighing the potential benefit of
vaccinationagainst its potential risk.

Its exemplary of a strange sort of schizophrenia in a wide range of recent immunology papers. The doctors seem to be trying
to reconcile a century of safe and effective vaccine dogma with the last decades worth of terrifying research findings.
Theres a lot of on the one hand and on the other hand in them.
Related: Gary Null: Are we being lied to about 'vaccine efficacy'?

The new research seems about to gain the upper hand, however. A 2013 overview of ASIA by six immunologists including
Shoenfeld, for example, is a catalogue of vaccine side effects from Gardasil deaths, narcolepsy epidemics, infertility, chronic
fatigue, dead sheep and aluminum-addled brains. It is rife with statements that would have been virtually unheard of inside
mainstream medicine a decade ago. Like this shocker:

Perhaps, in twenty years, physicians will be dueling with better characterized particles of autoimmunity, and the
vaccines may become fully safe as well as effective.

Nonetheless the recognition of ASIA has initiated the change to put more efforts in identifying the good, the bad
and the ugly of vaccines and in particular of adjuvants as triggers of autoimmunity.

Bad and ugly of vaccines? Whats wrong with the adjuvants? Thats not in the CDC hand-out.

Or How About This One:

Despite the huge amount of money invested in studying vaccines, there are few observational studies
and virtually no randomized clinical trials documenting the effect on mortality of any of the existing
vaccines.

One recent paper found an increased hospitalization rate with the increase of the number of vaccine doses
and a mortality rate ratio for 5-8 vaccine doses to 1-4 doses of 1.5, indicating a statistically significant
increase of deaths associated with higher vaccine doses.
Since vaccines are given to millions of infants annually, it is imperative that health authorities have
scientific data from synergistic toxicity studies on all combinations of vaccines

That could be any anti-vaxxer jabbering onbut its not.

But Here is the Topper:

The US Supreme Court ruled that vaccines makers are immune from lawsuits charging that the design of the
vaccine is defective. Thus there is need for innovative clinical trial design and the vaccines themselves should be
redesigned.

Immunologists including the worlds leading authority on autoimmunity are saying it is time to take vaccines back to
the drawing board.

Autoimmune disease is the third leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide and now among the top 10 killers of
young American women.

The American Autoimmune Related Diseases Association estimates that 50 million Americans suffer from one of 88
autoimmune diseases - from type 1 diabetes to systemic lupus erythematosus - and some research puts the figure at one in
five globally.

At least 40 more diseases are suspected to be immune-mediated. Most of them are devastating - frequently crippling,
expensive to treat and incurable. And they are increasing at an astonishing pace.

Related: Mercury and autism: New research provides yet more damning evidence that mercury exposure leads to
ASD
At this stage, it looks like the more the research pours in, the harder it is going to get for pro-vaccine immunologists to keep
multiple personality disorder or complete nervous breakdown - at bay. Ten years of cutting edge research into aluminums
effects on the immune system has revealed primarily how wrong they were.

And how little they know. If, after 90 years, doctors finally have begun to seriously examine the mechanism and question the
merits of injecting metal toxins into newborn babies, what have they yet to discover? ASIA sounds awful. (Too bad for all the
people whose kids suffered through chronic fatigue when it was just a Freudian yearning to sleep with their mother.)

But what if, like Lujans sheep, the negligible minority that has been paying the price for the good of humanity is actually only
the tip of the iceberg? What if some people with no apparent adverse immune reactions still have nanocrystals of aluminum
silently depositing in their brains? What if ASIA really includes Alzheimers? ALS, autism? ADD? And thats just the As.

Related: New Transmissible Vaccine Spreads Like Virus, No Consent Necessary

Even if immunologists keep wearing their rose coloured glasses, and vaccine ingredients are only responsible for a tiny
fraction of the exploding autoimmunity, the ugly in vaccines will still get harder and harder to ignore.

When everyone on the planet is getting injected, 20 years is a long time for disabled people to stack up while scientists duel
with the characterized particles of autoimmunity.

In the fury over the Disneyland measles outbreak that is gripping the worlds vaccine promoters, time is running out for
doctors and researchers who see the bad and ugly side of vaccines and their adjuvants to do something about it.

Theres slim chance of a vaccine redesign in the absence of a profit incentive and a strong chance of universal vaccine
mandates for one and all - previous anaphylactic shock reaction or not.

Study Pulled From Publication After Proving Truth Of Vaccinated Versus Unvaccinated
Children

The censorship of science is nothing new. In Canada, for instance, there were serious concerns
about the federal governments increasingly strict regulations that prevented scientists from sharing
their findings with the public.
Censorship, on the whole, is a persistently under-acknowledged problem in our society. The election of Donald
Trump certainly showcased the fact that the mainstream media only portrays the narratives they want us to see.

In the latest instance of scientific censorship, an article from a scientific journal was unpublished, but only after vaccine
enthusiasts proclaimed that it needed to be removed. The study, you see, examined the differences in health outcomes
between vaccinated and unvaccinated children.

The studys results indicated that:

Vaccinated children were significantly less likely than the unvaccinated to have been diagnosed with
chickenpox and pertussis, but significantly more likely to have been diagnosed with pneumonia, otitis
media, allergies and NDDs (defined as Autism Spectrum Disorder, Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder,
and/or a learning disability).

From the mothers reports, the researchers found that vaccinated children were more likely to have allergies and
neurodevelopmental disorders (NDDs). The team noted that even after controlling for other factors, vaccination remained
significantly associated with the presence of an NDD.

VaxXed Stories: Social Engineering of Medical Professionals


Dr. Suzanne Humphries attends a meeting called "Confronting Vaccine Resistance: Strategies For Success" at NYU
Langone Medical Center in New York, New York on November 21, 2016.

This meetings speakers were Senator Richard Pan, Dr. Paul Offit and Dorit Rubenstein Reiss. Afterwards she comes out to
the VaxXed Bus to share what happened. Camera and editing by Joshua Coleman.

Indeed, those that were vaccinated were three times more likely to be diagnosed with an NDD such as autism. The
combination of preterm birth and vaccination produced an even higher risk of NDD, increasing the chances of it by more than
six-fold.

In the abstract, the researchers wrote in their conclusion;

In this study based on mothers reports, the vaccinated had a higher rate of allergies and NDD than the
unvaccinated. Vaccination, but not preterm birth, remained significantly associated with NDD after controlling for
other factors.

However, preterm birth combined with vaccination was associated with an apparent synergistic increase in the
odds of NDD. Further research involving larger, independent samples is needed to verify and understand these
unexpected findings in order to optimize the impact of vaccines on childrens health.

Baxter Dmitry from Investment Watch Blog notes that the study was unpublished from the journal Frontiers In Public Health.
Normally, one can still view the cached version in internet archives.

But Baxter says this too was removed, noting that a cached version available on internet archives has also been removed,
suggesting there is a serious campaign to stop members of the public from viewing the study.

Fortunately, a screenshot of the study was saved before the whole thing was scrubbed off the internet for good.
Prior to being removed from the internet, the study was subjected to massive amounts of scrutiny; apparently in this instance,
the use of surveys which are widely used for data gathering somehow invites bias.

Some of the colorful public comments included;

This study is of poor design, though not impossible results. Study relies of self-report of moms, inducing
bias, and, Another garbage vaccine study in Frontiers journal. Scientists, stop reviewing/publishing there.
This, of course, is not the first time that a study that showcased the potential ill effects of vaccines has been pulled from the
internet. In February, the journal Vaccine temporarily removed, and eventually retracted, a study that linked the HPV vaccine
to behavioral issues in mice.

Publishing research that contains information that conflicts with the mainstream narrative continues to prove to be a quick and
easy way to find yourself blacklisted and censored by conventional media. This just underscores the importance
of independent research and alternative media outlets.

Related: Big Pharma now wants to vaccinate babies while theyre still in the womb

Fluoride Action Network: A Report From New Zealand


December 23 2016 | From: FluorideAlert

Two weeks ago legislation was introduced into the NZ Parliament in an attempt to force fluoridation
on the whole country. Currently, only half of New Zealands population is on fluoridated water. The
decision-making for fluoridation had been held by local councils since it was introduced starting in
the 1960s.

The proposed new legislation has only had its first reading at Parliament and must go through two more readings
before it becomes law. The next step is for this drafted legislation to go before the Health Select Committee and this
is where citizens can help make changes.

Related: The Question That Fluoridation Promoters Cant Answer

TV advert produced for Fluoride Free New Zealand. Shows that New Zealand is one of the few countries that still has
fluoridation and that other countries, without fluoridation, have just as good, if not better, teeth.

It also shows that there are public dental health policies that really work that could be implemented in NZ.
Fluoride Free NZ on Facebook / fluoridefree.org.nz

Legislation is often amended once the Committee involved has heard feedback from a wide range of people. So it is possible
that a strategic amendment might nullify the proposed legislation.

Interview With Dr. John Colquhoun, 1998

The legislation attempts to shift responsibility from the local councils to the District Health Boards (DHBs), but the DHBs are a
branch of the Ministry of Health in the Central Government, and are contractually obligated to do what the Ministry instructs.
The DHBs will only have a limited window with which to view the issue: they will only be allowed to consider dental health and
weigh that up against the costs of fluoridation.

Their purview will not include considering:

Health effects

Current fluoride exposure

A lternatives to fluoridation, like the Childsmile program in Scotland

ill not include consultation with the community

As far as dental health is concerned, the DHBs are being steered to a single survey carried out in 2009 that found a 40%
difference in dental decay rates. However, this survey was only a snapshot in time and did not take into consideration life time
residence.

The two studies published prior to this survey (that did look at life time residence), and a study published this year as well as
the New Zealand School Dental statistics (published every year) did not find any difference in decay rates. The only
differences that can be found in the School Dental statistics is for Maori children.

This fact distorts the picture because the non-fluoridated total includes the poorest area, with a high population of Maori
children, while the fluoridated total includes the wealthiest area. The sad irony in all this is that Maori children had perfect
teeth before the advent of western diets.

Related: Fluoride IQ Loss and the Brain

The Health Select Committee is inviting feedback from the public until the 2nd of February and will allow people to also speak
in person and by Skype to the Committee. The Hearing is likely to be February or March next year. This Committee is made
up of representatives from the top four political parties with the National Party (the current Government) making up the
majority.

The aim of Fluoride Free NZ (FFNZ) is to educate the Health Select Committee members in the hope that they will agree to
amendments to the legislation. We also aim to educate other Members of Parliament who are not on the Select Committee, so
that they are supportive of their members on the Select Committee making changes to the legislation.
Only 23 of the 67 NZ local councils still have any fluoridation, because FFNZ has managed to convince several councils to
stop over the past decade.

We also plan to put out as much publicity as our budget allows especially on health effects and the potential for fluoride to
damage to the brain so the general public become more informed and advise political parties and individual MPs that they
wont get their vote unless they change their stance.

As you will see from the Transcript and the video footage of the MPs that spoke at the first Parliamentary Reading of
the Bill - none of the MPs that spoke know very much about the subject.

Health Select Committee Chair Simon OConnor mistakenly credits his good teeth on taking fluoride tablets as a child.

Unbeknownst to him, the NZ Ministry of Health no longer recommends fluoride tablets because we now know
fluoride doesnt work by swallowing and fluoride tablets cause dental fluorosis!
Associate Health Minister Peter Dunne, who introduced the Bill, but fortunately is not on the Health Select Committee, has
called opponents of fluoridation tin-foil hat wearing, UFO-abducted pseudo-scientists.

He mustnt realise that he is insulting around half of the NZ population. Results from all referenda held in NZ show that people
tend to vote status quo. If a nationwide referendum was held tomorrow, we would have a good chance of winning.

Charges of anti-science are sounding rather ridiculous for those who have actually read the literature and even taken a
cursory look at the science presented by Michael Connett in the TSCA petition to the US EPA.

However, the ill-informed NZ media do not challenge these inaccurate and insulting attacks on fluoridation
opponents, thats why our advertising campaign is so important.

This really is crunch time for us in New Zealand. If we do not get changes to this draconian legislation, it will be nigh on
impossible to get it stopped where it has started and very, very difficult to resist its introduction to areas that dont have it, even
if the vast majority of the community, including local councillors, dont want it.

On the other hand, if we do get changes we could see an end to fluoridation completely in NZ and the fluoridated
world would get even smaller.

Why Does NZ Still Fluoridate?

Related: Undeniable Evidence From Numerous Studies Proves That Fluoride Causes Cancer

As many of your supporters know, when Prof Paul Connett was over here in New Zealand earlier in the year, we were able to
persuade a TV station in Auckland to host a 30-minute debate with a well-known NZ scientist, Prof Mike Berridge. We were
excited about this because Paul had been trying to get such a debate in NZ with someone who was pro-fluoridation for 12
years.

I think we can safely assume that our side won that debate because the proponents dont promote or mention this debate and
anyone who watched it can see that Paul won this debate. That is why during our campaign we are paying for this debate to
be aired again on NZ television 8 times on FACE SKY Channel 083.
You can also view the debate online anytime.

*If you have family or friends in NZ please send them this bulletin and encourage them to tell everyone they know that NZ is
under threat of mandatory fluoridation this includes Christchurch which has some of the most beautiful water in the world.

See all FAN bulletins online

Related Articles:

Water Fluoridation Linked to Diabetes and Low IQ

Study Finds Link Between Water Fluoridation And Diabetes

What's the only drug intentionally added to tap water? Fluoride

What does mandatory fluoridation mean for you?

Fluoride, the Only Drug Intentionally Added to Your Tap Water

Experts Admit That Fluoride May Be Completely Uselesss

Index of Fluorinated Pharmaceuticals

Hamilton to get two unfluoridated water filling stations

Kubrick Told Us about FLUORIDE in 1964

At Least 6 Dead, Hundreds Sickened In Australia Asthma Attacks *Triggered By


Thunderstorm* + Something Very Strange Is Going On In The Pacific - A 'Perfect
Cocktail' Of 'Toxic Death Dumps'
December 18 2016 | From: HealthNutNews/ AllNewsPipeline / Various

A recent thunderstorm during southeastern Australias humid November spring, triggered a rash of
asthma attacks across Melbourne last Monday, leaving families grieving in its wake.
At least four people died: 20-year-old law student Hope Carnevali died waiting for responders from Ambulance
Victoria to arrive, paramedics also struggled to resuscitate 35-year-old Apollo Papadopoulos, who eventually
succumbed to the respiratory attack.

Omar Majoulled, 18, died two days before what would have been his high school graduation. And Clarence Leo reportedly
died early Wednesday. Several more remained in Melbourne intensive care units.

Thunderstorm Asthma Hits Kuwait 10 Days After Melbourne

Only 10 days after Melbourne was attacked with Thunderstorm Asthma we have the same occurrence of this VERY
RARE PHENOMENON happening across the world in Kuwait. This is not a coincidence. Both places don't have
similar pollen problems.

This is BIO WARFARE. This is as a result of Geoengineering (CHEMTRAILS) which have taken place for many years now.
The consequences are now being exposed.
We tried to warn everyone over 5 years ago but as always people turn a blind eye to anything that resembles the truth.
Is it too late? We shall see in the coming months and years.

Between 6 p.m. and 11 p.m. on Monday, Ambulance Victoria took about 1,900 calls, which is nearly six times the usual
volume- that works out to about a days work in five hours. In fact, at their peak, 200 calls came within a span of 15 minutes.

From the article:

Since the first such events were recognized in the 1980s, there have been scattered reports of asthma attack
outbreaks during thunderstorms around the globe, including Napoli, Italy and Atlanta. The largest confirmed
episode to date was in London in June 1994.

Six hundred-forty Londoners visited emergency departments with complaints of asthma or respiratory problems, of
which more than a hundred were hospitalized, according to a 2016 review published in the journal Clinical &
Experimental Allergy.

Allergy experts posit that during the spring season, storms increase pollens ability to penetrate deep into the lungs. Because
the storms concentrate pollen grains near the ground, the grains swell with so much water that they rupture into tinier pieces.

Once dispersed into the air, the particles basically form a fine allergenic mist that if inhaled, winds up in bronchial crevasses
normally too small for unbroken grains to enter.
As "changes in climate" brings about more severe weather, respiratory disease scientists predict these types of thunderstorm
asthma outbreaks to happen with increased frequency. Were not sure we agree with these scientists and know some others
who disagree.

Hope Carnavelis relatives said they waited for more than a half an hour for an ambulance to arrive and would have taken her
straight to the emergency room had they known. Our hearts go out to all the grieving families.

Something Very Strange Is Going On In The Pacific - A 'Perfect Cocktail' Of 'Toxic Death
Dumps'

Were Nearly 10,000 Hospitalized In Australia Victims Of A Bio-Weapon Attack?


All News Pipeline received an email on Thursday from a reader who lives in Australia who was very concerned that
the recent 'thunderstorms' that killed at least 4 people and put 8,500+ others into hospitals around the Melbourne,
Australia area were anything but 'normal' thunderstorms.

As Samantha tells us, she is very concerned that a possible bioweapon attack had been carried out upon Australia and while
ANP is unable to confirm her theory at this time, we will outline some very strong evidence below that proves something very,
very strange indeed is going on in Australia and throughout large parts of the Pacific .

For those who may have missed it, back on Monday November 21st, massive thunderstorms kicked up a major
health emergency after 'heavy rain caused rye grass pollen to absorb moisture and burst, dispersing smaller
particles that became trapped in people's lungs', according to official reports.

Leading to the deaths of at least 4 people and the hospitalization of almost 10 thousand, medical experts there described the
event as unprecedented:

When we've had people calling for ambulances - one call every four-and-a-half seconds at the peak - it was like
having 150 bombs going off right across a particular part of metropolitan Melbourne," she said.

"That's something we've never planned for and we need to do that better."

And while most Americans and people across the entire world now know that we'll never get the truth about real
issues from the rapidly dying mainstream media, as we do our own research, there is plenty of evidence to indicate
that 'weather modification' is now taking place across Australia as well.

First, for those who still don't believe in weather warfare or weather modification, we suggest you read Steve Quayle's book
"Weather Wars And Un-Natural Disasters" and read up on all of the weather modification patents long documented by Dane
Wigington over at his Geoengineering Watch website.
Related: Weather Weapons Are Real, They Have A Treaty To Regulate Them

As this Thursday story from The Watchers tells us, a spell of very unusual weather has been reported across Australia over
the last few days with widespread snow falling in Tasmania on November 24th of 2016, only days before the arrival of their
summer.

We're also told that heavy rains, landslides and floods recently hit New Caledonia, an island just outside of Australia with huge
rainfall. We also hear reports of the use of massive amounts of chemtrails over Melbourne prior to the 'thunderstorm asthma
outbreak'.
Related: Chemtrails & Geoengineering

As we learned from the recent SQnote which linked to this story from Strange Sounds telling us Tokyo had seen their first
November snow storm in more than 50 years, this indicates weather warfare manipulation was secondary to the earthquake
generation.

Is it just a coincidence that a hurricane and earthquake also hit just off of the Pacific coast of Central America as shared in this
linked Yahoo news story and seen in the Drudge Report.

Was what happened in Australia some kind of a 'dry run' for additional weather warfare attacks in the future, possibly
upon much larger populations?

Imagine such a situation happening where you live - suddenly and out of the blue, a massive thunderstorm hits with howling
winds and heavy rainfall, stirring up all of the poisons that have been delivered by chemtrails sprayed upon us, sending
thousands to the hospitals unable to breath and dying.

We can hear TPTB right now:

Just blame it on the weather... 'thunderstorm asthma'...yeah, that's it."

Well, ANP reader Samantha in Australia isn't buying it and, very few others are buying the official explanation either.

From theories of a perfect cocktail of poisons being sprayed upon them to 'toxic death dumps', we also see that
people from other parts of the world are also reporting death being sprayed upon them from above as well.

Will the world ever get the truth about chemtrails and weather modification? If you asked the MSM, any and all such talk is
'fake news', despite years and years of weather modification patents and official US govt documents to prove them wrong.
The Question That Fluoridation Promoters Cant Answer
December 17 2016 | From: FluorideAlert

During 2016, I asked this question to many fluoridation promoters and have yet to receive an
adequate scientific answer.

I asked it in several audiences in New Zealand and also to promoters at a council hearing in Naples, Florida and most
recently at a debate in Cortland, New York with Johnny Johnson and Steve Slott. Neither Johnson nor Slott,
otherwise very vocal on promoting fluoridation, had an answer.

Related: Why Does NZ Still Fluoridate? TV Commercial FFNZ

The Question to Promoters of Fluoridation:

What primary scientific studies (not bogus reviews conducted by pro-fluoridation agencies) can you cite
that gives you the confidence to ignore or dismiss the evidence that fluoride damages the brain as
documented in over 300 animal and human studies (including 50 IQ studies).

If proponents cannot provide an adequate scientific answer to this question: fluoridation should be halted
immediately.

On Nov 22, 2016, Michael Connett, JD, asked this question to the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), on behalf of
FAN, Food & Water Watch, Organic Consumers Association, American Academy of Environmental Medicine, International
Academy of Oral Medicine and Toxicology, Moms Against Fluoridation, and several individual mothers, in a petition calling on
the EPA to ban the deliberate addition of fluoridating chemicals to the drinking water under provisions in the Toxic Substances
Control Act (TSCA).

The EPA has 90 days to reply, and if they fail to provide a satisfactory reply then they can be taken to Federal Court.

How you can take this further?


We are requesting that each one of you to ask this question of any promoter of fluoridation and keep asking it throughout
2017 until you can get an answer. Send that answer to us.

Based on responses we have seen so far we anticipate that there will be no satisfactory answers. In our view, there is no
scientific evidence that could justify ignoring the large number of scientific studies that fluoride damages the brain and thus no
justification for continuing this unethical and reckless practice of deliberately adding fluoridating chemicals to the drinking
water.

This in essence will be our 2017 campaign. Very simple, very direct and very important. We hope that you will support this in
two ways: a) ask this showstopper question in as many creative ways as you can and as many times as you can, and b)
support FAN financially.

Five More Ways to Take Action:

1. Send a letter-to-the-editor to your local newspapers

2. Sign on to FANs petition to the EPA.

3. Send the press release to your media outlets

4. Share this Facebook and this Twitter post.

5. Make a donation to support this campaign (see below).

Fundraising Update
Our new totals are $70,150 from 235 donors. We will be updatinng our running totals on a daily basis on our home
page: www.FluorideACTION.net

Related Articles:

Undeniable Evidence From Numerous Studies Proves That Fluoride Causes Cancer

New Zealand Government Plans To Drown Its Citizens In Toxic Fluorides

Auckland: No Consultation Needed For Stopping Or Starting Fluoridation + Decision Is An Attack On Democracy

Fluoride: Poison On Tap Official Trailer

The Fluoride Deception

New Zealand Fluoridation Review Unscientific And Intellectually Dishonest Say International Reviewers

Fluoride Free New Zealand: Dirty Science

Secret Fluoridation Review Totally One-Sided Admits Chair

Harvard Research Finds Link Between Fluoridated Water, ADHD & Mental Disorders

CIA MKULTRA: Drugs To Take Down The Nation


December 8 2016 | From: JonRappoport / Various

Drugs to transform individualsand even, by implication, society. Drug research going far beyond
the usual brief descriptions of MKULTRA.
The intention is there, in the record: A CIA document was included in the transcript of the 1977 US Senate Hearings
on MKULTRA, the CIAs mind-control program.

Related: Roseanne Barr: MK Ultra Rules In Hollywood

The document is found in Appendix C, starting on page 166. Its simply labeled Draft, dated 5 May 1955 (note: scroll down
to #123-125 in the document).

It states: A portion of the Research and Development Program of [CIAs] TSS/Chemical Division is devoted to the discovery
of the following materials and methods:

What followed was a list of hoped-for drugs and their uses.

First, a bit of background: MKULTRA did not end in 1962, as advertised. It was shifted over to the Agencys Office of
Research and Development.

John Marks is the author of the groundbreaking book, Search for the Manchurian Candidate, which exposed MKULTRA.
Related: MK-ULTRA - The CIA's Mind Control Program

Marks told me a CIA representative informed him that the continuation of MKULTRA, after 1962, was carried out with a
greater degree of secrecy, and he, Marks, would never see a scrap of paper about it.

Im printing below, the list of the 1955 intentions of the CIA regarding their own drug research. The range of those intentions
is stunning.
Some of my comments gleaned from studying the list: The CIA wanted to find substances which would promote illogical
thinking and impulsiveness. Serious consideration should be given to the idea that psychiatric medications, food additives,
herbicides, and industrial chemicals (like fluorides) would eventually satisfy that requirement.

The CIA wanted to find chemicals that would produce the signs and symptoms of recognized diseases in a reversible
way. This suggests many possibilities - among them the use of drugs to fabricate diseases and thereby give the false
impression of germ-caused epidemics.

Related: Implanting False Memories is Real, says Psychologist | A Memory Hacker Explains How to Plant False
Memories in Peoples Minds

The CIA wanted to find drugs that would produce amnesia. Ideal for discrediting whistleblowers, dissidents,
certain political candidates, and other investigators. (Scopolamine, for example.)

The CIA wanted to discover drugs which would produce paralysis of the legs, acute anemia, etc. A way to make
people decline in health as if from diseases.

The CIA wanted to develop drugs that would alter personality structure and thus induce a persons dependence
on another person. How about dependence in general? For instance, dependence on institutions, governments?

The CIA wanted to discover chemicals that would lower the ambition and general working efficiency of
men. Sounds like a general description of the devolution of society.

Related: Central Intelligence Agency collection: MKULTRA

As you read the list yourself, youll see more implications/possibilities.

Here, from 1955, are the types of drugs the MKULTRA men at the CIA were looking for. The following statements are direct
CIA quotes:

A portion of the Research and Development Program of TSS/Chemical Division is devoted to the discovery of the
following materials and methods:
1. Substances which will promote illogical thinking and impulsiveness to the point where the recipient would be
discredited in public.

2. Substances which increase the efficiency of mentation and perception.

3. Materials which will prevent or counteract the intoxicating effect of alcohol.

4. Materials which will promote the intoxicating effect of alcohol.

5. Materials which will produce the signs and symptoms of recognized diseases in a reversible way so that they
may be used for malingering, etc.

6. Materials which will render the induction of hypnosis easier or otherwise enhance its usefulness.

7. Substances which will enhance the ability of individuals to withstand privation, torture and coercion during
interrogation and so-called brain-washing.

8. Materials and physical methods which will produce amnesia for events preceding and during their use.

9. Physical methods of producing shock and confusion over extended periods of time and capable of
surreptitious use.

10. Substances which produce physical disablement such as paralysis of the legs, acute anemia, etc.

11. Substances which will produce pure euphoria with no subsequent let-down.

12. Substances which alter personality structure in such a way that the tendency of the recipient to become
dependent upon another person is enhanced.

13. A material which will cause mental confusion of such a type that the individual under its influence will find it
difficult to maintain a fabrication under questioning.

14. Substances which will lower the ambition and general working efficiency of men when administered in
undetectable amounts.

15. Substances which promote weakness or distortion of the eyesight or hearing faculties, preferably without
permanent effects.

16. A knockout pill which can surreptitiously be administered in drinks, food, cigarettes, as an aerosol, etc., which
will be safe to use, provide a maximum of amnesia, and be suitable for use by agent types on an ad hoc basis.

17. A material which can be surreptitiously administered by the above routes and which in very small amounts
will make it impossible for a man to perform any physical activity whatsoever.

At the end of this 1955 CIA document, the author [unnamed] makes these remarks:

In practice, it has been possible to use outside cleared contractors for the preliminary phases of this [research]
work. However, that part which involves human testing at effective dose levels presents security problems which
cannot be handled by the ordinary contactors.

The proposed [human testing] facility [deletion] offers a unique opportunity for the secure handling of such clinical
testing in addition to the many advantages outlined in the project proposal.

The security problems mentioned above are eliminated by the fact that the responsibility for the testing will rest
completely upon the physician and the hospital. [one line deleted] will allow [CIA] TSS/CD personnel to supervise
the work very closely to make sure that all tests are conducted according to the recognized practices and embody
adequate safeguards.
In other words, this was to be ultra-secret. No outside contractors at universities for the core of the experiments, which by
the way could be carried forward for decades.A secret in-house facility. Over the years, more facilities could be created.

If you examine the full range of psychiatric drugs developed since 1955, youll see that a number of them fit the CIAs
agenda. Speed-type chemicals to addle the brain over the long term, to treat so-called ADHD.

Anti-psychotic drugs, AKA major tranquilizers, to render patients more and more dependent on others (and government)
as they sink into profound disability and incur motor brain damage.

Related: Monarch Mind Control & The MK-Ultra Program

And of course, the SSRI antidepressants, like Prozac and Paxil and Zoloft, which produce extreme and debilitating highs
and lows - and also push people over the edge into committing violence.

These drugs drag the whole society down into lower and lower levels of consciousness and action.

Related Articles:

Secret Deep-Black War to Hijack Your Mind

Investigating MK-ULTRA and psychedelic and environmental movements Brain database

Central Intelligence Agency collection: Stargate

The Stargate Project : Psychic Warriors and the CIA

Climate Intervention: A Government Cover-Up Of Epic Proportions


December 3 2016 | From: WND

I recently addressed how CIA Director John Brennan gave a historic speech to the Council on
Foreign Relations, confessing something few thought they would ever hear: the federal
governments explicit and intentional climate intervention via operations like stratospheric aerosol
spraying or injections, or SAI.
What I didnt explain is that SAI is a ginormous federal geo-engineering cover up that is now being exposed, and
yet not a single mainstream media outlet has reported on it. Let me explain.

Related: The Real Fake News exposed: '97% of scientists agree on climate change' is an engineered hoax... here's
what the media never told you

In April, the U.S. Senate directed the Department of Energy (DOE) to review the findings of the National Academy [of
Sciences, or NAS] report, Climate Intervention: Reflecting Sunlight to Cool Earth, and to study the potential impacts of
albedo modification [or solar radiation management], a potential method of geoengineering, which included smaller scale
field trials.

Science magazine explained:

Albedo modification would work by lacing the atmosphere with tiny particles or aerosols that would reflect sunlight
and mimic natural processes.

For example, in 1991 the volcano Mount Pinatubo in the Philippines spewed 20 million tons of sulfur dioxide into
the stratosphere, which spans altitudes from 10 to 50 kilometers.

There, the sulfur dioxide produced aerosols that reflected enough sunlight to reduce global temperature by an
estimated 0.3C for 3 years.

Albedo modification might also work by using aerosols to seed cloud formation in a lower atmospheric layer called
the troposphere.

The U.S. Senate pushed the DOE to pursue albedo modification action a couple months before CIA Director Brennan gave
his blessing to stratospheric spraying as a government operation that potentially could help reverse the warming effects of
global climate change.
Whats crazy about all that government endorsement is that the February 2015 NAS report, on which the feds base their
entire toxic rain operation;

Warned explicitly that albedo modification shouldnt be deployed now because the risks and benefits
were far too uncertain.

What are those risks? Here are just three grave consequences that we know about:

Drought: The team under Chien Wang, a co-author of the NAS study and a senior research scientist at MITs Center for
Global Change Science and the Department of Earth, concluded that albedo modification would lead;

To dangerous changes in global weather: Precipitation would also decline worldwide, and some parts of the world
would be worse off. Europe, the Horn of Africa, and Pakistan may receive less rainfall than they have historically.

Loss of blue sky: According to a report by the New Scientist, Ben Kravitz of the Carnegie Institution for Science explained,
Releasing sulphate aerosols high in the atmosphere should in theory reduce global temperatures by reflecting a small
percentage of the incoming sunlight away from the Earth.

Related: Trump Picks Top Climate Skeptic to Lead EPA Transition

However, the extra particles would also scatter more of the remaining light into the atmosphere. This would reduce by 20
per cent the amount of sunlight that takes a direct route to the ground, and it would increase levels of softer, diffuse
scattered light, making the sky appear hazier.

Hazards to human health and other earth life: The gravest of all consequences of atmospheric aerosol spraying is that,
simply put, whats sprayed above us settles down upon us and in us, as well as other life on earth.

The U.S. governments own National Center for Biotechnology Information, or NCBI, released a report in January 2016, the
goal of which was Assessing the direct occupational and public health impacts of solar radiation management with
stratospheric aerosols. The NCBI concluded:

Our analysis suggests that adverse public health impacts may reasonably be expected from SRM via deployment
of stratospheric aerosols.

Little is known about the toxicity of some likely candidate aerosols, and there is no consensus regarding
acceptable levels for public exposure to these materials.

There is also little infrastructure in place to evaluate potential public health impacts in the event that stratospheric
aerosols are deployed for solar radiation management.

No wonder the co-author of the study on Climate Intervention, Dr. James Fleming, called geo-engineering like
SAI: untested and untestable, and dangerous beyond belief.

Related: A new study suggests that carbon-hungry plants help keep atmospheric CO2 levels in check

Another colleague and co-author, Dr. Raymond T. Pierrehumbert, the Louis Block professor in geophysical sciences at the
University of Chicago, and Swedens King Carl XVI Gustafn, chairman in environmental science at Stockholms Universitet,
took it one step further. He warned;
The nearly two years worth of reading and animated discussions that went into this study have
convinced me more than ever that the idea of fixing the climate by hacking the Earths reflection of
sunlight is wildly, utterly, howlingly barking mad.

(That is why Dr. Pierrehumbert prefers to call albedo modification by the name albedo hacking.)

Dr. Pierrehumber added: The report describes albedo modification frankly as involving large and partly unknown risks. It
states outright that albedo modification should not be deployed.'

So, why are the U.S. Senate and CIA director disregarding the dire and passionate warnings of scientists like Dr.
Pierrehumbert and Dr. Fleming by demanding that the Department of Energy proceed with trials on geo-engineering? In the
words of Dr. Pierrehumber, are they wildly, utterly, howlingly barking mad? Answer: Yes!

Is it a mere coincidence that the very government agencies that are spraying our stratosphere with toxic chemicals were the
actual sponsors of the NAS report? The NAS itself confessed:

The study was sponsored by the National Academy of Sciences, U.S. intelligence community, National
Aeronautics and Space Administration, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and U.S. Department of
Energy (italics mine).

Isnt that like your right hand quoting your left hand so that your right hand can grab what its already holding? Is
the NAS report another government push and ploy to collaborate and cite scientific proof to justify its clandestine
climate agenda?

Why else would the CIA and U.S. Senate be proceeding in climate aerosol spraying when the very scientists
preparing the study warned, Stop! Dont do it! Its crazy and dangerous!

The most colossal and tragic of all government cover-ups is the fact that the feds have been waging climate warfare for
more than 30 years, lacing our clouds and stratosphere with dangerous nano-particles, including environmental sulfates,
black carbon, metallic aluminum and aluminum oxide aerosols.
The truth is, for decades, the feds have been covertly and overtly running sky criminal operations behind (above!) our backs,
leaving humans and the rest of the planet life as lab rats of their toxic cocktail fallout.

Geoengineeringwatch.org reported that a 1978 750-page congressional report was recently discovered with a mountain of
information going back decades that confirms the ongoing extensive involvement of our government in climate
modification/weather warfare.

This document also confirms the involvement of foreign governments around the globe, even governments that would
otherwise have been considered hostile to US interests.'

Why hasnt a single mainstream media outlet reported on the CIA and DOEs march forward with SAI when the scientific
community has explicitly and repeatedly warned against it?

Why are geo-engineering researchers being stonewalled by government and media?

And why in hell are watchdogs on both the left and right dodging the feds intentional and hazardous climate intervention,
when they seek to uncover government cover-ups and conspiracies with the most scant of evidence?

Dane Wigington, the lead researcher for GeoengineeringWatch.org and a fierce fighter for government geoengineering
transparency, was absolutely right when he wrote: How big does the climate engineering elephant in the room need to be
before it can no longer be hidden in plain site?
How much more historical proof do we need of the ongoing climate engineering/weather warfare before the denial of the
masses crumbles? When will populations around the globe bring to justice all those responsible for the ongoing and rapidly
worsening worldwide weather warfare assault?

Is it a mere coincidence that, in October 2015, the feds put a universal gag order on agency employees in The National
Weather Service, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the U.S. Dept. of Commerce?

Is it a mere coincidence that the Obama administration has spent more taxpayer monies for legal prosecutions of
government whistleblowers than all other U.S. presidents combined, resulting in 31 times the jail sentences?
Its time to blow the lid off the governments climate cover-up!

That is why my wife, Gena, and I encourage citizens everywhere to do their own research on geo-engineering and then
write their government representatives to demand action. We also encourage the support of the Legal Alliance of pro-bono
lawyers now amassed as a united front to fight the geo-engineering government cover-up in court.

To read or learn more immediately, I highly recommend the work and website of Dane
Wigington. GeoEngineeringWatch.org is loaded with great research on the many facets of climate intervention.

Is Psychiatry Bullshit? + Fourteen Lies That Our Psychiatry Professors Taught Us In


Medical School
November 26 2016 | From: Sott / GlobalResearch

Some Psychiatrists View The Chemical-Imbalance Theory As A Well-Meaning Lie.


In the current issue of the journal Ethical Human Psychology and Psychiatry, Australian dissident psychiatrist Niall
McLaren titles his article, "Psychiatry as Bullshit" and makes a case for just that.

Related: The Myth Of Mental Illness: Psychiatry Is A Fraud And It Is All About Control + Opposition Defiant
Disorder - Non-Conformity And Anti-Authoritarianism Now Considered An Illness

The great controversies in psychiatry are no longer about its chemical-imbalance theory of mental illness or its DSM
diagnostic system, both of which have now been declared invalid even by the pillars of the psychiatry
establishment.

In 2011, Ronald Pies, editor-in-chief emeritus of the Psychiatric Times, stated;

In truth, the 'chemical imbalance' notion was always a kind of urban legend - never a theory seriously propounded
by well-informed psychiatrists."

And in 2013, Thomas Insel, then director of the National Institute of Mental Health, offered a harsh rebuke of the
DSM, announcing that because the DSM diagnostic system lacks validity, the: "NIMH will be re-orienting its
research away from DSM categories."

So, the great controversy today has now become just how psychiatry can be most fairly characterized given its record of
being proven wrong about virtually all of its assertions, most notably its classifications of behaviors, theories of "mental
illness" and treatment effectiveness/adverse effects.

Among critics, one of the gentlest characterizations of psychiatry is a "false narrative," the phrase used by investigative
reporter Robert Whitaker (who won the 2010 Investigative Reporters and Editors Book Award for Anatomy of an Epidemic)
to describe the story told by the psychiatrists' guild American Psychiatric Association.

In "Psychiatry as Bullshit," McLaren begins by considering several different categories of "nonscience with scientific
pretensions," such as "pseudoscience" and "scientific fraud."

"Pseudoscience" is commonly defined as a collection of beliefs and practices promulgated as scientific but in reality
mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method. The NIMH director ultimately rejected the DSM because of its lack
of validity, which is crucial to the scientific method.

In the DSM, psychiatric illnesses are created by an APA committee, 69 percent of whom have financial ties to Big
Pharma.

The criteria for DSM illness are not objective biological ones but non-scientific subjective ones (which is why homosexuality
was a DSM mental illness until the early 1970s).

Besides lack of scientific validity, the DSM lacks scientific reliability, as clinicians routinely disagree on diagnoses because
patients act differently in different circumstances and because of the subjective nature of the criteria.

"Fraud" is a misrepresentation, a deception intended for personal gain, and implies an intention to deceive others
of the truth - or "lying." Drug companies, including those that manufacture psychiatric drugs, have been convicted
of fraud, as have high-profile psychiatrists (as well as other doctors).

Human rights activist and attorney Jim Gottstein offers an argument as to why the APA is a "fraudulent enterprise"; however,
the APA has not been legally convicted of fraud.
To best characterize psychiatry, McLaren considers the category of "bullshit," invoking philosopher Harry Frankfurt's 1986
journal article "On Bullshit" (which became a New York Times bestselling book in 2005).

Defining Bullshit

What is the essence of bullshit? For Frankfurt, "This lack of connection to a concern with truth - this indifference to how
things really are - that I regard as of the essence of bullshit."

Frankfurt devotes a good deal of On Bullshit to differentiating between a liar and a bullshitter. Both the liar and the bullshitter
misrepresent themselves, representing themselves as attempting to be honest and truthful. But there is a difference
between the liar and the bullshitter.

The liar knows the truth, and the liar's goal is to conceal it.

The goal of bullshitters is not necessarily to lie about the truth but to persuade their audience of a specific
impression so as to advance their agenda. So, bullshitters are committed to neither truths nor untruths,
uncommitted to neither facts nor fiction. It's actually not in bullshitters' interest to know what is true and what is
false, as that knowledge can hinder their capacity to bullshit.

Frankfurt tells us that liar the hides that he or she is "attempting to lead us away from a correct apprehension of reality." In
contrast, the bullshitter hides that "the truth-values of his statements are of no central interest to him."

Are Psychiatrists Bullshitters?

Recall establishment psychiatrist Pies' assertion:


In truth, the 'chemical imbalance' notion was always a kind of urban legend - never a theory seriously propounded
by well-informed psychiatrists."

What Pies omits is the reality that the vast majority of psychiatrists have been promulgating this theory. Were they
liars or simply not well-informed? And if not well-informed, were they purposely not well-informed?

If one wants to bullshit oneself and the general public that psychiatry is a genuinely scientific medical specialty, there's a
great incentive to be unconcerned with the truth or falseness of the chemical imbalance theory of depression.

Bullshitters immediately recognize how powerful this chemical imbalance notion is in gaining prestige for their profession
and themselves as well as making their job both more lucrative and easier, increasing patient volume by turning virtually all
patient visits into quick prescribing ones.

Prior to the chemical imbalance bullshit campaign, most Americans were reluctant to take antidepressants - or to
give them to their children.

Related: Big Pharma Caught Manipulating Antidepressant Drug Trials Putting Teenagers in Grave Danger

But the idea that depression is caused by a chemical imbalance that can be corrected with Prozac, Paxil, Zoloft and
selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor antidepressants sounded like taking insulin for diabetes.

Correcting a chemical imbalance seemed like a reasonable thing to do, and so the use of SSRI antidepressants
skyrocketed.

In 2012, National Public Radio correspondent Alix Spiegel began her piece about the disproven chemical imbalance theory
with the following personal story about being prescribed Prozac when she was a depressed teenager:

My parents took me to a psychiatrist at Johns Hopkins Hospital. She did an evaluation and then told me this story:
"The problem with you," she explained, "is that you have a chemical imbalance. It's biological, just like diabetes,
but it's in your brain.

This chemical in your brain called serotonin is too, too low. There's not enough of it, and that's what's causing the
chemical imbalance. We need to give you medication to correct that." Then she handed my mother a prescription
for Prozac. "

Related: 7 Facts About Depression That Will Blow You Away

When Spiegel discovered that the chemical imbalance theory was untrue, she sought to discover why this truth had been
covered up, and so she interviewed researchers who knew the truth.

Alan Frazer, professor of pharmacology and psychiatry and chairman of the pharmacology department at the University of
Texas Health Sciences Center, told Spiegel that by framing depression as a deficiency - something that needed to be
returned to normal - patients felt more comfortable taking antidepressants.

Frazer stated;

If there was this biological reason for them being depressed, some deficiency that the drug was correcting, then
taking a drug was OK."

For Frazer, the story that depressed people have a chemical imbalance enabled many people to come out of the closet
about being depressed.

Frazer's rationale reminds us of Edward Herman and Noam Chomsky's book Manufacturing Consent, the title deriving from
presidential adviser and journalist Walter Lippmann's phrase "the manufacture of consent" - a necessity for Lippmann, who
believed that the general public is incompetent in discerning what's truly best for them, and so their opinion must be molded
by a benevolent elite who does know what's best for them.
There are some psychiatrists who view the chemical imbalance theory as a well-meaning lie by a benevolent elite to ensure
resistant patients do what is best for them, but my experience is that there are actually extremely few such "well-meaning
liars." Most simply don't know the truth because they have put little effort in discerning it.

I believe McLaren is correct in concluding that the vast majority of psychiatrists are bullshitters, uncommitted to either facts
or fiction. Most psychiatrists would certainly have been happy if the chemical-imbalance theory was true but obviously have
not needed it to be true in order to promulgate it.

For truth seekers, the falseness of the chemical imbalance theory has been easily available, but most psychiatrists
have not been truth seekers.

It is not in the bullshitters' interest to know what is true and what is false, as that knowledge of what is a fact and what is
fiction hinders the capacity to use any and all powerful persuasion. Simply put, a commitment to the truth hinders the
capacity to bullshit.

About the Author

Bruce E. Levine is a practicing clinical psychologist. His latest book is Get Up, Stand Up: Uniting Populists, Energizing the
Defeated, and Battling the Corporate Elite.

Psychotropic Drugs, Are They Safe?


Fourteen Lies That Our Psychiatry Professors Taught Us In Medical School.

Myth # 1:

The FDA (US Food and Drug Administration) tests all new psychiatric drugs

False. Actually the FDA only reviews studies that were designed, administered, secretly performed and paid for by the
multinational profit-driven drug companies.

The studies are frequently farmed out by the pharmaceutical companies by well-paid research firms, in whose interest it is to
find positive results for their corporate employers. Unsurprisingly, such research policies virtually guarantee fraudulent
results.

Myth # 2:

FDA approval means that a psychotropic drug is effective long-term

False. Actually, FDA approval doesnt even mean that psychiatric drugs have been proven to be safe either short-
term or long-term! The notion that FDA approval means that a psych drug has been proven to be effective is also a false
one, for most such drugs are never tested prior to marketing for longer than a few months (and most psych patients take
their drugs for years).

The pharmaceutical industry pays many psychiatric researchers often academic psychiatrists (with east access to
compliant, chronic, already drugged-up patients) who have financial or professional conflicts of interest some of them even
sitting on FDA advisory committees who attempt to fast track psych drugs through the approval process.
For each new drug application, the FDA only receives 1 or 2 of the best studies (out of many) that purport to show short-
term effectiveness. The negative studies are shelved and not revealed to the FDA. In the case of the SSRI drugs, animal lab
studies typically lasted only hours, days or weeks and the human clinical studies only lasted, on average, 4- 6 weeks, far too
short to draw any valid conclusions about long-term effectiveness or safety!

Hence the FDA, prescribing physicians and patient-victims should not have been surprised by the resulting
epidemic of SSRI drug-induced adverse reactions that are silently plaguing the people.

Indeed, many SSRI trials have shown that those drugs are barely more effective than placebo (albeit statistically significant!)
with unaffordable economic costs and serious health risks, some of which are life-threatening and known to be capable of
causing brain damage.

Myth # 3:

FDA approval means that a psychotropic drug is safe long-term

False. Actually, the SSRIs and the anti-psychotic drugs are usually tested in human trials for only a couple of months
before being granted marketing approval by the FDA. And the drug companies are only required to report 1 or 2 studies
(even if many other studies on the same drug showed negative, even disastrous, results).

Drug companies obviously prefer that the black box and fine print warnings associated with their drugs are ignored by both
consumers and prescribers. One only has to note how small the print is on the commercials.
Related: Key Factors To Overcoming Depression Without Drugs

In our fast-paced shop-until-you-drop consumer society, we super-busy prescribing physicians and physician
assistants have never been fully aware of the multitude of dangerous, potentially fatal adverse psych drug effects
that include addiction, mania, psychosis, suicidality, worsening depression, worsening anxiety, insomnia,
akathisia, brain damage, dementia, homicidality, violence, etc, etc.

But when was the last time anybody heard the FDA or Big Pharma apologize for the damage they did in the past?

And when was the last time there were significant punishments (other than writs slaps and chump change multimillion
dollar fines) or prison time for the CEOs of the guilty multibillion dollar drug companies?

Myth # 4:

Mental illnesses are caused by brain chemistry imbalances

False. In actuality, brain chemical/neurotransmitter imbalances have never been proven to exist (except for cases of
neurotransmitter depletions caused by psych drugs) despite vigorous examinations of lab animal or autopsied human brains
and brain slices by neuroscientist s who were employed by well-funded drug companies.

Knowing that there are over 100 known neurotransmitter systems in the human brain, proposing a theoretical chemical
imbalance is laughable and flies in the face of science.
Related: Low-Serotonin Depression Theory Challenged

Not only that, but if there was an imbalance between any two of the 100 potential systems (impossible to prove), a drug
that has never been tested on more than a handful of them could never be expected to re-balance it!

Such simplistic theories have been perpetrated by Big Pharma upon a gullible public and a gullible psychiatric
industry because corporations that want to sell the public on their unnecessary products know that they have to
resort to 20 second sound bite-type propaganda to convince patients and prescribing practitioners why they
should be taking or prescribing synthetic, brain-altering drugs that havent been adequately tested.

Myth # 5:

Antidepressant drugs work like insulin for diabetics

False. This laughingly simplistic and very anti-scientific explanation for the use of dangerous and addictive synthetic
drugs is patently absurd and physicians and patients who believe it should be ashamed of themselves for falling for it.

There is such a thing as an insulin deficiency (but only in type 1 diabetes) but there is no such thing as a Prozac deficiency.

SSRIs (so-called Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors an intentional mis-representation because those drugs
are NOT selective!) do not raise total brain serotonin.

Rather, SSRIs actually deplete serotonin long-term while only goosing serotonin release at the synapse level while at the
same time interfere with the storage, reuse and re-cycling of serotonin (by its serotonin reuptake inhibition function).
(Parenthetically, the distorted illogic of the insulin/diabetes comparison above could legitimately be made in the case of the
amino acid brain nutrient tryptophan, which is the precursor molecule of the important natural neurotransmitter serotonin.

If a serotonin deficiency or imbalance could be proven, the only logical treatment approach would be to supplement the
diet with the serotonin precursor tryptophan rather than inflict upon the brain a brain-altering synthetic chemical that actually
depletes serotonin long-term!

Myth # 6:

SSRI discontinuation syndromes are different than withdrawal syndromes

False. The SSRI antidepressant drugs are indeed dependency-inducing/addictive and the neurological and psychological
symptoms that occur when these drugs are stopped or tapered down are not relapses into a previous mental disorder -
as has been commonly asserted - but are actually new drug withdrawal symptoms that are different from those that
prompted the original diagnosis

The term discontinuation syndrome is part of a cunningly-designed conspiracy that was plotted in secret by
members of the psychopharmaceutical industryin order to deceive physicians into thinking that these drugs are
not addictive.
Related: Dr. Kelly Brogan's Takedown Of Big Pharma's SSRI Anti-Depressant Drug Lies Hits Bestseller Lists

The deception has been shamelessly promoted to distract attention from the proven fact that most psych drugs are
dependency-inducing and are therefore likely to cause discontinuation/withdrawal symptoms when they are stopped.

The drug industry knows that most people do not want to swallow dependency-inducing drugs that are likely to cause
painful, even lethal withdrawal symptoms when they cut down the dose of the drug.

Myth # 7:

Ritalin is safe for children (or adults)

False. In actuality, methylphenidate (= Ritalin, Concerta, Daytrana, Metadate and Methylin; aka kiddie cocaine), a
dopamine reuptake inhibitor drug, works exactly like cocaine on dopamine synapses, except that orally-dosed
methylphenidate reaches the brain more slowly than snortable or smoked cocaine does.
Related: Nutrition And Mental Health + ADHD Is A Fabricated Disease, Says Reputed Neurologist

Therefore the oral form has less of an orgasmic high than cocaine.

Cocaine addicts actually prefer Ritalin if they can get it in a relatively pure powder form.

When snorted, the synthetic Ritalin (as opposed to the naturally-occurring, and therefore more easily metabolically-
degraded cocaine) has the same onset of action but, predictably, has a longer lasting high and is thus preferred among
addicted individuals.

The molecular structures of Ritalin and cocaine both have amphetamine base structures with ring-shaped side
chains which, when examined side by side, are remarkably similar. The dopamine synaptic organelles in the brain (and
heart, blood vessels, lungs and guts) are unlikely to sense any difference between the two drugs.

Myth # 8:

Psychoactive drugs are totally safe for humans

False. See Myth # 3 above. Actually all five classes of psychotropic drugs have, with long-term use, been found to be
neurotoxic (ie, known to destroy or otherwise alter the physiology, chemistry, anatomy and viability of vital energy-producing
mitochondria in every brain cell and nerve). They are therefore all capable of contributing to dementia when used long-term.
Related: The Shocking Truth About Antidepressant Drug Studies + Peter Breggin MD: How Do Psychiatric Drugs
Really Work?

Any synthetic chemical that is capable of crossing the blood-brain barrier into the brain can alter and disable the brain.
Synthetic chemical drugs are NOT capable of healing brain dysfunction, curing malnutrition or reversing brain damage.

Rather than curing anything, psychiatric drugs are only capable of masking symptoms while the abnormal emotional,
neurological or malnutritional processes that mimic mental illnesses continue unabated.

Myth # 9:

Mental illnesses have no known cause

False. The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM, published by the American Psychiatric Association, is pejoratively
called the psychiatric bible and billing book for psychiatrists.

Despite its name, it actually has no statistics in it, and, of the 374 psychiatric diagnoses in the DSM-IV (there is now
a 5th edition) there seem to be only two that emphasize known root causes.

Those two diagnoses are Posttraumatic Stress Disorder and Acute Stress Disorder. The DSM-V has been roundly
condemned as being just another book that laughingly pathologizes a few more normal human emotions and behaviors.

In my decade of work as an independent holistic mental health care practitioner, I was virtually always able to detect many
of the multiple root causes and contributing factors that easily explained the signs, symptoms and behaviors that had
resulted in a perplexing number of false diagnoses of mental illness of unknown origin.

Many of my patients had been made worse by being hastily diagnosed, hastily drugged, bullied, demeaned, malnourished,
incarcerated, electroshocked (often against their wills and/or without fully informed consent).

My patients had been frequently rendered unemployable or even permanently disabled as a result all because temporary,
potentially reversible, and therefore emotional stressors had not been recognized at the onset.
Because of the reliance on drugs, many of my patients had been made incurable by not having been referred to
compassionate practitioners who practiced high quality, non-drug-based, potentially curable psychotherapy.

The root causes of my patients understandable emotional distress were typically multiple, although sometimes a
single trauma, such as a rape, violent assault or a psychological trauma in the military would cause an otherwise
normally-developing individual to decompensate.

But the vast majority of my patients had experienced easily identifiable chronic sexual, physical, psychological, emotional
and/or spiritual traumas as root causes often accompanied by hopelessness, sleep deprivation, serious emotional or
physical neglect and brain nutrient deficiencies as well.

The only way that I could obtain this critically important information was through the use of thorough, compassionate (and,
unfortunately, time-consuming) investigation into the patients complete history, starting with prenatal, maternal, infant and
childhood exposures to toxins (including vaccines) and continuing into the vitally important adolescent medical history (all
periods when the patients brain was rapidly developing).
My clinical experience proved to me that if enough high quality time was spent with the patient and if enough hard work was
exerted looking for root causes, the patients predicament could usually be clarified and the erroneous past labels (of
mental illnesses of unknown origin) could be thrown out.

Such efforts were often tremendously therapeutic for my patients, who up to that time had been made to feel guilty,
ashamed or hopeless by previous therapists.

In my experience, most mental ill health syndromes represented identifiable, albeit serious emotional de-compensation due
to temporarily overwhelming crisis situations linked to traumatic, frightening, torturous, neglectful and soul-destroying life
experiences.

My practice consisted mostly of patients who knew for certain that they were being sickened by months or years of
swallowing one or more brain-altering, addictive prescription drugs that they couldnt get off of by themselves.

I discovered that many of them could have been cured early on in their lives if they only had access and could afford
compassionate psychoeducational psychotherapy, proper brain nutrition and help with addressing issues of deprivation,
parental neglect/abuse, poverty and other destructive psychosocial situations.
Related: Officials Declare Eating Healthy A Mental Disorder

I came to the sobering realization that many of my patients could have been cured years earlier if it hadnt been for the
disabling effects of psychiatric drug regimens, isolation, loneliness, punitive incarcerations, solitary confinement,
discrimination, malnutrition, and/or electroshock.

The neurotoxic and brain-disabling drugs, vaccines and frankenfoods that most of my patients had been given early on had
started them on the road to chronicity and disability.

Myth # 10:

Psychotropic drugs have nothing to do with the huge increase in disabled and unemployable American
psychiatric patients

False. See Myths # 2 and # 3 above. In actuality recent studies have shown that the major cause of permanent disability in
the mentally ill is the long-term, high dosage and/or use of multiple neurotoxic psych drugs any combination of which, as
noted above, has never been adequately tested for safety even in animal labs.
Related: Neuroscientist Shows What Fasting Does To Your Brain & Why Big Pharma Wont Study It

Many commonly-prescribed drugs are fully capable of causing brain-damage long-term, especially the anti-psychotics (aka,
major tranquilizers) like Thorazine, Haldol, Prolixin, Clozapine, Abilify, Clozapine, Fanapt, Geodon, Invega, Risperdal,
Saphris, Seroquel and Zyprexa, all of which can cause brain shrinkage that is commonly seen on the MRI scans of anti-
psychotic drug-treated, so-called schizophrenics commonly pointed out as proof that schizophrenia is an anatomic brain
disorder that causes the brain to shrink! (Incidentally, patients who had been on antipsychotic drugs for whatever reason
have been known to experience withdrawal hallucinations and acute psychotic symptoms even if they had never
experienced such symptoms previously.)

Of course, highly addictive minor tranquilizers like the benzodiazepines (Valium, Ativan, Klonopin, Librium, Tranxene,
Xanax) can cause the same withdrawal syndromes. They are all dangerous and very difficult to withdraw from (withdrawal
results in difficult-to-treat rebound insomnia, panic attacks, and seriously increased anxiety), and, when used long-term, they
can all cause memory loss/dementia, the loss of IQ points and the high likelihood of being mis-diagnosed as Alzheimers
disease (of unknown etiology).

Myth # 11:

So-called bipolar disorder can mysteriously emerge in patients who have been taking stimulating
antidepressants like the SSRIs

False. In actuality, crazy-making behaviors like mania, agitation and aggression are commonly caused by the SSRIs. That
list includes a syndrome called akathisia, a severe, sometimes suicide-inducing internal restlessness like having restless
legs syndrome over ones entire body and brain.

Akathisia was once understood to only occur as a long-term adverse effect of antipsychotic drugs (See Myth # 10). So it was
a shock to many psychiatrists (after Prozac came to market in 1987) to have to admit that SSRIs could also cause that
deadly problem.
Related: Antidepressants Arent Needed Most Of The Time

It has long been my considered opinion that SSRIs should more accurately be called agitation-inducing drugs rather than
anti-depressant drugs.

The important point to make is that SSRI-induced psychosis, mania, agitation, aggression and akathisia is NOT bipolar
disorder nor is it schizophrenia!

Myth # 12:

Antidepressant drugs can prevent suicides

False. In actuality, there is no psychiatric drug that is FDA-approved for the treatment of suicidality because these drugs,
especially the so-called antidepressants, actually INCREASE the incidence of suicidal thinking, suicide attempts and
completed suicides.
Related: The Roots Of Mental Health - Maybe Theyre Not In Our Heads + Rising Rates Of Suicide: Are Pills The
Problem?

Drug companies have spent billions of dollars futilely trying to prove the effectiveness of various psychiatric drugs in suicide
prevention.

Even the most corrupted drug company trials have failed! Indeed what has been discovered is that all the so-called
antidepressants actually increase the incidence of suicidality.

The FDA has required black box warning labels about drug-induced suicidality on all SSRI marketing materials, but that was
only accomplished after over-coming vigorous opposition from the drug-makers and marketers of the offending drugs, who
feared that such truth-telling would hurt their profits (it hasnt).

What can and does avert suicidality, of course, are not drugs, but rather interventions by caring, compassionate and
thorough teams of care-givers that include family, faith communities and friends as well as psychologists, counselors, social
workers, relatives (especially wise grandmas!), and, obviously, the limited involvement of drug prescribers.

Myth # 13:

Americas school shooters and other mass shooters are untreated schizophrenics who should have been taking
psych drugs

False. In actuality, 90% or more of the infamous homicidal and usually suicidal school shooters have already been
under the care of psychiatrists (or other psych drug prescribers) and therefore have typically been taking (or withdrawing
from) one or more psychiatric drugs.

SSRIs (such as Prozac) and psychostimulants (such as Ritalin) have been the most common classes of drugs involved.
Antipsychotics are too sedating, although an angry teen who is withdrawing from antipsychotics could easily become a
school shooter if given access to lethal weapons. (See www.ssristudies.net).

The 10% of school shooters whose drug history is not known, have typically had their medical files sealed by the authorities
probably to protect authorities such as the drug companies and/or the medical professionals who supplied the drugs from
suffering liability or embarrassment.
Important Comment: It should be noted that in most cases such 'False Flag' shooter events, that Mind-Controlled
assets are used in order to carry out events pushing Cabal-driven agenda's such as gun control. In virtually EVERY
case the 'perpetrators' are on multiple prescription drugs for mental health issues.

This is not a comfortable subject but it is one that you will need to confront sooner or later, as the truth will become
common knowledge at some point. Interspersed with the rest of this section are details of the reality which hides
behind the prescription drugs and their side effects -

Related: Monarch Mind Control & The MK-Ultra Program

The powerful drug industry and psychiatry lobby, with the willing help of the media that profits from being their handmaidens,
repeatedly show us the photos of the shooters that look like zombies.

They have successfully gotten the viewing public to buy the notion that these adolescent, white male school
shooters were mentally ill rather than under the influence of their crazy-making, brain-altering drugs or going
through withdrawal.

Contrary to the claims of a recent 60 Minutes program segment about untreated schizophrenics being responsible for half
of the mass shootings in America, the four mentioned in the segment were, in fact, almost certainly being already under the
treatment with psych drugs prior to the massacres by psychiatrists who obviously are being protected from public
identification and/or interrogation by the authorities as accomplices to the crimes or witnesses.
Related: CIA MKULTRA: They Intended To Use Drugs For Everything

Because of this secrecy, the public is being kept in the dark about exactly what crazy-making, homicidality-
inducing psychotropic drugs could have been involved.

The names of the drugs and the multinational corporations that have falsely marketed them as safe drugs are also being
actively protected from scrutiny, and thus the chance of prevention of future drug-related shootings or suicides is being
squandered.

Such decisions by Americas ruling elites represent public health policy at its worst and is a disservice to past and
future shooting victims and their loved ones.
Related: Confession Of A Human Programmer: Illuminati Mind Control

The four most notorious mass shooters that were highlighted in the aforementioned 60 Minutes segment included the
Virginia Tech shooter, the Tucson shooter, the Aurora shooter and the Sandy Hook shooter whose wild-eyed (drugged-up)
photos have been carefully chosen for their dramatic zombie-look effect, so that most frightened, paranoid Americans are
convinced that it was a crazy schizophrenic, rather than a victim of psychoactive, brain-altering, crazy-making drugs that
may have made him do it.

Parenthetically, it needs to be mentioned that many media outlets profit handsomely from the drug and medical industries.

Therefore those media outlets have an incentive to protect the names of the drugs, the names of the drug
companies, the names of the prescribing MDs and the names of the clinics and hospitals that could, in a truly just
and democratic world, otherwise be linked to the crimes.
Related: Are You A Mind-Controlled CIA Stooge? + The Term Conspiracy Theory Was Invented By The CIA In
Order To Prevent Disbelief Of Official Government Stories

Certainly if a methamphetamine-intoxicated person shot someone, the person who supplied the intoxicating drug would be
considered an accomplice to the crime, just like the bartender who supplied the liquor to someone who later committed a
violent crime would be held accountable.

A double standard obviously exists when it comes to powerful, respected and highly profitable corporations.

A thorough study of the scores of American school shooters, starting with the University of Texas tower shooter in 1966 and
(temporarily) stopping at Sandy Hook, reveals that the overwhelming majority of them (if not all of them) were taking brain-
altering, mesmerizing, impulse-destroying, dont give a damn drugs that had been prescribed to them by well-meaning but
too-busy psychiatrists, family physicians or physician assistants who somehow were unaware of or were misinformed about
the homicidal and suicidal risks to their equally unsuspecting patients (and therefore they had failed to warn the patient
and/or the patients loved ones about the potentially dire consequences).

Related: Censorship Shock: Amazon.com Bans Investigative Book Nobody Died At Sandy Hook Because It
Disagrees With Government Version Of What Happened
Most practitioners who wrote the prescriptions for the mass shooters or for a patient who later suicided while under the
influence of the drug, will probably(and legitimately so) defend themselves against the charge of being an accomplice to
mass murder or suicide by saying that they were ignorant about the dangers of these cavalierly prescribed psych drugs
because they had been deceived by the cunning drug companies that had convinced them of the benign nature of the
drugs.

Myth # 14:

If your patient hears voices it means hes a schizophrenic

False. Auditory hallucinations are known to occur in up to 10% of normal people; and up to 75% of normal people have had
the experience of someone that isnt there calling their name. (www.hearing-voices.org/voices-visions).

Nighttime dreams, nightmares and flashbacks probably have similar origins to daytime visual, auditory and
olfactory hallucinations, but even psychiatrists dont think that they represent mental illnesses.

Indeed, hallucinations are listed in the pharmaceutical literature as a potential side effect or withdrawal symptom of many
drugs, especially psychiatric drugs.

These syndromes are called substance-induced psychotic disorders which are, by definition, neither mental illnesses nor
schizophrenia.

Rather, substance-induced or withdrawal-induced psychotic disorders are temporary and directly caused by the
intoxicating effects of malnutrition or brain-altering drugs such as alcohol, medications, hallucinogenic drugs and
other toxins.

Psychotic symptoms, including hallucinations and delusions, can be caused by substances such as alcohol, marijuana,
hallucinogens, sedatives, hypnotics, and anxiolytics, inhalants, opioids, PCP, and the many of the amphetamine-like drugs
(like Phen-Fen, [fenfluramine]), cocaine, methamphetamine, Ecstasy, and agitation-inducing, psycho-stimulating drugs like
the SSRIs).

Psychotic symptoms can also result from sleep deprivation, sensory deprivation and the withdrawal from certain drugs like
alcohol, sedatives, hypnotics, anxiolytics and especially the many dopamine-suppressing, dependency-inducing, sedating,
and zombifying anti-psychotic drugs.
Examples of other medications that may induce hallucinations and delusions include anesthetics, analgesics, anticholinergic
agents, anticonvulsants, antihistamines, antihypertensive and cardiovascular medications, some antimicrobial medications,
anti-parkinsonian drugs, some chemotherapeutic agents, corticosteroids, some gastrointestinal medications, muscle
relaxants, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory medications, and Antabuse.

The very sobering information revealed above should cause any thinking person, patient, thought-leader or politician to
wonder:

How many otherwise normal or potentially curable people over the last half century of psych drug propaganda
have actually been mis-labeled as mentally ill (and then mis-treated) and sent down the convoluted path of
therapeutic misadventures heading toward oblivion?

In my mental health care practice, I personally treated hundreds of patients who had been given a multitude of confusing
and contradictory mental illness labels, many of which had been one of the new diseases of the month for which there was
a new psych drug of the month that was being heavily marketed on TV.

Many of my patients had simply been victims of unpredictable drug-drug interactions (far too often drug-drug-drug-
drug interactions) or simply adverse reactions to psych drugs which had been erroneously diagnosed as a new
mental illness.

Extrapolating my 1,200 patient experience (in my little isolated section of the nation) to what surely must be happening in
America boggles my mind.

There has been a massive epidemic going on right under our noses that has affected millions of suffering victims
who could have been cured if not for the drugs.

The time to act on this knowledge is long overdue.


Seeding Doubt: How Self-Appointed Guardians Of Sound Science Tip The Scales
Toward Industry
November 23 2016 | From: TheIntercept

At a time when public mistrust of science runs high, and non-experts are hard-pressed to separate
fact from industry-sponsored spin, Sense About Science, a charity based in London with an
affiliate in New York, presents itself as a trustworthy arbiter.

The organization purports to help the misinformed public sift through alarmist claims about public health and the
environment by directing journalists, policymakers, and others to vetted sources who can explain the evidence
behind debates about controversial products like e-cigarettes and flame retardants.

Related: Scientific American Writer Exposes The Tribal Cultist Arrogance And Dogmatic Lunacy Of Science
'Skeptics'

One reason the public is so confused, suggested Tracey Brown, the groups director, in a recent Guardian op-ed, is that the
media feeds alarmism by focusing on who sponsors scientific studies, rather than asking more important questions about
whether the research is sound.

Even when there is no evidence of bias, Brown contended, journalists attack industry-funded research, running exposs on
subjects such as fracking, genetically modified plants, and sugar. Brown lamented that what she called the who funded it?
question is too often asked by people with axes to grind.

Browns downplaying of concerns about such research invites skepticism. Since the mid-1990s, numerous studies have
shown that industry-funded research tends to favor its sponsors products. This effect has been documented in research
financed by chemical, pharmaceutical, surgical, food, tobacco, and, we have learned most recently, sugar companies.

In the 1960s, the sugar industry secretly paid scientists to minimize the role sugar plays in causing heart disease and blame
saturated fat instead, according to a study published in the September issue of JAMA Internal Medicine.
Related: The Sugar Conspiracy - Professor John Yudkin: The Man Who Tried To Warn Us About Sugar

For decades, industry-funded research helped tobacco companies block regulations by undermining evidence that
cigarettes kill.

Precisely because of the very real risk of bias, prestigious scientific journals have long required researchers to disclose their
sources of support.

Journalists in pursuit of transparency have good reason to ask, Who funded it?

Sense About Science claims to champion transparency. The organization has campaigned to see the evidence behind
policy decisions and asked for pharmaceutical companies to release all the results of clinical trials, not just the positive
ones.

Nearly 700 organizations have signed on to the clinical trials initiative since it began last year. These are salutary efforts,
and Brown points out that with the exception of one program funded by publishers, none of the groups projects
are underwritten by companies. But this sidesteps a larger issue.

Sense About Science does not always disclose when its sources on controversial matters are scientists with ties to the
industries under examination. And the group is known to take positions that buck scientific consensus or dismiss emerging
evidence of harm.

When journalists rightly ask who sponsors research into the risks of, say, asbestos, or synthetic chemicals, theyd be well
advised to question the evidence Sense About Science presents in these debates as well.
A man holds a tobacco sample at the Seita-Imperial tobacco research center on May 29, 2012, in Fleury-les-Aubrais, France

In 2002, Dick Teverne, an English politician and business consultant, founded Sense About Science to expose bogus
science, he explains in his memoir, Against the Tide.

Through his consulting work, Taverne had cultivated relationships with energy, communications, food, and pharmaceutical
companies. Sense About Sciences early sponsors included some of Tavernes former clients and companies in which he
owned stock.

Taverne must have known the power of media narratives about science firsthand, because he had experience with the
tobacco industry, which labored mightily to change the conversation about its product in the face of evidence that cigarettes
were lethal.

According to internal documents released in litigation by cigarette manufacturers, Tavernes consulting company, PRIMA
Europe, helped British American Tobacco improve relations with its investors and beat European regulations on cigarettes in
the 1990s.

Taverne himself worked on the investors project: In an undated memo, PRIMA assured the tobacco company that:

The work would be done personally by Dick Taverne,because he was well placed to interview industry opinion
leaders and would seek to ensure that industrys needs are foremost in peoples minds.

During the same decade, Taverne sat on the board of the British branch of the powerhouse public relations firm Burson-
Marsteller, which claimed Philip Morris as a client.
Related: Heres How Industry-Funded Research Is Making Us Sick And Fat + Like Tobacco And Big Pharma, The
Sugar Industry Has Manipulated Research For 50 Years

The idea for a sound science group, made up of a network of scientists who would speak out against regulations that
industrial spokespeople lacked the credibility to challenge, was a pitch Burson-Marsteller made to Philip Morris in a 1994
memorandum.

Its not hard to identify traces of this approach in Tavernes later work. Writing in his 2005 book, The March of
Unreason, Taverne complained that eco-fundamentalists and fearmongers had fomented a backlash against science and
technology, which had in turn produced a multiplication of health and safety regulations.

That year British Petroleum donated 15,000 pounds to Sense About Science, and Taverne argued in the House of
Lords that as much as 80 percent of global warming might be attributable to solar activity, even though that theory had
been discredited two years earlier. Taverne, who stepped down as chairman of Sense About Science in 2012, did not
respond to The Intercepts requests for comment.

Sense About Science established an American affiliate in 2014, under the direction of a Brooklyn-based journalist named
Trevor Butterworth. In financial documents, Sense About Science claims Sense About Science USA as a sister organization
with close ties and similar aims.

High-profile scientific publishers, as well as such reputable institutions as the Shorenstein Center on Media, Politics and
Public Policy and the Columbia Journalism Review, have promoted Butterworths services to scientists and journalists.
Why Scientists Disagree About Global Warming by Craig D. Idso, Robert M. Carter, S. Fred Singer

Related: Green Gestapo Says You're Mentally Ill If You Challenge Climate Change + Over 30,000 Scientists Say
'Catastrophic Man-Made Global Warming' Is A Complete Hoax And Science Lie

From 2003 to 2014, Butterworth contributed to the website of an organization called STATS, a nonprofit that promoted
statistical literacy. STATS had its own connections to the tobacco industry, in this case through founder Robert Lichter, a
conservative political scientist and now a communications professor at George Mason University.

Lichter also co-founded and continues to run the Center for Media and Public Affairs, which Philip Morris hired in 1994 to
survey news reports about tobacco as part of its strategy, outlined in a memo from March of that year, to counter personal
and public bias in stories about cigarettes health risks.

Lichter, like Sense About Sciences Tracey Brown, has argued that industry money doesnt necessarily taint the
science it supports.

In 2003, a congressional report charged the George W. Bush administration with stacking a government committee on
childhood lead poisoning with industry scientists.

Lichter appeared as an analyst on CNN and said;

Studies have found that scientists who have consulted for industry do not differ in their assessment of risks, of
health risks, from scientists who have not consulted for industry.

Lichter did not respond to The Intercepts requests for comment or citations to these studies.

Before STATS was dissolved in 2014, and its web site adopted by Sense About Science USA, it received regular grants
from free-market sources. Between 1998 and 2014, STATS received $4.5 million, 81 percent of its donations, from the
Searle Freedom Trust, the Sarah Scaife Foundation, the John M. Olin Foundation, Donors Trust (a fund largely sustained by
Charles Koch), and other right-wing foundations.

Searle, which describes its mission as promoting economic liberties, gave STATS $959,000 between 2010 and 2014.

Anti-regulatory foundations, including these, spent over half a billion dollars between 2003 and 2010 to;

Manipulate and mislead the public over the nature of climate science and the threat posed by climate
change, according to a 2013 study by Drexel University sociologist Robert Brulle.

A worker sprays foam before removing asbestos from a ceiling at Jussieu University in Paris, France, on March 25, 1999

With these roots Sense About Science should not surprise anyone when it promotes anti-regulatory voices on issues like
asbestos. In a 2006 brochure called Science for Celebrities and purporting to correct misperceptions about synthetic
chemicals, Sense About Science offers John Hoskins, a toxicologist formerly of the Medical Research Council Toxicology
Unit at the University of Leicester.

Under the rubric Toxic effects depend on dose, Hoskins reassures us:

Away from the high doses of occupational exposure a whole host of unwanted chemicals finds their way into our
bodies. Most leave quickly but some stay: asbestos and silica in our lungs, dioxins in our blood. Do they matter?
No!

More than two decades ago, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the International Agency for Research
on Cancer declared asbestos a proven human carcinogen.

Since then, as countries continue to mine asbestos, industry groups have argued that certain varieties, including chrysotile
and crocidolite, are not so toxic.
In response, several groups, including the Collegium Ramazzini, an international body of occupational and environmental
health experts, have issued consensus statements warning that no form of asbestos is safe at any dose.

In calling for a universal ban on all forms of asbestos in 2010, the Collegium Ramazzini observed that the asbestos
industrys attacks on evidence that irrefutably links its product to cancer closely resemble those used by the tobacco
industry.

Brown maintains that Sense About Science has not disagreed with the scientific consensus on asbestos, and she notes that
dose and type of exposure are the issue. But when I asked Hoskins why his position differed from the scientific consensus,
he shrugged over email, Once upon a time the consensus was that the earth is flat.

Hoskins further replied;

Unfortunately, to say that within a population low-level exposure of many chemicals must be dangerous is not
borne out by reality, much to the chagrin of those who live in the fantasy world of chemical-free.

Hoskinss rsum states that he has represented the Chrysotile Institute in discussion with the governments of several
countries. But he did not disclose this relationship to the Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Public Health journal when he co-
authored two scientific papers disputing claims that chrysotile or crocidolite caused a rare cancer in exposed populations.

When his industry ties came to light, the journal issued errata for both papers to disclose this competing interest.

(Hoskins denies any conflict of interest, insisting that his role in authoring the papers was confined to providing
information the other authors requested. Yet all but one of the other authors had also failed to disclose their
asbestos interests, which now appear in the errata.)

Soon after the first paper appeared, eight public health researchers wrote a letter to the editors of Epidemiology,
Biostatistics and Public Health expressing outrage that the journal would publish a paper with gross mistakes and no
scientific content.

A group that included many of the letters signatories asked the journal to consider retracting the second paper, citing
seriously misleading information.

But the journals editors declined to retract the papers, which remain in the technical literature, casting doubt on the scientific
consensus that all forms of asbestos are hazardous to human health.

Flames threaten to jump a ridge that firefighting aircraft have painted red with fire retardant above Cajon Boulevard at the Blue Cut Fire on Aug. 18,
2016, near Wrightwood, California

It's hard to make a case for the safety of a substance like asbestos, which most people know causes cancer. Other
commercial products are easier to defend, not because they are less hazardous, but because consumers are not as familiar
with the evidence questioning their safety and utility.

Scientists have known since 1997 that flame retardants, for example, can cause cancer.

These brominated and chlorinated chemicals are used in a wide range of consumer products, including nursing pads and
car seats. For more than three decades, studies in animals and humans have linked them to cancer, developmental delays,
and other serious health problems.

By 2010, the evidence was so persuasive that nearly 150 scientists from 22 countries signed a statement warning that flame
retardants are a concern for persistence, bioaccumulation, long-range transport, and toxicity. Flame retardants fire safety
benefit not only remains unproven, the scientists asserted, but the chemicals form highly toxic byproducts when burned.

Sense About Science has long relied on dubious numbers to insist on the efficacy of these chemicals.

In 2006 it published a pamphlet on misconceptions about chemicals in which it claimed that British laws requiring flame
retardants in furniture had reduced fire deaths by 20 percent, citing a 2000 European Commission report called Flame
Retardants.
A European Commission press officer told me she knows of no such report.

The reference to the 20 percent reduction in fire deaths is repeatedly quoted in papers and publications from
flame retardant industries and associations, and they always refer to Flame Retardants, DG Environment Video
2000, which we cannot find.

On the contrary, she told me, it is simply not possible to correlate fire deaths to non-flammability requirements.

Who did make the claim? Flame retardant industry trade groups, including the European Flame Retardant Association and
the Bromine Science and Environmental Forum, run by Philip Morriss longtime PR firm Burson-Marsteller.

Where Flame Retardants are Found:

Realted: The Rise Of Scientific Fundamentalism

The U.S.-based Citizens for Fire Safety also repeated the claim until it disbanded, following revelations in 2012 that leading
flame retardant producers ran the organization, not the grassroots group of staff and volunteers committed to national fire
safety its literature asserted.

The same year, Sense About Science again called on John Hoskins, identified as an independent toxicologist, this time to
fact-check a study that found potentially carcinogenic flame retardants in sofas. In his response, Hoskins wrote: The bottom
line is that danger of fire is many, many times greater than any imagined danger from chemicals used to prevent it.
Everything I wrote about flame retardants was taken from published works, Hoskins told me.

Reviewers at the time found nothing to criticize and I have had no comment from the thousands of people who
must have read the pieces.

Sense About Science reprinted its guide on chemicals in 2014. The trade-off between fire risk and toxicology is changing,
and we represented that newer precautionary thinking in our most recent publications, Brown, the groups director, told The
Intercept in an email.

The new guide acknowledged allegations of side effects from flame retardants, including persistence in the
environment and toxicity to humans and animals.

But it also retained the unsupported claim that regulations requiring the chemicals saved lives.

The guide even retained the text that countered concerns about traces of flame retardants found in childrens bodies by
asserting that because the chemicals protected children from death or injury from fire;

To fail to expose them to such chemicals could be regarded as negligent.

Scientists who reviewed human studies had come to a different conclusion the year before. They warned that although such
links were impossible to prove conclusively, the evidence suggested that childrens exposure to flame retardants could have
serious health consequences, including neurobehavioral and developmental problems. The scientists called for regulatory
oversight.

A scientist holds a flask containing bisphenol A, a chemical used to make plastics that numerous scientific studies have linked to developmental and
reproductive disorders
Related: The Cult Of 'Scientism' Explained: How Scientific Claims Behind Cancer, Vaccines, Psychiatric Drugs And
GMOs Are Nothing More Than Corporate-Funded Science Fraud

Of all the controversial chemicals in the public eye, the one Trevor Butterworth, Sense About Science USAs director, has
most fervently defended is bisphenol A, a compound used to make plastics. BPA is found in hard plastics, the lining of
canned drinks and foods, thermal receipts, and other consumer and industrial products, including cigarette filters.

Manufacturers produce billions of pounds of BPA each year. Its market value is projected to reach $20 billion by 2020. And
numerous studies and scientific consensus statements have linked BPA, which can interfere with hormone signaling, to
developmental and reproductive disorders.

Leading reproductive biologists released a consensus statement in 2007 warning that the wide range of adverse effects of
low doses of BPA in laboratory animals exposed both during development and in adulthood is a great cause for concern
with regard to the potential for similar adverse effects in humans.

Two years later, while working for STATS, Butterworth published a 27,000-word investigation sharply questioning the validity
of the scientific studies and news reports about BPAs health effects.

Related: Chemical Exposure Linked To Rising Diabetes, Obesity Risk

Butterworths central claim was that a handful of scientists, journalists, and environmental activist groups had ignored good
science in a crusade to paint BPA as the biological equivalent of global warming.

He singled out a widely acclaimed special report by Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel reporters Susanne Rust and Meg Kissinger
called Chemical Fallout.

These reporters, he claimed, relied on flawed studies by independent researchers and unfairly dismissed the industry-
funded studies that found no harm.

But the independent studies were not, in fact, flawed. Regulators just didnt consider them useful, because, like many such
academic studies, they didnt measure toxicity but tested hypotheses about how BPA could alter living systems.

BPA trade groups have long insisted that the substance is metabolized too quickly to cause harm.

Butterworth cites a 2009 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention study that measured BPA concentrations in newborns
to make the same case. The study, he argues, provides important evidence that infants - even those born prematurely - are
able to detoxify BPA in the same way as adults.

Related: Why Touching Receipts Can Harm Your Health

The CDC study he cited was designed to gauge exposure, not metabolism. BPA has been detected in the urine of nearly
every American tested. Premature babies fragile systems make them particularly vulnerable to environmental contaminants.

The researchers suspected that the use of plastic medical devices in neonatal intensive care units might expose premature
infants to higher than average levels of BPA. And thats exactly what they found: Average BPA concentrations in
hospitalized premature babies were about 10 times higher than those measured in adults.

The authors noted that although premature babies appear to have some ability to metabolize BPA, their detoxification
pathways are not expected to be functional at adult rates until months after birth.

Butterworth ended his critique of what he called the BPA is dangerous thesis by suggesting that banning the chemical
could result in greater harm:

What if some parents who turned to glass bottles for fear of leaching BPA drop and break them, causing injury
to their babies?

Butterworths arguments have reverberated across an echo chamber of free-market organizations, including Philip
Morriss product defense law firm, Koch-funded think tanks, chemical and food-packaging industry trade
groups in Europe and the U.S., and an ostensibly neutral environmental health research foundation run by a chemical
industry PR firm.

Reached by email for comment, Butterworth did not account for his questionable characterization of the CDC study. He
said that his critique relied on the work of scientists from regulatory agencies involved in risk assessment, and that these
scientists had criticized smaller studies that claimed adverse effects.

He maintained that studies assessing the effects of low doses of BPA are inconsistent and unlikely to capture significant
results because of methodological and statistical problems.

The year after Butterworths 2009 investigation, the anti-regulatory Donors Trust awarded STATS $86,000 for its research
efforts, and the Grocery Manufacturers Association, which belongs to the BPA Joint Trade Association, gave Lichters
Center for Media and Public Affairs $10,000 for research support.
Related: The Top 10 Tricks Used By Corporate Junk Science

Butterworth continued to defend BPA in news outlets and in 2013 made his case on a blog for Coca-Cola, another BPA
Joint Trade Association member.

That year Coca-Cola gave more than $30,000 to Butterworths future partner, Sense About Science, which hosted a BPA
forum the next year. (Since then, Sense About Science has not received corporate donations, which represented less than
3 percent of our income, Brown wrote in an email.)

In the forum, a Q&A on social media, Sense About Science put forward a representative of the British Plastics Federation
and a toxicologist whose longstanding ties to the chemical industry the organization did not disclose. Participants were
assured that BPA posed no risk to human health.

Several plastic industry trade sites praised the event. One welcomed Sense About Sciences efforts, reporting that plastic
packaging was stoutly defended.
Sales staff exhale vapor while demonstrating their electronic cigarette products at the Vape China Expo at the China International Exhibition Center
in Beijing on July 23, 2015

The tobacco industry pioneered tactics to fight regulations by manufacturing doubt about the scientific consensus that
cigarettes kill. So it should be no surprise to encounter a strategy among defenders of the e-cigarette that also centers
around doubt. If we dont know for certain that a product is safe, we might urge caution.

Sense About Science has argued the opposite: so long as we dont know the product is unsafe, medical professionals have
no business urging regulation.

E-cigarettes turn chemical solutions into a nicotine-filled mist, which consumers ingest without the added harm of
tobacco tar.

When the devices hit the American market in 2007, sales quickly took off. Tobacco companies increasingly dominate the
industry, which is projected to be worth $54 billion by 2025. A recent national survey found a sharp rise in e-cigarette
smoking among high school students - from 1.5 percent in 2011 to 16 percent last year.

The skyrocketing popularity of e-cigarettes among young people worries public health experts because so little is
known about the devices safety.

E-cigarettes are too new for scientists to have assessed their long-term health risks. British and American scientific bodies
have reacted to this paucity of evidence with different views of the relative dangers.
Last year, Public Health England joined other British public health organizations in encouraging smokers to use e-cigarettes
as an aid in quitting tobacco. The Royal College of Physicians effectively endorsed this view in April, when it argued against
regulating a product that could help smokers quit.

But American public health officials worry that nicotine, which is as addictive as heroin and cocaine, will hook young
smokers and cause lasting harm to their still-developing brains. Nicotine is linked to immunosuppression as well as
cardiovascular, respiratory, and gastrointestinal disorders.

There is evidence that it interferes with chemotherapies and may even play a role in cancer. Researchers are just beginning
to study whether the more than 7,000 flavoring chemicals, which typically arent disclosed on e-cigarettes, are safe when
inhaled.

Back in 2012, the British Medical Association called for a ban on the devices in public in order to:

Ensure their use does not undermine smoking prevention and cessation by reinforcing the normalcy of cigarette
use.

BMA reaffirmed this judgment as recently as this past June, despite the opposing position of the Royal College of
Physicians. Sense About Science reacted to BMAs call for a ban by asking the association to produce evidence that e-
cigarettes caused harm.

This move towards heavy regulation appears to be driven by the fear that e-cigs might be harmful or act as a
gateway to conventional tobacco - despite little or no evidence for either claim, the organization argued on its
website in 2013, two years before Public Health England endorsed e-cigarettes as a tool to quit smoking.
Such regulations, Sense About Science stated, could do more harm than good by inhibiting access to products that may
help reduce harm from smoking tobacco cigarettes.

Although Sense About Science has demanded evidence that e-cigarettes cause harm, it seems poised to cast doubt on the
evidence when it turns up. In August, the organization challenged the relevance of research presented that month at a
cardiology conference showing that nicotine in e-cigarettes can stiffen arteries, an early indication of heart disease.

Sense About Sciences expert dismissively compared the effects of nicotine documented in the research to those
of watching a thriller or a football match.

In the United States, just this past May, the Food and Drug Administration moved to regulate e-cigarettes, including banning
sales to those 18 and under. The CDC, too, takes the health risks of nicotine seriously. Last fall, the centers called for
strategies to reduce the use of all tobacco products, including e-cigarettes.

The potential long-term benefits and risks associated with e-cigarette use are not currently known, the
CDC reported. What is known is that nicotine exposure at a young age may cause lasting harm to brain
development, promote nicotine addiction, and lead to sustained tobacco use.
David Koch, executive vice president of chemical technology for Koch Industries, listens as U.S. Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke, not
pictured, speaks to the Economic Club of New York on Nov. 20, 2012

Having established itself as a credible voice in debates about science and industrial regulation in the United States and
Britain, Sense About Science has set out for what may prove to be its most challenging assignment.

In July, following Britains vote to leave the European Union, Sense About Science established an EU branch in Brussels,
the headquarters of the European Commission, which has placed tighter restrictions on e-cigarettes, chemicals, and other
potentially risky consumer goods than the United States has mustered.

The new branch of Sense About Science plans to monitor the use and abuse of scientific evidence in EU policy.

Both Sense About Science and Sense About Science USA undertake some initiatives that serve the public interest. But the
founder of the British organization worked with the architects of the tobacco industrys disinformation strategy, and both
groups have been known to promote science that favors private interests over public health.

When an organization claims to serve as a neutral arbiter in high-stakes debates about science, it pays to do what
Sense About Science does: ask for the evidence.

Related: Official Science: The Grand Illusion

Do You Really Understand The Health Risks From Microwave Technology? + The
Health Effects Of Microwave Radiation Spelled Out
November 19 2016 | From: ActivistPost / EnergyFanatics / Various

One of the most definitive, expansive and inclusive peer-reviewed papers Ive ever read on any
subject was published July 25, 2016 online at Electronic Physician as an open access article that
I sincerely hope everyone in the media and healthcare industries will take extremely seriously.
Especially those who are promoting more and more smart appliances and devices that transmit electromagnetic
frequencies and radiofrequencies - microwaves, which damage human health more than we are being told by
government health agencies at all levels (local, state and national), manufacturers, employers and school districts
that even mandate their uses as new technologies to learn and to implement.

Related: Cellphone Radiation Warning Sparks First Amendment Battle

New technologies are fine IF and WHEN they take into consideration and implement safeguards for human health,
which is not the case with microwave technology, but has been the "dream warfare" technology for the United States
military and other governments, so anything goes, including our being bombarded with so much microwaves, we now are
experiencing more adverse health effects attributed to what's scientifically termed "Non-thermal Adverse Health Effects."
Related: Electronic Torture + 21st-Century Bio-Hacking And Bio-Robotizing

The U.S. military has had a GREAT interest in keeping microwave safety standards higher than they should be and not as
applicable as the science demands.

Dr Magda Havas, PhD, Environmental & Resource Studies, 1600 West Bank Drive, Trent University, Peterborough, ON,
Canada, K9J 7B8 on her website published the following incriminating unclassified U.S. Army documents information as to
why microwaves are not safe, nor made safer, due to U.S. military involvement with its electronic warfare techniques, which
harm everything.

There are two disturbing paragraphs in the document "Biological Effects of Electromagnetic Radiation (Radiowaves and
Microwaves) - Eurasian Communist Countries (U)". Prepared by U.S. Army Medical Intelligence and Information Agency
Office of the Surgeon General and released by the Defense Intelligence Agency.

Adams, R.L. and R.A. Williams. 1976. 34 pp. Unclassified, which clearly indicate the U.S. military's perspective opposing
more stringent guidelines for microwave radiation.

No. 1: "If the more advanced nations of the West are strict in the enforcement of stringent exposure standards,
there could be unfavorable effects on industrial output and military function.

The Eurasian Communist countries could, on the other hand, give lip service to strict standards, but allow their
military to operate without restriction and thereby gain the advantage in electronic warfare techniques and the
development of antipersonnel applications." [Page vii]

No. 2: "Should subsequent research result in adoption of the Soviet standard by other countries, industries whose
practices are based on less stringent safety regulations, could be required to make costly modifications in order to
protect workers.

Recognition of the 0.01 mW/cm2 standard could also limit the application of new technology by making the
commercial exploitation of some products unattractive because of increased cost, imposed by the need for
additional safeguards." [Page 24]

Below is the copy and paste job of the Introduction from A review on Electromagnetic fields (EMFs) and the reproductive
system, which I hope my readers will take seriously and also take necessary steps to protect yourselves, your children, your
pets and your home environment.

Generation Zapped

This is SERIOUS stuff no one is taking as seriously as we ALL should. Those smart gadgets just may be making you
more sick than you can imagine. With 61 References, I think the Electronic Physician article needs to be taken seriously
with revisions made to EMF/RF standards by the U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to reflect them.

"People in the modern world frequently are exposed to electromagnetic fields (EMFs). Human exposure to EMFs
comes from many sources, and situations are different in people's everyday lives.

EMFs emanate from power lines, computer devices, televisions, radios, and telephones. There are many factors
that influence the degree to which people may be affected by EMFs. For example, body weight, body-mass index,
bone density, and the levels of water and electrolytes can alter the conductivity of and biological reactivity to EMFs
(1, 2).

Therefore, the effects of this environmental pollution can depend on gender, tissue density of the body, the
period of life, and the exposure levels to EMFs.

Beginning in 1960 when the biological hazards caused by EMFs first were studied, human health became an
important focus in the workplace and at home (3).

Although, the biological effects of EMFs are still controversial, in general, the negative effects should not be
ignored.

Currently, people are exposed to various types of EMFs, which are non-ionic radiation that cannot release
electrons.

They are energy in the form of oscillating electric and magnetic fields that are transformed from one point to
another. Many forms of physical energy, such as X-rays, UV light, and sunlight produce EMFs (4).

There are several references that classify EMFs, but, in general, they can be considered to consist of four different
types. The first type of EMFs refers to extremely low frequency (ELF) EMFs, which are EMFs that are below 300
HZ, and they are produced by military equipment and railroads.

The second type, known as intermediate frequency (IF) EMFs, have frequencies in the range of 300 Hz to 10
MHZ, and they are produced by industrial cables and electrical equipment in homes, such as televisions and
computer monitors.

The third type is hyper frequency (HF) EMFs that have frequencies in the range of 10 MHz to 3000 GHz and are
produced by mobile phones and radio broadcasting. Radio frequencies (RFs) also are a part of this category,
which has frequencies up to 100 MHz (4).

There are also static EMFs that are produced by MRI and geomagnetism and have specified with zero frequency
(3).

In 1979, Wertheimer and Looper showed that there is a direct relationship between EMFs and the increased
incidence of leukemia in infants (5).

If the body's biological system is exposed to EMFs, which produce electric currents and fields, which, in fact, deal
with the current and voltage, the normal physiological balance is upset.

If the density of the electric current increases to the stimulation threshold, membrane depolarization of the nerves
and muscles may result. Electric and magnetic fields at environmental levels may extend the lifetime of free
radicals and result in damage to people's deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) (6).

Some epidemiological studies have been done in various populations, but most have been done in laboratory
animals and cell lines (4).

The biological effects of EMFs generally can be divided into thermal and non-thermal effects (7). Thermal effects
are defined as the heat generated by EMFs in a specific area.

The non-thermal effects depend on the absorption of energy and changes in the behavior of tissues without
producing heat. EMFs have high penetration power, and they are capable of moving charged particles, such as the
electrons and ions of large macromolecules and polymers (7).

So EMFs can have devastating effects on tissue with high concentrations of electrons and ions.

EMFs that cause changes in the behavior of cells (8) and tissues alter the function of the cardiovascular system (9)
and bone marrow (7).

Electromagnetic fields can have several different effects on cellular components (10), including disorders of cell
proliferation and differentiation (10), damaged DNA in cells, chromosomal abnormalities (11), blood
disorders (9), birth defects (12), and various mutations, including those associated with long-term exposure to
EMFs.

Under the influence of these fields, the balance of the CNS and the hormonal and respiratory systems become
weak, resulting in decreased activity of the mentioned organs (13, 14).

Research on the effects of EMFs on the endocrine system has focused mostly on melatonin and the derived
tryptophan produced by the pineal gland (15).

Most of the harmful effects of EMFs act through the protein synthesis process (16, 17). In this regard,
enzymes, due to their combination of amino acids, are affected, and their catalytic activity is decreased (4).

Studies concerning the cytotoxicicity and genotoxicity effects of EMFs mostly have focused on fibroblasts,
melanocytes, lymphocytes, monocytes, and muscular cells in people and on the granolosa cells of rats (18).

A declassified 1976 Defense Intelligence Agency report showed that military personnel exposed to non-thermal
microwave radiation experienced "headaches, fatigue, dizziness, irritability, sleeplessness, depression,
anxiety, forgetfulness, and a lack of concentration (19).

A 2015 study showed that 2.4 GHz WiFi may be one of the major risk factors for brain tumors and other
neurodegenerative diseases (20). Another 2015 paper showed that polarized EMF (man-made) was much more
active biologically than non-polarized EMF (21).

Another paper showed that rabbits experienced heart arrhythmia and increased blood pressure when exposed to
2.4 GHz Wi-Fi (22). A long-term study conducted by Lennart Hardell, a Swedish scientist, on glioma and acoustic
neuroma brain tumors showed that RF is carcinogenic.

The scientist called for RF to be labeled an IARC Class 1 Carcinogen and recommended urgent revision to safety
guidelines (23). A 2011 study by Nora Volkow showed that radiation from cell phones, in areas next to the
antenna, increased the metabolism of glucose in the brain.

Increased metabolism of glucose is associated with cancer. The study showed that biological changes occur at
levels lower than the current FCC guidelines (24)."

The Health Effects Of Microwave Radiation Spelled Out

On 14 July 2016 the FCC (Federal Communications Commission) of the USA made space available
in the radio spectrum for consumer devices to operate within the 25 GHz to 100 GHz of the
electromagnetic spectrum. It went on to say:

Related: Heads in the Sand , Pies in the Sky - Health Canada Denies the Proven Dangers of Microwave Radiation
"The Commission has struck a balance between new wireless services, current and future fixed satellite service
operations, and federal uses. The item adopts effective sharing schemes to ensure that diverse users including
federal and non-federal, satellite and terrestrial, and fixed and mobile can co-exist and expand.

Nowhere in its document is mention made of consumer safety or well-being. I guess that is fair of the FCC because
historically, it is not interested in matters of microwave radiation and consequent thermal and non-thermal effects on the
population. Lets face it, and most people find this hard to believe, the FCC works purely on behalf of the telecoms
industries in granting them access to the airwaves, no more and no less.

Industry was very happy to hear the FCC announcement on granting access of large portions of the radio spectrum for yet
more of its toys and other consumer devices.

Qualcomm for example talks much about the massive internet of things, yet nowhere on its 5G musings is
mention made of consumer safety or well-being.

Related: Why It Matters: Council Votes 7-0 in Favour of Better Cell Phone Warnings on Advice of Brain Tumour
Association

That pink elephant in the living room regarding safety brings me to the point of this article. The FCC and the telecomms
industry rub their hands with glee because lots of money is going to be made as 5G devices rollout yet no recent safety
studies have been carried out on consumer safety.

No doubt both the FCC and industry will point regulators to the old, out-dated and one-dimensional so-called safety studies
(thermal effects) produced by the ICNIRP.

This private organisation is comprised of people and individuals who work in the telecommunications industries
with no background in epidemiology, toxicology, radio frequency safety or medical practice.

The implications of 5G on consumer well-being and safety do not look good for one reason: devices that will operate within
the 5G electromagnetic spectrum will use antennas that are physically small i.e. from a few millimetres to a centimetre in
length.

This means that industry will produce a variety of different antenna systems to do different things.

The weird fact of operating within this very high frequency range is that signals are mostly line of sight or they are
easily reflected, refracted or lost within the differing build composition of urban environment structures.
Related: The Gloves Come Off On EMF / Mobile / WiFi Radiation + Understanding The Dangers Of The 5G Rollout

In other words, without careful antenna design and recognition of many of the pitfalls trying to propagate microwave signals
within urban environments, the signal can be easily degraded or completely lost.

In response to these challenges, the advantages in using very small physical size antennas in the millimetre wavelength is
you can feed many antennas in various configuration arrays e.g. vertical or horizontal arays, waveguide, coned or highly
directional beam type designs.

These types of antenna designs focus most of the transmitted power into specified directions.

This is bad news for consumers because these very small physical size antennas will pack a mighty punch to our biological
systems if we step into them.

Getting back to consumer safety and well-being and all things microwave, it is clear that the latency period for adverse
biological effects from devices using microwave frequencies from say 1 GHz to 5 Ghz is approximately 10 20 years.

In 2016 there are now many thousands of peer-reviewed medical and epidemiological studies that show, illustrate
or correlate, adverse biological effects with use of mobile phone technology or WIFI.
Related: The Science is Overwhelming At This Point Wifi Industry Appeals Brain Tumor Association Ordinance

Using frequencies even higher than 5 GHz (and up to 100 GHz) will compress the timeframe in which cancers and other
biological effects show themselves within society.

It is anyones guess on what might happen in terms of biological safety yet it is clear to see that the pulsed nature of these
high frequency, high signal intensity signals do not harbour good news for humanity, particularly in relation to the functioning
of our DNA.

Nowadays, exposure to microwave radiation or frequencies used by WIFI, mobile phones, smart phones, smart meters,
WIFI-enabled audio devices, WIFI-enabled fridges, most baby monitors and a whole host of other esoteric electrical
devices were recently classed as Class 2B carcinogens.

Point of sale literature excludes this fact on any advertising blurb and it is also fascinating that the small print embedded
deep within mobile phone product literature say that you should not put these devices directly to your skin, body or face. If
you do, you exceed the so-called safe exposure thresholds put in place for these devices.
Related: 5G Telecomm Radiation The Perfect Tool To Mass Modify Human Brain Waves + More Studies Reveal
Dangers

Getting back to the very small physical length of the antennas that will be used for 5G devices, it is very clear to surmise that
if these devices talk to each other using highly efficient, directional antennas, the ERP (effective radiated power) will be
huge.

If you happen to walk into this intensely focused beam of microwave radiation, what will this level of signal intensity do to
your biology?

Yet again, time will tell unless we get our arses into gear and demand proper safety studies from industry and independent
academia that focus on thermal and non-thermal effects on our biology.

Just like the advent of modern mobile phone technology, it is us, the consumers, who provide the guinea pig role in terms of
safety.

Sufferers of EHS (electro-hyper-sensitivity) will need to be aware of any 5G device simply because the electron volt
assault on their compromised bodies will be easily and instantly felt.

It is they who will suffer first and in time, everyone will be affected because one other fact the telecoms industries have not
mentioned is that in order to develop an efficient network of signals within an urban environment, many thousands of new
transmitter sites will need to be installed.
Related: Gestapo In The USA: FCC Intimidates Press And Kills Free Speech At 5G Rollout

The physical small size of these antennas means they can be covertly installed into all sorts of urban structures which
suggest that for urban dwellers at least, there will be no escape from exposure to these highly damaging microwave
frequencies.

I also feel that when these antennas are in place, it will be relatively easy to alter and manipulate brain wave
function of its users and others close by.

The amount of ancillary information that can be piped or attached to the main carrier frequency of such a
telecommunications network system is potentially, huge. Police forces the world over use Tetra as a systems of
communication.

This system also includes a sub-carrier frequency of about 16 Hz which is very close to our natural brainwave
patterns.

Could this 16 Hz ancillary pulsed ELF (extremely low-frequency) be responsible for instilling aggressive behaviours in our
police force personnel?

The zombie apocalypse might just be around the corner unless of course, we refuse to comply. That is our choice.

Related: Wireless Mouse, Wireless Keyboard, Tablet - See the Wireless Radiation Measured

$340 Billion Per Year In US Healthcare Costs Linked To Chemicals Found In Plastic,
Detergents, Cosmetics And Toys
November 12 2016 | From: NaturalNews
A newly released report, published in the The Lancet Diabetes & Endocrinology has revealed that
exposure to hormone-disrupting chemicals is attributed to $340 billion in health costs each year in
the United States.

These endocrine-disrupting chemicals, or EDCs for short, are found in many everyday items that are used in
homes across the country. Plastic food containers, detergents, flame retardants, cosmetics and even toys for
children can be host to these damaging substances.

Related: Who knew? Many wines are contaminated with cancer-causing herbicide glyphosate

Some of the problems related to exposure to EDCs include neurological damage and behavioral problems such as attention
deficit/hyperactivty disorder (ADHD), autism and loss of IQ. The report suggests that these issues make up about 80 percent
of the problems caused by EDC exposure.

Of course, these are not the only health issues that are caused by EDCs. These chemicals, which are basically toxins, have
also been attributed to obesity, diabetes, cancer, male infertility, and endometriosis a painful condition characterized by
abnormal tissue growth outside of the uterus.

The economic impact of the harm caused by EDCs is also quite important. These costs add up to about two percent of the
United States' gross domestic product (GDP) each year a huge financial wound.
Related: 30 Reasons to Never Put Another M&M in Your Mouth Ever Again

The study's lead investigator Leonardo Trasande, an associate professor at NYU Langone Medical Center in New York City,
said;

Our research adds to the growing evidence on the tremendous economic as well as human health costs of
endocrine-disrupting chemicals."

Trasande also commented that this issue has the potential to become a much more prominent health and economic
problem if no policy action is taken.

Endocrine tissue is essential to many of the body's functions. It produces many of the body's hormones that regulate energy
levels, reproduction, growth and development. The endocrine system also modulates our response to stress and injury; like
every other part of the body, it's clearly important.

What EDCs do is mimic natural hormones produced by the body, such as estrogen and androgen, and then lock onto the
receptors for those hormones within cells. This prevents the body's own hormones from binding to reception sites, and in
turn, creates a number of different potential health problems.
Related: Are Deodorants Really Dangerous?

Even the Environmental Protection Agency has recently come forward to admit that recent research has been raising a few
red flags about environmental contaminants, such as their potential to "disrupt the endocrine system leading to adverse-
health consequences."

Some of the most dangerous chemicals prevailing in the US are PBDEs, which are found in flame retardants. This class of
man-made substances is suspected of being one of the largest culprits behind human hormone interference. Flame
retardants and pesticides have both been associated with a loss in IQ points and are known to affect developing brains.

Bisphenol A, or BPA, which is found in plastic bottles, can linings and other products, has been subject to a lot of public
scrutiny and for good reason. Countless studies have linked it to a myriad of health problems, including changes in
metabolism and disruption of the reproductive and nervous systems.
Related: Leading Tea Brands Contain Illegal Levels Of Dangerous Pesticides

Phthalates are another ingredient of concern; these are often seen in plastics and other consumer goods, like cosmetics.
They make plastic more flexible and can also be used as suspension or stabilizing agent in solutions (like your lip gloss).
These are also attributed to a number of health problems, including reproductive issues.

Together, BPA and phthalates have racked up about $50 billion in health damages. Estimates suggest that the amount of
these chemicals circulating in the blood of an average American would be among the top 5 percent in Europeans.

These chemicals are not safe, and should be avoided even if our government won't do anything about them.

Related Articles:

KFCs Secret Ingredient Revealed: Its a Neurotoxin

10 Reasons Wheat Is Toxic Whether You are Gluten Sensitive or Not

Soylent food bars 'proudly made with GMOs' causing stomach problems, vomiting and diarrhea

WHO cancer agency under fire for withholding carcinogenic glyphosate documents

Canola oil: a chemical carcinogen that doesn't belong anywhere near your food

These 3 Foods are Banned in Other Countries - Avoid Them at All Costs

Cancer, Cancer Everywhere... But Not In The Elite's Presidential Suites


November 3 2016 | From: ActivistPost
A recent cancer symposium, with a surgical focus, met in Boston to discuss how surgical
oncology is experiencing an exciting evolution and the ways in which we treat cancer are
changing.

However, there are indications that the cure for cancer may have already been found and that those who have it are
keeping it close to their chests.

Related: The Man Who Discovered The Cause Of Cancer Wrote A Book On Curing It

In order to support this contention, which may be seen as alarming and extreme, one must look at the rates of cancer
among the general population and compare these to the rates of cancer deaths among world leaders.

And the latter is almost non-existent.

In the US, cancer is the second leading cause of death, exceeded only by heart disease. According to recently breaking
news, Australia now lists cancer as its leading cause of death. In the rest of the developed world, cancer is near the top of
the list.

A recent list published by the World Cancer Research Fund International shows that Denmark leads the pack in terms of
cancer rates.
Related: 5 Facts On Cancer That Conventional Medicine Is Now Aggressively Claiming Are Myths + Amish Have
Lower Rates Of Cancer, Ohio State Study Shows

Indeed, the list of the fifty countries with the highest cancer rates might lead one to believe that cancer is a disease of
prosperity. Conspicuously absent from the list are countries in the Third World - in particular Africa.

Cancer will fell approximately of all those living in the developed world. However, this particular manifestation of the Grim
Reaper gives world leaders a wide berth.

Since 1980, when the exiled Shah of Iran succumbed to lymphatic cancer in Egypt, the deaths by cancer of those leading
their nations can be counted on the fingers of one hand. And what is most telling about those on this short list is where they
stood on the political spectrum.
Related: Modern Life Is Killing Our Children: UK Cancer Rate In Young People Up 40% In 16 Years + 12 Things a
Cancer Doctor Should Never Say

Hugo Chavez, the colorful and controversial President of Venezuela between 1999-2013, was a Socialist and
prominent adversary of US foreign policy and neo-liberalism. Before succumbing to cancer in 2013, Chavez made a
much publicized radio announcement in which he speculated that the US government gave him cancer.

Chavez has been quoted as saying, Would it be so strange that theyve invented the technology to spread cancer and we
wont know about it for 50 years? He is also quoted as saying:

Fidel [Castro] always told me, Chvez take care. These people have developed technology. You are very
careless. Take care what you eat, what they give you to eat... a little needle and they inject you with I dont know
what.

Since his death Venezuela has crumbled into economic chaos.

Vaclav Havel, who was the last president of Czechoslovakia and the first President of the Czech Republic, is somewhat of a
more ambiguous character.

While he is seen as being a pivotal player in breaking up the Soviet bloc, and therefore bringing what is popularly termed
democracy to a formerly Communist country, he may have also been serving US and CIA interests, either unintentionally
or otherwise.

In his period of political dissidence, prior to ascending to power, Havel was imprisoned a number of times, the longest
incarceration being four years. As President, Havel was instrumental in dismantling the Warsaw Pact and expanding NATO
into Eastern European countries. Havel died of lung cancer in 2011 at the age of 75.
Related: Dangerous Products That Were Unknowingly Using In Our Day-To-Day Life + The Cancer Risk To People
Who Drink Chlorinated Water Is 93% Higher Than Those Who Dont

Jack Layton, the head of Canadas New Democratic Party, succumbed to an unspecified, newly diagnosed cancer in 2011.

The NDP occupies the furthest left of Canadas political spectrum. Indeed, there has never been an NDP head of state in
Canada.

So when the NDP swept the national parliamentary elections in 2011, winning 103 seats, the NDP became Canadas Official
Opposition. Laytons tenancy as head of the opposition was short lived, however. Layton succumbed to cancer less than
four months later, passing on in August of 2011.

He had been committed to ousting the conservative Harper government. Following Laytons death, the NDP tumbled from its
position and currently occupies third place in Canadas parliament.
Related: 5 Cancer Myths Busted

As Prime Minister of the tiny island of Barbados, David Thompson could only marginally have been considered a world
leader. The population of Barbados is less than 300,000, mostly black. Barbados, also known as Little England, is an
independent state with the British monarch as hereditary head of state.

Thompson was in office from 2008 until October of 2010, when he passed away from pancreatic cancer, one of the most
deadly forms of the Big C.

Statistically, since cancer is listed as cause of death in roughly of all deaths, one might logically expect that one quarter of
the US Presidents and one quarter of the US Vice Presidents, to pick one example, would have cancer listed as cause of
death.

With 44 Presidents and 47 Vice Presidents, one might think that somewhere in the realm of 24 or so might have
succumbed to cancer.

However, there are none. Zero. Zilch. A search for cancer as a cause of death for German, French or British leaders in the
past forty years produces only one name, that of former French President Francois Mitterrand, who succumbed to prostate
cancer in 1996 at the age of 80.
Related: Hospital Fires Leading Cancer Surgeon For Telling The Truth About Medical Establishment

Mitterrand was the first French President who was a Socialist and he led the nation for fourteen years, as its longest serving
President.

Since the 1972 throat cancer death of Edward VIII - who abdicated the throne in 1936 - no members of British
royalty have died of cancer.

In October of this year, the World Cancer Leaders Summit will be convening in Paris, France. The announcement for this
Summit states that The World Cancer Leaders Summit brings together global decision makers who can shape the way our
generation addresses the task of eliminating cancer as a life threatening disease for future generations.

Their announcement also states:

The Summit plays a pivotal role in this portfolio of global events by ensuring that the 2020 targets detailed in the
World Cancer Declaration are appropriately recognised and addressed at the highest political levels.

However, those at the highest political levels are often seen as escaping repercussions for criminal behavior and worse.
The idea of the Teflon-coated political elite is an idea that has now gained general - albeit grim - acceptance.

Given the probability that the cure may already exist, in light of the unusual lack of incidence of fatal cancers afflicting the
powerful, one might want to ask the Summit if the world leaders might be willing to share... please?

Related: The Truth About Cancer


Heres How Industry-Funded Research Is Making Us Sick And Fat + Like Tobacco
And Big Pharma, The Sugar Industry Has Manipulated Research For 50 Years
October 26 2016 | From: DaisyLuther / NaturalBlaze

A scathing new study has put artificial sweeteners under the spotlight and is supporting what
health writers have been saying for years.

The researchers have found that most of the previous studies into the sweeteners touting their alleged health
advantages over using sugar as a sweetener, were written or sponsored by the companies that produce the
products.

Related: The Top 10 Tricks Used By Corporate Junk Science

"A trio of researchers from John Hopkins University in Maryland, the University of California San Francisco, and
Australias University of Sydney took an extensive look at 31 past reviews on the potential weight loss effects of
artificial sweeteners.

They found that studies directly funded by sweetener companies or published in industry-funded journals were
more likely to find positive health benefits compared to reviews funded independently or by the competing sugar
industry.

Similarly, reviews authored by scientists who had a relevant financial conflict of interest were also less likely to
shine a harsh light on sweeteners, either directly via positive results or by putting a positive spin on negative
results when discussing their conclusions."

- Source

Note that even the healthy sweetener that is supposedly made from stevia hardly contains any stevia at all - Truvia is still
made up of terrible chemical ingredients that are hazardous to your health.
Earlier this month it was discovered that the sugar industry paid the equivalent of nearly $50,000 in todays dollars to fund a
review back in 1967 that concluded fats were the leading cause of heart disease and sugar had little nothing to do with
heart disease risk.

"In the 1950s, studies showing a link between coronary heart disease (CHD) and sugar intake started to emerge.

When the sugar industry (which many not-so-affectionately call Big Sugar) got wind of this not-so-sweet news,
they paid scientists to downplay the link and promote saturated fat as the culprit instead, a new study has
revealed.

The research, published in JAMA Internal Medicine, was based on thousands of pages of Sugar Research
Foundation (SRF) documents, reports, and statements that Cristin E. Kearns, a postdoctoral fellow at UCSF,
discovered in the basement at Harvard University.

The SRF (known today as The Sugar Association) sponsored its first CHD research project in 1965 a literature
review published in the New England Journal of Medicine. The reviews objective was established by SRF, and the
group contributed articles for inclusion and received drafts. The SRFs funding and role was not disclosed.

Why is this a big deal?

Big Sugar paid Harvard scientists the equivalent of about $50,000 in todays dollars to influence the review, and
subsequently spent $600,000 ($5.3 million in 2016 dollars) to teach people who had never had a course in
biochemistry that sugar is what keeps every human being alive and with energy to face our daily problems.

- Read the rest of this article here

For years many industries have delayed the publication of research that may put their products in a bad light, others have
simply paid off researchers to point the finger of blame at other products, as did the Sugar Association in 1967.

The revelations over sweeteners come as no surprise, but they should remind us that we need to do our own research
rather than taking something at face value just because there was a study.
Drugs companies, the oil industry, and tobacco companies have all used such tactics in the past.

This isnt new. The FDA upholds these studies all the time, and products that could literally kill us end up on the store
shelves marked as safe, false nutritional information that supports the sugar lobby and the grain lobby is touted as the truth,
and Americans get sicker and fatter as a result.

Industries and individual companies have paid researchers to lie or distort the truth on their behalf in order to sell more of
their products. Not only is this shameful behavior from the companies, but also from the researchers that compromised their
science to accommodate them.

The results of such spurious research have an even further effect. Fewer people start to trust medical and scientific
research - including well-executed and honest research.
The answer as always it to look behind the headlines, find the counter arguments, track down the source of the funding, and
make your decisions accordingly.

PS: The best quality low-carb sweetener weve gotten our hands on is Agave 5 you can find it here.

Related: The Shocking Story of How Aspartame Became Legal + What Is Aspartame? Five Surprising Facts You
Never Know About This Chemical Sweetener

Like Tobacco And Big Pharma, The Sugar Industry Has Manipulated Research For 50
Years
Dont you love people who cling to scientific research without ever questioning who sponsored
that research? Using archival documents, a new report published by JAMA Internal
Medicine examines the sugar industrys role in heart disease research.
The study suggests that the sugar industry sponsored research to influence the scientific debate to cast doubt on
the hazards of sugar and to promote dietary fat as the culprit in heart disease. Governments worldwide agreed just
like they did with the tobacco industry and big pharma.

Related: The Sugar Conspiracy - Professor John Yudkin: The Man Who Tried To Warn Us About Sugar

The sugar industry was instrumental in influencing the prevailing thinking about fat, obesity and related diseases holding that
quantifying calories should be a principal concern and target for intervention.

Part of this thinking is that consumed calories - regardless of their sources - are equivalent; i.e. a calorie is a calorie. There
needs to be a greater qualitative focus on the sources of calories consumed (i.e. a greater focus on types of foods) and on
the metabolic changes that result from consuming foods of different types.

Calorie-focused thinking is inherently biased against high-fat foods, many of which may be protective against obesity and
related diseases, and supportive of starchy and sugary replacements, which are likely detrimental.

The intake of dietary fructose increased significantly from 1970 to 2000. There has been a 25% increase in available added
sugars during this period. The average person has a daily added sugar intake of 79 g (equivalent to 15% of energy intake),
approximately half of which was fructose.
Related: New Zealand Considers Taxing Sugar While New Zealand Government Invests $240m In Coca Cola And
Fast Food Chains

A report - authored by Cristin E. Kearns, Laura A. Schmidt, and Stanton A. Glantz of the University of California, San
Francisco - examined internal documents from the Sugar Research Foundation (which later evolved into the Sugar
Association).

The Sugar Research Foundation started doing research on coronary heart disease research in 1965; its first project was a
literature review published in the New England Journal of Medicine in 1967.

The review focused on fat and cholesterol as the dietary causes of coronary heart disease, downplaying sugar consumption
as a risk factor.

UCSF researchers have recently claimed sugar should be controlled like alcohol and tobacco to protect public health since it
is fueling a global obesity pandemic, contributing to 35 million deaths annually worldwide from non-communicable diseases
like diabetes, heart disease and cancer.

Like manufacturers from both Big Tobacco and Big Pharma who denied the presence of any danger in their products and
even spent millions of dollars trying to discredit the research that points to problems, the Sugar Industry followed suit.
Related: Rumsfeld & Monsanto Team Up To Bring You Neuro-Toxic Aspartame & Splenda

While the Sugar Research Foundations funding and role were not disclosed, internal documents reveal that the
organization set the reviews objective, contributed articles to be included, and received drafts - a smoking gun linking the
industrys influence over the research it paid for, writes Marion Nestle in a related commentary, also published in JAMA
Internal Medicine.

This 50-year-old incident may seem like ancient history, but it is quite relevant, not least because it answers some
questions germane to our current era. Is it really true that food companies deliberately set out to manipulate
research in their favor?

Yes, it is, and the practice continues, writes Nestle, the Paulette Goddard Professor of Nutrition and Food Studies
at NYU Steinhardt."

Industry-sponsored nutrition research, like that of research sponsored by the tobacco, chemical, and
pharmaceutical industries, almost invariably produces results that confirm the benefits or lack of harm of the
sponsors products, even when independently sponsored research comes to opposite conclusions, Nestle adds.

Nestle says the report should serve as a warning to policymakers, researchers, clinicians, and journalists in carefully
interpreting studies funded by food companies with vested interests in the results, and highlights the need to find better
ways to fund studies and to prevent and disclose conflicts of interest.

Related: Big Tobacco Misrepresented Dangers From Cigarettes, Same For Big Pharma With Vaccines

WHO Publishes Strategies For EU Healthcare Professionals To Convince Vaccine


Deniers Vaccines Are Safe + News On Vaccine Safety Reveals Rampant Corruption
October 14 2016 | From: NaturalBlaze / AustralianNationalReview

Vaccines are taking a big hit on the refusal side from more and more people doing their due
diligence and becoming more fully engaged in knowing what supposedly safe vaccines really are
about: Fraud and deceit on the part of the U.S. CDC and FDA, plus vested-interest tobacco
science from Big Pharma and vaccine manufacturers publishing falsified research and data, who
export their brand of pseudoscience.

Nothing confirms that more than the documentary movie VAXXED currently making the rounds in local movie
theaters and on the Internet.

Related: VAXXED Documentary Explored with Filmmakers on Antidote

In view of the all the developing negative vaccine research and adverse health issues, the World Health Organization
(WHO) apparently is trying to come to vaccines rescue by publishing the 44 page 2016 document, How to respond to vocal
vaccine deniers in public.

What I found most amazing and ironically curious, if not pathetic, is the information on page 34 in Chapter 6 How to
Protect Yourself, referring to the healthcare professional who is encouraged to go out and spread the vaccine
gospel. Paradoxically, the WHO makes the following statement:

"Remember

You have the right to say No. Your personal safety comes first. Consider the context and time of the discussion,
and weigh up whether it is safe for you to take part.

Your mind stores thousands of pieces of information which it uses to warn you that something is wrong. Trust your
instincts when you feel uncomfortable, get away from whatever situation you are in. You will only know if you were
wrong if you ignore your instincts is it worth the risk?"
Apparently, WHO believe doctors have the right of personal safety first, but what are the rights of innocent infants, toddlers,
teens and adults from being forced to be vaccinated immediately after birth and into adulthood with Big Pharmas poison
needles?

Trust your instincts when you feel uncomfortable, get away from whatever situation you are in, is excellent advice to
parents when being badgered about vaccines, I offer.

Related: Vaccines Have Become Even More Scary Than Ever

However, the WHO thinks that only applies to medical proselytizers and not those who are bullied into taking vaccines or
else suffer untold consequences like your families are discharged from their medical practices! Or, how about having Child
Protective Services showing up at a refusers front door?

The WHO apparently has concerns about security threats to healthcare professionals from vaccine refusers. I wonder why,
especially when children have been damaged for life and parents are getting extremely fed up with how they are treated by
the medical and legal professions, healthcare regulatory bodies especially in the USA, e.g., CDC, FDA, state and local
health agencies and even school districts.

On page 6 of that report, we see the Goal stated as:

"Make the public audience more resilient against anti-vaccine statements and stories; support the vaccine
hesitants in their vaccine acceptance decision."

Readers need to read page 9: how the WHO defines various members of the anti-vaccine movement. However, the WHO
does not say anything about all the fines and ethical problems leveled against the pharmaceutical industry because of its
inherent bad business practices that have evolved into class action lawsuits and billion-dollar fines from the U.S. CDC /
FDA!
Related: Flu Vaccines are Toxic

What is it that the WHO doesnt seem to be getting about the problems with the pharmaceutical industry for which it
apparently is one of its key promoters?

Personally, I just love this remark on page 15:

"Remember, you are presenting the scientific consensus."

And that sad statement is KEY, since the REAL science is totally different than consensus science!

Consensus science is that which researchers agree to lie about or withhold data about or even discard data into a trash can
about, e.g., MMR vaccine-Autism connection and CDC whistleblower William Thompson, PhD, admission or perform
incorrect vaccine trials, e.g., placing aluminum adjuvant into control subjects vaccines, when those vaccines should be
adjuvant-free!

Thats consensus science!

Scientific consensus ignores scientific studies, especially when it comes to vaccine ingredients, or so it really
seems. My book Vaccination Voodoo, What YOU Dont Know About Vaccines discusses most of the toxic ingredients in
vaccines from what scientific studies have found those ingredients are capable of doing as published in peer review
literature.
Its not what I have made up; its what published scientific journal articles say about neurotoxins, aluminum in as many as
four formulations, ethylmercury (Thimerosal) thats still found in trace amounts in many vaccines given to infants (YES, thats
a real FACT), formaldehyde / Formalin, dangerous polysorbate 80 thats been shown to cause infertility in animal studies
plus other problems, sodium borate plus a shopping list of ingredients such as foreign DNA from animals like monkeys-
mouse brain-cattle-insects, including human diploid cells (a line of aborted fetal cells).

Let me not forget to mention mycoplasmas and genetically modified organisms. How can all that scientific crap be injected
into a less than 25 pound infant and no health damages occur, especially to their not-fully-developed immune system?

Something is terribly wrong with consensus science when it has to bully others into taking harmful products! The WHO
apparently recognizes that and is trying to do damage control for the next pandemic that probably is in the wings. Heres a
hint: Zika. Or, the refugee crisis in the EU.

On page 22 we read the admonition to;

"Emphasize high safety instead of low risk."

How ridiculous a mantra, when each vaccine package insert [2] recites contraindications and adverse events, including
Guillain-Barr syndrome. But then, its consensus science not to tell patients that information as their right under fully
informed consent.
On page 23, proselytizers are cautioned about telling the truth. However, the WHO does not tell them how to keep their
noses from growing two feet long or whats called the Pinocchio syndrome.

On page 24, WHO reiterates the sorry mantra about consensus science:

"11. Underline scientific consensus

Research in the area of climate change shows that the belief in a scientific fact increases when consensus is
highlighted [60][30]. However, identifying a scientific consensus requires a thorough understanding of the specific
area of interest and a layperson will not gain that knowledge all by himself [61].

Therefore, highlighting the scientific consensus in public is a powerful tool to transfer essential scientific knowledge
and increase belief in a scientific fact, especially when presented in a simple and short message [62][63]."

Underline scientific consensus with regard to vaccine safety and efficacy.

Boy, has WHO really placed itself precariously out on the credibility limb its sawing off when it includes climate change as
scientific fact.

With weather geoengineering, Solar Radiation Management, chemtrails, HAARPs around the globe and the information
about smart clouds I discussed thats in the U.S. Air Force report about owning the weather by 2025 in my article Whats
Up With the Newest Presidential Executive Order?, WHO ought to be embarrassed beyond embarrassment, plus be
regarded as the Illuminatis toady it apparently is.

WHO wants proselytizers to Emphasize social benefits of vaccines. Does that mean that herd immunity is not discussed
for what it really is - treating humans like cattle? What are the social benefits of vaccines when lives and families are
damaged?

When there is total denial by doctors and others with almost no recourse at law in the USA because the U.S. Congress
disenfranchised healthcare consumers rights by giving vaccine manufacturers a get out of jail free card from any legal and
financial liability for product damage from vaccines?
Related: Shock Report: Testing Reveals Glyphosate Present in Childhood Vaccines

But things are different in the European Union where lawsuits are being filed against vaccine manufacturers, and thus one of
the probable reasons for WHOs How to respond report.

How about the Algorithm of how to respond on page 29! Studying that algorithm should give everyone some clever hints
on how to respond to the proselytizers, I think.

The WHOs bibliography of References ought to be studied as a strategy play book to use in beating them at their own
game regarding vaccine consensus science, I offer. There are 51 member states in the European Union. The recent
manufactured refugee crisis in the EU probably is of much concern to WHO, since many refugees obviously will need to be
convinced to take those poison needles.

News On Vaccine Safety Reveals Rampant Corruption

When people hear about life threatening conditions such as seizure, cardiovascular ailments and
encephalitis, the first thing that comes to their minds is viruses. These are the harmful side effects
of Gardasil, an HPV vaccine that are given to 9-year-old children.
There are many more vaccines that pose similar health dangers that are being given to children.

Related: Parents of vaccine-damaged children wrongly imprisoned, as doctors blame 'shaken baby syndrome'

NaturalNews Talk Hour reveals the harmful side effects of vaccination with PhD scholars Judy Mikovits and
Jonathan Landsman that our government doesnt want you to know.

Dr Mikovits feels that the possibility of latent viruses released into the system in the form of vaccines can be unleashed due
to the response of dendritic cells in our body, which release inflammatory messages to cytokines, triggering inflammation.
She terms this response as cytokine storm.

The Shocking Truth About Mandatory Vaccines Revealed

This response of the body could lead to permanent damage to the bodys immune system, which would ultimately lead to a
lifetime of diseases.

The body can have very severe effects from vaccination, a phenomenon known as vaccine injuries. Diseases like myalgic
encephalomyelitis, postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome, autism and polycystic ovarian syndrome can also be caused
by vaccine injuries.
Related: Vaccine for Flu Has 25000 Times More Mercury Concentration Than Drinking Water

The government has always hidden the harmful effects of vaccination on the grounds of coincidence or no specific reason.
Some members of the health administration have even gone as far as saying that the after effects of vaccination are actually
psychogenic in nature.

Dr Mikovits new publication, Plague, draws to the many responses that the government have, or have had for vaccine side
effects.

The side effects arent just caused by the antigens present in the vaccines. The additives used in most vaccines to
trigger immune response are also very toxic in nature and are equally harmful to our system, if not more.

The alternative media is flooded with the singular admission of a whistleblower at the CDC that lab results were
faked. The alternative media is flooded with 127 papers on the connection of thimerosal with autism.

Here we have a 188 page document with nothing but references to articles DATING BACK TO 1926 WHEN
ALUMINUM WAS FIRST USED AS AN ADJUVANT IN VACCINES to the present day with a bloom that was
noticed in articles around 1999 when Scientific American had an article called GENETIC VACCINES as noted in
my book Timeline.

What we are talking about here makes the recent British expose on the cover-up of vaccine science look like
neighborhood kids playing in the sandbox.

Credit to the Red Hens who discovered it @ www.vaccinefraud.com

The use of of ingredients like Polysorbate 80, which have detergent properties, has also been discovered.
Vaccines also have amounts of inflammatory additives and neurotoxins such as MPL and aluminium hydroxide respectively.

Related: Vaccines containing aluminum shown to cause neurological damage

Borax, a sodium compound present in vaccines, depletes important micronutrients from the body such as zinc, magnesium
and calcium. Dr Mikovits also reveals that vaccinations should not be given to children under 3 years, as it affects brain
development.

Dr Mikovits is a pioneer in the field of immunology and a PhD scholar from George Washington University.

Related Articles:
U.S. Federal Court Rules Autism & Brain Damage Caused By Big Pharma Vaccine!

Big Pharma developing baby vaccines for PREGNANT women

Toddler injected with 37 vaccines before the age of two left paralyzed and wheelchair-bound for life

How much money do pediatricians really make from vaccines?

Lead developer of HPV vaccine admits it's a giant, deadly scam

Dispelling Vaccination Myths

San Antonio district attorney states 'Vaccines cause autism'

Prominent District Attorney Blames Vaccines for His Childrens Autism

Press Release: Vaccine Safety Documentary Pulled from East End Film Festival Amid Outside Pressure

BANNED Man Made Epidemic Film Available Online

The Flawed Germ Theory; Unfortunately The Basis Of Modern Medicine


October 8 2016 | From: Tbyil

Ever wonder why modern medicine is not helping the populations of the western world to become
healthier? Maybe the foundation for health is wrong.
Pasteur's germ theory of disease has helped forward the one germ for one disease concept that has raised Big
Pharma to the wealthy business of developing drugs for one germ to purportedly cure one disease while causing
autoimmune and chronic diseases to flourish from destroyed immune systems.

Related:The Medical Dictatorship of Australia, New Zealand, Canada, England and the USA

Germ phobia, here comes the flu, get your flu shots or you may wind up as one of the 36,000 who manage to die from it
each year according to the CDC. It's never more, never less - 36,000 deaths each flu season. Isn't there something fishy
about that?

Then get out the antibiotics for every case of the sniffles. Don't forget the pharmaceutical antiviral Tamiflu, expensive, not so
effective, and dangerous. The germ theory has turned out to be great for the pharmaceutical business model.
Related: Patients at risk and billions of dollars being wasted because of tests, scans and procedures that don't
work

Now we have those nasty mosquitoes carrying the Zika virus, which has no real history of being problematic. So spray
everything and everyone with toxic chemicals that do cause disease. And let's not forget those new vaccines. Over a billion
dollars of government money has been recently set aside for Zika virus research and vaccines.

Why the Germ Theory is Flawed

The following quote is used by Dr. Robert O. Young in his book Sick and Tired?: Reclaim Your Inner Terrain:

If I could live my life over again, I would devote it to proving that germs seek their natural habitat - diseased tissue
- rather than being the cause of the diseased tissue; e.g., mosquitoes seek the stagnant water, but do not cause
the pool to become stagnant.

- Dr. Rudolph Virchow (Father of Pathology 1821 - 1902)

Related:Shocking Report from Medical Insiders: a shocking amount of published research is unreliable at best, if
not completely false, as in, fraudulent

Pasteur was the original scammer of the germ theory, not considered a worthy scientist by his peers. But he had good
press. Media bias and corruption are nothing new.

Other scientists, especially Claude Bernard, claimed the inner terrain, which includes overall and organ specific pH levels
and all facets of the immune system countered Pasteur's one germ for one disease theory with claims of pleomorphism
within damaged or diseased tissue, which the Medical Mafia and Big Pharma refused to acknowledge.

Pleomorphism was proven when Royal Raymond Rife's universal microscope in the late 1930s revealed structural changes
in microbes, up to 16, according their host's environment. Microbes can start out as benign then alter themselves to
survive if one's inner terrain is unhealthy.
In other words, inflammation and tissue degeneration with acidic pH levels attract pathogenic microbes or encourage
existing ones into morphing as pathogenic microbes if already present and harmless or even beneficial. The germ theory
hoax is the basis of modern pharmaceutical medicine and killing good food with pasteurization and irradiation.

Not only do our highly acidic junk and processed foods with add sugars promote acidic pH levels under 7.3, so do
overworking, stress, and anger. The combination of our environmental toxic load and inadequate nutrition lead to the
stagnant pools within our tissues that become the breeding grounds for existing or new pathogenic microbes to thrive.

Detoxing and seeking fresh whole foods with the proper supplements offer more disease protection from germs than all the
vaccines in the world.
Vaccinations offer the following tradeoffs for thwarting germs: Death, lifelong disability, or most commonly
autoimmune disease vulnerability.

Haven't you noticed? Autoimmune diseases and allergies have risen with the rise in vaccination schedules.

There have been studies in the USA among Amish children and in Europe among those raised on small dairy farms that
demonstrate how being exposed to germs at an early age exercises the immune system and make it stronger, thus
rendering natural immunization.

This is where rude, crude, over the top and hilarious George Carlin comes in:

Another Reason to Not Trust the CDC's Fear Mongering

Sharyl Attkinson was the news producer for CBS's Washington Bureau. During the Swine Flu pandemic of 2008-9, she
was intent at getting to the truth of just how much of an epidemic it really was. Sharyl, who is now independent with her own
website and her book Stonewalled in circulation, questioned the authenticity of the CDC's reportage on incidents of Swine
Flu.

Related: Sharyl Attkinson On The Hypnotic Power Of Germ Propaganda

After being stonewalled by the CDC with her Freedom of Information (FOI) requests for detailed statistics on the Swine Flu,
she and her CBS Washington Bureau news staff did an end around they went directly to state health departments and
discovered only a very few flu cases, mostly single digit numbers, tested positive for Swine Flu.

Those numbers were not nearly enough to justify claims of a level 6 pandemic, considered the most severe and
dangerous international pandemic level.

Then the CDC attempted damage control by announcing they had stopped counting because there were millions of Swine
Flu cases and they couldn't keep up with it.
Related: Flu Vaccines are Toxic

Wow, if the first lie doesn't work then tell a bigger one, even if it doesn't make any sense at all. This incident forced Sharyl
out of mainstream news. Can't question the CDC on mainstream TV.

You're better off sticking with alternative media and holistic health approaches for establishing a stronger immune system by
lessening your toxic chemical load and increasing your nutritional level with organic foods and supplements.

See also:

Louis Pasteur, Antoine Bechamp and the True Causes of Disease

Modern Medicine: How Healing Illness became Managing Symptoms for Profit

Red Cross Built Exactly 6 Homes For Haiti With Nearly Half A Billion Dollars In
Donations
October 1 2016 | From: Propublica / Various

The neighborhood of Campeche sprawls up a steep hillside in Haitis capital city, Port-au-Prince.
Goats rustle in trash that goes forever uncollected. Children kick a deflated volleyball in a dusty lot
below a wall with a hand-painted logo of the American Red Cross.
In late 2011, the Red Cross launched a multimillion-dollar project to transform the desperately poor area, which was
hit hard by the earthquake that struck Haiti the year before. The main focus of the project called LAMIKA, an
acronym in Creole for A Better Life in My Neighborhood was building hundreds of permanent homes.

Related: Wheres the $500 mn? Red Cross promises houses for 130,000 Haitians, builds only 6

Today, not one home has been built in Campeche. Many residents live in shacks made of rusty sheet metal, without access
to drinkable water, electricity or basic sanitation. When it rains, their homes flood and residents bail out mud and water.

The Red Cross received an outpouring of donations after the quake, nearly half a billion dollars.

The group has publicly celebrated its work. But in fact, the Red Cross has repeatedly failed on the ground in Haiti.
Confidential memos, emails from worried top officers, and accounts of a dozen frustrated and disappointed insiders show the
charity has broken promises, squandered donations, and made dubious claims of success.

The Red Cross says it has provided homes to more than 130,000 people. But the actual number of permanent homes the
group has built in all of Haiti: six.

After the earthquake, Red Cross CEO Gail McGovern unveiled ambitious plans to develop brand-new communities. None
has ever been built.
Haitians outside a Red Cross field hospital in Carrefour, Haiti, on Dec. 14, 2010, 11 months after a magnitude 7.0 earthquake hit the country's capital,
Port-au-Prince

Aid organizations from around the world have struggled after the earthquake in Haiti, the Western Hemispheres poorest
country. But ProPublica and NPRs investigation shows that many of the Red Crosss failings in Haiti are of its own making.

They are also part of a larger pattern in which the organization has botched delivery of aid after disasters such
as Superstorm Sandy. Despite its difficulties, the Red Cross remains the charity of choice for ordinary Americans and
corporations alike after natural disasters.

One issue that has hindered the Red Cross work in Haiti is an overreliance on foreigners who could not speak French or
Creole, current and former employees say.

Documents: Inside The Red Cross Haiti Failures

Confidential memo warns of failed results

Report on key project finds no contributions of any sort to the well being of households

Red Cross CEO emails about wonderful helicopter idea to spend money

In a blistering 2011 memo, the then-director of the Haiti program, Judith St. Fort, wrote that the group was failing in Haiti and
that senior managers had made very disturbing remarks disparaging Haitian employees. St. Fort, who is Haitian American,
wrote that the comments included, he is the only hard working one among them and the ones that we have hired are not
strong so we probably should not pay close attention to Haitian CVs.
The Red Cross wont disclose details of how it has spent the hundreds of millions of dollars donated for Haiti. But our
reporting shows that less money reached those in need than the Red Cross has said.

Where did the half billion raised for Haiti go? The Red Cross wont say.

Related: In Search Of The Red Cross' $500 Million In Haiti Relief

Lacking the expertise to mount its own projects, the Red Cross ended up giving much of the money to other groups to do the
work. Those groups took out a piece of every dollar to cover overhead and management. Even on the projects done by
others, the Red Cross had its own significant expenses in one case, adding up to a third of the projects budget.

In statements, the Red Cross cited the challenges all groups have faced in post-quake Haiti, including the countrys
dysfunctional land title system.

Like many humanitarian organizations responding in Haiti, the American Red Cross met complications in relation
to government coordination delays, disputes over land ownership, delays at Haitian customs, challenges finding
qualified staff who were in short supply and high demand, and the cholera outbreak, among other challenges, the
charity said.

The group said it responded quickly to internal concerns, including hiring an expert to train staff on cultural competency after
St. Forts memo.
Minouche Lamour, a member of the Community Platform for Development in Campeche, says she doesn't see how millions of dollars from the Red
Cross could have been spent in her neighborhood

While the group wont provide a breakdown of its projects, the Red Cross said it has done more than 100. The projects
include repairing 4,000 homes, giving several thousand families temporary shelters, donating $44 million for food after the
earthquake, and helping fund the construction of a hospital.

"Millions of Haitians are safer, healthier, more resilient, and better prepared for future disasters thanks to generous
donations to the American Red Cross, McGovern wrote in a recent report marking the fifth anniversary of the
earthquake."

In other promotional materials, the Red Cross said it has helped more than 4.5 million individual Haitians get back on their
feet.
Oops. Busted - The Order of St. John; a secret society under deep cover - hidden in plain sight, a classic esoteric 'laughing at the goyim who are too
stupid to see' hallmark. Compare the St. John logo with the flag above. St. John is admittedly run by The Knights of Malta. Similarly, Red Cross has
it's origins in the esoteric and was influenced by John D Rockefe;ler. While the Freemasons are lees inclined to admit their stewardship directly.
Charities? Throw your money away if you like. It is quite well known nowadays that most of the money given to charity organisations never get's to
where it was intended. Those pulling the strings simply play on peoples good nature

For those interested in the occult history of the Red Cross see: The Knights Templar

It has not provided details to back up the claim. And Jean-Max Bellerive, Haitis prime minister at the time of the earthquake,
doubts the figure, pointing out the countrys entire population is only about 10 million.

"No, no, Bellerive said of the Red Cross claim, its not possible.

When the earthquake struck Haiti in January 2010, the Red Cross was facing a crisis of its own. McGovern had become
chief executive just 18 months earlier, inheriting a deficit and an organization that had faced scandals after 9/11 and Katrina.
Gail McGovern

Inside the Red Cross, the Haiti disaster was seen as a spectacular fundraising opportunity, recalled one former official who
helped organize the effort. Michelle Obama, the NFL and a long list of celebrities appealed for donations to the group.

The Red Cross kept soliciting money well after it had enough for the emergency relief that is the groups stock in trade.
Doctors Without Borders, in contrast, stopped fundraising off the earthquake after it decided it had enough money. The
donations to the Red Cross helped the group erase its more-than $100 million deficit.

The Red Cross ultimately raised far more than any other charity.
A year after the quake, McGovern announced that the Red Cross would use the donations to make a lasting impact in Haiti.

We asked the Red Cross to show us around its projects in Haiti so we could see the results of its work. It declined. So earlier
this year we went to Campeche to see one of the groups signature projects for ourselves.

Street vendors in the dusty neighborhood immediately pointed us to Jean Jean Flaubert, the head of a community group that
the Red Cross set up as a local sounding board.

Sitting with us in their sparse one-room office, Flaubert and his colleagues grew angry talking about the Red Cross. They
pointed to the lack of progress in the neighborhood and the healthy salaries paid to expatriate aid workers.

"What the Red Cross told us is that they are coming here to change Campeche. Totally change it, said Flaubert.

Now I do not understand the change that they are talking about. I think the Red Cross is working for themselves.

The Red Cross initial plan said the focus would be building homes an internal proposal put the number at 700. Each
would have finished floors, toilets, showers, even rainwater collection systems. The houses were supposed to be finished in
January 2013.
The Red Cross promised to build hundreds of new homes in Campeche but none have been built. Many residents still live in
crude shacks. (Marie Arago, special to ProPublica)

None of that ever happened. Carline Noailles, who was the projects manager in Washington, said it was endlessly delayed
because the Red Cross didnt have the know-how.

Another former official who worked on the Campeche project said, Everything takes four times as long because it would be
micromanaged from DC, and they had no development experience.

Shown an English-language press release from the Red Cross website, Flaubert was stunned to learn of the projects $24
million budget and that it is due to end next year.

"Not only is [the Red Cross] not doing it, Flaubert said, now Im learning that the Red Cross is leaving next year. I
dont understand that.

(The Red Cross says it did tell community leaders about the end date. It also accused us of creating ill will in the community
which may give rise to a security incident.)

The project has since been reshaped and downscaled. A road is being built. Some existing homes have received earthquake
reinforcement and a few schools are being repaired. Some solar street lights have been installed, though many broke and
residents say others are unreliable.

The groups most recent press release on the project cites achievements such as training school children in disaster
response.

The Red Cross said it has to scale back its housing plans because it couldnt acquire the rights to land. No homes will be
built.
Other Red Cross infrastructure projects also fizzled.

In January 2011, McGovern announced a $30 million partnership with the U.S. Agency for International Development, or
USAID. The agency would build roads and other infrastructure in at least two locations where the Red Cross would build new
homes.

But it took more than two and a half years, until August 2013, for the Red Cross just to sign an agreement with USAID on the
program, and even that was for only one site. The program was ultimately canceled because of a land dispute.

A Government Accountability Office report attributed the severe delays to problems in securing land title and because
of turnover in Red Cross leadership in its Haiti program.

Other groups also ran into trouble with land titles and other issues. But they also ultimately built 9,000 homes compared to
the Red Cross six.

Asked about the Red Cross housing projects in Haiti, David Meltzer, the groups general counsel and chief international
officer, said changing conditions forced changes in plans. If we had said, All were going to do is build new homes, wed still
be looking for land, he said.

The USAID projects collapse left the Red Cross grasping for ways to spend money earmarked for it.

"Any ideas on how to spend the rest of this?? (Besides the wonderful helicopter idea?), McGovern wrote to
Meltzer in a November 2013 email obtained by ProPublica and NPR.

Can we fund Conrads hospital? Or more to PiH[Partners in Health]? Any more shelter projects?
Jean Jean Flaubert says the Red Cross promised to transform his neighborhood. Now I do not understand the change that
they are talking about, he said. (Marie Arago, special to ProPublica)

Its not clear what helicopter idea McGovern was referring to or if it was ever carried out. The Red Cross would say only that
her comments were grounded in the American Red Cross strategy and priorities, which focus on health and housing.

Another signature project, known in Creole as A More Resilient Great North, is supposed to rehabilitate roads in poor, rural
communities and to help them get clean water and sanitation.

But two years after it started, the $13 million effort has been faltering badly. An internal evaluation from March found
residents were upset because nothing had been done to improve water access or infrastructure or to make contributions of
any sort to the well being of households, the report said.

The Red Cross says 91% of donations went to help Haitians. Thats not true.

So much bad feeling built up in one area that the population rejects the project.

Instead of making concrete improvements to living conditions, the Red Cross has launched hand-washing education
campaigns. The internal evaluation noted that these were not effective when people had no access to water and no soap.
(The Red Cross declined to comment on the project.)
The groups failures went beyond just infrastructure.

When a cholera epidemic raged through Haiti nine months after the quake, the biggest part of the Red Cross response
a plan to distribute soap and oral rehydration salts was crippled by internal issues that go unaddressed, wrote the
director of the Haiti program in her May 2011 memo.

Throughout that year, cholera was a steady killer. By September 2011, when the death toll had surpassed 6,000, the project
was still listed as very behind schedule according to another internal document.

The Red Cross said in a statement that its cholera response, including a vaccination campaign, has continued for years and
helped millions of Haitians.

But while other groups also struggled early responding to cholera, some performed well.

"None of these people had to die. Thats what upsets me, said Paul Christian Namphy, a Haitian water and
sanitation official who helped lead the effort to fight cholera. He says early failures by the Red Cross and other
NGOs had a devastating impact.

These numbers should have been zero.

So why did the Red Cross efforts fall so short? It wasnt just that Haiti is a hard place to work.

"They collected nearly half a billion dollars, said a congressional staffer who helped oversee Haiti reconstruction.

But they had a problem. And the problem was that they had absolutely no expertise.
Lee Malany was in charge of the Red Cross shelter program in Haiti starting in 2010.

He remembers a meeting in Washington that fall where officials did not seem to have any idea how to spend millions of
dollars set aside for housing. Malany says the officials wanted to know which projects would generate good publicity, not
which projects would provide the most homes.

"When I walked out of that meeting I looked at the people that I was working with and said, You know this is very
disconcerting, this is depressing, he recalled.

The Red Cross said in a statement its Haiti program has never put publicity over delivering aid.

Malany resigned the next year from his job in Haiti.

"I said theres no reason for me to stay here. I got on the plane and left.
Transitional shelters like these on the outskirts of Port-Au-Prince, paid for by the Red Cross, typically last three to five years.

Sometimes it wasnt a matter of expertise, but whether anybody was filling key jobs. An April 2012 organizational chart
obtained by ProPublica and NPR lists 9 of 30 leadership positions in Haiti as vacant, including slots for experts on health and
shelter.

The Red Cross said vacancies and turnover were inevitable because of the security situation, separation from family for
international staff, and the demanding nature of the work.

The constant upheaval took a toll. Internal documents refer to repeated attempts over years to finalize and complete a
strategic plan for the Haiti program, efforts that were delayed by changes in senior management. As late as March 2014,
more than four years into a six-year program, an internal update cites a revised strategy still awaiting final sign-off.

The Red Cross says it provided homes to more than 130,000 Haitians. But they didnt.

The Red Cross said settling on a plan early would have been a mistake. It would be hard to create the perfect plan from the
beginning in a complicated place like Haiti, it said. But we also need to begin, so we create plans that are continually
revised.

Those plans were further undermined by the Red Cross reliance on expats. Noailles, the Haitian development professional
who worked for the Red Cross on the Campeche project, said expat staffers struggled in meetings with local officials.

"Going to meetings with the community when you dont speak the language is not productive, she
said. "Sometimes, she recalled, expat staffers would skip such meetings altogether.
The Red Cross said it has made it a priority to hire Haitians despite lots of competition for local professionals, and that over
90 percent of its staff is Haitian. The charity said it used a local human resources firm to help.

Yet very few Haitians have made it into the groups top echelons in Haiti, according to five current and former Red Cross
staffers as well as staff lists obtained by ProPublica and NPR.

That not only affected the groups ability to work in Haiti, it was also expensive.

Related: Senator's Report Finds 'Fundamental Concerns' About Red Cross Finances

According to an internal Red Cross budgeting document for the project in Campeche, the project manager a position
reserved for an expatriate was entitled to allowances for housing, food and other expenses, home leave trips, R&R four
times a year, and relocation expenses. In all, it added up to $140,000.

Compensation for a senior Haitian engineer the top local position was less than one-third of that, $42,000 a year.

Shelim Dorval, a Haitian administrator who worked for the Red Cross coordinating travel and housing for expatriate staffers,
recalled thinking it was a waste to spend so much to bring in people with little knowledge of Haiti when locals were available.

"For each one of those expats, they were having high salaries, staying in a fancy house, and getting vacation trips
back to their countries, Dorval said.

A lot of money was spent on those people who were not Haitian, who had nothing to do with Haiti. The money
was just going back to the United States.

Soon after the earthquake, McGovern, the Red Cross CEO, said the group would make sure donors knew exactly what
happened to their money.
The Red Cross would lead the effort in transparency, she pledged. We are happy to share the way we are spending our
dollars.

That hasnt happened. The Red Cross public reports offer only broad categories about where $488 million in donations has
gone. The biggest category is shelter, at about $170 million. The others include health, emergency relief and disaster
preparedness.

After the earthquake, Red Cross CEO Gail McGovern unveiled plans to develop brand-new communities. None has ever been built.

It has declined repeated requests to disclose the specific projects, to explain how much money went to each or to say what
the results of each project were. There is reason to doubt the Red Cross claims that it helped 4.5 million Haitians.
An internal evaluation found that in some areas, the Red Cross
reported helping more people than even lived in the
communities.

In other cases, the figures were low, and in others double-


counting went uncorrected.

In describing its work, the Red Cross also conflates different


types of aid, making it more difficult to assess the charitys
efforts in Haiti.

For example, while the Red Cross says it provided more than
130,000 people with homes, that includes thousands of people
who were not actually given homes, but rather were trained in
proper construction techniques. (That was first reported by the
Haiti blog of the Center for Economic and Policy Research.)

The figure includes people who got short-term rental assistance


or were housed in several thousand transitional shelters,
which are temporary structures that can get eaten up by
termites or tip over in storms.

It also includes modest improvements on 5,000 temporary


shelters.The Red Cross also wont break down what
portion of donations went to overhead.

McGovern told CBS News a few months after the quake,


Minus the 9 cents overhead, 91 cents on the dollar will be
going to Haiti.

And I give you my word and my commitment, Im banking my


integrity, my own personal sense of integrity on that statement.

But the reality is that less money went to Haiti than 91 percent.

Thats because in addition to the Red Cross 9 percent


overhead, the other groups that got grants from the Red Cross
also have their own overhead.

In one case, the Red Cross sent $6 million to the International


Federation of the Red Cross for rental subsidies to help
Haitians leave tent camps.

The IFRC then took out 26 percent for overhead and what the
IFRC described as program-related administration, finance,
human resources and similar costs.

Beyond all that, the Red Cross also spends another piece of each dollar for what it describes as program costs incurred by
the American Red Cross in managing the projects done by other groups.

The American Red Cross management and other costs consumed an additional 24 percent of the money on one project,
according to the groups statements and internal documents. The actual work, upgrading shelters, was done by the Swiss
and Spanish Red Cross societies.

"Its a cycle of overhead, said Jonathan Katz, the Associated Press reporter in Haiti at the time of the earthquake
who tracked post-disaster spending for his book, The Big Truck That Went By.

It was always going to be the American Red Cross taking a 9 percent cut, re-granting to another group, which
would take out their cut.
Given the results produced by the Red Cross projects in Haiti, Bellerive, the former prime minister, said he has a hard time
fathoming whats happened to donors money.

"Five hundred million dollars in Haiti is a lot of money, he said. Im not a big mathematician, but I can make some
additions. I know more or less the cost of things. Unless you dont pay for the gasoline the same price I was
paying, unless you pay people 20 times what I was paying them, unless the cost of the house you built was five
times the cost I was paying, it doesnt add up for me.

A resident in a Port-Au-Prince transitional shelter paid for by the Red Cross.

This story was co-published with NPR. Mitzy-Lynn Hyacinthe contributed reporting. Design direction by David Sleight,
production by Hannah Birch.

Read about how the Red Cross botched key elements of its mission after Superstorm Sandy and Hurricane Isaac in PR Over
People: The Red Cross' Secret Disaster. And about how the Red Cross' CEO has been serially misleading about where
donors' dollars are going.

If you have information about the Red Cross or about other international aid projects, please email justin@propublica.org.

Dangerous Products That Were Unknowingly Using In Our Day-To-Day Life


+ The Cancer Risk To People Who Drink Chlorinated Water Is 93% Higher Than Those
Who Dont
September 30 2016 | From: NewEasternOutlook / EnvirowatchRangitikei / Varous
In todays highly controversial and aggressive world, virtually anything can present a threat to the
life of a human being, not just wars, climate change, or short-sighted and often criminal actions of
certain politicians.

As it has been shown by a number of scientific studies, the activities of a number of American corporations
present a very real threat the well-being of the population mainly due to the use of genetically modified substances
in their products while manufacturing substandard health and beauty aids.

The truth is that its the people of developing countries that are being affected by these fraudulent business practices the
most, since Western corporations try to suppress any information about the health effects of their products to obtain
maximum profit.

At the end of the twentieth century British scientists have come to a sensational conclusion that parabens are capable of
penetrating the skin barrier and are being accumulated in the tissues of the body, causing cancer, hormone system failures,
endocrine system suppression, and skin diseases.
Related: Johnson & Johnson Hid Talcum Powder Link to Ovarian Cancer for 40 Years

Research made this finding while studying malignant tumors in breast tissue, all of which contained parabens, Later
on, these findings were confirmed by Canadian and French scientists.

Parabens are artificial preservatives that are often used in the pharmaceutical and cosmetic industry by a number of
Western corporations.

Even though they are effectively increasing the shelf life of a product, while remaining relatively cheap to use, parabens
pose a serious threat to human health and well-being.

From time to time one can come across articles on the harmful effects of parabens in Europe and the United States, forcing
certain companies to replace parabens with less harmful preservatives. However, the markets of developing countries,
especially those with hot and humid climates, are flooded with Western cosmetic products that contain the dangerous
substance.

In order to attract international attention to this danger, the French Le Monde went as far as to publish a list of the 400
Western pharmaceutical products containing parabens and that are, therefore, dangerous for use or consumption.

Related: A New Study Links Benadryl to Serioud Mental Health Diseases Such as Dementia

In this list one may find the baby cream Biafine, such cough medicines as Clarix, Codotussyl, Drill, Hexapneumine, Humex,
Pectosan, and Rhinathiol, stomach relief medicine such as Maalox, Gaviscon, Josacine, and antibiotic Zinnat, along with a
list of other drugs produced by Western corporations and actively advertised for mass consumption.

As it has been pointed out by French journalists, numerous studies have shown that drugs from this list compromise the
functioning of the hormone system, especially the reproductive ability of men and women, and may result in cancer.

At the same time, scientists are stressing the danger of hydro-alcoholic gels which were brought to the market in the wake of
the artificially created hysteria around the danger of the so-called bird flu, the H1N1. These gels are advertised as the
ultimate solution for sanitizing hands and body in the absence of soap.
Related: Hydrogen Peroxide Or Soap And Water To Clean Your Wound? + Why You Should Think Twice Before
Using Antibacterial Soap

A study carried out by the University of Missouri and published in the Plos ONE journal shows that hydro-alcoholic gels
make a person more susceptible to Bisphnol-A.

In 2010, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) officially recognized that Bisphnol-A is harmful to human health due
to the negative effect it has on brain functions and the reproductive system. It also causes a number of cancers (in both
women and men) in particular, prostate cancer, breast cancer as well as autism, depression, reproductive and endocrine
systems failure, delays in brain development, diabetes, obesity, and cardiovascular disease.
Yet another study conducted in Argentina showed that 85% of the womens hygienic pads presented a serious
threat to women since they contain the chemically hazardous substance known as glyphosate.

This fact was revealed by researchers of the National Argentine University of La Plata at a recent congress of physicians in
Buenos Aires, upon examining sanitary towels and sanitary pads produced with the use of genetically-modified cotton that
was grown using Roundup herbicide of the American company Monsanto-Bayer.

As we learn from this study,after the use of this herbicide, all cotton products contain this carcinogenic substance. For this
reason, theres been a massive movement in many countries through the collection of signatures to force such producers as
Tampax or Always to state the composition of their products.
Related: Why Are These 25 Carcinogens Still Being Sold?

The Cancer Risk To People Who Drink Chlorinated Water Is 93% Higher Than Those
Who Dont
This information is from well known Dr Mercola. If you go to the link you can download his free
ebook, an excellent resource that will show you how to protect yourself and your loved ones from
health risks by choosing the best water to drink and bathe in.

Need I repeat? We need to be vigilant in what we expose ourselves to today because corporate interests are such
that they will focus on profits not on your health. Be vigilant and be informed.

Related: 'Brockovich' carcinogen found at unsafe levels in tap water supplies of 218mn Americans report

What if that clear, clean-looking liquid you use every day to quench your thirst, to bathe and shower in, and to wash your
dishes and laundry in contributed to dozens of everyday ailments, includingheart attacks, tiredness, sinus problems,
sperm count, risk of miscarriage, a weakened immune system and many more.

Truth is, the water we use in and around our homes is far from the fresh, pure resource you might assume. And the worst
part is

Americans are ingesting from 300 to 600 times what the Environmental Protection Agency considers a safe amount while
chlorine itself is relatively benign, and was created to help keep us free from infectious diarrheas, it reacts with organic
materials which already dissolve in water, forming chemicals (known as DBPs) that are over 100 times more toxic than
chlorine
According to the U.S. Council of Environmental Quality, the cancer risk to people who drink chlorinated water is
93 percent higher than among those whose water does not contain chlorine.

The residents of a small town in Pennsylvania who ate diets rich in saturated animal fats and milk had no heart
attacks until they switched from mountain spring water to fluoridated water.

Research from the University of Nijmegen in the Netherlands discovered that people who swam in chlorinated
pools or polluted waters as children had 2.2 to 2.4 times the risk of developing melanoma compared to those who
did not swim in chlorinated waters.

Male smokers who drank chlorinated tap water for more than 40 years had double the risk of bladder cancer as
smoking males who drank non-chlorinated water.

Related: Get this FREE report "Is Your Water Safe? How Modern Water Sanitation Can Damage Your Health and
How To Protect Yourself"

Is October Breast Cancer "Awareness" Or "Industry" Month?


September 29 2016 | From: DrMcDougall

October is commonly known as "Breast Cancer Awareness Month." This is an annual, international
campaign organized by major charities to increase the awareness of breast cancer and to raise
funds for research.

"A lot of awareness has been created, but unfortunately there has been no useful progress made in finding the
cause, or for effectively preventing, treating, or curing breast cancer." - HORSESHIT

Related: Mammograms Send Women To Their Deathbeds Faster And Increase Their Risk of Breast Cancer As Much
As 30 Percent

Comment: In 100 years of 'modern medicine' research not ONE cure for ANY DISEASE has ever been allowed to
emerge through the medical establishment - because the upper echelons of the establishment are not interested in
cures or addressing causes - only in addressing symptoms - for profit.
Slowly people are waking up to this, especially with the news of natural cures being so successful, remedies that
the pharmaceutical industry CANNOT PATENT and therefore cannot CONTROL not PROFIT from. And so they
lobby to have real, natural remedies SLANDERED and OUTLAWED.

Related: Eugenics & The Depopulation Agenda

So, put your coins in the buckets but know that you are further funding the medical establishment that will NEVER
RELEASE A CURE FOR CANCER if they have their way.

We do not have a Healthcare System - that label is a farce. We have a Sickness Industry. Driven by the mandates
and objectives of the 'elite' at the top. They have no interest in wellness nor cures.

They wish to keep you as sick as they can for as long as they can whilst extracting as much money from you as
they can in the process. This is not just about money, but consolidation of power and population control, otherwise
known as Eugenics.

Related: The Truth About Cancer

Related: Hospital Fires Leading Cancer Surgeon For Telling The Truth About Medical Establishment

The campaign's efforts have, however, increased the number of women diagnosed with breast cancer, primarily by
encouraging mammograms, and the use of powerful treatments, such as surgery, radiation, and chemotherapy.

The conflicts of interest between businesses sponsoring breast cancer awareness campaigns while at the same time
profiting from breast cancer diagnosis and treatment have resulted in October also being known as "Breast Cancer
Industry Month."

The same year that the Breast Cancer Awareness Month campaign was founded (1985) as a team effort between the
American Cancer Society and a pharmaceutical company (AstraZeneca), I wrote McDougall's Medicine: A Challenging
Second Opinion.

This book includes a comprehensive chapter on the testing and treatment of breast cancer. After reading this scientifically
backed material (click the link over the book cover) you will be shocked to learn that medical doctors and scientists have
known for more than 30 years about the harms that are still being done to women.
Related: Cancer Update: There Are Now 100 Scientific Studies That Prove Cannabis Cures Cancer + Watch What
Happens When Cannabis Is Injected Into Cancer Cells

Countless women have been subjected to life-damaging fear, testing, biopsies, radiation, breast amputations,
drugs, and death, with little, if any, improvement in the quality or quantity of their lives.

The reason this inhumanity continues is that the business of diagnosing and treating breast cancer generates a
great deal of money for medical practices, far more than would be generated through alleviating women's suffering.

Three major articles that made worldwide headlines were published this year (2015) during Breast Cancer Awareness
Month (October), proving that the ineffective ways women have been cared for is widely known. McDougall's Medicine: A
Challenging Second Opinion shows you that this is old news.
Related: 'Cancer Screening Has Never Saved Lives' - BMJ Study Concludes

The first article was published in JAMA Oncology and was a 20-year study of more than 108,000 ductal carcinoma in situ
(DCIS)* patients who had undergone treatment.

The headline-grabbing news was the finding that there was no significant difference in survival among women who had a
mastectomy, a lumpectomy, or a lumpectomy followed by radiation. Surgery and/or radiation do not save lives (not even for
women with invasive cancer).

The second article was published in the Journal of the American Medical Association and was new advice from the
American Cancer Society for when and how often women should have mammograms.
Related: Mammograms Cause Breast Cancer

This organization now recommends that most women should start annual screenings at age 45 rather than at 40, and also
advises switching screening to every other year at 55. This update also recommends no routine physical breast exams to be
performed by doctors, concluding that there is no evidence that these exams save lives.

The third study was published in the New England Journal of Medicine and found the rate of cancers that have spread
beyond the breast when detected has stayed stable since 1975, meaning that mammograms are not preventing the most
deadly (metastatic) forms of breast cancer.

McDougall's Medicine: A Challenging Second Opinion can be ordered as a PDF and found in libraries and secondhand
bookstores. However, you can read this chapter on breast cancer now by clicking on the book cover above.

*DCIS refers to the formal name, ductal carcinoma in situ. This condition is also referred to as stage 0 breast cancer. The
implication is that the abnormal "cancer appearing" cells remain in the milk ducts and show no evidence of spread to other
parts of the body. Because the cells have not spread, DCIS is really not cancer.

Many doctors and scientists are calling for a new name for this condition in an effort to reduce the fear and over-treatment
caused by the word "cancer."

Related Articles:
The 20 Biggest Cancer Lies You've Been Brainwashed To Believe By The For-Profit Cancer Industry + Cancer
Cures Exposed: Natural Medicine Revealed As The Answer

Watch As Amazing GcMAF Treatment Kills Cancer Cells In Real Time

Cancer Industry Now Admits That Chemo And Radiation Treatments Generate Huge Repeat Business & Repeat
Profits

Medical Establishment Doesn't Like Baking Soda Cancer Treatment Because Its Too Effective And Too Cheap

The Man Who Discovered The Cause Of Cancer Wrote A Book On Curing It

5 Cancer Myths Busted

The Cult Of 'Scientism' Explained: How Scientific Claims Behind Cancer, Vaccines, Psychiatric Drugs And GMOs
Are Nothing More Than Corporate-Funded Science Fraud

5 Facts On Cancer That Conventional Medicine Is Now Aggressively Claiming Are Myths + Amish Have Lower
Rates Of Cancer, Ohio State Study Shows

Breast Cancer Cover-Up Continues

Modern Life Is Killing Our Children: UK Cancer Rate In Young People Up 40% In 16
Years + 12 Things A Cancer Doctor Should Never Say
September 25 2016 | From: TheTelegraph / TheTruthAboutCancer / Various

Modern life is killing children with the number of youngsters diagnosed with cancer rising 40 per
cent in the past 16 years because of air pollution, pesticides, poor diets and radiation, scientists
have warned. These two articles include a massive dump on cancer topics both causes and
solutions.
New analysis of government statistics by researchers at the charity Children with Cancer UK found that there are
now 1,300 more cancer cases a year compared with 1998, the first time all data sets were published.

Note: As this first article is from the controlled mainstream it makes ridiculous statements like the causes of cancer
not being known. Interspresed are links to various other articles and resources.

Related: Electromagnetic fields and their negative effects

The rise is most apparent in teenagers and young adults aged between 15 and 24, where the incident rate has risen from
around 10 cases in 100,000 to nearly 16.

Researchers say that although some of the rise can be explained by improvements in cancer diagnoses and more
screening, the majority is probably caused by environmental factors.

Related: CT scans increase your risk of cancer by 35 percent

Dr Denis Henshaw, Professor of Human Radiation Effects at Bristol University, the scientific adviser for Children with
Cancer UK, said air pollution was by far the biggest culprit, accounting for around 40 per cent of the rise, but other elements
of modern lifestyles are also to blame.

Among these are obesity, pesticides and solvents inhaled during pregnancy, circadian rhythm disruption through too much
bright light at night, radiation from x-rays and CT scans, smoking during and after pregnancy, magnetic fields from power
lines, gadgets in homes, and potentially, radiation from mobile phones.

Related: Vaccine ingredients cause tumors to grow


Children are surrounded by electrical fields, warn scientists

"When you look at cancers such as childhood leukaemia there is no doubt that environmental factors are playing a
big role, said Dr Henshaw. We were shocked to see the figures, and its modern lifestyle Im afraid."

Many items on the list of environmental causes are now known to be carcinogenic, such as air pollution and
pesticides and solvents. There has been good research to suggest a mother's diet can damage DNA in cord blood.
Light at night we know is very disruptive for the body, which is why shift workers have such bad health.

Burnt barbecues, the electric fields of power lines, the electricity supply in your home. Hairdryers. Its all of these
things coming together, and it seems to be teenagers and young people that are most affected.

Whats worrying is it is very hard to avoid a lot of these things. How can you avoid air pollution? It sometimes feels
like we are fighting a losing battle.

More than 4,000 children and young people are diagnosed with cancer every year in Britain, and cancer is the leading cause
of death in children aged one to 14.

Related: Brain cancer replaces leukemia as deadliest cancer for kids, study shows

Diagnoses of colon cancer among children and young people has risen 200 per cent since 1998, while thyroid cancer has
doubled. Ovarian and cervical cancers have also risen by 70 per cent and 50 per cent respectively.

The charity estimates that the rise in cases now costs the NHS an extra 130 million a year compared with 16 years ago.
Related: Gwyneth Paltrow warns of the dangers of cell phone use and WiFi radiation

But experts believe many cancers could be prevented with lifestyle changes such as allowing children to attend nursery to
boost their immune system, not painting childrens rooms with oil-based paints, avoiding night shift work and processed
meats in pregnancy.

The figures were released ahead of the Children with Cancer UK conference which is taking place in London this week.

Other cancer experts said they had also noticed a rise in cancer diagnoses but warned it was too early to draw firm
conclusions on the causes.

Nicola Smith, Cancer Research UKs senior health information officer, said: [Bollocks mainly]

Any rise in childhood cancers is worrying but its important to remember that less than one per cent of cancer
cases in the UK occur in children.

Its not yet clear exactly what causes cancer in childhood and research has not shown a link with environmental
factors like air pollution and diet during pregnancy.

There are some factors which can increase the risk of childhood cancer like inherited genetic conditions and
exposure to radiation but these are usually not avoidable and no one should feel blamed for a child getting
cancer.

Evidence has shown that there are lots of things adults can do to reduce cancer risk and its always a good idea to
set up healthy habits as a family, like eating healthily, being active and enjoying the sun safely.

Related: Massive government study concludes cell phone radiation causes brain cancer

Kate Lee, chief executive of childrens cancer charity CLIC Sargent, said that a child cancer diagnosis places a huge
emotional and financial burden on the whole family.
"Over the last year CLIC Sargent provided support for more than 7,100 families, more than ever before, but we
know that we can still only reach two out of three of those children and young people diagnosed with cancer, she
added.

As more young cancer patients are diagnosed every year, we know each of those families will need support and
are working hard to one day be able to provide those services for every young patient.

Despite the increase, around 80 per cent of child cancer patients now survive for at least five years. But the aggressive
treatments they have as children can have a major impact on their future health, even if they survive.

Related: Apple's new 'wireless' headphones emit radiation ... right next to your brain

Tomorrow, Children with Cancer UK launches a five-point plan calling on the Government and the science and medical
community to ensure that all children diagnosed with cancer in the UK have access to precision medicine by 2020.

Related Articles:

The politics behind the science of cell phone safety

Teen who was allergic to WiFi commits suicide: mom

Cellphone Radiation Linked to Cancer in Major Rat Study

Latest iPhones Have Almost SIX TIMES More Cancer-Causing Radiation Than Competing Brands

Telecom Companys Patent Admits: Non-Thermal Exposures To Wireless Radiation Is Genotoxic, Causes Clear
Damage to Hereditary Material

What the Hell is this? Microwave Bursts in most Major US Population Centers Showing up on Weather Radar!

Cancer Curing Doctor Found Shot Dead shortly after Govt. Raid on Clinic

Interview with the late Dr. Nicholas Gonzalez: Chemo drugs are derived from World War I nerve gas chemicals
The cancer risk to people who drink chlorinated water is 93 percent higher than those who dont

8 Lifestyle Hacks that Ward off Cancer

The Quiet Killer ~ Exploding Autoimmune Epidemics ~ Vaccines & Man Made Cancer ~ Dr. Randy Tent

Why I Said No to Chemo

Wi-Fi: The Invisible Killing Fields

Why wireless radiation is dangerous and why the safety guidelines urgently need updating

Cell Phone Technology Disrupts Brain Activity

12 Things A Cancer Doctor Should Never Say

We can all agree that proper communication skills are essential for the best cancer care. While
some patients appreciate a direct approach, others need a bit of hand-holding. Some cancer
doctors have good bedside manners, displaying genuine empathy for their patients. Others can
be considered bullies in white coats. But it all comes down to this what a cancer doctor says or
doesnt say can make all the difference in your outcome.

Doctors frequently take an overly dominant role. Proactive patients are often treated with sarcasm or arrogance.
The patient who comes armed with research might be told I see you have spent some time on Google. I think it is
best if you let me diagnose you and tell you the treatment that is most suitable for you.

Related: Researchers Finally Confirm that Cancer is a Purely Man-Made Disease

Cancer treatment requires a partnership between doctor and patient. A patient needs to be comfortable and confident
that the chosen treatment is the best option for them.
As a cancer strategist I hear of all kinds of terrible comments made by oncologists to their patients. Even those patients who
intend to comply with the recommendations of their oncologist hear words that should never be spoken. Often times I am
sure that these comments are not meant to be callous, but are just spoken in ignorance.

Here are 12 things you should never hear from your cancer doctor. Be on the lookout for doctors who say any of
these. It could be a sign that they need an attitude adjustment and that you need a new doctor:

#1. Im afraid I have bad news. If you didnt already suspect you had a problem to deal with, you would not be sitting in
the doctors office. This statement brings on fear. Doctors do this so that you will comply with their orders. Skip the drama
doc.

Related: A DIRE WARNING: The Cancer Industry Owns The Media And Your Mind

#2. You have three months to live. It is rarely helpful to have a doctor pretend he has a crystal ball. While from
experience they might have an idea how long the average patient lives given a particular diagnosis, we are all individuals
and YOU ARE NOT AVERAGE. Despite what the doctor says, there is always hope. There is always a way to extend life or
even reverse the dis-ease.

Just like bad news, a prognosis brings on fear and the need to comply albeit in a different way. Studies show that people
are told they have three months to live dutifully fulfill that directive from their doctor. Even worse, a poor prognosis takes
away the will to live and ability to think outside the box and to change the direction of the dis-ease.

There are innumerable remissions of advanced and late stage cancers. There are countless stories of patients who were
offered little chance of survival or a cure, yet who are here years later to tell their tale. A quick perusal through the articles on
The Truth About Cancer website will bring you valuable information on surviving the odds.

Related: Breakthrough Discovery Shows That Resonant Frequencies Can Kill Cancer Cells

Hope gives us the opportunity to do what we must do to heal from cancer. Even in the face of the most advanced of
cancers, there is usually room for some words of encouragement and support. This can make all the difference in the
patients attitude towards their disease and their treatment. While there is hope, there is life.

#3. If you dont do X you will die. For some bizarre reason, cancer doctors think they know everything. Yes, I know
that they went to medical school, but there was competent and effective medicine well before Big Pharma taught these
doctors. Know that there are many, many options when it comes to managing cancer dont let your doctor bully you. In
fact, you might point out to your doctor that you are more likely to die if you follow one of the standard protocols instead of
opting for a less toxic treatment plan.
Related: Landmark Study Shows Half of Cancer Patients are Killed by Chemo - NOT Cancer

#4. You have no choice. Sorry, doctor, yes, you do. They might also say you have no other options. While it is always a
good idea to get a second, third, or even fourth opinion, be sure to get at least one from an alternative or holistic doctor.

The award-wnning documentary The Idiot Cycle (2009) about the companies involved in producing toxic chemicals, cancer treatments and
genetically modified crops

Otherwise, you are still limiting your options and overlooking key lifelines to survival.

#5. Calm Down. Given the situation at hand, it is understandable that a patient might be upset. Telling a patient they need
to calm down or speaking to him or her in a dominant tone of voice clearly shows a lack of empathy and offers no chance of
a partnership.

#6. This treatment will not harm you. Be sure you are clear on what harm means to your cancer
doctor. Chemotherapy, radiation, hormone therapies, and even surgery harm the body and increase your risk of more
cancer. Be aware of the life-threatening and quality of life-threatening side effects, and do not believe that they are always
worth it. Studies and case studies have not provided evidence of efficacy.

Related: The TRUTH about CHEMO

#7. Here are the statistics. You are a person, not a statistic. You have your own unique set of circumstances; your own
history. Statistics are helpful for doctors who use a checklist to make treatment recommendations. As an empowered person
who is committed to make lifestyle changes that can affect your health and outcome, statistics do not apply.

Further, statistics are typically skewed in favor of treatment recommendations. For example, a patient might hear that by
taking hormone therapy they will reduce their risk of recurrence by almost 50%. Sounds great, right? However in actuality, it
may be the case that the risk without the therapy was only 2% and with the drugs 1%. That 50% reduction doesnt really
mean much, does it?
Related: American Cancer Society admits conventional cancer treatment causes more cancer

Or in the case of chemotherapy, a patient might hear that the therapy will decrease risk by 30%. But if the risk of dying was
only 10% to begin with, the survival benefit on an absolute basis is only 3%. Considering the downsides of these therapies,
one must extrapolate the true benefit and compare this to the possible harm they deliver.

#8. This treatment will cure you. This is a bold statement for sure. If your doctor is not addressing the cause of your
cancer, the treatment is not a cure. Cancer is complicated, but most often the root cause can be determined and
resolved. Only then can any treatment be considered curative.

I have never met anyone who was Tamoxifen- or chemotherapy-deficient, for example, so there is no reason to believe that
taking either will resolve the reason for your cancer.

#9. You are wasting your time with nutritional supplements. While there is no one magic bullet, no one cure for
cancer, lifestyle factors such as taking supplements can make a difference. There is too much evidence on how nutritional
factors influence genetic expression for anyone to ignore the power of food and supplements.

Related: HOW and WHY Cannabis Cures Cancer Scientific Explanation

What we eat makes a powerful difference. A mostly plant based, whole foods diet and taking nutritional supplements can
have a substantial impact. That said, in these days of nutrient-depleted soil conditions and over-farming, food just does not
have the nutrient content of years past. Plus, busy lives do not always allow for perfect meals. Hence, supplements are a
necessary part of an anticancer protocol.

#10. Cancer Just Happens: Its a Matter of bad luck. This is so ridiculous I just had to include it. Cancer develops for a
reason. It is a signal, a cry for help that tells us something or many things are not right within the body. Overexposure to
toxins, the genetic inability to manage toxins, and the entire issue of unresolved emotional traumas are some of the biggest
triggers of cancer.
Although nutritional deficiencies are not likely the cause of ones cancer, they do allow it to develop and grow.

Related: The Shocking REAL Cause of Cancer Deaths!

Dont accept that blanket statement from your doctor. Whether they are saying this out of ignorance or for your emotional
protection, it is not helpful when it comes to your healing and survival.

#11. Alternative doctors are quacks. What mainstream cancer doctors consider to be alternative was once medicine.
Sadly, modern medicine focuses on drug therapies and fails to acknowledge the reasons that cancer has become rampant.
We are not sick because we have cancer we have cancer because we are sick. If we do not correct what created the dis-
ease, we cannot cure it. Alternative doctors consider the whole person. They believe that making a person well is just as
important or even more important than targeting the symptoms of cancer (such as a tumor).

Related: The Suppression of a Natural Cancer Cure

While every alternative treatment works for someone, not every treatment works for everyone. Part of this is, again, because
we all have our own unique circumstances for having cancer. Be sure you work with a qualified practitioner and coach to
optimize the healing of your body and your cancer.

And last but not least

#12. Estrogen causes breast cancer. This is simply not accurate. Estrogen has 400 essential functions in a womans
body. While estrogen dominance and hormonal imbalance can allow breast cancer to develop and grow, estrogen does not
cause breast cancer. More precisely, estrogen can turn on cancer genes, but only if not opposed by progesterone. So
blaming estrogen for cancer is a bit like saying that matches cause fires. You have to light the match, right?

Related: Breast Cancer Cover-Up Continues


Progesterone acts as an antagonist to estrogen. While estrogen is associated with breast and other cancers, progesterone
has anti-cancer effects.

When the opposing force of progesterone is increased, the toxic effect of estrogen is decreased. So while estrogen can turn
on cancer genes, progesterone turns on genes that can prevent breast cancer from occurring. Instead of blocking or
eliminating estrogen, you may want to concentrate on increasing progesterone so the fire is not ignited by the match.

A note on receptors: when activated by progesterone, the progesterone receptors attach themselves to the estrogen
receptors. Once this happens, the estrogen receptors stop turning on genes that promote the growth of the cancer cells.
Instead, they turn on genes that promote the death of cancer cells (known as apoptosis) and the growth of healthy, normal
cells.

Hormone receptors are dependent on iodine, which increases the sensitivity of the receptor to the hormone it was designed.
So rather than block your receptors, it would be prudent to ensure you have sufficient iodine in your diet so that the
receptors can work most efficiently.

Related Articles:

Scientist Demonstrates How Cancer Can Be Destroyed By Frequencies

John Grisham is Giving His Book Away for Free to Educate People on an Alternative Cure for Cancer

Cannabis oil cures terminal cancer in 3-year-old after pharmaceutical drugs fail miserably

10 Natural Cancer Treatments Revealed

Olive Oil Compound Kills Cancer Cells in 30 Minutes

Marijuana Kills Cancer Cells, Admits the U.S. National Cancer Institute

TRULY HEAL CANCER with GcMAF WHY THEY BAN RAW MILK
Bayer's Monsanto Deal To Be Closely Watched By New Zealand Farmers As Agri-
Chemical Players Dwindle
September 22 2016 | From: NationalBusinessReview

Bayer's US$66 billion acquisition of Monsanto, creating the world's biggest supplier of seeds and
agri-chemicals to farmers, will be closely watched by New Zealand's rural sector as the latest in a
series of deals that has shrunk the number of competitors in the market.

Bayer and Monsanto are two of the big seven companies selling agricultural chemicals in New Zealand.

Related: Monsanto to be acquired by Bayer, the Nazi-era IG Farben 'crimes against humanity' poison chemical
company

Of the other five, Dow Chemical is in the process of a global merger with DuPont and Swiss seed giant Syngenta is close to
being acquired by China National Chemical Corp, which already owns Adama.

Of the others, ASX-listed Nufarm had a distribution agreement with Monsanto for its Roundup glyphosphate products up
until 2013, while Bayer rival BASF reportedly held inconclusive talks with Monsanto earlier this year

Bayer chief executive Werner Baumann has indicated the companies would need to file for clearance in about 30
jurisdictions for the deal and get antitrust approval in the US, Canada, Brazil and the EU, the Financial Times reports. The
deal has stoked concern among US farmer groups that they may face price increases for agricultural products.

Federated Farmers arable farming chair Guy Wigley called it:

"A significant development for New Zealand farming. It's a very finely tuned marketplace and farmers are highly
sensitive to pricing," he said. "The costs and benefits of using all their products are keenly understood."
Wigley likened agri-chemicals to the pharmaceuticals industry, where there was plenty of competition for older products that
had come off patent while companies sought a premium to cover research and development costs for new products.

The Commerce Commission said it is unable to comment on whether the transaction would require its scrutiny. However,
John Hampton, professor of seed technology and director of the Lincoln University Seed Research Centre, said it may
require antitrust approval.

While Monsanto is the world's largest seed company, its GM crops such as Roundup-ready Canola, soybean and maize
aren't sold in New Zealand and its local sales in that market are confined to vegetable seeds produced by its Seminis and
De Ruiter units.

Related: The Complete History Of Monsanto, The Worlds Most Evil Corporation

Bayer has a smaller seeds business but is mainly in the pest and disease product side of the agri-chemical market, including
seed treatments, while Monsanto's chemicals were more in the herbicide and weed control side of the market.

All up there were about half a dozen major companies in the seed sector, "so I can't see there would be a major impact in
what's happening in seeds in New Zealand," Hampton said, adding that he speculated that Monsanto's GM technology was
a major driver for Bayer's takeover offer.

Globally, there was no new herbicide chemistry emerging and increased resistance and regulatory hurdles for some existing
ones. At the same time growing demand "for more sustainable methods of weed and pest control," he said.

Chemicals aren't the future. Now the industry is looking at interactions between microbes and plants -
biocontrols," he said.
The past five years have been marked by a number of acquisitions of small biocontrol companies by big agri-chemical
producers "being astute and looking to the future". Research was now focussed in two main areas - GM technology and the
use of bacteria and fungi to control pests and diseases and to promote plant growth, he said.

Industry group Agcarm, which represents about 85 percent of the New Zealand agri-chemicals market, has 14 members
listed as crop protection companies. It estimates the New Zealand market is worth $250 million to $300 million.

Bayer's offer for Monsanto of US$128 a share in cash is about 20 percent more than the last trading price of US$106.76.
Bayer said the deal would create "significant value" with annual synergies of about US$1.5 billion after three years "plus
additional synergies from integrated solutions in future years".

Related: Monsanto and Bayer: Why Food And Agriculture Just Took A Turn For The Worse

What Do Smart Meters And Vaccinations Have In Common? + Another Vaccine Dump
September 20 2016 | From: NaturalBlaze / Various

Jerry Day of Freedom Taker.com has produced an exceptional new video wherein he explains in
detail what Smart Meters and Vaccinations have in common.
Its called Conditional Acceptance, a term and a legal tactic whereby you can refuse anyone who pressures you
to sign either an opt-out agreement for a Smart Meter or demands you to accept a vaccination.

Related: Del Bigtree: Our Children Are Being Sold To The Pharmaceutical Industry

Opt-out contracts are ones big corporations give you when you refuse corporate offers. Jerry explains what he calls
highway robbery in this video.

Listen carefully to what Jerry explains, plus take notes, because his logic may be one that you can utilize under Right of
Contract. Jerry says;

Always remember that you have Right of Contract. That is the legal term used to describe the fact that on any
contract or agreement your signature must be fully voluntary and not coerced in any way. If youre pressured into
signing or agreeing, your signature and agreement technically have no authority or effect."

And legally, there is no contract or agreement if you can show there was coercion or pressure causing you
to sign that contract. So your Right of Contract means that you and only you may decide whether you
sign something or not. And you may not be penalized in any way for refusing to sign anything.

They [utilities and governments] are criminally violating utility customers and they know it. So when they
refuse to insure the damage, their equipment will cause to you, you have every right to refuse that equipment.

If the equipment they are installing was really not harmful and did not violate your rights, the insurance would cost
almost nothing. But electronic utility meters are known to be hazardous and harmful so much so that no
insurance company will provide insurance for any price [more about insurance here], because they know
that advanced utility metering is a ticking time bomb of damages and litigation. Vaccinations represent a
very similar situation to utility metering.

Listen intently to what Jerry says about Conditional Acceptance because thats the bargaining chip in the song and dance
you will have to engage in to protect yourself and your family from AMI Smart Meter RFs/EMFs, dirty electricity they produce
, plus possible fire loss to your home from Smart Meters proclivity to malfunction.
The same logic regarding Right of Contract and Conditional Acceptance applies with regard to vaccinations. Jerry delves
into vaccinations like you may not have heard before.

Homeowners insurance and health insurance do not cover you for losses from AMI Smart Meters or injured health from
receiving a vaccine! The unfair fact about bullying and harassment from utilities and the medical profession has to be
understood fully for what it is: You are liable for all damages unless you are prepared not to be left helpless and demand
your legal rights by taking Jerrys advice into consideration.

After listening to the above video, please be certain to check out thedownloadable documents A-2 and A-4 regarding Smart
Meters. Theres also a Vaccination Notice Jerry talks about. All are offered as templates at www.FreedomTaker.com.

Related Articles

Yes, they just keep coming - the evidence is in the order of a flood of biblical proportions for this with the eyes to see:

Shocking research confirms vaccines are contaminated with Monsanto's RoundUp herbicide

Anthony Samsel on Vaccines contaminated with Glyphosate

Vaccines: Prevention or Curse?

Vaccination: Serious Concerns

Another Vaccine Bombshell Glyphosate Think Monsantos Roundup Confirmed in Most Vaccines

Intelligent Parents are Refusing Vaccinations

The Average Flu Shot Left This 9-Year-Old Girl Paralyzed And Non-Verbal

Flu deaths continue to mount in people vaccinated against it

Vaccine Quackery Bombshell: Key studies cited to 'prove' vaccines are safe were funded almost entirely by
vaccine manufacturers

New vaccines will permanently alter human DNA

New Vaccine Whistleblower Film Premieres To Standing Ovation

How Big Pharma Targets Your Kids!

Actor Rob Schneider Speaks Out Against the Dangers of Vaccines

Shock Report: Testing Reveals Glyphosate Present in Childhood Vaccines

Shocking Research Confirms Vaccines Are Contaminated With Monsanto's RoundUp


Herbicide

Folks, I have written about the problems with vaccines in previous blog posts. Now, a new serious
contamination problem with our vaccines has been identified.
Researcher Anthony Samsel has published five peer-reviewed articles on the herbicide Glyphosate (the active
ingredient in Roundup). A yet-to-be published sixth paper found various commonly-used vaccines contaminated
with the herbicide glyphosate.

Yes, you read that correctly: Our vaccines are contaminated with an herbicide that the World Health Organization
characterized as"probably carcinogenic to humans."

How can this happen? That answer is easy.

Many vaccines contain animal byproducts such as gelatin, bovine casein, bovine serum, bovine calf serum, or chicken egg
protein. The animals from which these products come from are fed grains sprayed with glyphosate. It does not take a rocket
scientist to come to the conclusion that these animals, fed glyphosate in their diet, would contain glyphosate in their
byproducts.

Samsel sent a letter to Congress that stated:

I have run numerous groups of vaccines and identified several vectors of contamination. These include the
excipient gelatins, egg protein and or similar substrates used to grow vaccines.

I have found gelatins and egg proteins contaminated with Glyphosate-based herbicides from animals fed a
glyphosate contaminated diet.

This contamination carries into thousands of consumer products i.e. vitamins, protein powders, wine, beer and
other consumables which use gelatins as part of the product or in fining and processing."

What did Samsel hear back?

He heard nothing.

In other words, our do-nothing Congress, so far, has failed to respond. In his letter to Congress, Samsel also stated that
Glyphosate is a synthetic amino acid. It bioaccumulates and is found in all tissue types, particularly the bone and marrow of
animals fed a diet contaminated with Glyphosate residues.

You can see Dr. Samsel talk about his research by clicking here.
The following vaccines were found to be contaminated with the herbicide glyphosate:

1. MMR

2. Varicella (chicken pox)

3. Zostavax (shingles)

4. Proquad (MMR, rubella, varicella)

5. Fluzone Quad (flu vaccine)

6. Hepatitis B (B Energix-B)

Multiple vaccines from different manufactures were found to be contaminated. Folks, this is a big deal. Injecting a
vaccine contaminated with a known herbicide that is "probably carcinogenic to humans" should be prohibited. We need a
Congressional investigation into our vaccines.

We keep hearing the mantra that vaccines are safe. Injecting a vaccine containing an herbicide is safe? Give me a break!
It is time to call your political representatives and tell them to investigate this matter. I can assure you that it is not safe to
inject a known neurotoxin such as mercury or aluminum. Nor is it safe to inject a known carcinogen such as formaldehyde.

Guess what? It is not safe to inject an herbicide that is a probable human carcinogen.

Follow Dr. Brownstein's blog for more great articles by clicking here.

Anthony Samsel on Vaccines contaminated with Glyphosate

Scientists Anthony Samsel and Stephanie Seneff have just gotten the fifth peer reviewed paper on Glyphosate published. Its
named "Glyphosate pathways to modern diseases V: Amino acid analogue of glycine in diverse proteins".

In this regard Tony Mitra interviewed Anthony Samsel, to cover the newly emerging scientific findings on Glyphosate and
how it can and does hurt creatures including humans.

In the course of the interview, Anthony Samsel mentioned the issues being covered in their next paper, the 6th one. This
covers a number of vaccines that use animal byproducts such as egg protein and gelatine. He suspected these products
might be contaminated with Glyphosate, if the vaccine makers were using factory farmed animals fed with Glyphosate laced
GMO feed.

To verify, he got a large number of vaccines that do use egg proteins and gelatine and got them analyzed in multiple labs.
The results confirmed his doubt. The vaccines themselves are largely contaminated with Glyphosate and pose serious
hazard to those that are and will be vaccinated using these products.

5G Telecomm Radiation The Perfect Tool To Mass Modify Human Brain Waves + More
Studies Reveal Dangers
September 16 2016 | From: WakingTimes / Mobilize

On 14 July 2016 the FCC (Federal Communications Commission) of the USA made space available
in the radio spectrum for consumer devices to operate within the 25 GHz to 100 GHz of the
electromagnetic spectrum.
It went on to say: The Commission has struck a balance between new wireless services, current and future fixed
satellite service operations, and federal uses. The item adopts effective sharing schemes to ensure that diverse
users including federal and non-federal, satellite and terrestrial, and fixed and mobile can co-exist and expand.

Related: This Is What WIFI, Cell Phones, iPads And More Are Doing To Your Childs Brain 100 + Scientists Are
Now Petitioning The UN

Nowhere in its document is mention made of consumer safety or well-being. I guess that is fair of the FCC because
historically, it is not interested in matters of microwave radiation and consequent thermal and non-thermal effects on the
population.

Lets face it, and most people find this hard to believe, the FCC works purely on behalf of the telecoms industries in
granting them access to the airwaves, no more and no less.

Industry was very happy to hear the FCC announcement on granting access of large portions of the radio spectrum for yet
more of its toys and other consumer devices. Qualcomm for example talks much about the massive internet of things, yet
nowhere on its 5G musings is mention made of consumer safety or well-being.

That pink elephant in the living room regarding safety brings me to the point of this article. The FCC and the telecomms
industry rub their hands with glee because lots of money is going to be made as 5G devices rollout yet no recent safety
studies have been carried out on consumer safety.
Yes, their official logo is actually that shit

Related: Gestapo In The USA: FCC Intimidates Press And Kills Free Speech At 5G Rollout

No doubt both the FCC and industry will point regulators to the old, out-dated and one-dimensional so-called safety studies
(thermal effects) produced by the ICNIRP. This private organisation is comprised of people and individuals who work in the
telecommunications industries with no background in epidemiology, toxicology, radio frequency safety or medical practice.

The implications of 5G on consumer well-being and safety do not look good for one reason: devices that will operate within
the 5G electromagnetic spectrum will use antennas that are physically small i.e. from a few millimetres to a centimetre in
length.

This means that industry will produce a variety of different antenna systems to do different things.

Qualcomms 5G Vision

5G is much more than higher peak rates - it needs to enable new classes of services, connect new devices and
industries, and empower new user experiences while fully leveraging 4G investments. The envisioned unified
platform needs to support all spectrum, below 6 GHz as well as above 6 GHz and mmWave."

Everything is awesome!

The weird fact of operating within this very high frequency range is that signals are mostly line of sight or they are easily
reflected, refracted or lost within the differing build composition of urban environment structures.

In other words, without careful antenna design and recognition of many of the pitfalls trying to propagate microwave signals
within urban environments, the signal can be easily degraded or completely lost. In response to these challenges, the
advantages in using very small physical size antennas in the millimetre wavelength is you can feed many antennas in various
configuration arrays e.g. vertical or horizontal arays, waveguide, coned or highly directional beam type designs.

These types of antenna designs focus most of the transmitted power into specified directions. This is bad news for
consumers because these very small physical size antennas will pack a mighty punch to our biological systems if we step
into them.

Getting back to consumer safety and well-being and all things microwave, it is clear that the latency period for adverse
biological effects from devices using microwave frequencies from say 1 GHz to 5 Ghz is approximately 10 - 20 years.
In 2016 there are now many thousands of peer-reviewed
medical and epidemiological studies that show, illustrate or
correlate, adverse biological effects with use of mobile
phone technology or WIFI.

Using frequencies even higher than 5 GHz (and up to 100


GHz) will compress the timeframe in which cancers and
other biological effects show themselves within society.

It is anyones guess on what might happen in terms of


biological safety yet it is clear to see that the pulsed nature
of these high frequency, high signal intensity signals do not
harbour good news for humanity, particularly in relation to
the functioning of our DNA.

Nowadays, exposure to microwave radiation or


frequencies used by WIFI, mobile phones, smart
phones, smart meters, WIFI-enabled audio devices,
WIFI-enabled fridges, most baby monitors and a whole
host of other esoteric electrical devices were recently
classed as Class 2B carcinogens.

Point of sale literature excludes this fact on any advertising


blurb and it is also fascinating that the small print embedded
deep within mobile phone product literature say that you
should not put these devices directly to your skin, body or
face.

If you do, you exceed the so-called safe exposure


thresholds put in place for these devices.

Getting back to the very small physical length of the antennas that will be used for 5G devices, it is very clear to surmise that
if these devices talk to each other using highly efficient, directional antennas, the ERP (effective radiated power) will be
huge.

If you happen to walk into this intensely focused beam of microwave radiation, what will this level of signal intensity do to
your biology?

Yet again, time will tell unless we get our arses into gear and demand proper safety studies from industry and
independent academia that focus on thermal and non-thermal effects on our biology.

Just like the advent of modern mobile phone technology, it is us, the consumers, who provide the guinea pig role in terms of
safety.

Sufferers of EHS (electro-hyper-sensitivity) will need to be aware of any 5G device simply because the electron volt assault
on their compromised bodies will be easily and instantly felt.

It is they who will suffer first and in time, everyone will be affected because one other fact the telecoms industries have not
mentioned is that in order to develop an efficient network of signals within an urban environment, many thousands of new
transmitter sites will need to be installed.
Related: WiFi Radiation New Device Makes It Visible At Last

The physical small size of these antennas means they can be covertly installed into all sorts of urban structures which
suggest that for urban dwellers at least, there will be no escape from exposure to these highly damaging microwave
frequencies. I also feel that when these antennas are in place, it will be relatively easy to alter and manipulate brain wave
function of its users and others close by.

The amount of ancillary information that can be piped or attached to the main carrier frequency of such a telecommunications
network system is potentially, huge.

Police forces the world over use Tetra as a systems of communication. This system also includes a sub-carrier
frequency of about 16 Hz which is very close to our natural brainwave patterns.

Could this 16 Hz ancillary pulsed ELF (extremely low-frequency) be responsible for instilling aggressive behaviours
in our police force personnel?

The zombie apocalypse might just be around the corner unless of course, we refuse to comply. That is our choice.

Mobilize

Mobilize is an investigative documentary that explores the long-term health effects of cell phone radiation, including
cancer and infertility.

Clear Light Ventures is sponsoring free viewing of Mobilize from September 15 to October 16, 2016 - enter promo code
"ClearLight".

Film Synopsis
In 2011 the World Health Organization stated, The electromagnetic fields produced by mobile phones are classified by the
International Agency for Research on Cancer as possibly carcinogenic to humans. The cell phone industry has vigorously
disputed these findings.

Mobilize is an explosive investigative documentary that explores the potential long-term health effects from cell phone
radiation, including brain cancer and infertility.

The politically charged film examines the most recent scientific research and the harsh challenges politicians face trying to
pass precautionary legislation. Featuring interviews with expert researchers, mobile phone industry representatives, and
prominent politicians, MOBILIZE illuminates how industrys economic and political influence can corrupt public health.

Featuring Gavin Newsom Lt. Governor of California, Lawrence Lessig, Esq., Steve Wozniak, Richard Branson, Devra Davis,
PhD, MPH and many more.

To watch Mobilize click here

How Much Of This Junk Are You Exposed To?


September 16 2016 | From: Inquisitr / Sott / NaturalNews / GreenMedInfo

We all know about toxins and poisons in the environment - the slow kill. Keep the populace sick
while the globalist corporatocracy bleeds us dry of money for power whilst they get off on their
depopulation Eugenics agenda.

Awareness of 'environmental toxins' that are literally all around us helps you keep some of the crap out of your
system...

Related: Lawsuit reveals extent of DuPont's C8 Teflon cover-up


Antibacterial Soap Banned By FDA, Commonly Used Chemicals May Do More Harm
Than Good
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has banned antibacterial soap sales in the United
States, and the reason why is incredibly disturbing.

Many people have turned to antibacterial soap for years, believing them to be a safe and effective way to remove
dirt and germs from the body and hands, and more effective than traditional soap and water. However, when the
FDA banned the popular soaps, they informed the public that they might not be so effective after all.

Whats more and infinitely more disturbing, according to the FDA, the chemicals most commonly used in antibacterial soaps
may not even be safe.

A total of 19 chemicals often used in antibacterial soaps have been targeted by the FDA, and the agency has given
manufacturers only a year to remove them all from the products they are selling (and marketing as safe and effective) to the
public.

As The New York Times reports, while nearly 20 chemicals were involved in the decision that led to the antibacterial soap
being banned by the FDA, two are the primary culprits. Triclosan and triclocarban are used in both bar and liquid
antibacterial soap, and they are almost everywhere.

When the FDA banned antibacterial soap this week based on the risks of using the product often outweighing the benefits,
they didnt ban the questionable chemicals from all products.

Reportedly, at least one toothpaste uses a now-banned chemical, but according to the FDA, in that product its risks are less
than the benefits it provides to consumers.
While the news that antibacterial soap has been banned by the FDA may be shocking and sudden to some, the truth of the
matter is that there have been questions about its safety for years and years.

As Smithsonian Magazine reports, the FDA has been threatening to ban antibacterial soap for years. In the article,
published in 2014, cited questions that the FDA had about the safety and effectiveness of antibacterial soap.

Even then, the FDA warned that antibacterial soap would be banned if manufacturers didnt prove that it was both safe and
more effective than using soap and water.

Apparently, the industry was unable to prove that antibacterial soap is safe or provides a public benefit that outweighs the
potential risk of exposure of the chemicals used in the product.

At the time of the Smithsonian Magazine article, triclosan (with is banned as part of the FDAs sweeping decision on
antibacterial soap) was used in roughly 30 percent of all bar soap and 75 percent of liquid antibacterial soap. In 2014, the
antibacterial soap industry, now banned by the FDA, was worth about $1 billion.

In 2014, the antibacterial soap industry was put on notice by the FDA. They were told to prove the safety of their product by
2016 or see their product banned. Despite the fact that manufacturers had turned antibacterial soap into a $1 billion industry
and were given two years, they chose not to put together the required proof that they were selling a product that is safe and
effective.
And plenty of people are speculating that the reason that the antibacterial soap industry didnt prove to the FDA that their
product is safe is that they know that it isnt.

But rather than simply removing it from the market themselves (or demonstrate its safety), the antibacterial soap industry
continued to use the questionable chemicals and sell personal hygiene products that may not be safe until the FDA
announced that the products were banned.

Even now, antibacterial soap can be legally sold, despite questions about its safety.

In the aftermath of the announcement that the FDA had banned antibacterial soap, public health professionals have
overwhelmingly supported the decision, adding that the chemicals in antibacterial soap can alter the hormones of children
and even contribute to the problem of antibiotic-resistant superbugs.

It has boggled my mind why we were clinging to these compounds, and now that they are gone I feel liberated
They had absolutely no benefit but we kept them buzzing around us everywhere. They are in breast milk, in urine,
in blood, in babies just born, in dust, in water.

Recent studies into the chemicals found in antibacterial soap products have resulted in some very disturbing discoveries
regarding the harm they can do to animals and likely to humans, too.

Among the problems caused by the now-banned products include severe abnormalities having to do with metabolism and
reproduction. According to the CDC, the chemicals found in FDA banned antibacterial soap have been found in the bodily
waste of 75 percent of U.S. residents.

Related: Why Touching Receipts Can Harm Your Health

Kinder and Lindt Chocolate Bars Revealed to Contain Cancer-Causing Carcinogens

Tests carried out by a German watchdog revealed Kinder chocolate bars and two other brands
tested positive for a hazardous cancer-causing substance.

Surprise!

Foodwatchcalled for Ferrero's Kinder Riegel, Lindt's Fioretto Nougat Minis, and Sun Rice Classic Schokohappen by
Rbezahl to be taken off the shelves on Monday after tests found "possible carcinogens."

The sweet treats had been contaminated with "so-called aromatic mineral oils (MOAH)," says Foodwatch, but the
manufacturers are allegedly reluctant to recall their products.
"The manufacturer is guilty of gross negligence. Instead of clearing the dangerous candy from the shelves
and alerting consumers, they [postulate]... that everything was undertaken legally," said Foodwatch's
John Heeg.

Foodwatch tested more than 20 different kinds of potato chips and chocolate snacks and found saturated
mineral oils (MOSH) which it warned can "accumulate in the human body and [cause] long term damage to
organs" with children particularly at risk.

"There is no acceptable levels of mineral oils in food for consumption," Heeg told the German edition of The Local,
citing the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) who he says considers MOAHs "likely carcinogenic and
mutagenic."

"You can't see it, you can't taste it, but it's in there," warned Hegg. "We recommend not purchasing these products
because the levels are simply unacceptable for consumption."

Kinder Riegel, "one of the best-selling chocolate bars in Germany," had the worst MOSH and MOAH values. The chemicals
are usually transferred to foods through recycled packaging that previously had been printed with inks which may contain
oils.

Foodwatch is calling for strict limits on saturated mineral oils (MOSH) in food and a zero tolerance for aromatic mineral oils
(MOAH).

Brain Damaging Heavy Metal Mercury Found in Grocery Products Made With High
Fructose Corn Syrup (HFCS)

HFCS is ubiquitous in the modern processed food supply. It's added to pizza sauce, salad
dressings, ketchup and "whole wheat" breads. Did you know it's often contaminated with the toxic
heavy metal mercury?
The following excerpt is from my new book Food Forensics, available now for preorder on Amazon.com or Barnes
& Noble.

Watch the video trailer for Food Forensics at this Youtube link. What follows is extracted from a near-final manuscript of the
book:

HFCS and Mercury Contamination

High-fructose corn syrup (HFCS) is a highly processed sweetener made primarily from corn and found in a plethora of food
and beverages on grocery store shelves.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture's Economic Research Service estimated in 2011 that the average consumer per capita
consumes nearly 42 pounds of high fructose corn syrup per year. Not one, but two studies in 2009 found that HFCS
commercially produced in America and American-bought HFCS products were tainted with mercury.

The first study published in the peer-reviewed journal Environmental Health found that, of twenty samples collected and
analyzed from three different manufacturers, nine, or 45 percent, came back tainted with mercury.
The second study by watchdog group Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy (IATP) purchased fifty-five food items from
popular brands off grocery store shelves in the fall of 2008 -- items in which HFCS was the first or second principal
ingredient -- and detected mercury in nearly a third of them.

The contamination may have been due to the fact that mercury cells are still used in the production of caustic soda, an
ingredient used to make HFCS.

The HFCS mercury plot thickens, however. Online news outlet Grist reported that the lead researcher in the Environmental
Health study, Renee Dufault, previously worked as an FDA researcher.

Dufault had apparently turned over the information contained in her HFCS mercury study to the agency back in 2005, but
the FDA reportedly sat on it and did nothing, so Dufault went public with it after she retired in 2008.

How Big Food Cornered the Market with a Liquid Sweetener

Initial attempts to get corn syrup widely dispersed into the U.S. food supply in the 1970s didn't really take off because sugar
was so cheap and abundant at the time. However, this changed, as U.S.- imposed tariffs decreased sugar imports
throughout the 1970s and early 1980s, making sugar significantly more expensive in America than in other parts of the
world.

The surface explanation for these tariffs was to protect American sugar farmers; behind the scenes, however, Big Agra
interests had lobbied for the policy to promote what would become a new source of sugar - derived from corn - which soon
emerged as a popular commodity that was sold at a price significantly cheaper than cane sugar or beet sugar.
Archer Daniels Midland opened the first large-scale plant in 1978 (before they acquired the Clinton Corn Processing
Company) to produce 90 percent HFCS and 55 percent HFCS. By January 1980, Coca-Cola began allowing high fructose
corn syrup to be used as a sweetener at 50 percent levels with regular sugar; Pepsi Cola followed suit by 1983.

By November 1984, both major soft drink brands had approved full sweetening with HFCS, and HFCS quickly captured 42
percent of the sweetener market. The rising dominance of HFCS allowed it to maintain commercial prices similar to sugar
until the 1990s.

Government Money Subsidizing Corn Syrup

For the past several decades, the U.S. government has paid subsidies to American farmers to grow tons of corn (much of
which -- nearly 90 percent -- is genetically modified) and shifted domestic agricultural policy to maximize corn crops. This
made high-fructose corn syrup and other corn-derived processed ingredients much cheaper for industrial food
manufacturers to use.

Today, HFCS is nearly ubiquitous on American grocery store shelves. It can be found in a wide range of items, including
candy, ice cream, bread, chips, snacks, soups, soft drinks, fruit drinks and other beverages, condiments, jellies, deli meats,
and much, much more.
Overall, Americans consume about fifty to sixty pounds of high fructose corn syrup per capita an insane amount. HFCS
has been linked in scientific research to obesity, diabetes, heart disease, fatty liver and other contributors of bad health and
early death.

As the biggest dietary source of fructose, HFCS also promotes insulin resistance and increasing uric acid levels, which
contribute to metabolic dysfunction and type 2 diabetes. Further, researchers in 2008 found a correlation between high
fructose consumption and liver scarring in non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), which is present in nearly a third of
American adults.

Corn Refiners Association Attempts to Hoodwink Consumers

On top of lobbying efforts, the Corn Refiners Association, an industry organization of which Archer Daniels Midland a is a
key member, launched the website sweetsurprise.com as a media relations ploy to debunk "myths" about HFCS and clarify
"The Facts about High Fructose Corn Syrup."

It also ran well-funded TV advertising starting in 2008 sticking up for the industry's favorite sweetener and asserting that
"sugar is sugar," which prompted a lawsuit by sugar producers claiming false advertising in 2011. The FDA also demanded
the corn industry stop using the term "corn sugar" without approval.

In 2012, the FDA rejected a petition filed by the Corn Refiners Association in 2010 to change the name of high-fructose corn
syrup to "corn sugar" for the purposes of food labeling and advertising. The Corn Refiners Association claims that it wanted
the name change to "educate consumers," the majority of whom are "confused about HFCS."

To keep reading, get my new book Food Forensics, available now for pre-order everywhere books are sold.

How Sucralose (Splenda) Affects Health [Artificial Sweeteners in General]


The emergence of sucralose came from the fight against obesity, but did we trade one problem for
another?

This video was originally published on NutritionFacts.org and republished with permission.

In the United States, sucralose (the sweet tasting chemical in Splenda brand artificial sweeteners) was approved for use by
the FDA in 1998. It was deemed safe, but we no have over a decades worth of research to prove that sucralose affects
health in a very negative and very unique way.

The only effect they thought it would have on health was that it could potentially trigger migraines in a small percentage of
people.

This, they decided, was a small enough issue that the FDA allowed the substance into the marketplace, citing obesity as a
more pressing issue. They could not have been more wrong.

One of the major complications that can come from obesity is diabetes, where the body no longer responds to insulin
properly. Originally meant to combat issues like obesity-caused diabetes, lab tests show that insulin resistance increases by
as much as 20% after ingesting the sugar substitute.
The cause can be traced back to gut bacteria and how sucralose and other artificial sweeteners can alter their
environments. For example; Aspartame is another type of artificial sweetener which studies have shown is metabolized in
the body as formaldehyde, a known carcinogen.

Furthermore, alterations in gut bacteria are also very likely the culprit behind the rise in inflammatory bowel diseases
like Crohns disease.

In every part of the world where sucralose has been approved, inflammatory bowel disease has increased. Clearly, there is
a causal link between this substance and the health of our gut.

Though the alternative to sugar was created in an effort to combat obesity, with all of the complications and damage it can
cause, its clear that how sucralose affects health negatively. This just further proves that we can all do ourselves a service
by sticking to natural foods whose benefits dont have to be decided on by a committee.

1080: NZ Animals Killed For No Reason In $80m Yearly 1080 Drops


September 6 2016 | From: Various

Over 80 million dollars, including farmers hard earned cash, is spent every year eradicating a
disease, that by World standards, doesn't exist...
The Agency considered that acute exposures to 1080 in humans and animals may give rise to irreversible adverse,
target organ [heart and brain] effects. These effects are severe.

Related: Satanists Escape Plan Involves Killing Natives Of New Zealand

Continued presence of predators (rats, mice, cats, stoats) [on Rangitoto Island after 1080 cereal operation]..ongoing
predation..less than expected bird population recoveries (2004)

Related Links & Information on 1080:

What DOC doesnt want you to know about 1080 Poison

"The recent post about 89 dead Kiwis that DOC didnt bother to test for 1080 poisoning relates to this report of birds that
actually were tested. Thanks to the person with a conscience who let the public know what is going on!"
TVwild.co.nz

More 1080 videos + If you have your pets, farm stock, deer, trout or eels, native wildlife (including birds), poisoned on or
near your property or have any information to share with regard to aerial 1080 poison drops taking place near you, please let
us know

1080Science.co.nz

Introduction Environmental Risk Management Authoritys 1080 Documents + factual evidence against 1080.
Monsanto Promoting Worldwide Infertility? + Academic GMO Shills Exposed: Fraud
And Collusion With Monsanto
September 6 2016 | From: Sott / NaturalNews

Monsanto has a long and infamous history of manufacturing and bringing to market such
chemicals as DDT, Agent Orange, aspartame, Roundup and dioxin - chemical compounds from
which society continues to feel the effects.

In an effort to distance the current corporation from past deeds, Monsanto refers to the company prior to 2002 as
"the former Monsanto" in their news releases. However, nothing has really changed aside from their PR machine.

While Monsanto has branched into genetic engineering (GE) of plants, the sale of patented GE seeds simply feeds the need
for the company's pesticides. Monsanto is STILL primarily a purveyor of toxins, not life.

Monsanto began forging a unique and financially advantageous relationship with the U.S. government starting with the
company's involvement in the Manhattan Project that produced the first nuclear weapons during World War II. During the
Vietnam War they were the leading producer of Agent Orange.

Related: The Complete History Of Monsanto, The Worlds Most Evil Corporation

The specialization in the production and distribution of toxic chemicals continues today.

Their influence over government runs so deep that despite the fact 64 other countries have been labeling genetically
engineered (GE) foods for years, the U.S. now has the distinction of being the first country to un-label GE foods at
the urging of a company producing mass amounts of GE seeds.

Monsanto and Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs)

In the latter part of the 1920s, Monsanto was the largest producer of PCBs. This chemical was used in lubricant for electric
motors, hydraulic fluids and to insulate electrical equipment. Old fluorescent light fixtures and electrical appliances with PCB
capacitors may still contain the chemical.

During the years PCB was manufactured and used, there were no controls placed on disposal. Since PCBs don't break
down under many conditions, they are now widely distributed through the environment and have made the journey up the
food chain.
Between the inception and distribution of the product and its subsequent ban in the late 1970s, an estimated 1.5 billion
pounds were distributed in products around the world.

Monsanto was the primary manufacturer of PCBs in the U.S. under the trade name Aroclor. Health problems associated
with exposure to the chemical were noted as early as 1933 when 23 of 24 workers at the production plant developed
pustules, loss of energy and appetite, loss of libido and other skin disturbances.

According to Monsanto's public timeline, it was in 1966 that "Monsanto and others began to study PCB persistence in the
environment." However, seven years earlier, Monsanto's assistant director of their Medical Department wrote:

... [S]ufficient exposure, whether by inhalation of vapors or skin contact, can result in chloracne which I think we
must assume could be an indication of a more systemic injury if the exposure were allowed to continue."

In 1967, Shell Oil called to inform Monsanto of press reports from Sweden, noting that PCBs were accumulating in
mammals further up the food chain. Shell asked for PCB samples to perform their own analytical studies.

With full knowledge of the devastation expected to the environment and humanity, it wasn't until 11 years later, in 1977, that
Monsanto reportedly pulled production on PCB.

PCBs Are Probable Human Carcinogens

The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the National
Toxicology Program, and the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIEHS) have identified PCBs as either
probable, potential or reasonably likely to cause cancer in humans.

If it seems like these agencies are couching their words, they are. Human studies have noted increased rates of liver
cancer, gall bladder cancer, melanomas, gastrointestinal cancer, biliary tract cancer, brain cancer and breast
cancer when individuals had higher levels of PCB chemicals in their blood and tissue.

However, the EPA limits the ability of researchers to link a chemical as a carcinogen unless there is conclusive proof. While
this proof is evident in animal studies, you can't feed these chemicals to humans and record the results. Thus PCBs are a
"probable" carcinogen in humans.

Other health effects from PCBs include:

Babies born with neurological and motor control delays including lower IQ, poor short-term memory and poor
performance on standardized behavioral assessment tests

Disrupted sex hormones including shortened menstrual cycles, reduced sperm count and premature puberty

Imbalanced thyroid hormone affecting growth, intellectual and behavioral development

Immune effects, including children with more ear infections and chickenpox

Once PCBs are absorbed in the body they deposit in the fat tissue. They are not broken down or excreted. This means the
number of PCBs build over time and move up the food chain. Smaller fish are eaten by larger ones and eventually land on
your dinner table.

Chemical Poisoning Begins Before Birth

A recent study at the University of California demonstrated that PCBs are found in the blood of pregnant women. Before
birth, the umbilical cord delivers approximately 300 quarts of blood to your baby every day.

Not long ago, researchers believed the placenta would shield your developing baby from most pollutants and chemicals.
Now we know it does not.

The umbilical cord is a lifeline between mother and child, sustaining life and propelling growth. However, in recent research
cord blood contained between 200 and 280 different chemicals; 180 were known carcinogens and 217 were toxic to the
baby's developing nervous system.
The deposits of chemicals in your body or the body of your developing baby are called your "body burden" of chemicals and
pollution.

A steady stream of chemicals from the environment during a critical time of organ and system development has a
significant impact on the health of your child, both in infancy and as the child grows to adulthood.

Tracey Woodruff, Ph.D., director of the University of California San Francisco Program on Reproductive Health and the
Environment, was quoted in a press release, saying:

It was surprising and concerning to find so many chemicals in pregnant women without fully knowing the
implications for pregnancy. Several of these chemicals in pregnant women were at the same concentrations that
have been associated with negative effects in children from other studies.

In addition, exposure to multiple chemicals that can increase the risk of the same adverse health outcome can
have a greater impact than exposure to just one chemical."

Butyl Benzyl Phthalate - Another Monsanto Product

Butyl benzyl phthalate (BBP), also manufactured by Monsanto, was recently implicated in cell fat storage. This specific
phthalate was found in human fluids and had an effect on the accumulation of fat inside cells.
BBP is used in the manufacture of vinyl tile, as a plasticizer in PVC pipe, carpets, conveyer belts and weather stripping in
your home and office.

Like other phthalates used in the production of plastics, BBP is not bound to the product and can be released into your
environment. It may be absorbed by crops and move up the food chain. The biggest source of exposure is food.

Drive-through hamburgers and take-out pizzas may be increasing your intake of phthalates. The danger is not in the food
itself but in the products used to handle it. The study analyzed data from nearly 9,000 individuals, finding the one-third who
had eaten at a fast food restaurant had higher levels of two different phthalates.
Potentially, BBP may adversely affect your reproductive function. However, at lower doses it also has an effect on your
kidneys, liver and pancreas. Increased risks of respiratory disorders and multiple myelomas have also been reported in
people who have exposure to products manufactured with BBP. An increasing waistline from BBP exposure may also
reduce your fertility.

Low Sperm Count and Infertility Affecting Animals and Humans

A 26-year study of fertility in dogs, published recently, has distinct similarities to infertility rates in humans. In this study,
researchers evaluated the ejaculate of nearly 2,000 dogs. Over the 26 year period, they found a drop in sperm motility of 2.4
percent per year.

Additionally, both the semen and the testicles of castrated dogs contained by PCBs and phthalates, implicated in other
studies to reduction in fertility. Phthalates have been implicated in both decreased sperm motility and quality of your sperm,
affecting both fertility and the health of your children.

Researchers used dogs in this study as they live in the same environment as their owners, and often eat some of the same
food. This correlation between sperm function and concentration, and environment and food in dogs and humans is
significant.

In those 26 years there was also a rise in cryptorchidism in male pups (a condition where the testicles don't descend into the
scrotum) born to stud dogs who experienced a decline in sperm quality and motility.
Cryptorchidism and undescended testicles, occurs at a rate of 1 in 20 term male human infants and 1 in 3 pre-term babies.

Problems with infertility are also affecting marine animals at the top of the food chain. In the western waters of the Atlantic,
the last pod of Orcas are doomed to extinction. High levels of PCB have been found in the fat of over 1,000 dolphins and
Orcas in the past 20 years. Now taking a toll on the animal's fertility, this pod of Orcas has not reproduced in the 19 years it
has been under study.

Orcas were living in the North Sea until the 1960s. At that time PCB pollution peaked in the area and the Orca whales
disappeared. The same happened in the Mediterranean Sea, where the whales flourished until the 1980s. This pod off the
coast of the U.K. is the last living pod in that area.

Monsanto's Argument in PCB Lawsuits

Although Monsanto denies culpability and knowledge of the danger behind the chemical PCB, you'll discover internal
documentation in this video that they did, in fact, know of the danger while manufacturing and distributing the product.
Monsanto is currently embroiled in several lawsuits across eight cities and the argument is over who owns the rain. The
cities are suing Monsanto in Federal Court, saying PCBs manufactured by Monsanto have polluted the San Francisco Bay.

Monsanto attorney Robert Howard argues that because the city does not own the water rights, the city does not have the
right to sue. And, because the PCBs have not damaged city property, such as corroding pipes, Howard claims it is a state
problem. Scott Fiske, attorney for three cities, countered with the city's regulatory interests in management of storm water as
a fundamental function of the city.

While Fiske claims he can prove Monsanto knew the product was hazardous as early as 1969, Howard maintains the
company should not be liable for the use of the chemicals it produced.

In 2001, Monsanto attorneys in the Owens v. Monsanto case, acknowledged only one health threat from exposure to PCBs:
chloracne, and instead argued that since the entire planet has been contaminated, they are innocent of all liability. The
attorney for Monsanto was quoted in the Chemical Industry Archives, saying:
The truth is that PCBs are everywhere. They are in meat, they are in everyone in the courtroom, they are
everywhere and they have been for a long time, along with a host of other substances."

The cities currently engaged in lawsuits against Monsanto for damage to the environment and waterways include Berkley,
Oakland, San Jose, Portland, Spokane, Seattle, Long Beach and San Diego. All eight cities attempted to combine their
cases against the agrochemical giant but were unsuccessful when one judge found the issues were different enough to
warrant separate cases.

Monsanto's Deep Pockets

Monsanto petitioned the Federal Court to dismiss Portland's lawsuit, claiming it would countersue, adding years to the
process. It is likely Monsanto would increase the scope of the case and include companies who used the product and
released the PCBs.

Meanwhile, three plaintiffs in St. Louis received better news in May 2016 when a jury awarded them a total of $46.5
million, finding Monsanto negligent in the production of PCBs.

This suit claimed Monsanto sold PCBs even after it learned about the dangers, bringing to court internal documents dated
1955, which stated: "We know Aroclors [PCBs] are toxic but the actual limit has not been precisely defined."33 To date this
win over Monsanto has been rare. Williams Kherkher, attorney for the plaintiffs, explained in EcoWatch:

The only reason why this victory is rare is because no one has had the money to fight Monsanto."

Kherkher and other firms pooled their resources in this case and expect wins in upcoming lawsuits. The firm has
accumulated the names of approximately 1,000 plaintiffs with claims against Monsanto and PCBs.
Related: The Daily Show takes on Monsanto

SAD NEWS: House Passes DARK Act Compromise

The House passed a compromise to the DARK Act that will force food distributors to disclose the presence of genetically
engineered (GE) ingredients with a smartphone scan code. President Obama has signed the bill that removes states' rights
for labeling GMOs. The bill is full of loopholes, which may allow genetically modified ingredients to slip through
unannounced.

Genetically modified organisms (GMOs), aka GE foods, are live organisms whose genetic components have been artificially
manipulated in a laboratory setting through creating unstable combinations of plant, animal, bacteria and even viral genes
that do not occur in nature or through traditional crossbreeding methods.

GMO proponents claim that genetic engineering is "safe and beneficial," and that it advances the agricultural industry. They
also say that GMOs help ensure the global food supply and sustainability.

But is there any truth to these claims? I believe not. For years, I've stated the belief that GMOs pose one of the
greatest threats to life on the planet. Genetic engineering is NOT the safe and beneficial technology that it is touted
to be.

Related: GMO ban expands in Russia as Putin halts all production and imports

The FDA cleared the way for GE Atlantic salmon to be farmed for human consumption. Thanks to added language in the
federal spending bill, the product will require special labeling so at least consumers will have the ability to identify the GE
salmon in stores. However, it's imperative ALL GE foods be labeled clearly without a smartphone scan code because not
everyone owns a smartphone.

The FDA is threatening the existence of our food supply. We have to start taking action now. I urge you to share this article
with friends and family. If we act together, we can make a difference and put an end to the absurdity.

Related: Venezuela passes new law rejecting GMOs and seed patents nationwide

Boycott Smart Labels Today

When you see the QR code or so-called Smart Label on a food product, pass it by. Products bearing the Grocery
Manufacturer's Association's (GMA) Smart Label mark are in all likelihood filled with pesticides and/or GMO ingredients.

The GMA's 300-plus members include chemical technology companies, GE seed and food and beverage companies.
Monsanto, Dow and Coca-Cola are just some of the heavy-hitters in this powerful industry group, which has showed no
qualms about doing whatever it takes to protect the interest of its members.

Don't waste your time searching through their website, which may or may not contain the information you're looking for. If
they insist on wasting your time and making your shopping difficult, why reward them with a purchase?

A little known fact is that the GMA actually owns the "Smart Label" trademark that Congress has accepted as a so-called
"compromise" to on-package GMO labeling, and that's another reason why I believe the Smart Label mark is the mark of
those with something to hide, such as Monsanto.

Will you financially support a corrupt, toxic and unsustainable food system, or a healthy, regenerative one? There are many
options available besides big-brand processed foods that are part of the "GMA's verified ring of deception."

You can:

Shop at local farms and farmers markets

Only buy products marked either "USDA 100 percent Organic" (which by law cannot contain GMOs), "100 percent
Grass-Fed" or "Non-GMO Verified"

If you have a smartphone and you don't mind using it, download the OCA's Buycott app to quickly and easily
identify the thousands of proprietary brands belonging to GMA members, so you can avoid them, as well as
identify the names of ethical brands that deserve your patronage

Last but not least, encourage good companies to reject QR codes and to be transparent and clear with their labeling. This
will eventually ensure that all GMO foods can easily be identified by the GMA's "verified ring of deception" mark that is the
Smart Label.

Campbell's, Mars, Kellogg's, ConAgra and General Mills all vowed to voluntarily comply with Vermont's GMO labeling law by
labeling all of their foods sold across the U.S.

Will their plans change now that the law has been passed by Congress and signed by the President? That remains to be
seen, but if you like these companies, I would encourage you to reach out to them and ask them to remain steadfast in their
promise.

Non-GMO Food Resources by Country

If you are searching for non-GMO foods, here is a list of trusted sites you can visit:

Organic Food Directory (Australia)

Eat Wild (Canada)

Organic Explorer (New Zealand)

Eat Well Guide (United States and Canada)

Farm Match (United States)

Local Harvest (United States)

Weston A. Price Foundation (United States)

Comment: Check out the informative videos in the following article America's monster: Monsanto

Few corporations in the world are as loathed - and as sinister - as Monsanto. But the threat it poses to people and planet
could be reaching new heights, as the World Health Organization has recently upgraded Monsanto's main product as
carcinogenic to humans. With protests against the agrochemical giant held in more than 40 countries in May, learn why the
global movement against Monsanto is of critical importance to our future.

In this episode of The Empire Files, Abby Martin issues a scathing expose on the corporate polluter, chronicling it's rise to
power, the collusion of its crimes by the US government and highlighting the serious danger it puts us in today.
Academic GMO Shills Exposed: Once-Secret Emails Reveal Gross Collusion With
Monsanto, Academic Fraud At The Highest Levels Inside U.S. Universities
U.S. Right to Know (USRTK), a non-profit organization dedicated to exposing the fraud and
corruption surrounding the food industry, launched an investigation into the intimate and
unethical relationship between the biotech industry and university faculty and staff, which is used
to manipulate public opinion about GMOs and to coerce the government into passing legislation
supportive of Big Ag's patented seeds and pesticides.

The investigation, which is still ongoing, reveals how biotech industry giants Monsanto, DuPont, Syngenta, Dow
AgroSciences and others, buy academics employed by taxpayer-funded universities to push GMOs and lobby
Congress to pass legislation favorable of their products, with one of the most high-profile examples including
attempts to derail states' rights to enact GMO-labeling laws.

The collusion between Big Food, its front groups and university staff has been exposed through thousands of emails and
documents obtained through a USRTK Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request, which was meticulously filed over a six-
month period.

USRTK: Public deserves to know about flow of money and level of coordination between Big Ag
and public university scientists

The FOIA request sought to obtain emails and documents from 43 public university faculty and staff to learn more about the
biotech industry's public relations strategies. Records were requested from scientists, economists, law professors, extension
specialists and communicators, all of whom are employed by taxpayer-funded public institutions and steadily promote GMO
agriculture under the "independent" research.

Currently, USRTK has received thousands of documents in nine of their requests; however, much more information is
expected to be released as FOIA requests continue to be answered.

The documents received thus far expose how the biotech industry funds expenses for university faculty to travel the globe
promoting and defending GMOs and their associated pesticides, highlighting the shift that scientists have made from being
researchers to being actors in Big Ag PR campaigns.
Named the "Biofortified boys" by Alicia Maluafiti, executive director of Hawaii Crop Improvement Association (HCIA), a
biotech front group, the academics were awarded thousands, and in some cases, hundreds of thousands of dollars in
unrestricted grant money.

Dr. Kevin Folta, professor and chairman of the Horticultural Sciences Department at the University of Florida, Gainesville, is
one of the biotech industry's most cooperative "Biofortified boys." Emails show that Folta was enlisted to travel to Hawaii and
later to Pennsylvania to "testify to government bodies to oppose proposed mandatory genetically modified labeling
measures."

Folta has repeatedly denied ties to Monsanto or having accepted funds from them; however, newly released documents
prove otherwise, exposing him as a bald-faced liar and attack dog for the biotech industry.

Sponsored and organized by the HCIA, which includes Monsanto, DuPont, Dow AgroSciences, Syngenta and BASF, Folta
and others were recruited to meet with local business execs to lobby against Hawaii's proposed GMO-labeling law.

HCIA's Maluafiti writes:

"So please know that you are part of our overall public education strategy and specifically how do we use your
valuable time wisely while you are here in Hawaii (besides hitting the beaches!) I'd love to hear your thoughts.
Aloha!"

A second email authored by Renee Kester, wife of Dow AgroSciences R&D Leader Kirby Kester, who is also president of
the HCIA, thanks them for their support:

"First off I would like to thank you for all of the support you have given us over here in Hawaii with regards to our
recent legislative battles, it means a lot to all of us over here."
Monsanto asks academics to author articles promoting GMOs

In an effort to influence "thought leaders and influencers," Monsanto reached out to Dr. Folta and other academics, asking
them to author a series of pro-GMO policy briefs to be used for "outreach and engagement with policy makers and
consumers." The briefs were to be promoted as being authored by "independent scientists."

Eric Sachs, the chief of Monsanto's global scientific affairs group wrote:

"The key to success is participation by all of you recognized experts and leaders with the knowledge,
reputation and communication experience needed to communicate authoritatively to the target groups."

"You represent an elite group whose credibility will be strengthened by working together."

Recognizing participants' careers are at stake, Sachs offers the academics assurance by promising that he will protect their
"independence," as well as their reputations.

Some of the topics the academics were asked to write on include:

Meeting World Challenges (discuss how GMOs will save the world by addressing shrinking agricultural resources, food
security, food affordability and environmental sustainability).

Stifling Innovation (discuss how GM crop regulations stifle technological advancements and prevent GMOs from
improving overall quality of life).

Holding Activists Accountable assigned to Kevin Folta (discuss how anti-GMO activist campaigns spread false
information and if left unchallenged will limit consumer choice, increase food prices, decrease farmer viability and undermine
global food security).

GM Crop Safety (address consumer and policy maker concerns that GM crops aren't tested for safety, convince public
that they are proven safe).
Consequences of Rejecting GM Crops (address public health fears and political resistance and concerns about
biodiversity and biological safety and intellectual property rights that create barriers to GM acceptance).

Sustainable Crop Systems (discuss how GM crop technology provides environmental benefits, increases yields and
improves productivity).

Responsible Choice (highlight the role GM crop technology plays in ensuring increase production and how it balances
our needs for food, feed, fiber and fuel). Academics were asked to include a "call to action," which would be used in the
briefs to influence the public on a variety of platforms including social media, blogs, websites and allied organizations.

Montano enlists university scientists to pressure EPA to abandon proposed pesticide regulations

Documents reveal that Monsanto also used academics to put pressure on regulatory agencies like the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) in one instance pressuring the EPA to abandon its proposal to tighten regulations regarding
pesticide use on insect-resistant crops.

"Is there a coordinated plan to maintain pressure and emphasis on EPA's evolving regulations?" asked Sachs in
an email to Dr. Bruce Chassy, a professor emeritus at the University of Illinois at Urbana - Champaign.

Sachs continued, "Have you considered having a small group of scientists request a meeting with Lisa Jackson
[referring to the EPA's administrator at the time]?"

With the help of an industry lobbyist, Chassy was eventually able to set up a meeting with Jackson, after which the agency's
proposal was ultimately dropped.

Stay tuned for more as Natural News continues to dissect documents exposing the incestuous relationship between the
biotech industry and university scientists.

Related Articles:
The sheer volume of information exposing Monsanto is overwhelming - yet where are the mainstream media on
this?

Owned and censored is where - impotent to report on anything but PR spin, lies, fluff and sports.

World Health Organization Admits Roundup Probably Causes Cancer

MIT Researcher: Glyphosate Herbicide Will Cause Half Of All Children To Have Autism By 2025

Union Of 30,000 Doctors In Latin America Wants Monsanto Banned!

Zika HOAX exposed by South American doctors: Brain deformations caused by larvicide chemical linked to
Monsanto; GM mosquitoes a 'total failure'

The Case of Glyphosate: Product Promoters Masquerading as Regulators?

Bill Gates, Monsanto & Saudi Arabia are Raping Nigeria with Terror & GMO

Monsanto Exposed as Source for White Phosphorus Used in Gaza Massacre

Glyphosate Herbicide Found in 14 Popular Beer Brands from Germany

Venezuela passes new law rejecting GMOs and seed patents nationwide

Glyphosate: Pathways to Modern Diseases

Supermodel Christie Brinkley Christie Brinkley Slams Monsanto, Speaks Out in Favor of GMO Labeling

Genetically Engineered Destruction: The Hidden Agenda of Genetic Manipulation


How GMO Foods Turn Your Intestines Into an Insecticide Factory

Oakland sues Monsanto for long-standing contamination of San Francisco Bay

EPA Raises Alarm Over GMO Crops that Are Breeding Swarms of These Mutant Bugs

Academic GMO shills exposed: Once-secret emails reveal gross collusion with Monsanto, academic fraud at the
highest levels inside U.S. universities

New England Journal of Medicine article calls for labeling of GM foods

Avengers actor Mark Ruffalo is aggressively fighting the Bayer, Monsanto merger

Zika virus or insecticide Pyriproxyfen - which is behind rise in microcephaly cases?

What is the Zika Virus Epidemic Covering Up?

Autism - Made in the U S A - Gary Null's Remarkable Documentary

MIT States That Half of All Children May be Autistic by 2025 due to Monsanto

Bayer defies critics with $62 billion Monsanto offer

Nazi-founded Bayer chemical company wants to buy Satan-inspired Monsanto for $42 billion... it's a perfect match
made in chemical Hell

How Monsanto stifles criticism

Monsanto To Merge With Whole Foods For New Health Store 365

GE Food Venture: Chronically Dependent On Deception


September 1 2016 | From: Uncensored

Although it purports to be based on solid science and the open flow of information on which
science depends, the massive venture to reconfigure the genetic core of the worlds food supply
has substantially relied on the propagation of falsehoods.
Its advancement and very survival have been crucially and chronically dependent on the misrepresentation of
reality to the extent that more than thirty years after the creation of the first genetically engineered plant, the vast
majority of people the world-over (including most government officials, journalists, and even scientists) continue to
be misled about the important facts.

Related: High Court ruling on GE a win for democracy

Moreover, contrary to what people would expect, the biotechnology industry has not been the main source of the
deceptions.Instead, the chief misrepresentations have been issued by respected government agencies and eminent
scientists and scientific institutions.

The following paragraphs describe several of the key deceptions and delinquencies that have been essential in enabling the
genetically engineered (GE) food venture to advance all of which are more thoroughly documented in my book: Altered
Genes, Twisted Truth.

The Disaster Caused by GEs First Edible Product Was Obfuscated

The genetic engineering venture received an alarming jolt when its first ingestible product caused an epidemic that killed
dozens of Americans and seriously sickened thousands, permanently disabling many of them.

The product was a food supplement of the essential amino acid L-tryptophan that had been derived from genetically altered
bacteria. Although it met the standards for pharmacological purity, like all other tryptophan supplements it contained minute
amounts of impurities.

However, unlike the conventionally produced supplements, one or more of its accidental additions was highly toxic, even at
extremely low levels.
Because none of the tryptophan supplements produced via non-engineered bacteria had ever been linked to disease, and
because genetic engineering can create unintended disruptions within the altered organisms, there were legitimate reasons
to suspect that the process had induced the formation of the extraordinarily toxic substance that caused the calamity.

Consequently, the proponents of genetic engineering, including the United States Food and Drug Administration (the FDA),
which admits it has a policy to foster biotechnology, strove to convince the public that the technology was blameless.[ii]

But to do so, they had to issue a string of deceptive statements. Those deceptions have been highly successful.
Consequently, despite the fact the evidence points to genetic engineering as the most likely cause of the toxic
contamination, most people who know of this tragedy are under the illusion that the technology has been exonerated.[iii]

Worse, because GE proponents routinely claim that none of its products has ever been linked to a health problem, most
people arent even aware that such a catastrophe happened.

The Problems Linked to the First GE Whole Food Were Also Covered Up

The first whole food produced via genetic engineering (Calgenes Flavr Savr tomato) was also problematic. Calgene
voluntarily conducted feeding studies, and the FDA scientists who reviewed them expressed concern about a pattern of
stomach lesions that raised a safety issue.

The Pathology Branch concluded that safety had not been demonstrated, and other FDA experts concurred. One wrote that
the data:

Raise a question of safety and that they fall short of satisfactorily resolving it.[iv] Another agreed that . . .
unresolved questions still remain.[v]
Nevertheless, the FDA claimed that its scientists had determined that all safety questions had been resolved and that the
tomato had been demonstrated to be just as safe as other tomatoes. And because the FDA kept a lid on its scientists
memos, no one outside the agency was aware of the fraud.

The memos only came to light four years later (in 1998) when my organization, the Alliance for Bio-Integrity, led a lawsuit
that compelled the FDA to hand over more than 44,000 pages of its internal files.

However, because the mainstream media has failed to adequately report what those documents reveal, most people are still
unaware of the FDAs misbehavior.

GE Foods Reached the Market Through Governmental Fraud

If the actual facts about the toxic tryptophan and the troubling tomato had been disclosed, the GE food venture might well
have been brought to a halt and at minimum would have been slowed and subjected to more rigorous testing. A similar
effect would have resulted if concerns that other FDA experts had expressed about GE foods in general had been
publicized.

Those concerns appeared in memos written a few years before the GE tomato entered the market, and they reveal that the
agencys scientists didnt agree with the biotech proponents claims that GE is substantially the same as conventional
breeding.

For example, an FDA microbiologist stated:

There is a profound difference between the types of unexpected effects from traditional breeding and genetic
engineering. He added that GE . . . may be more hazardous . . . [vi]

A toxicologist warned that GE plants could contain unexpected new toxins.[vii]

The Director of FDAs Center for Veterinary Medicine (CVM) stated:

CVM believes that animal feeds derived from genetically modified plants present unique animal and food safety
concerns. [viii]

He explained that residues of unexpected substances could make meat and milk products harmful to humans.

The pervasiveness of the concerns is attested by an FDA official who studied the expert input and declared:

The processes of genetic engineering and traditional breeding are different, and according to the technical experts
in the agency, they lead to different risks. [ix]

In light of the unique risks, those experts called for GE foods to undergo careful testing capable of detecting unexpected
side effects.

Moreover, the FDAs Biotechnology Coordinator acknowledged there was not a consensus about safety in the scientific
community at large. He also admitted that the allergenic potential of some GE foods is particularly difficult to predict. [x]
Nonetheless, in May 1992 the FDA claimed that:

The agency is not aware of any information showing that foods derived by these new methods differ from other
foods in any meaningful or uniform way. [xi]

It also asserted that there is overwhelming consensus among scientists that GE foods are so safe they dont
require any testing. Accordingly, the agency doesnt require a smidgen of testing and allows GE foods to enter the
market without any.

If the FDA had told the truth and disclosed the extensive concerns of its own experts, the subsequent history of the GE
venture would have surely been very different and might well have been quite short. At the least, any GE foods that did
reach market would have been subjected to much more rigorous testing than regulators anywhere have required.

The State of the Research and the Degree of Expert Consensus Have Been Misrepresented

Like the FDA, other GE proponents habitually claim theres an overwhelming expert consensus that GE foods are safe. And
the American Association for the Advancement of Science has declared that every respected organization that examined
the evidence has determined theyre no riskier than conventional ones.

But this is flat-out false. For instance, in 2001 the Royal Society of Canada issued a report concluding that:

A ) it is scientifically unjustifiable to presume that GE foods are safe.


B) the default prediction for each should be that the genetic alteration has induced unintended and potentially
harmful side effects.[xii]

Moreover, the British Medical Association, the Public Health Association of Australia, and the editors of The Lancet (a
premier medical journal) have all expressed concerns about the risks;[xiii] and in 2015 a peer-reviewed journal published a
statement signed by more than 300 scientists asserting that there is not a consensus about the safety of GE foods and that
their safety has not been adequately demonstrated.[xiv]

GE proponents also falsely profess that the safety of GE foods has been thoroughly demonstrated when in reality many
well-conducted studies published in peer-reviewed journals have detected harm to the animals that ate GE food.

In fact, a systematic review of the toxicological studies on GE foods published in 2009 concluded that the results of most of
them indicate that the products:

May cause hepatic, pancreatic, renal, and reproductive effects and may alter hematological, biochemical, and
immunologic parameters the significance of which remains unknown. [xv]

It also noted that further studies were clearly needed.

Another review that encompassed the additional studies that had been published up until August 2010 also provided cause
for caution. It concluded that there was an equilibrium between the research groups;

Suggesting that GE crops are as safe as their non-GE counterparts and those raising still serious
concerns. [xvi]

Between 2008 and 2014 eight such research reviews were published, and although some interpreted the data in favor of GE
crops, as a whole, they provide no grounds for unequivocally proclaiming safety. As Sheldon Krimsky, a professor at Tufts
University, observed in a comprehensive examination that itself was published in a peer-reviewed journal:
One cannot read these systematic reviews and conclude that the science on health effects of GMOs has been
resolved within the scientific community. [xvii]

Yet, GMO proponents routinely proclaim that it has been conclusively resolved and that safety is a certitude.

Two Compelling and Disturbing Conclusions

Thus, even from this brief summary, its clear that the GE food venture has been chronically dependent on twisting the truth;
and this dependence can be readily detected in virtually every statement thats been issued in support of its products.

A striking example is the guide to GE crops published by the UKs Royal Society in May 2016.[xviii] Although it professes to
provide accurate, science-based information, analysis reveals that its case for the safety of these crops is based on multiple
misrepresentations.[xix]

So if the worlds oldest and most respected scientific institution cannot argue for the safety of GE foods without
systematically distorting the facts, it indicates that such distortion is essential to the argument.

Moreover, when the multitude of distortions and deceptions that have been issued on behalf of these products over the last
thirty-five years are compiled and irrefutably documented (as in my book), the conclusion that the GE food venture could not
have survived without them becomes virtually inescapable.

And another conclusion is equally obvious. The incontestable fact that the evidence has been methodically misrepresented
is in itself compelling evidence of how strongly the aggregate evidence raises reasonable doubts about the safety of these
foods because if it was as favorable as the proponents claim, there would have been no need to distort it.

References
[i] Druker, Steven, Altered Genes, Twisted Truth: How the Venture to Genetically Engineer Our Food Has Subverted
Science, Corrupted Government, and Systematically Deceived the Public (Clear River Press 2015)

[ii] The agencys promotional policy was acknowledged in Genetically Engineered Foods, FDA Consumer, Jan.-Feb. 1993,
p.14.

[iii] The demonstrably false statements that have been issued in order to deflect suspicion from the GE process, as well as
other deceptive tactics that have been employed, are described in Chapter 3 of Altered Genes, Twisted Truth. That chapter
also comprehensively examines the evidence, including important evidence produced by researchers at the Mayo Clinic that
had not been previously made public.

[iv] Document #15, p. 3 at: http://biointegrity.org/24-fda-documents. NOTE: If the URL specified for this endnote (which is
also the URL for numbers 5 through 10) is temporarily inactive, the documents can be accessed
at: http://www.biointegrity.org/list.htm

[v] Document #16 at: http://biointegrity.org/24-fda-documents.

[vi] Document #4 at: http://biointegrity.org/24-fda-documents.

[vii] Document #2 at: http://biointegrity.org/24-fda-documents.

[viii] Document #10 at: http://biointegrity.org/24-fda-documents.

[ix] Document #1 at: http://biointegrity.org/24-fda-documents.

[x] Document #8 at: http://biointegrity.org/24-fda-documents.

[xi] Statement of Policy: Foods Derived From New Plant Varieties, May 29, 1992, Federal Register vol. 57, No. 104 at
22991

[xii] Elements of Precaution: Recommendations for the Regulation of Food Biotechnology in Canada. The Royal Society of
Canada, January 2001. This report has never been withdrawn or revised.

[xiii] The British Medical Association has clearly expressed reservations about the safety of these novel products. As
described in the British Medical Journal, the Association released a 2004 report stating that:

More research is needed to show that genetically modified (GM) food crops and ingredients are safe for people
and the environment and that they offer real benefits over traditionally grown foods. (Kmietowicz, Z. GM Foods
Should Be Submitted to Further Studies, says BMA,

- British Medical Journal, 2004 March 13; 328(7440): 602)

The Public Health Association of Australia has likewise (and more recently) indicated its opinion that the safety of genetically
modified foods has not been adequately demonstrated. Its policy statement on genetically modified (GM) foods adopted in
2013 states:

Thorough, independent research into the effects of GM foods on agronomy, health, society, the environment and
the economy should be undertaken, and until this work is completed, all governments in Australia should impose
an immediate and indefinite freeze on: the growing of GM crops for commercial purposes; the importation of GM
foods and food components; and the patenting of genetic resources for food.

- www.phaa.net.au/documents/item/235

The Lancet criticized the presumption that genetically engineered foods entail no greater risks of unexpected effects than
conventional foods, stating that there are good reasons to believe that specific risks may exist and that governments
should never have allowed these products into the food chain without insisting on rigorous testing for effects on health. (The
Lancet, Vol. 353, Issue 9167, p. 1811, 29 May 1999.)

[xiv] Hilbeck et al. Environmental Sciences Europe (2015) 27:4. http://www.enveurope.com/content/pdf/s12302-014-0034-


1.pdf

[xv] Dona, A., and I. S. Arvanitouannis. 2009. Health Risks of Genetically Modified Foods. Critical Reviews in Food
Science and Nutrition 49 (2): 164-75.

[xvi] Domingo, J. L., and J. G. Bordonaba. 2011. A Literature Review on the Safety Assessment of Genetically Modified
Plants. Environment International 37 (4): 734-42

[xvii] Krimsky, S., An Illusory Consensus Behind GMO Health Assessment, Science, Technology & Human
Values, November 2015; vol. 40, 6: pp. 883-914., first published on August 7, 2015.

[xviii] GM plants: Questions and answers. The Royal Society, May 2016.

[xix] For a documentation of the major misrepresentations, see my article published in The Ecologist: http://bit.ly/29NN8dk

Steven M. Druker is a public interest attorney and the executive director of the Alliance for Bio-Integrity. He is the author
of Altered Genes, Twisted Truth: How the Venture to Genetically Engineer Our Food Has Subverted Science, Corrupted
Government, and Systematically Deceived the Public, which was released in 2015 with a foreword by Jane Goodall hailing it
as without doubt one of the most important books of the last 50 years.

The Eradication Of Natural Alternatives: Big Pharma Wants To Eliminate The


Competition
August 25 2016 | From: Sott

Everyone has the simple desire to find happiness within themselves - to find a state of well-being
that can be carried throughout their lives. Sara is no different. Sara is a teacher who struggles with
mental conditions for which she has been prescribed a bevy of medications.

Over the years she has struggled, as most in her situation have, with addiction and the unbearable side-effects of
her FDA-approved "safe" medications.

Related: FDA wants to jail Amish man 48 years for selling herbal remedies people love

Her absolute passion in this life is for the children whom she molds and develops with an unrivaled dedication. As she
began to grapple further with the unexpected effects and growing addiction to her medications, she began to see it affecting
her ability to be present in her responsibilities, while also stealing her creativity that she so greatly treasured.

So when she discovered kratom, which successfully replaced not one, but all of her medications, with zero side-effects, she
thanked God for providing this miracle and natural alternative.

In a time when much of what Westerners thought they knew about themselves and their health has begun to prove
unfounded, the ever-present natural and homeopathic alternatives are once again gathering attention.

Due largely in part to the continual effort of the pharmaceutical industry, many are unaware that the majority of natural
alternatives to the overwhelming amount of different pharmaceutical medications are not only very effective, but in many
cases, a far better option.

To some this might seem a fantastical claim, yet that is exactly what people have been conditioned to think.
Big Pharma has been caught in kickback schemes, exposed for bribery, fraud, and price-fixing, and has made it quite clear
to the American people that their primary concern is not the health of the nation, but their own bottom line. Yet the
pharmaceutical giants march on, increasing their profit with every passing year.

To think that this or any other company would not attempt to stomp out competition that threatened to rival their products is
just nave. This is seen in business every day.

Yet people seem to cast Big Pharma in a light of righteousness, as if they are some benevolent caregiver providing
the country with loving healthcare; as if they are somehow exempt from the cutthroat nature of big business simply
because their efforts are incorrectly seen as a public service, even though Big Pharma is not concerned with
anything above and beyond its own profits.

What is being witnessed is an all-out assault on any possible natural alternative to Big Pharma medications; and currently in
their crosshairs, being heralded as a miracle drug, is the natural root extract kratom.

Just as the nation is witnessing with cannabis, the pharmaceutical industry is beginning to wage war against this natural
substance because it threatens to expose the simple fact that natural remedies actually work; and work well.
Kratom has shown to work wonders for pain relief, anxiety, insomnia, and much more. In addition to its list of uses, it has a
long and respected history; kratom has been used in Southeast Asia for centuries and is perfectly safe, especially when
compared to the obvious dangers known to exist with opiate use.

Opiates are an epidemic in this county, causing more 16,000 deaths a year, and according to the National Institute on Drug
Abuse, an estimated 36 million people abuse opioids worldwide, with an estimated 2.1 million Americans suffering from
opiate addiction.

The number of unintentional overdose deaths from prescription pain relievers has soared in the United States, more than
quadrupling since 1999.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention report that more Americans now die from painkillers than from heroin and
cocaine combined. This is due in large part to the industry's efforts to over-prescribe opiate based medications; and this is
not a hypothetical.

Many doctors have been arrested, charged, and shut down do to running what is called a "pill-mill," or a location where
doctors unanimously and haphazardly hand out prescriptions for opiate painkillers for a multitude of reasons, primarily and
most commonly, the pharmaceutical company's direct compensation for being one of their best salesmen.

Americans now consume more than 84 percent of the world's supply of oxycodone and almost 100 percent of
hydrocodone opioids.

These "painkillers," which most doctors will tell you do a poor job of living up to that title, are currently listed as a Schedule II
controlled substance.

Currently cannabis, the plant being shown to have more health benefits than all of Big Pharma's medications combined, is
listed as a Schedule I controlled substance, implying that the plant has zero medical value and is highly addictive - both of
which are categorically untrue.

To add insult to injury, the Federal government has a patent on the medical use of cannabis, all while arresting those who
use cannabis for its medical value. It's laughably absurd.
Related: Cancer Update: There Are Now 100 Scientific Studies That Prove Cannabis Cures Cancer + Watch What
Happens When Cannabis Is Injected Into Cancer Cells

To the resounding cheers of the American people, Big Pharma has been losing the battle to keep cannabis in the dark
shadowy recesses of the illegal drug world and out of the hands of those in desperate need of its healing properties.

That in itself is a perfect example of how the industry is not focused on the needs and desires of the people they claim to
help, but rather on telling them what they need and creating a situation in which that need becomes a reality; and their
profits soar at the expense of real cures as opposed to prolonged treatments.

As kratom continues to rise and its value begins to be clearly demonstrated, Big Pharma has now made it their
number one enemy.

It may seem illogical and unnecessary to label a natural root extract that has been used for thousands of years as
dangerous while this country's number one prescribed medication is killing people in the millions, yet that is exactly what's
happening.

In Alabama, Governor Robert J. Bentley signed a bill Tuesday that would make kratom a Schedule I controlled substance,
right alongside heroin, and amazingly, with the same penalties.

The stark contrast between painkillers and a natural substance such as kratom is painfully obvious.
It's clear that opiates are the real problem; so all should be asking themselves why law enforcement chooses to
focus on the natural substances alone: It always comes back to money.

There are billions of dollars in profit that the government stands to lose with the rise of natural substances such as cannabis,
kratom, or kava, on both a medical and an industrial level. This is why Americans are exposed to fast-tracked drugs with
countless known (as well as unknown) side-effects that fly through the FDA, only to be pulled years later due to terrible and
often terminal results.

This has almost become an accepted practice. Yet there are drugs with the potential to cure and not just treat that get
shelved at the FDA for decades, shrugged off as just the backlogged efforts of the FDA. They can only do so much, right?

The FDA just approved a new super-Vicodin type drug called Zohydro. This drug contains up to five times the amount of
hydrocodone and does not have time-release protection, so it can be easily crushed up and snorted or injected by those
who would abuse it.

This drug was approved after only one twelve-week trial in which five of the people involved died as a result.

Yet kratom, which has been used for centuries and is widely accepted as extremely safe, is dangerous and unlawful in the
eyes of the Feds.

When you talk to pain specialists in our field, they will all tell you one indisputable fact: opiates are lousy drugs to
treat chronic pain" said one FDA committee member who voted against Zohydro approval.

The hypocrisy within this country's medical field, as well as many others, has become something of an established
American business model. Lie long enough, with enough confidence and with enough force, and the Truth no
longer matters.

Recently the Editor-in-Chief of The Lancet released information showing how at least 50% of all scientific research today is
false.

This is becoming business as usual, and it is at the expense of the nation's health. They are bogging down drugs that can
cure while fast-tracking highly addictive treatments, producing the perfect return customer.

With Alabama's new law deeming kratom illegal and with other states soon to follow, Sara is left falling back into her old rut
of addiction and mental fog brought on by the prescribed "healthcare" that so often left her feeling lost in a world full of
potential.
So many fall victim to the pacification and addiction almost certain to rear its ugly head when being subjected to daily and
prolonged pharmaceutical drug use. Kratom was the one natural substance that gave her zero side-effects and completely
relieved her of her anxiety while rendering her other drugs unnecessary.

It is not hard to see why Big Pharma saw this substance as a threat to its ongoing domination of the drug trade in the United
States.

Related: What The Amish Can Teach Us About Modern Medicine

20 Practical Uses For Coca Cola - Proof That Coke Does Not Belong In The Human
Body & 22 Ways Drinking Soda Will Shorten Your Life + The Hidden Costs Of Soda
August 20 2016 | From: TrueActivist / GreenMedInfo

Numerous studies have shown the negative health effects of drinking soda on your waistline and
your teeth.
To prove Coke does not belong in the human body, here are 20 practical ways you can use Coke as a domestic
cleaner:

1. Removes grease stains from clothing and fabric.

2. Removes rust; using fabric dipped in Coke, a sponge or even aluminum foil. Also loosens rusty bolts.

3. Removes blood stains from clothing and fabric.

4. Cleans oil stains from a garage floor; let the stain soak, hose off.

5. Kills slugs and snails; the acids kills them.

6. Cleans burnt pans; let the pan soak in the Coke, then rinse.

7. Descales a kettle (same method as with burnt pans).

8. Cleans car battery terminals by pouring a small amount of Coke over each one.

9. Cleans your engine; Coke distributors have been using this technique for decades.

10. Makes pennies shine; soaking old pennies in Coke will remove the tarnish.
11. Cleans tile grout; pour onto kitchen floor, leave for a few minutes, wipe up.

12. Dissolves a tooth; Use a sealed containertakes a while but it does work.

13. Removes gum from hair; dip into a small bowl of Coke, leave a few minutes. Gum will wipe off.

14. Removes stains from vitreous china.

15. Got a dirty pool? Adding two 2-liter bottles of Coke clears up rust.

16. You can remove (or fade) dye from hair by pouring diet Coke over it.

17. Remove marker stains from carpet. Applying, scrub and then clean with soapy water to remove marker stains.

18. Cleans a toilet; pour around bowl, leave for a while, flush clean.

19. Coke and aluminum foil will bring Chrome to a high shine.

20. Strips paint off metal furniture. Soak a towel in Coke and lay it on the paint surface.

Furthermore, have you ever wondered what exactly Coca Cola is?
After 10 minutes: The sugar contained in a glass of Cola can cause a devastating strike on the body. The cause being
the phosphoric acid which inhibits the action of sugar.

After 20 minutes: A leap in insulin levels in bloodstream occurs.

After 40 minutes: Ingestion of caffeine is finally completed. The eyes pupils are expanding. Blood pressure rises because
the liver disposes more sugar into the bloodstream. The adenosine receptors become blocked thereby preventing
drowsiness.

After 45 minutes: The body raises production of the dopamine hormone, which stimulates the brain pleasure center.
Similar to the reaction Heroin creates.

After 1 hour: Phosphoric acid binds calcium, magnesium and zinc in the gastrointestinal tract, which supercharges
metabolism. The release of calcium through urine takes place.

After more than 1 hour: Diuretic effects of the drink enters in the game. The calcium, magnesium, and zinc are removed
out of the body, which are a part of our bones, as well as sodium. At this time, we can become irritable or subdued. The
whole quantity of water, contained in a coca cola, is removed through urination.

When having a cold bottle of Coke and enjoying its undeniable freshness are we aware of what chemical cocktail
we are putting into our bodies?

The active ingredient in Coca-Cola is orthophosphoric acid. Due to its high acidity, cisterns used for transporting the
chemical have to be equipped with special reservoirs designed for highly corrosive materials.

The Anatomy of Diet Coke / Coke Light


Lets have a look at the anatomy of one of the most advertised products of Coca-Cola Co. Coca-Cola Light
(Diet) without caffeine.
This drink contains Aqua Carbonated, E150D, E952, E951, E338, E330, Aromas, E211.

Aqua Carbonated this is sparkling water. It stirs gastric secretion, increases the acidity of the gastric juice and provokes
flatulency. Filtered tap water is what is primarily used.

E150D this is food coloring obtained through the processing of sugar at specified temperatures, with or without addition
of chemical reagents. In the case of coca-cola, ammonium sulfate is added.

E952 Sodium Cyclamate is a sugar substitute. Cyclamate is a synthetic chemical, has a sweet taste, which is 200 times
sweeter than sugar, and is used as an artificial sweetener. In 1969 it was banned by FDA, since it, as well as saccharin and
aspartame, caused cancer in rats.

E950 Acesulfame Potassium. 200 times sweeter than sugar, containing methyl-ether. It aggravates the operation of the
cardiovascular system. Likewise, it contains asparaginic acid which can also cause an excitant effect on our nervous system
and in time it can lead to addiction. Acesulfame is badly dissolved and is not recommended for use by children and pregnant
women.

E951 Aspartame. A sugar substitute for diabetics and is chemically unstable at elevated temperatures it breaks down
into methanol and phenylalanine. Methanol is very dangerous as only 5-10ml can cause destruction of the optic nerve and
irreversible blindness. In warm soft drinks, aspartame transforms into formaldehyde which is a very strong carcinogen.
Symptoms of aspartame poisoning include: unconsciousness, headaches, fatigue, dizziness, nausea, palpitation, weight
gain, irritability, anxiety, memory loss, blurry vision, fainting, joint pains, depression, infertility, hearing loss and more.
Aspartame can also provoke the following diseases: brain tumors, MS (Multiple Sclerosis), epilepsy, Graves disease,
chronic fatigue, Alzheimers, diabetes, mental deficiency and tuberculosis. Later, this substance was initially illegal due to its
dangers but was again made legal in a suspicious manner.

E338 Orthophosphoric Acid. This can cause irritation of the skin and eyes. It is used for production of phosphoric acid
salts of ammonia, sodium, calcium, aluminum and also in organic synthesis for the production of charcoal and film tapes. It
is also used in the production of refractory materials, ceramics, glass, fertilizers, synthetic detergents, medicine,
metalworking, as well as in the textile and oil industries. It is known that orthophosphoric acid interferes with the absorption
of calcium and iron into the body which can cause weakening of bones and osteoporosis. Other side effects are thirst and
skin rashes.

E330 Citric Acid. It is widely used in pharmaceutical and food industries. Salts of citric acid (citrates) are used in the food
industry as acids, preservatives, stabilizers, and in the medical fields for preserving blood.

Aromas unknown aromatic additives

E211 Sodium Benzoate. It is used in production of some food products for anti-bacterial and anti-fungal purposes. It is
often found in jams, fruit juices and fruit yogurts. Its not recommended for use by asthmatics and people who are sensitive
to aspirin. A study conducted by Peter Piper at the Sheffield University in Britain, found that this compound causes
significant damage to DNA. According to Peter, sodium benzoate which is an active component in preservatives, doesnt
destroy DNA, but deactivates it. This can lead to cirrhosis and degenerative diseases like Parkinsons disease.

Coca-Cola is undeniably a very useful product. The key is to use it for purposes that do not include drinking! Here
is a video about Coca-Cola:

22 Ways Drinking Soda Will Shorten Your Life


Numerous studies have shown the negative health effects of drinking soda on your waistline and
your teeth. Drinking soda however, has far more serious health risks than many of us may realize.

According to Euromonitor, the average person in the United States consumes more than 126 grams of sugar per
day. Thats equal to 25.2 teaspoons, or the equivalent of drinking a little over three 12 ounce colas.

Numerous studies have shown the negative health effects of drinking soda on your waistline and your teeth. Drinking
soda however, has far more health risks than many of us may realize. Regular consumption of sugary drinks is linked to
numerous health problems including diabetes, heart disease, asthma, COPD and obesity.

So what are the risks and how much soda is too much? Lets take a look:

1. Soda can cause a decline in kidney function. In an 11-year-long Harvard Medical School study, including 3,318
women, researchers found that diet cola is linked with a two-fold increased risk for kidney decline.

2. Soda increases diabetes risk. High levels of sugar in soda places a lot of stress on your pancreas, potentially leaving
it unable to keep up with the bodys need for insulin. Drinking one or two sugary drinks per day increases your risk for type 2
diabetes by 25%.

3. Soda cans are lined with BPA. Soda cans are coated with the endocrine disruptor bisphenol A (BPA), which has
been linked to everything from heart disease to obesity to reproductive problems.

4. Soda dehydrates you. Caffeine is a diuretic. Diuretics promote the production of urine, causing you to urinate more
frequently. When the bodys cells are dehydrated they have difficulty absorbing nutrients, and it also makes it more difficult
for the body to eliminate waste.

5. Caramel coloring in soda is linked to cancer. The artificial brown coloring in colas is a chemical process, it is not
made from caramelized sugar. It is made by reacting sugars with ammonia and sulfites under high pressure and
temperatures. These chemical reactions result in the formation of 2-methylimidazole (2-MI) and 4 methylimidazole (4-MI),
which in government-conducted studies caused lung, liver, or thyroid cancer or leukemia in laboratory mice and rats.
6. Caramel coloring in soda is linked to vascular issues. Dr. Nehal N. Mehta, director of Inflammatory Risk Cardiology
at the University of Pennsylvania states that there is a link between vascular problems and caramel-containing products.

7. Soda is high in calories. A 20 ounce can of Coca Cola contains 17 teaspoons of sugar and 240 caloriesempty
calories devoid of any nutritional value. It would take the average adult over one hour of walking to burn off the 240 calories
in a 20-ounce soda.

8. Caffeine in soda blocks the absorption of magnesium. According to Carolyn Dean, M.D., N.D. Magnesium is
essential for more than 325 enzyme reactions in the body. Magnesium also plays a role in your body's detoxification
processes and therefore is important for minimizing damage from environmental chemicals, heavy metals, and other
toxins.

9. Soda increases obesity risk in children. Each additional soda or other sugary drink consumed per day increases the
likelihood of a child becoming obese by about 60%. Sugary drinks are connected to other health problems as well.

10. Soda increases heart disease in men. Each soda consumed per day increases the risk of heart disease by 20% in
men.

11. Acid in soda wears away dental enamel. Lab testing on soda acidity shows that the amount of acid in soda is
enough to wear away dental enamel. pH levels in soda can be as low as 2.5, as a frame of reference battery acid has a pH
of 1, water has a pH of 7.0.

12. Soda contains high amounts of sugar. The average 20-ounce can of Coca Cola has the equivalent of 17 teaspoons
of sugar, it's not hard to see that soda can be bad for your teeth and your overall health.

13. Soda contains artificial sweeteners. While many people opt for artificial sugar to lower caloric intake the tradeoff for
your health isnt so sweet. Artificial sugars are linked to numerous illness and diseases including cancer.

14. Soda depletes your mineral levels. Sodas that contain phosphoric acid removes much needed calcium from your
bones. After studying several thousand men and woman, researchers at Tufts University, found that women who drank 3
or more cola based sodas a day, had almost 4% lower bone mineral density in their hips, even though researchers
controlled their calcium and vitamin D intake.

15. Drinking soda changes your metabolism. Dr. Hans-Peter Kubis, the director of the Health Exercise and
Rehabilitation group at Bangor University in England, has found that drinking soda on a regular basis can actually change
the metabolism in the human body. Participants drank 140 grams of sugar every day for four weeks (thats less than two 20
ounce cans of Coke). The results: their metabolism changed after the four weeks, making it more difficult for them to burn fat
and lose weight.

16. Drinking more than one soda daily, increases your risk for heart disease and metabolic syndrome. According to
Ravi Dhingra, M.D., lead author of the study and an instructor in Medicine at Harvard Medical School states If you are
drinking one or more soft drinks a day, you may be increasing your risk of developing metabolic risk factors for heart
disease. The Framingham study included nearly 9,000 individuals, over a four year period. Researchers found that
individuals consuming one or more sodas a day had a 48 % increased risk of metabolic syndrome compared to those
consuming less than one soft drink daily.

17. Diet soda does not help you lose weight. A University of Texas Health Science Center study found that the more
diet sodas a person drank, the greater their risk of becoming overweight. Consuming two or more cans a day increased
waistlines by 500% greater than those who do not consume diet soda.

18. Diet sodas contain mold inhibitors. They go by the names sodium benzoate or potassium benzoate, and theyre
used in nearly all diet sodas.

These chemicals have the ability to cause severe damage to DNA in the mitochondria to the point that they totally
inactivate it - they knock it out altogether, Peter Piper, a professor of Molecular Biology and Biotechnology at the
University of Sheffield in the U.K., told a British newspaper.

The preservative has also been linked to hives, asthma, and other allergic conditions, according to the Center for Science in
the Public Interest.

Note: Some companies have phased out sodium benzoate. Diet Coke and Diet Pepsi have replaced it with another
preservative, potassium benzoate. Both sodium and potassium benzoate were classified by the Food Commission in the UK
as mild irritants to the skin, eyes, and mucous membranes.

19. Sodas containing ascorbic acid and potassium benzoate can form benzene, a known carcinogen. Benzene can
form in beverages and foods that contain both ascorbic acid and potassium benzoate. According to the FDA, when
benzoate is exposed to light and heat in the presence of vitamin C, it can be converted into benzene. According to the
American Cancer Society, benzene is considered a carcinogen

20. Daily sodas and other sugar sweetened drinks are linked to Non-Alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease (NAFLD). The
2,634 individuals in the study completed a CT scan to measure the amount of fat in the liver. They saw a higher prevalence
of NAFLD among people who reported drinking more than one sugar-sweetened drink per day compared to people who
said they drank no sugar-sweetened beverages.

21. Some sodas contain flame retardant. Brominated vegetable oil (BVO) is added to many citrus based sodas and
sports drinks to prevent the drinks from separating. Whats the concern? BVO is patented by chemical companies as a
flame retardant. It is also banned in over 100 countries, but it is still used in the U.S. Learn more here.

22. Soda is linked to Asthma. A study done in South Australis of 16,907 participants aged 16 years and older, showed
high levels of soda consumption were positively associated with asthma and COPD.

The Hidden Costs of Soda

Just as lifestyle diseases like Type II Diabetes and obesity grow to epidemic proportions in the U.S., the average
American now consumes 20 oz of soda every day. For non-diet drinkers that means guzzling an extra 17 teaspoons
of sugar daily.
New Zealand Baby Food Contains 800 Times More Pesticides Than Baby Food In
Europe - But Pesticides To Stay In Baby Food
August 16 2016 | From: SafeFood

New Zealand baby food contained nearly 800 times more pesticides than baby food in Europe,
according to a recent analysis.

This evidence and why this is a risk to New Zealand babies was presented to the Primary
Production Committee by Dr Meriel Watts of the Pesticide Action Network Aotearoa and Alison
White of the Safe Food Campaign in December 2014

Related: Why Is Pesticide Used As An Ingredient In Infant Formula?

Their oral submissions are in support of a petition presented to parliament earlier this year calling for zero tolerance of
pesticides in baby food.

We want New Zealand to follow the European directives which basically stipulate a zero tolerance policy", stated
Ms White. "Three of the pesticides found in New Zealand baby food are hazardous for young children and babies
in the womb. Kiwi babies deserve the same level of protection as they have in the EU."

Analysis of a government study shows more than 30% of New Zealand baby food contained pesticide residues whereas
less than 1% (0.04%) of European baby food did so.
Five pesticides were detected in 32 baby food samples of the last NZ Total Diet Survey of 2009, which included testing of
formula, cereal based, custard/fruit and savoury weaning foods. The EU analysis of 2,062 baby foods showed residues in
only 0.04% of samples in 2010.

Some of the pesticides found are carcinogens and endocrine disruptors, for which no safe level has been
scientifically established, and doses thousands of times lower than those generally considered toxic are known to
interfere with normal human development," said Ms White.

"Children have unique windows of vulnerability which adults do not have", said Dr Watts.

"Extremely low doses which may not have an immediate effect on adults can critically interfere with children's
ongoing developmental processes. This may result in lifelong alterations in growth and development, organ
formation, as well as disease occurrence. One of the key outcomes of exposure to even tiny amounts of pesticides
like chlorpyrifos is lowered IQ and delayed development."

Dr Watts is senior scientist for the Pesticide Action Network Asia Pacific, and last year published a book Poisoning our
future: children and pesticides, in which she collates a substantial amount of research on why children are at risk from
pesticides, even from very low doses.

The Safe Food Campaign also thinks the government should do a more extensive analysis of baby food.

More extensive and regular surveys need to be done of baby food not only to monitor the proposed legislation but
also to provide a more adequate baseline for comparison over time and with other countries," said Ms White.
Pesticides To Stay In Baby Food

Pesticides are to stay in baby food, in spite of a petition presented to parliament. The Primary Production
Committee decided on May 28 2015 not to act on the Safe Food Campaign petition asking for zero tolerance for
pesticide residues in baby food, even though such directives are currently in place in the European Union.

The Committee acknowledged the public interest to New Zealanders and the concern felt about toxins in food, especially for
parents of new-borns and young children. However they did not call for a more extensive baby food residue surveillance
programme, as suggested by the Safe Food Campaign.

Every five to six years a mere eight samples of four different kinds of baby food are analysed for pesticide
residues," said Alison White, Co-convenor of the Safe Food Campaign, "and this is absolutely inadequate."

Pesticides were found in over 30% of baby food samples in the last Total Diet Survey in 2009. Ms White contrasted this to
the EU:

New Zealand baby food had 533% more pesticide residues. The EU had an average of less than 6% of baby food
samples positive for pesticide residues over 6 years."

"We want to make parents more aware of the dangers that certain pesticide residues pose to babies and young
children," Ms White stated.

"To this end, we are running a campaign the week of the 15 June to protect our children from toxic pesticides here
in New Zealand, following the pesticide awareness campaign of Pesticide Action Network Asia Pacific. More
details will be available on our website."
"Certain pesticides, including some detected in New Zealand baby food, have been found to be linked to cancer
progression and endocrine or hormonal disruption," said Dr Heli Matilainen of the Safe Food Campaign.

"Children, due to their actively developing bodies, have unique windows of vulnerability which adults do not have.
This means that it is not the dose which is critical, but the timing of exposure, because doses thousands of times
lower than those normally considered toxic may interfere with children's development," explained Dr Matilainen.

"I am sure I am talking on behalf of every parent in New Zealand," concluded Ms White, "when I urge the
government to step up and protect our babies from dangerous pesticides that are currently present in
baby food."

The Safe Food Campaign is a nationwide organisation that gives consumers information about food so when they buy food
they can make a more informed choice.

Related: Chemical preservative in baby wipes found to cause eczema-like rashes

Wi-Fried? Australian Broadcasting Company: Catalyst


August 13 2016 | From: ForbiddenKnowledge

This documentary by Australia's ABC TV may change the way you look at your cell phone.

A scientific paper bravely published by a leading radiation biologist, Prof. Dariusz Leszczynski now allows top
neurologists, like Keith Black, MD of Los Angeles' Cedars-Sinai Hospital to issue warnings to their patients about
the dangers of cell phone use, which he describes as "Cooking the brain".

Related: The Gloves Come Off On EMF / Mobile / WiFi Radiation + Understanding The Dangers Of The 5G Rollout

The cell phone industry retaliated against Leszczynski by lobbying to have his funding stopped and in the meantime,
insurance companies in the US stopped coverage for health damages related to cell phone use.
Brain tumors associated with cell phone use has replaced leukemia as the number one child-killer. Men who store cell
phones in their pockets are assured lower sperm counts and there is a rash of young women contracting breast cancer, in
the very spot where they tuck their cellphones in their bras.

You can expect to receive the following measurable doses of radiation, using a standard radiation measuring device: 1)
Microwave oven: 800 microvolts, 2) WiFi Router: 800 microvolts, 3) Tablet PC: 2,000 microvolts (watching a movie), 4)
Smartphone: 40,000 microvolts (Samsung S3). This last device emits over a thousand times the normal background
radiation level of 30 microvolts.

Related: Australian Researcher: Phone Radiation Is A Hotline To Brain Cancer + Is Wi-Fi Making Your Child Ill?

The use of cell phones and other wireless technologies is being called the next 'casualty catastrophe,' after tobacco and
asbestos.

iPhones now all contain a legal disclaimer page with fine print, which cannot be enlarged and which is relatively difficult to
locate within the phone's navigation. It discloses the dangers of radiation exposure from cell phones and advises users to
keep the device at least 10mm from the body - but it's next to impossible to find on the device.

After conducting studies, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) in Lyon, France has officially classified
the radio wave radiation emitted by cellphones and other household devices (to say nothing of SmartMeters - which is a
whole other video!) as a Class 2B Carcinogen (a possible cause of cancer).

At the same time, a US wireless lobbying group called the CTIA assures us that "Radio waves from cell phones are safe"
and studies paid for by the cell phone industry claim that, "Cell phone use causes no biological damage."

However, independent studies consistently report serious health effects, ranging from DNA damage, a 300% reduction in
sperm counts, 290% more brain tumors, autism and birth defects.
Related: Parents Of Boy With Tumour Want Wi-Fi Out Of School

Former senior White House adviser, Epidemiologist, Dr. Devra Davis, who appears in this film testified to the US Senate and
has given a hair-raising reports about the back-stories behind these contradictory scientific reports:

The independent scientists who reported on the ill effects of cell phones found themselves under attack by the cellphone
industry, who would attempt to get them fired and to get their funding taken away or else accuse them of fraud.

When that didn't work, they hired inexperienced scientists who didn't know anything about the subject to *look* like they
were replicating the incriminating experiments - and when all of the above didn't work, they wrote an internal memo, in which
they stated, "We war-gamed the science."

To prove a point, one scientist wrote a paper on the subject, laden with obvious errors, which was published in numerous
science journals and translated in over 15 countries.
Journalist, Anthony Gucciardi had previously proven how easy it is for industry to plant fake science in such publications in
the very similar case involving the drug Prozac, which was long ago proven to increase the incidence of suicide among
users and to cause violent behavior in the 1980s - but hidden from the public until 2005 until there was a BBC expos.

In response, the manufacturers hired their own scientists to prove how "great" Prozac was. However, producers of anti-
depressants today are forced to disclose these side effects, which one reads in their accompanying manuals or overhear, in
the blindingly-fast and unintelligible disclosure statements that run during television advertisements for these products.

People who know the details believe that once the public becomes aware of these dangerous side effects, the public outcry
will be worse than it was for cigarettes.
Related: Environmental Lawyer Talks About Wifi In Schools

Dr. Louis Slesin, editor of Microwave News since 1981 says:

The system is broken, nobody has been told the truth. It's crazy."

He says that it's one thing for the tobacco industry to finally admit to the dangers of smoking tar and nicotine, after centuries
of being on the market because the science, which would eventually prove that cigarettes and secondhand smoke damaged
human health did not yet exist when tobacco was initially marketed - but cell phones were launched after preliminary
science was already available as to its inherent dangers and these products were released into the public without any safety
studies, whatsoever!

The point is to take action. Action is already being taken in Europe: In Italy, a landmark supreme court ruling found
a "causal link" between cell phone use and brain tumors.

In France, WiFi is being taken down and replaced with cabled Internet in schools and countries from Germany to Israel and
Finland are moving to stop cell phone sales to kids. In the UK, children under the age of 18, have been barred from cell
phone use for several years, already.

But of course, in the Good Ol' USA, the former chief lobbyist for the wireless industry, Thomas Wheeler was appointed by
President Barack Obama to head up the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), which regulates the safety of
wireless devices, in yet another astonishing conflict-of-interest in the choice of appointed US Federal Regulators, who better
resemble wolves guarding the sheep than advocates for the health of the public at-large.
Wifi, Microwaves and the Consequences to our Health
Mr. Barrie Trower, a British physicist who was a microwave weapons expert and who worked for the Royal Navy
and the British Secret Service, talks about the health effects of WiFi and other forms of microwave radiation.

Mr. Trower came out of retirement because he was concerned that the microwave frequencies and intensities to which
children are exposed in schools are similar to those used for microwave weapons.

Bill Gates And George Soros Fund Monsanto And A World Depopulation Agenda
August 9 2016 | From: NaturalNews

Hitler had a depopulation agenda which he kept under wraps, until so many millions of people
disappeared that the world started figuring out what was happening.

What if he had come right out and announced his plan to create a master race and eliminate everyone else by
shooting them in the head with two bullets, starving them to death, or putting them in gas chambers?

Related: Indian Doctors Sue Bill Gates For Harming Children With Deadly 'Humanitarian' Vaccines + Dr. Robert
Rowen Reveals The Raw Truth About Vaccines At The Vaccine World Summit

How many people around the world would have supported him and said they liked the idea of getting rid of all the
"undesirables" and blaming them for all the world's problems?

Well, Bill Gates and George Soros are also all about depopulation, but there's no way they're going to come right out and
say it ... or has Bill already done so? What if you found out right now, by video, that Bill Gates, along with his partner in
crime, are planning on reducing the world's population by about 5 billion over the next decade, and that they plan on using
vaccines and genetically modified food to do so? Here it is.
Related: Top Scientist Resigns From His Post At The University Of California Admitting Global Warming Is A Big
Scam

United States citizens underestimate the devastating power of consuming pesticides daily. Sure, most Americans say they
want labels on GMOs, but they're not getting them anytime soon, so now what? Also, most Americans believe vaccines are
a good idea for combating infectious disease, and two out of every three people get a flu shot yearly, but do they know what
the typical ingredients are and what chronic damage they're really doing to their brains and nervous, immune and
reproductive systems?

Bill Gates and George Soros know. These two super rich white dudes are not trying to save poor people in Africa, or India or
Brazil.

They don't care at all about the health of underprivileged societies, but what they do care about is making sure these folks
can't reproduce, and that if they do reproduce, they are creating deformed, severely autistic, cancer-ridden beings that won't
reproduce or even lead productive lives, but rather cost their parents all of their earnings and savings just to care for them.

Bill Gates has spoken at a TED conference saying he can reduce the world population by billions using vaccines. How so? If
vaccines supposedly prevent infectious disease, how does that equate to killing off people or keeping them from
multiplying? Great question.

South African 'test and treat' mass HIV experimentation begins with funding from Bill Gates

As of 2016, it's approximated that 7 million people in South Africa have HIV, with over 300,000 new cases arising every
year. Of those, nearly 200,000 die each year from an AIDS related death, usually because their immune systems are next to
non-existent, so anything from a head cold to the flu could drive them into their graves.
What else could "kill off" these "undesirables?" Vaccines that contain known neurotoxins and heavy metal toxins. It's
called eugenics, and some tall white guys are running the show. "Trials" are underway, and Bill Gates, the ultimate
population control promoter and self-declared philanthropist, is pumping money into the pharma labs to concoct an AIDS
vaccine.

Zika hoax, Bill Gates' GM mosquitoes, mass media propaganda scare, followed by mass DNA
vaccination agenda

The CDC defines DNA vaccines as "purified plasmid preparations containing one or more DNA sequences capable of
inducing and/or promoting an immune response against a pathogen," yet there is no proof that this really works as stated,
and research shows that when these sequences are injected they can cause "insertional mutagenesis," which means gene
and cell mutations can result and that's also the definition of carcinogenesis, or "cancer."

Care to turn off your tumor suppressor genes? Bill Gates and George Soros would love it if you did. That could help reduce
the world population "problem" they are so righteously battling for us.

Could these novel sounding DNA vaccines actually create human tolerance to pathogens instead of immunity? Why would
billionaires who support and promote cancer-causing, pesticide-laden GM food support a vaccine that creates immunity? It
wouldn't make sense. That would be like breeding and releasing millions of poisonous snakes while creating and promoting
anti-venom inoculation.

Watch out for hoax vaccines that contain neurotoxins. Ask your naturopathic physician if the highly experimental, untested
and dangerous Zika, HIV, Ebola, Anthrax, HPV, Swine Flu, MMR and DNA vaccines are "right for you" and your children.

Dying Of Thirst: Privatization Of Water As An Owned Commodity Rather Than A


Universal Human Right
August 6 2016 | From: Sott

There is no greater natural resource on this earth than water. As the sustenance of all life, water
keeps every living and breathing organism, every plant, every animal and every human being on
this planet alive. In the same way that without air to breathe, without water we humans cannot
sustain life for more than a few days.

Due to "global warming", widespread drought [Read: Geoengineering] and increasingly polluted water systems, the
projected availability of clean freshwater in years to come to meet the rising demands of a growing global
population is among the most daunting human challenges of this century.

Related: Elation As Ashburton Council Backs Out Of Controversial Water Bottling Deal

By 2015 a 17% increase in global water demand is projected just for increasing agriculturally produced food. By the same
year 2025, the growing global population will increase water consumption needs by a whopping 40%. While oil played the
keenly critical role during the twentieth century, water is being deemed the most valued precious natural resource
of the twenty-first century.

As such, several years ago the United Nations declared access to clean drinking water a universal human
right. Conversely, willfully denying it is considered a serious human rights violation that denies life itself. And any calculated
decision denying people their universal right to life is nothing short of a murderous, shameful crime against humanity.

Despite the human air pollution that has long been dirtying our lungs, while also causing global warming, climate change
and increasing catastrophic natural disasters, not to mention the growing global health hazard for us humans, the very
thought of making clean air a precious commodity that can opportunistically be packaged and sold by the same corporations
that have been ruining our air, that very notion would instantly be criticized, scorned and ridiculed.

Yet that is exactly what has been happening for the last thirty years now all over this planet with the earth's preciously
dwindling freshwater drinking supply. The World Bank has been financing global privatization of the earth's water supply
making clean water that is so necessary for survival an unaffordable private commodity for the poorest people on earth to
even access.

They are literally dying of thirst and disease because of greedy psychopathic corporate profiteers once again
placing theft and greed over human welfare and life itself.

But then that is the globalist agenda - thinning the human herd down from near seven billion currently to as low as just half a
billion. That means 13 out of 14 of us alive today according to their diabolical oligarch plan simply must die within the next
few years. And what better way to rapidly kill off the human population than taking full ownership and control over the earth's
limited diminishing water supply.

More people on this planet are dying presently from waterborne disease from dirty water than are dying from all wars and
violence worldwide combined. Every hour 240 babies die from unsafe water. 1.5 million children under five years of
age die every year from cholera and typhoid fever due to unsanitary water conditions.

These incredibly sad, alarming facts illustrate just how significant and critical a clean freshwater supply is to staying alive on
this planet. Taking control over the earth's clean water supply is achieved by turning water into a privately owned commodity
that only the largest corporations and banks control.

Simply making water unaffordable and thereby inaccessible to the poorest people on the planet is one extremely effective,
albeit most sinister way to reduce the so called overpopulation problem.

Three primary ways that the human population decreases significantly every year is death caused by starvation
and malnutrition (including lack of drinkable water) at between seven to eight million people, diseases that kill
between two to three million (with mounting threats of infectious diseases becoming pandemics) and upwards of
near a half million dying each year from war.

Behind closed doors oligarchic globalists periodically meet and discuss what is best for humanity and the planet according
to them and their megalomaniacal self-interests.

For many years now this all important topic of water privatization and control as a convenient and most effective means of
addressing the overpopulation problem has been regularly tabled for discussion... along with related topics like geo-
engineering, GMO's, vaccines, overuse of antibiotics, planned wars over oil and water, devising global policies designed to
increase political destabilization, poverty and undermine economies, nuclear radiation and a host of other means for culling
the human population.
Time Magazine reported how the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation has been financing research at the University of North
Carolina among 78 others to develop ultrasound infertility contraception techniques to sterilize male sperm.

At a 2010 TED conference Bill Gates spoke openly of depopulating the total of 6.8 billion people living on earth by up to "10
to 15%" using both of his heavily funded vaccine and contraception programs that will render much of the global population
infertile.

Meanwhile, billionaire Ted Turner went even further, offering his public opinion to decrease the world population by 70%
down to "two billion." It too is on tape.

Calls to begin sterilizing the human population began surfacing back in the mid-1970's with Henry Kissinger as former
Secretary of State and high ranking Bilderberg member in his declassified National Security Council document (1974)
entitled "The Implications of World-wide Population Growth on the Security and External Interests of the United States."

This document emphasized highest priority given to implementing birth control programs targeting thirteen Third World
nations mostly in South America. Extraordinary resources were allocated through the U.S. Agency for International
Development (USAID) pushing the carrot stick of additional financial aid to countries willing to enact sterilization and
depopulation programs.

More overt evidence of the callous contempt that globalist oligarchs have toward us 99%-ers is captured in a statement
written by Prince Phillip, Queen Elizabeth II's husband in the forward of his book, "I must confess that I am tempted to ask
for reincarnation as a particularly deadly virus" to reduce the human population.

It seems readily discernable that an explicit globalist agenda for a New World Order openly propagated with repeated
references by President Goerge Bush senior includes depopulation through various means, water control through
privatization just one of many in the power elite's arsenal.

Humans have been dying from lack of clean water for a long time now and will only continue dying at an even greater
frequency if the plan to privatize water continues to unfold unchecked and without opposition. Fortunately forces have been
mobilizing to combat water privatization.

Just last week on the heels of the World Bank annual convening in Washington DC for several days of conferencing, an
international coalition of anti-privatization water rights groups from India and America sent a formal message calling on the
World Bank to end its destructive practice of privatizing water around the world under the guise of developmental progress.

The Bank's DC meetings had been touting lies and disinformation in an attempt to paint a glowing report showcasing the so
called efficacy and successes that turning water rights over to the private sector have accomplished in recent years.

The World Bank's International Finance Corporation (IFC) as the planet's largest funding source for water
privatization provides loans and financing to Third World nations for private water management companies to take
charge of municipal, regional and national water rights.

The director of a global advocacy group called Corporate Accountability International, Shayda Naficy, pointed out that 75%
of expenses for running a water utility company should go to infrastructure. In nation after nation private companies have
placed the priority of making a profit over the need to invest in necessary infrastructure to connect and adequately service
water customers.

In efforts to maximize cost efficiency as well as profits, water prices invariably go up and fast become out of reach for
poorest customers. Cutting off the water supply to thousands of low income families unable to pay for their rising costs has
become the all too frequent inevitable result.

The World Bank's 34 percent failure rate for all private water and sewerage contracts between 2000 and 2010 far surpasses
its single digit failure rates in the telecommunications, energy and transportation industries.

Critics maintain that the public sector is far more accountable to its public constituents than private sector businesses that
only answer to its board of directors to show sufficient profits.
Corruption becomes commonplace. Additionally, a conflict of interest exists when the IFC acts as both a money lender and
consultant to foreign municipalities in assigning no bid contracts to favored private water utility companies.

To best illustrate typical scenarios where water privatization is either not working or already proved a failure deserve close
examination. The good news is that in recent years people in various parts of the world have been mobilizing successful
efforts and campaigns to stop water privatization in their own backyards.

Presently in a number of regions in India, citizens are banding together to confront and fight the myriad of problems with
water privatization in their country.

Recently in Nagpur, central India's largest city where the country's first municipal partnership with a private utility company is
being played out, major tensions have erupted. Three years ago the city signed a 25-year contract with Veolia Water to
supply the city of 2.7 million residents with 24 hour-7-days a week water service.

Instead unforeseen delays driving up prices manyfold along with unfair water distribution and frequent service breakdowns
have led to widespread angry protests in the streets and charges of corruption. City officials point to a series of serious
contract violations.

Again cutting corners by refusing to invest in the needed infrastructure appears to be the primary cause for this failed
project. The Corporate Accountability International's 2012 report called "Shutting the Spigot on Private Water: The Case for
the World Bank to Divest" cites a number of similar cases where privatization has proven ineffective.

Bold and empowered citizens in Bolivia in the year 2000 made headlines around the globe when they were victorious in
kicking out privatized water there in the form of the Bechtel, the fifth largest private corporation on the planet. Impassioned
protestors in Bolivia's third-largest city managed to oppose Bechtel's increasing prices and demanded that the company
abandon its hold on their city's municipal water supply, eventually driving the powerful scandalous giant out of the country.

Though big business efforts to buy and control water rights in many Latin American nations have each had their turn in
nations like Equator and Brazil, only Chile water services are privatized.

Ultimately local residents virtually everywhere privatization has attempted to take hold has been met with such strong
resistance from consumers who realize their private utility company has failed miserably in delivering quality service at
affordable prices.

The story is always the same. That is why advocacy groups like Corporate Accountability International is proactively working
toward educating governments and citizens worldwide to ensure water remains under the public domain.

The exhaustive and expensive legal process of ending long term contracts and successfully removing privatized foreign
corporations once established in a city, state or country is formidable. It is obviously in the best interests of people around
the world to ensure privatization of their water supply never gets a local foothold in the first place.

Nestl corporation's marketing campaign targeted wealthy Pakistanis in Lahore, and its brand of bottled water 'Pure Life'
became a status symbol for the rich. To bottle its product, Nestl busily dried up local underground springs that
subsequently caused the village poor unable to buy the bottled water stolen from their springs to end up consuming
contaminated water.
Nestl went on to extracting water from two deep wells in Bhati Dilwan village, forcing them to turn to bottled water. A similar
story emerged from Nigeria where a single bottled water exceeds the average daily income of a Nigerian citizen. Nestl is
notorious for draining local water supplies used to bottle its water brands, then charge unaffordable prices to the
local population whose clean water supply was stolen from them.

Corporate Watch released a report exposing some of the unethical and illegal practices that Nestl has long been
committing around the globe, completely disregarding public health concerns while destroying natural environments to
ensure huge annual profits of $35 billion just from water bottle sales alone.

In Brazil's Serra da Mantiqueira region where the groundwater is rich in mineral content containing medicinal properties,
over-pumping has depleted its valuable water resources and caused permanent damage to the natural environment. and
long-term damage.

Nestl has also allegedly been involved in human trafficking of child slave labor. A BBC investigative report claimed that:

"Hundreds of thousands of children in Mali, Burkina Faso and Togo were being purchased from their destitute
parents and shipped to the Ivory Coast to be sold as slaves to cocoa farms."

Yet Nestl likely bought the cocoa from the Ivory Coast and Ghana knowing it was produced using child slaves.

Finally, Nestl owns or leases fifty spring sites throughout America. Nestl controls a third of the domestic market for bottled
water in the US. The company is notorious for unlawful extraction of spring water while engaging in price-gouging and
reeking havoc in numerous communities.

An example of the trouble Nestl typically causes is Colorado where 80% of the citizens of Aurora were opposed to Nestl's
presence, fully aware of the company's terrible reputation for damaging communities and natural environments. Yet the city
council voted in favor 7 to 4 to let the devastation begin and over the next decade Nestl extracted 650 million gallons of
precious Arkansas River valley water that went into its Arrowhead Springs brand of bottled water.

For years the embattled townspeople of Aurora fought to rid the company predator from destroying their precious aquifers.
Additionally, the plastic non-biodegradable bottles are major pollutants that stay toxically intact for a full millennium.

Related: Profits for psychopathic corporations! Nestl CEO says water should be privatized - not a basic human
right
The cumulative grave effects of privatizing water as a global commodity are appalling. The underprivileged residents of
Jakarta, Manila and Nairobi pay 5 to 10 times more for water than those living in high-income areas of those same cities.
People living in the Third World slums even pay more for water than upscale New Yorkers and Londoners.

This kind of unfairness and inequity is obscene. Women in places in Africa where privatized water is beyond their limit walk
miles to obtain dirty water from rivers and then too often die along with their children from contamination and disease. Asian
farmers are losing their livelihoods if they are unable to receive state funded irrigation.

The human suffering caused globally by wealthy private corporations from North America and Europe exploiting people from
Third World nations for pure profit is nothing less than pure psychopathic evil.

Taking on global privatization of water for the well being and greater good of the people is but an example of the
monumental work that needs to be done. Only if informed, caring and committed human beings collectively come together
worldwide to take a global stand against this gravest of life and death issues facing humanity can this oligarch agenda be
stopped dead in its tracks.

As global human rights activists it is up to us to end the global corporate malevolence and malfeasance from further
damaging and afflicting our planet like never before.
With the recent formal finding that the western world no longer lives in a democracy but an oligarchy, as if we did not already
painfully know, it becomes even more "formally" imperative now that we as ordinary citizens of the world take the vested
interest in preserving life on our only planet before it becomes too late.

It is high time we take back our planet once and for all from the oligarchic corporatocracy bent on insidiously making our
earthly home increasingly uninhabitable for all life forms.

Mass extinction of plant and animal species that have thrived on this planet for millions of years is silently, invisibly taking
place every single day right before our eyes.

At ever-perilous stake now is our own human species as well as all living species inhabiting this earth, suffering at the hands
of national governments that have corruptly co-opted with the banking cabal-owned transnational corporations and for too
many decades been systematically destroying the richly diverse natural ecosystems of all earthly life forms on an
unprecedented scale.
Since governmental co-opting with global fortune 500 corporations has been polluting and poisoning the earth's skies, its
waters, food sources and seeds for so long, global theft and destruction has us humans and all life forms teetering now on
the brink of complete self-annihilation and extinction, human-induced for the first time on a massive never before seen scale.

It is time to hold the oligarchy in the form of corporations responsible for all the damage they have reeked on this earth.

No more grotesque "Abama-nations" of bank and Wall Street bailouts at taxpayer expense. Since the 99% in debt to the hilt
have been squeezed dry, while the 1% have made this planet nearly unlivable as the only ones filthily richly profiting from
their plundering this earth, the transnationals are the sole entities with the financial capital and means to clean up the very
mess they created.

It is only fair then that after an entire century of mucking the planet up at our expense, that they now need to finally be held
accountable for repairing the destruction they directly caused and obscenely profited from.

FLOW - For the Love of Water

Irena Salina's award-winning documentary investigation into what experts label the most important political and
environmental issue of the 21st Century - The World Water Crisis.
Salina builds a case against the growing privatization of the world's dwindling fresh water supply with an unflinching focus on
politics, pollution, human rights, and the emergence of a domineering world water cartel.

Interviews with scientists and activists intelligently reveal the rapidly building crisis, at both the global and human scale, and
the film introduces many of the governmental and corporate culprits behind the water grab, while begging the question "CAN
ANYONE REALLY OWN WATER?"

Beyond identifying the problem, FLOW also gives viewers a look at the people and institutions providing practical solutions
to the water crisis and those developing new technologies, which are fast becoming blueprints for a successful global and
economic turnaround.

Monsanto's Dirty Dozen: 12 More Crimes Against Humanity And The Environment
Concocted By The World's Most Evil Corporation
+ New Evidence About the Dangers of Monsantos Roundup
August 2 2016 | From: NaturalNews / TheIntercept

Most of the backlash today against Monsanto comes from the public's growing awareness about the
dangers of genetically-modified organisms (GMOs), Roundup (glyphosate), and the systemic
poisoning of our food supply with these unlabeled chemical additives.
But did you know that the world's most evil corporation actually got its start in the artificial sweetener business?

Related: The Complete History Of Monsanto, The Worlds Most Evil Corporation

The following 12 products we'll refer to these as Monsanto's Dirty Dozen are included among the other major crimes
against humanity besides GMOs that Monsanto has pumped out over the years for consumer use. Some of these products
will be familiar to you, but chances are you weren't aware of their Monsanto ties:

1) Saccharin (Sweet 'N Low).

Monsanto's founding was predicated on finding a way to mass produce saccharin, an artificial sugar substitute, for Coca-Cola.
With some regulatory arm-twisting, the chemical sweetener, which was shown back in the 1970s to cause cancer in test mice,
was a boon for Monsanto, despite its threat to human health, and helped propel the company towards other endeavors.

2) Aspartame (NutraSweet, Equal).

An accidental discovery that first emerged from research into chemical weaponry, aspartame, another artificial sugar
substitute, gained access to the Monsanto portfolio in 1985. Since then, Monsanto has profited to the tune of tens of billions of
dollars, the blood money from a genetically-engineered chemical that's been linked to neurological damage and cancer.
3) Glyphosate (Roundup).

Currently the world's most widely used herbicide, glyphosate is the result of Monsanto's aggressive entrance into the
agricultural sector following its sweetener successes. Monsanto's Roundup line of glyphosate products maintains a ubiquitous
presence in both the commercial and consumer markets, but these chemicals are linked to organ damage, tumors, infertility
and cancer.

4) Recombinant bovine growth hormone (rBGH).

Monsanto's obsession with genetic engineering hasn't been limited to just tweaking plants and sweeteners; the company is
also responsible for unleashing recombinant bovine growth hormone, or rBGH, a genetically-modified animal bulking chemical
that causes cows to produce more milk and grow faster. rBGH also causes serious infections, and has been linked to multiple
varieties of cancer in humans.

5) "Terminator" seeds.

When left in their natural form, plants produce an endless supply of new seeds from which humanity can grow new food for
"free" minus labor and other inputs.
But thanks to Monsanto, much of our processed food supply is now derived from so-called "terminator" seeds that only
survive one growing season before self-destructing, enriching the pockets of Monsanto executives at the expense of our
agricultural heritage.

6) Petroleum-based fertilizers.

Back in the old days, manure, compost and other organic materials served as natural fertilizer for growing food. Today, many
farmers apply synthetic, petroleum-based fertilizers produced by none other than Monsanto. Many of these fertilizers deplete
soil nutrients and microbes, producing "dead" foods deficient in vitamins and minerals foods that are making people
chronically ill at an alarming rate.

7) Agent orange.

Perhaps you're beginning to notice a pattern: Monsanto has mastered the art of producing destructive chemicals that harm
the environment and humans. And, if you're at all familiar with the history of Agent Orange, you'll also recognize that many of
today's consumer chemicals were previously wartime chemicals.
This chemical defoliant-slash-herbicide is what American soldiers sprayed across Vietnam during the Vietnam War, and
components of Agent Orange like 2,4-D are still used today in industrial agriculture.

Related: 92 children in Peru poisoned by Monsanto's Roundup after plane fumigates nearby field

8) Dioxins.

Speaking of Agent Orange, dioxins are another noxious byproduct of its manufacture. Dioxins are persistent environmental
pollutants present in all sorts of chemical compounds and solutions, and once they enter the body they accumulate in fatty
tissue, causing all sorts of chronic health issues over time.

9) DDT (dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane).

We're often told that the only way to effectively combat pests is to carpet-bomb them with chemicals like DDT, a mosquito
repellent of old that's been shown to damage hormones, interfere with reproduction and potentially cause cancer. DDT was
banned in the U.S. in 1970, despite years of propaganda from Monsanto claiming DDT was completely safe.

10) The atomic bomb and nuclear weapons.

During WWII, Monsanto acquired a chemical company that it incorporated into its "Central Research Department."
This department was responsible for coordinating the efforts of the Manhattan Project, which included the purification and
production of plutonium for nuclear weapons and the atomic bomb.

11) PCBs (polychlorinated biphenyl).

Another industrial experiment, PCBs were long used in coolant products for cars and electric motors that is, until toxicity
tests conducted some 50 years after their initial use showed serious harm to mammals. Liver disease, neurological disorders
and cancer are among the many consequences of PCB exposure.

12) Polystyrene (styrofoam).

Despite its immense environmental impact, polystyrene continues to be used in food packaging. Polystyrene contains the
toxic substances styrene and benzene, both of which are known neurotoxins and suspected carcinogens.
When exposed to hot liquids and foods, polystyrene leaches out these chemicals, which are directly absorbed into the
bloodstream and cell tissue.

New Evidence About the Dangers of Monsantos Roundup


John Sanders worked in the orange and grapefruit groves in Redlands, California, for more than 30
years. First as a ranch hand, then as a farm worker, he was responsible for keeping the weeds
around the citrus trees in check. Roundup, the Monsanto weed killer, was his weapon of choice, and
he sprayed it on the plants from a hand-held atomizer year-round.

Frank Tanner, who owned a landscaping business, is also a Californian and former Roundup user. Tanner relied on
the herbicide starting in 1974, and between 2000 and 2006 sprayed between 50 and 70 gallons of it a year, sometimes
from a backpack, other times from a 200-gallon drum that he rolled on a cart next to him.

Related: Monsanto and the Poisoning of Europe

The two men have other things in common, too: After being regularly exposed to Roundup, both developed non-Hodgkin
lymphoma, a blood cancer that starts in the lymph cells. And, as of April, both are plaintiffs in a suit filed against Monsanto
that marks a turning point in the pitched battle over the most widely used agricultural chemical in history.

Until recently, the fight over Roundup has mostly focused on its active ingredient, glyphosate.

But mounting evidence, including one study published in February, shows its not only glyphosate thats dangerous, but also
chemicals listed as inert ingredients in some formulations of Roundup and other glyphosate-based weed killers.

Though they have been in herbicides - and our environment - for decades, these chemicals have evaded scientific scrutiny
and regulation in large part because the companies that make and use them have concealed their identity as trade secrets.

Now, as environmental scientists have begun to puzzle out the mysterious chemicals sold along with glyphosate, evidence
that these so-called inert ingredients are harmful has begun to hit U.S. courts. In addition to Sanders and Tanner, at least four
people who developed non-Hodgkin lymphoma after using Roundup have sued Monsanto in recent months, citing the
dangers of both glyphosate and the co-formulants sold with it.

As Tanner and Sanderss complaint puts it: Monsanto:

Knew or should have known that Roundup is more toxic than glyphosate alone and that safety studies of
Roundup, Roundups adjuvants and inert ingredients were necessary.

Research on these chemicals seems to have played a role in the stark disagreement over glyphosates safety that has played
out on the international stage over the last year. In March 2015, using research on both glyphosate alone and the complete
formulations of Roundup and other herbicides, the World Health Organizations International Agency for Research on Cancer
(IARC) declared glyphosate a probable human carcinogen.
The IARC report noted an association between non-Hodgkin lymphoma and glyphosate, significant evidence that the
chemical caused cancer in lab animals, and strong evidence that it damaged human DNA.

Meanwhile, in November the European Food Safety Authority issued a report concluding that the active ingredient in
Roundup was unlikely to pose a carcinogenic hazard to humans. The discrepancy might be explained by the fact that the
EFSA report included only studies looking at the effects of glyphosate alone.

Another reason the agencies may have differed, according to 94 environmental health experts from around the world, is that
IARC considered only independent studies, while the EFSA report included data from unpublished industry-submitted studies,
which were cited with redacted footnotes.

On Friday, April 29, the Environmental Protection Agency weighed in - briefly - when it posted a long-awaited report on the
reregistration of glyphosate concluding that the herbicide is not likely to be carcinogenic to humans.

But the agency removed the report and 13 related documents from its website the following Monday, saying the publication
had been an error. The U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Science, Space and Technology is looking into the
EPAs apparent mishandling of the glyphosate report, and the EPA said it will release the reregistration materials by the end
of this year.

In response to queries from The Intercept, a spokesperson for the EPA wrote that the safety of all inert ingredients are
considered during the pesticide registration process, though an 87-page Cancer Assessment Document, which was among
the documents accidentally released, contains no references to research conducted on the co-formulants.
Naming the Toxins

Some European governments have already begun taking action against one of these co-formulants, a chemical
known as polyethoxylated tallowamine, or POEA, which is used in Monsantos Roundup Classic and Roundup
Original formulations, among other weed killers, to aid in penetrating the waxy surface of plants.

Related: Global Ban on Glyphosate Called for by Portuguese Medical Association President

Germany removed all herbicides containing POEA from the market in 2014, after a forestry worker who had been exposed to
it developed toxic inflammation of the lungs. In early April, the French national health and safety agency known as ANSES
took the first step toward banning products that combine glyphosate and POEA.

A draft of the European Commissions reregistration report on glyphosate proposed banning POEA. In April, the European
Parliament passed a non-binding resolution that supported the POEA ban and also suggested requiring member states to
compile a list of other co-formulants to be banned from herbicides. The European Commissions final vote on glyphosates
reregistration is expected later this month.
Related: Urine of very single member of the European Parliament tested found to be heavily contaminated with
glyphosate weed killer

In response to inquiries about POEA, Charla Marie Lord of Monsanto referred The Intercept to the companys April 8 blog
post, which noted that Monsanto has already been preparing for a gradual transition away from tallowamine to other types of
surfactants for commercial reasons. The post also said that tallowamine-based products do not pose an imminent risk for
human health when used according to instructions.

Independent scientists have been reporting since at least 1991 that pesticides containing glyphosate along with other
ingredients were more dangerous than glyphosate on its own. More recently, two papers - one published in 2002, the other in
2004 - showed that Roundup and other glyphosate-containing weed formulations were more likely to cause cell-cycle
dysregulation, a hallmark of cancer, than glyphosate alone.

In 2005, researchers showed that Roundup was more harmful to rats livers than its active ingredient by itself. And
a 2009 study showed that four formulations of Roundup were more toxic to human umbilical, embryonic, and placental cells
than glyphosate by itself.
But because manufacturers of weed killers are required to disclose only the chemical structures of their active ingredients -
and can hide the identity of the rest as confidential business information - for many years no one knew exactly what other
chemicals were in these products, let alone how they affected health.

Escaping Regulation

In 2012, Robin Mesnage decided to change that. A cellular and molecular toxicologist in London, Mesnage bought
nine herbicides containing glyphosate, including five different formulations of Roundup, and reverse engineered
some of the other components.

After studying the chemicals patterns using mass spectrometry, Mesnage and his colleagues came up with a list of possible
molecular structures and then compared them with available chemical samples.

It took around one year and three people (a specialist in pesticide toxicology, a specialist of chemical mixtures,
and a specialist in mass spectrometry) to unravel the secrets of Monsantos Roundup formulations, Mesnage
explained in an email.

The hard work paid off. In 2013, his team was able not only to deduce the chemical structure of additives in six of the nine
formulations but also to show that each of these supposedly inert ingredients was more toxic than glyphosate alone.
That breakthrough helped scientists know exactly which
chemicals to study, though obtaining samples remains
challenging.

"It took around one year and three people (a


specialist in pesticide toxicology, a specialist of
chemical mixtures, and a specialist in mass
spectrometry) to unravel the secrets of Monsantos
Roundup formulations, Mesnage explained in an
email.

We still cant get them to make experiments, said


Nicolas Defarge, a molecular biologist based in
Paris.

Manufacturers of co-formulants are unwilling tosell


you anything if you are not a pesticide manufacturer,
and even less if you are a scientist willing to assess
their toxicity.

So when Defarge, Mesnage, and five other scientists


embarked on their most recent research, they had to be
creative. They were able to buy six weed killers, including
Roundup WeatherMax and Roundup Classic, at the store.
But, finding pure samples of the co-formulants in them was
trickier.

The scientists got one from a farmer who mixes his own
herbicide. For another, they went to a company that uses the
chemical to make soap.
The multi-Academy Award nominated 2007 film "Michael
Clayton" revolves around a lawyer for a large law firm
working on a multi-billion dollar class action law suit for a
giant agricultural chemical company that he knows is guilty.
"They were of course not aware that I was going to
Unorth has a logo with some very similar design emelents assess it for toxic and endocrine-disrupting
to those of the Monsanto logo. effects, said Defarge.

Andrs Szkcs, one of Defarges co-authors who is based


in Hungary, provided samples of the other three co-
formulants studied, but didnt respond to inquiries about how
he obtained them.

In February, the team published its findings, which showed


that each of the five co-formulants affected the function of
both the mitochondria in human placental cells and
aromatase, an enzyme that affects sexual development.

Not only did these chemicals, which arent named on


herbicide labels, affect biological functions, they did so at
levels far below the concentrations used in commercially
available products.
In fact, POEA - officially an inert ingredient - was between 1,200 and 2,000 times more toxic to cells than glyphosate,
officially the active ingredient.

The paper highlights the folly of letting co-formulants fly under the regulatory radar. Although the general public is never
exposed to pure glyphosate, government agencies set safe exposure levels for the declared active ingredient in Roundup and
other herbicides without considering POEA or any of the other chemicals that are bottled with it.

Take a look at this fictional advertisement for "Unorth" from the film Michael Clayton and tell us it doesn't look like a
Monsanto advertisement. If you take the time to watch Michael Clayton it's pretty clear that the movie is a dig at big
biotech.

Related: GMO and Toxic Chemicals: Monsanto Is Feeding the World

In February, the Food and Drug Administration announced plans to monitor food for glyphosate residue. But the agency has
no plan to test food for POEA or other additives, according to FDA press officer Lauren Sucher. And the EPA hasnt focused
squarely on POEA because it isnt officially an active ingredient.

Evidence of Toxicity

But the EPA has possessed evidence of POEAs toxicity for years, including several reports of substantial risk to
human health and the environment. One, submitted in 1998, noted that 1,000 fish died after 60 gallons of a mixture of
chemicals including POEA spilled into a ditch, according to the company responsible for the spill, whose name is
redacted in the document.

Related: Group of Nebraska Farmers Files Lawsuit Against Monsanto Claiming RoundUp Gave Them All Cancer

Another report, filed by the chemical company BASF in 2013, noted that several rats that inhaled POEA in an experiment
died. Researchers exposed rats to four different levels of the chemical, and at each level, at least some animals were killed.
Even at the lowest level, 4 out of 10 rats died.

The EPA has also reviewed the long-term environmental effects of POEA, including its impact on frogs. In 2008, the
agency reviewed the effects of both POEA-containing Roundup formulations and POEA itself on fish and amphibians,
and showed that Roundup Original, which has 15 percent POEA, is moderately toxic to wood frogs and that POEA itself is
highly toxic to rainbow trout.

As evidence of the harms of co-formulants has been building, the U.S. has increased the amount of glyphosate to which it is
theoretically safe to be exposed, which has in turn also increased our actual exposure to the chemicals it is packaged with.
Almost 300 million pounds of glyphosate was used on crops in the U.S. in 2013, up from approximately 16 million pounds in
1992, according to the U.S. Geological Survey.

For the lawyers litigating the cases against Monsanto, the idea that POEA and the other ingredients contribute to the toxicity
of Roundup is critical.
Thats one of the central theories of our case, said David Wool, an attorney at Andrus Wagstaff, who is working
on suits against Monsanto on behalf of four people who developed non-Hodgkin lymphoma after years of regularly
using Roundup.

Its not only that glyphosate is carcinogenic and dangerous, said Wool. Monsanto had every reason to know that,
by including POEA, it increased the danger of all of these products.

Robin Greenwald, the Weitz & Luxenberg attorney who filed Sanders and Tanners case, is confident that discovery, which
will begin over the next few months, will show that Monsanto intentionally mislabeled dangerous co-formulants.

My assumption is that we will find documents in their files that show they had ample evidence that the surfactants
were not inert and that they too had the potential to cause illness in people, said Greenwald.

But for her client, John Sanders, who is now in remission after undergoing chemotherapy, it doesnt really matter which
chemical did what. When he was using Roundup, Sanders had no idea that anything in the liquid that sometimes dripped on
his clothes and skin might cause cancer. That was never in my wildest dreams, he said recently. Now Sanders, who is 67,
dreams about staying healthy. He is due for a CT scan next month to see if his cancer has returned.

When asked to comment on the lawsuits, Monsanto provided the following statement:
While we have sympathy for the plaintiffs, the science simply does not support the claims made in these lawsuits.

The U.S. EPA and other pesticide regulators around the world have reviewed numerous long-term carcinogenicity
studies and agree that there is no evidence that glyphosate causes cancer, even at very high doses.

Surfactants such as tallowamines are soapy substances that help to reduce surface tension of the water and are
found in many everyday products such as toothpaste, deodorant, shampoo, detergent and many other cleaning
products.

Tallowamine-based products do not pose an imminent risk for human health when used according to instructions.
In a 2009 review of toxicological data on tallowamine, the U.S. EPA found no evidence that tallowamines are
neurotoxic, mutagenic or clastogenic."

Related Articles:

Putin Closes The Door To Monsanto

Canadian govt. accused of covering up adverse effects of glyphosate after firing top health official researching
Monsanto herbicide

Nebraska farmers diagnosed with cancer are suing Monsanto over glyphosate

Glyphosate weed killer unleashes grotesque chemical deformations in farm animals... two-headed calves, pigs
born with no skin, twisted life forms seem spawned from Hell

Claim That New Zealand Uses Safe Vaccines - A Sick Joke


August 1 2016 | From: GANZ

A recent statement by Dr. Nicky Turner that New Zealand uses only safe vaccines is surely a
sick joke! Considering the number of young women who have either died or become very ill
following HPV vaccinations, Dr. Turner claim that New Zealand uses safe vaccines doesnt stand
up to close examination.
I can only assume that Dr. Turners idea of a safe vaccine is very different from that of the average parent or even
a normal person. Most parents expect vaccines to protect their childrens health, not to cause serious illness or
even possibly death.

Related: Pharmacist Speaks Out: Get Off Prescription Drugs, Avoid Vaccines

An increasing number of scientific studies have linked HPV vaccines with serious adverse effects and provide a scientific
explanation why some previously healthy HPV vaccine recipients have died unexpectedly after receiving the shot.

Dr. Nicky Turner made the highly dubious claim that NZ uses safe vaccines that make a dramatic difference to childrens
lives when she was responding to comments about measles and MMR vaccination made by Katherine Smith from No
Forced Vaccines on Radio NZs Morning Report on May 17.

Dr Turner is frequently interviewed about vaccines as a spokeswoman for the Immunisation Advisory Centre, an
organisation that receives funding from both the Ministry of Health and pharmaceutical companies that distribute vaccines in
New Zealand.

Listen to Katherine Smith's interview here.

The Radio New Zealand interviewer herself deserves a brick bat, in my opinion. The audible intakes of breath here and
there were indicative of a self-imposed censorship on what Katherine Smith was attempting to get across. Totally
unprofessional!
I have to ask myself whether she had in fact down any research on the topic prior to having Katherine on air! I highly doubt
it, otherwise she may well have been able to pose thought-provoking questions that could actually take the discussion
somewhere! Perhaps she might like to take the time to read the actual Lancet paper By Dr Andrew Wakefield!

Read the Lancet paper here.

Under the Bill of Rights, you are required by law to receive informed consent prior to vaccination. That means your health
practitioner MUST provide disclosure of risk vs benefits. No one has the right to make that decision for you or to coerce
you!

The information in the Medsafe data sheet ought to read by everyone. Don't rely on the handouts that are sent out through
schools or lay in bundles in the doctor's waiting rooms ... if your doctor won't give you the full product data insert, just
Google it!
New Zealand families that have been adversely affected by HPV vaccines are planning rallies as part of a global protest
about the continuing promotion of HPV vaccines as safe by the pharmaceutical industry and some doctors, despite the
mounting toll of serious adverse reactions and deaths following HPV vaccinations.

Educate yourself, educate your children ... stop being led like lambs to the slaughter, and stop listening to those who would
no longer have a high paying job and a significant media presence (denied to those fighting vaccines in all forms!) if
vaccines were official disputed for what they truly are!

Related Articles:
Vaccination: How Dare You Cripple, Maim And Murder The Minds Of Our Children!

Silent Epidemic - The Untold Story of Vaccines

The Spanish Influenza Epidemic Of 1918 Was Caused By Vaccinations

Dangerous Molecules Detected In E-Cigarettes Which May Make Them More Harmful
Than The Real Thing
July 29 2016 | From: PreventDisease

Penn State College of Medicine researchers have found that electronic cigarettes produce highly-
reactive free radicals - molecules associated with cell damage and cancer - and may pose a health
risk comparable or worse than conventional cigarettes.
The use of e-cigarettes is on the rise but research into the effects of e-cigarettes lags behind their popularity.

The number of teens and tweens using these products doubled between 2011 and 2012. According to the Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention, more than 20 percent of young adults have tried e-cigarettes, and current smokers and
recent former smokers are most likely to have used them.

E-cigarettes deliver nicotine in water vapor instead of by burning tobacco. The battery-operated devices have been
marketed as an alternative to traditional cigarettes. They look like the real thing. The end glows as you inhale. As you
exhale, you puff out a cloud of what looks like smoke.

But we know very little about the toxic substances produced by e-cigarettes and their health effects. More evidence coming
forward may ultimately validate that e-cigarettes may be more dangerous than regular cigarettes, potentially causing cancer
at comparable and possible faster rates depending on the chemicals used.

E-cigarettes have triggered a fierce debate among health experts who share the same goal -- reducing the disease and
death caused by tobacco. However, many now claim they are not so safe after all.
Theres a perception that e-cigarettes are healthier than regular cigarettes, or at least not as harmful as regular
cigarettes, said John P. Richie Jr., professor of public health sciences and pharmacology.

While e-cigarette vapor does not contain many of the toxic substances that are known to be present in cigarette
smoke, its still important for us to figure out and to minimize the potential dangers that are associated with e-
cigarettes.

Previous studies have found low levels of aldehydes, chemical compounds that can cause oxidative stress and cell damage,
in e-cigarette smoke. But until now, no one has looked for free radicals, the main source of oxidative stress from cigarette
smoke. Highly reactive free radicals are a leading culprit in smoking-related cancer, cardiovascular disease and chronic
obstructive pulmonary disease.

Instead of smoke, e-cigarettes produce aerosols, tiny liquid particles suspended in a puff of air. The researchers measured
free radicals in e-cigarette aerosols.

They found that e-cigarettes produce high levels of highly reactive free radicals that fall in the range of 1,000- to 100-times
less than levels in regular cigarettes. Nanotechnology is also being implemeted to produced some of the chemicals involved
in their manufacturing.

This is the first study that demonstrates the fact that we have these highly reactive agents in e-cigarette
aerosols, Richie said. Results were published in the journal Chemical Research in Toxicology.

The levels of radicals that were seeing are more than what you might get from a heavily air-polluted area but less
than what you might find in cigarette smoke, Richie said.

The radicals are produced when the devices heating coil heats the nicotine solution to very high temperatures.
Further research is needed to determine the health effects of highly reactive free radicals from e-cigarettes.

This is the first step, Richie said. The identification of these radicals in the aerosols means that we cant just say
e-cigarettes are safe because they dont contain tobacco. They are potentially harmful. Now we have to find out
what the harmful effects are.

Richie is currently conducting studies to carefully measure total numbers of free radicals in e-cigarette aerosols
and to identify their chemical structures.

That will help us interpret the data better to know how dangerous they are, he said.

Some experts are comparing replacing tobacco with e-cigarettes to heroin users switching to the painkiller methadone. The
replacement may have its own risks, but is it safer, probably not.

Related: The Dangers of Nanotechnology

A Generation Of Poisoning With Gender-Bender Chemicals Has Created A New Class


Of Youth Who Fail To Recognize Gender At All
July 27 2016 | From: NaturalNews

The success of the globalists in perverting the minds of Western youth is evident in a new study
by the Innovation Group, which found that most people between the ages of 13 and 20 what the
mainstream media and social engineers have dubbed "Generation Z" no longer believe in
strictly-defined gender identities like "male" and "female."
These gender "binaries," which are really just the pronouns humanity has been using since the beginning of time
to differentiate between individuals with external reproductive equipment versus internal reproductive equipment,
are now "old-fashioned" to the youth of today, which the study found are more comfortable than previous
generations using gender-neutral (and grammatically incorrect) pronouns like "they" and "them" to describe a
single, genderless individual.

A majority of Gen-Z respondents, 52 percent, indicated that they aren't completely heterosexual, while 35 percent an 11
percent increase compared to "Millennials" admit that they fall somewhere along the spectrum of bisexuality. This
spectrum identification for sexuality is further reflected in the more than 38 percent of Gen-Zers who claim they don't believe
gender defines a person.

As far as the types of clothes and accessories they buy, 1320 year-olds are much more fluid when it comes to sticking to a
gender norm. Only 44 percent of Gen-Zers buy clothes exclusively designed for their own gender, while an astounding 70
percent say they support the idea that bathrooms become "genderless," welcoming anyone and everyone who wants to use
them.
Gen-Z is likewise more accepting of others who don't identify by any specific gender pronoun, or who identify by "non-
traditional" gender pronouns like "ze;" 74 percent of Gen-Zers fall into this category compared to just 62 percent of older
Millennials between the ages of 2134. But the one thing on which both Gen-Zers and Millennials agree? More people than
ever are experimenting with their gender identity.

A 16-year-old pansexual (genderless) student from Nebraska by the name of "Madeleine" told VICE that "it" (for lack of a
better pronoun) learned more about gender and identity from its peers than from older people, and that "agender," or no
gender at all, is a young people's phenomenon.

"I also notice that people my age are more open to gender and sexuality being fluid and subject to change," Madeleine
told VICE. "For a while, I identified as asexual, but as time went on and I changed, I realized that maybe I wasn't that way
anymore."

Endocrine-Disrupting Chemicals are Eliminating Sex, Gender


This lack of clarity about biological identity is a product of two things: relentless media propaganda and chemical poisoning
with gender-bending chemicals found in plastics, herbicides and pesticides sprayed on our food, and environmental
pollution. Chemicals like bisphenol-A (BPA), glyphosate, soy and other hormone-disruptors are altering human genes and
producing next-generation "robot" humans with no gender, and thus no identity.
It's sad, really, because it could have been prevented through reforms that protect the people rather than the chemical and
drug industries that produce these toxins. Food, water, air: It's all tainted with endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs) that,
more often than not, mimic the effects of estrogen, meaning they deplete testosterone and create hormone imbalances that
not only confuse children, but also affect their growth and development.

Young girls are becoming more "masculine," while young boys are becoming more "feminine" an alchemy of the two
sexes both physically and mentally that's changing the landscape of culture and civilization.

We've identified many sources of EDCs through our ongoing work at the Natural News Forensics Food Lab, which I
encourage you to check out in order to learn more.

Why Does New Zealand Still Fluoridate? TV Commercial From FFNZ


July 25 2016 | From: VinnyEastwood

Why Does NZ Still Fluoridate?


TV Commercial FFNZ

Five Astonishing Facts That Will Make You Want To Stop Using Plastic Containers For
Good
July 24 2016 | From: NaturalNews

There are plenty of good reasons to stop using plastic containers, ranging from health and
environmental concerns, to simple practicality in the kitchen.
Considering the facts, there's really no good reason to continue buying products packed or bottled in plastic, or to
use plastic containers for food storage at home except when there are no other options available.

The founder Sharon Tennison has focused on making people-people connections including the business community, Rotary
clubs, etc..This delegation was organized because of concern about escalating international tensions and the danger of a
drift toward world threatening military conflict.

We were in Russia in late June as they were commemorating the 75th anniversary of the Nazi invasion of the Soviet Union.

Here are the top five facts regarding plastic versus glass:

Fact #1: The environmental impact of plastic is enormous Enough plastic is discarded each year to circle the Earth four
times, and the average American throws away nearly 200 pounds of plastic each year. Billions of pounds of plastic are
polluting our oceans and threatening marine life, killing 1 million sea birds and 100,000 marine animals annually. Fifty
percent of plastic containers are used once and then thrown away.

Fact #2: Plastics are a threat to human health Chemicals leached from plastic containers enter our bodies and can lead
to serious health issues. Many of the substances used to make plastic are carcinogens, while others cause hormonal
imbalances, birth defects and developmental problems. Plastics often contain lead, cadmium and mercury, which can be
absorbed by the food or drinks they are used to contain and subsequently end up in our bodies.
Fact #3: Glass is better for the environment Glass containers can be used many times and can be recycled to make
new containers. Plastic containers are "down-cycled" instead. In other words, when you throw away a plastic bottle it will be
turned into other products (if it manages to get recycled at all). Every time you buy a plastic water bottle, it is made from
"new" plastic.

Fact #4: Glass is more practical in the kitchen One of the best things about glass containers is that they can be used
for storage, cooking and serving. The same glass food container can be used from the refrigerator to the oven to the dining
table. Glass containers can be used over and over again, and can be repurposed for other uses. If you buy a glass bottle
containing pasta sauce or juice, for instance, it can be washed and used for storing other foods once its contents are
consumed.
Fact #5: Glass does not absorb smells or colors Plastic containers not only leach dangerous chemicals into food, but
they also absorb smells and can become discolored. Glass containers, on the other hand, do not have this problem. Glass
containers are more aesthetically pleasing as well.

Kicking the Plastic Habit

Of course, it's nearly impossible to avoid all plastic packaging, but it's relatively easy to significantly reduce the amount of
plastic bags, bottles and containers you buy or use.

Many products, such as bottled water for example, are available in glass containers as well as plastic. If you buy your food
fresh from local sources which you should do anyway you can often avoid any packaging at all.

A number of foods are also available in bulk form, meaning that you can use your own recyclable containers to carry and
store them. It's easy to bring your own bags for shopping so that you don't have to use more plastic bags every time you go
to the supermarket.
Reducing your "plastic footprint" isn't difficult at all once you begin to become aware and start looking for alternatives. In fact,
you may be amazed at how much plastic packaging you can actually avoid using once you begin changing your habits.

Many of the things plastics are used for are completely unnecessary, so why not do yourself and the environment a big favor
and start kicking your plastic addiction today?

The Gloves Come Off On EMF / Mobile / WiFi Radiation + Understanding The Dangers
Of The 5G Rollout
July 20 2016 | From: TakeBackYourPower

If you care about your health, your children, your pets, your environment it is imperative that you
understand the implications of this freight train that is headed down the tracks.
I hope you get the same chills down your spine I get when you read this and are compelled to take swift action!

After reading this post, get informed about the electronic soup we are all frying in. Watch what 18 world class experts are
sharing on the EMF summit.

Untested 28GHz radiation blasting from millions of new hidden antennas and tuned-up "smart" meters. A corporate free-for-
all, with oversight eliminated. Total, for-profit surveillance. An "internet of everything" with "hundreds of billions of
microchippable products". Everywhere and everything... and eventually, everyone.

This is not sci-fi. This is FCC Commissioner Tom Wheeler's insane new plan, slickly badged as "5G". The US government's
own NTP cancer study inconveniently concluded that yes - cellular radiation DOES increase cancer. Now, the industy-
lobbyist-turned-government-czar gave an uber-creepy speech invoking technocracy's endgame with a stomach-churning
sense of urgency.

Check out Wheeler's creepy speech for yourself, here. He stammers through it like a man mostly-possessed. This is
desperation on their part. They know full well that the next phase of the megalomanic rollout needs to happen before the
SHTF for them, and the tipping point is reached in terms of a convergent awareness of wireless health / surveillance /
technocratic insanity- and their liability.

So let's engage and make some noise. Your voice is needed today. This plan is being fast-tracked & voted on tomorrow,
Thursday July 14. Let the FCC and this government know that if they do not listen to science and reason, they will be held
accountable and liable for their actions. Money is not only their god - it's their language.
Speak up and stop 5G now.

This one is heavy. Hang in there. It is darkest before the dawn. But in the night, act we must.

So it's handy when you contact the FCC & reps, here once again is a list of science-based resources:

1) 34 Scientific Studies Showing Adverse Health Effects From Wi-Fi

2) Several thousand studies that indicate a biological effect and/or harm:

PowerWatch

JustProveIt

RMFportal

StopSmartMeters

3) Radiofrequency science charts to visually compare studies, radiation intensities and biological effects

4) Apple manual states to keep your iPhone away from your body at all times

5) Study: Mobile phones are cooking men's sperm

6) Brain surgeon Dr Charlie Teo warns against mobiles, wireless home appliances

7) American Academy of Pediatrics warns: Limit children's exposure to cellphones

8) More than 60 international warnings on Wi-Fi and microwave radiation

9) A List of Teacher Unions and Parent Teacher Organizations Taking Action On Wi-Fi (USA, Canada, UK, etc).

10) TED Talk from a former Environmental Engineer in Silicon Valley


11) Insurance giant Swiss RE has given electromagnetic frequencies the HIGHEST possible long term risk rating

12) Another insurance giant, Lloyd's of London, will not insure anything wireless

13) Risk Management Magazine - The Invisible Threat: Radiofrequency Radiation Risk

14) US CDC retracts cellphone radiation warning following pressure from industry lobbyists

15) WHO involved in suppression of additional science showing harm, since 2011

16) Study Uncovers How Electromagnetic Fields Amplify Pain in Amputees

17) CEO of 1 Billion-dollar U.K. company speaks out on microwave sickness

18) Dozens of specific scientific abstracts that all show harm

19) Solutions: Reducing Wirelesss Radiation and EMF

20) Solutions: Reducing Your EMF Exposure

21) Cell Phone Radiation Boosts Cancer Rates in Animals; $25 Million NTP Study Finds Brain Tumors
This is so important and you need to understand it and protect yourself, your family, and your pets. Create a safe
environment and use technology wisely!

Update: July 14, 2016

Theres no stopping this freight train.

In a unanimous vote this morning, the Federal Communications Commission approved a plan to begin readying the United
States for 5G wireless networks.

Its the biggest expansion yet and will make many more people ill!

Now more than ever you need to know how to best protect yourself and your family using technology wisely. Get informed!

The Sugar Conspiracy - Professor John Yudkin: The Man Who Tried To Warn Us
About Sugar
July 9 2016 | From: TheGuardian / TheTelegraph

In 1972, a British scientist sounded the alarm that sugar and not fat was the greatest danger to
our health. But his findings were ridiculed and his reputation ruined. How did the worlds top
nutrition scientists get it so wrong for so long?
Robert Lustig is a paediatric endocrinologist at the University of California who specialises in the treatment of
childhood obesity. A 90-minute talk he gave in 2009, titled Sugar: The Bitter Truth, has now been viewed more than
six million times on YouTube. In it, Lustig argues forcefully that fructose, a form of sugar ubiquitous in modern
diets, is a poison culpable for Americas obesity epidemic.

A year or so before the video was posted, Lustig gave a similar talk to a conference of biochemists in Adelaide, Australia.
Afterwards, a scientist in the audience approached him. Surely, the man said, youve read Yudkin. Lustig shook his head.
John Yudkin, said the scientist, was a British professor of nutrition who had sounded the alarm on sugar back in 1972, in a
book called Pure, White, and Deadly.

"If only a small fraction of what we know about the effects of sugar were to be revealed in relation to any other
material used as a food additive, wrote Yudkin, that material would promptly be banned.

The book did well, but Yudkin paid a high price for it. Prominent nutritionists combined with the food industry to destroy his
reputation, and his career never recovered. He died, in 1995, a disappointed, largely forgotten man.

Perhaps the Australian scientist intended a friendly warning. Lustig was certainly putting his academic reputation at risk
when he embarked on a high-profile campaign against sugar. But, unlike Yudkin, Lustig is backed by a prevailing wind. We
read almost every week of new research into the deleterious effects of sugar on our bodies.

In the US, the latest edition of the governments official dietary guidelines includes a cap on sugar consumption. In the UK,
the chancellor George Osborne has announced a new tax on sugary drinks.

Sugar has become dietary enemy number one.


This represents a dramatic shift in priority. For at least the last three decades, the dietary arch-villain has been saturated fat.
When Yudkin was conducting his research into the effects of sugar, in the 1960s, a new nutritional orthodoxy was in the
process of asserting itself. Its central tenet was that a healthy diet is a low-fat diet.

Yudkin led a diminishing band of dissenters who believed that sugar, not fat, was the more likely cause of maladies such as
obesity, heart disease and diabetes. But by the time he wrote his book, the commanding heights of the field had been
seized by proponents of the fat hypothesis. Yudkin found himself fighting a rearguard action, and he was defeated.

Not just defeated, in fact, but buried. When Lustig returned to California, he searched for Pure, White and Deadly in
bookstores and online, to no avail. Eventually, he tracked down a copy after submitting a request to his university library. On
reading Yudkins introduction, he felt a shock of recognition.

"Holy crap, Lustig thought. This guy got there 35 years before me.

You can continue reading this article here - but be warned that it does go off on the tangent that saturated fats are also
bad for you which is also mainstrame propaganda that has been proven wrong:

9 Lies About Fat That Destroyed The World's Health

Your Body Is Electrical And Runs On Electrons NOT Sugar, Protein Or Fat!

Even though the medical establishment are still trtying to quash this new development:

Low-Carbohydrate, High Fat Diet Advice Questioned

Indeed the following article is on the same topic, and while it is correct about sugar, as the preceeding article is, it too
contains red herrings about saturated fats:

John Yudkin: the man who tried to warn us about sugar


The Truth About Mobile Phone And Wireless Radiation: What We Know, What We
Need To Find Out, And What You Can Do Now
July 5 2016 | From: UniversityOfMelbourne

Deans Lecture: Presented by Dr Devra Davis, Visiting Professor of Medicine at the Hebrew
University Hadassah Medical School, and Visiting Professor of Medicine at Ondokuz Mayis
University, Turkey.

What are the health effects of mobile phones and wireless radiation? While Australia has led the world in safety
standards, including compulsory seat-belt legislation, plain packaging on cigarettes, and product and food
disclosure legislation, it falls behind in addressing the significant issues associated with mobile phone use.

In this Deans Lecture, epidemiologist and electromagnetic radiation expert, Dr Devra Davis, will outline the evolution of the
mobile phone and smartphone, and provide a background to the current 19 year old radiation safety standards (SAR), policy
developments and international legislation. New global studies on the health consequences of mobile/wireless radiation will
be presented, including childrens exposure and risks.

Dr Devra Davis is an internationally recognised expert on electromagnetic radiation from mobile phones and other wireless
transmitting devices.

She is currently the Visiting Professor of Medicine at the Hebrew University Hadassah Medical School, and Visiting
Professor of Medicine at Ondokuz Mayis University, Turkey. Dr Davis was Founding Director of the Center for
Environmental Oncology at The University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute - the first institute of its kind in the world, to
examine the environmental factors that contribute to the majority of cases of cancer.

In 2007, Dr Devra Davis founded nonprofit Environmental Health Trust to provide basic research and education about
environmental health hazards. Dr Davis served as the President Clinton appointee to the Chemical Safety and Hazard
Investigation Board in the U.S.A. from 1994 -1999, an independent executive branch agency that investigates, prevents and
mitigates chemical accidents.
As the former Senior Advisor to the Assistant Secretary for Health in the Department of Health and Human Services, she
has counseled leading officials in the United States, United Nations, European Environment Agency, Pan American Health
Organization, World Health Organization, and World Bank.Dr Davis holds a B.S. in physiological psychology and an M.A. in
sociology from the University of Pittsburgh, 1967. She completed a PhD in science studies at the University of Chicago as a

Danforth Foundation Graduate Fellow, 1972 and a M.P.H. in epidemiology at the Johns Hopkins University as a Senior
National Cancer Institute Post-Doctoral Fellow, 1982. She has authored more than 200 publications and has been published
in Lancet and Journal of the American Medical Association as well as the Scientific American and the New York Times.

These Light Bulbs Cause Anxiety, Migraines, And Even Cancer


June 28 2016 | From: TMZ

In order to save money and energy, a lot of people replaced their old standard light bulbs with eco
-friendly new generation energy- saving light bulbs. Nevertheless, these energy- efficient bulbs are
extremely toxic.
According to a study conducted by researchers from the Fraunhofer Wilhelm Klauditz Institute for Germans
Federal Environment Agency, if broken indoors, these light bulbs release 20 times the maximum acceptable
mercury concentration in the air.

It was very astounding how the majority of the British people were able to figure out the fact that its too absurd to kill
someone from the other side when your position is winning in all the surveys, independent or otherwise.

Consequently, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency created an emergency protocol you need to follow in the event of
a bulb breakage, due to the poison gas that is released.

Moreover, these light bulbs have a number of negative effects for our health, including:

Anxiety

Fatigue

Migraines

Cluster headaches

Dizziness

Seizures

Inability to concentrate

Here are some more reasons to avoid these light bulbs and go back to incandescent bulbs.

Energy Saving Bulbs Contain Mercury

As previously stated, these energy- saving light bulbs contain mercury, which is a potent neurotoxin that is especially
dangerous to children and pregnant women. It is especially toxic to the brain, the nervous system, the liver and the kidneys,
and it can also damage the reproductive, cardiovascular and immune system. Furthermore, mercury can cause anxiety,
insomnia, memory loss, headaches, tremors, cancer and Alzheimers.

Energy Saving Light Bulbs Emit a Lot of UV Rays


It is generally recognized that UV-radiation is harmful for the eyes and the skin, as it can lead to skin cancer. These energy
saving lamps emit UV-B and traces of UV-C radiation.

This radiation directly attacks the immune system, and furthermore damages the skin tissues enough to prevent the proper
formation of vitamin D-3.

Energy Saving Bulbs Can Cause Cancer

The study by Peter Braun at Berlin Germanys Alab Laboratory discovered that these light bulbs contain poisonous
carcinogens that could cause cancer, such as:

Naphthalene, a volatile white crystalline compound, produced by the distillation of coal tar, used in mothballs and
as a raw material for chemical manufacture.

Styrene, an unsaturated liquid hydrocarbon, obtained as a petroleum byproduct.

Phenol, a mildly acidic toxic white crystalline solid, obtained from coal tar and used in chemical manufacture.
Hence, apart from the saving in energy and finances, these light bulbs pose serious health risks. Therefore, it
would be wise to change back to regular incandescent bulbs, but be careful in doing so as well- since if one
happens to break, the dangers are so severe.

The Environmental Protection Agency has laid out a very detailed protocol to deal with the mercury and cancer-causing
chemicals in these cases, which suggests as follows:
In the event of a bulb breakage, due to the poison gas that is released, you should follow this emergency procedure.
Before Cleanup

People and pets should leave the room.

Open a window or door to the outdoor environment to air out the room for 5-10 minutes

If you have a central forced air heating or air conditioning system, shut it off

Collect materials needed to clean up the broken bulb

Damp paper towels or disposable wet wipes (for hard surfaces)

A glass jar with a metal lid or a sealable plastic bag

Stiff paper or cardboard

Sticky tape

During Cleanup

Do not vacuum as it could spread mercury-containing powder or mercury vapor, unless broken glass remains after all
other cleanup steps have been taken.

Be thorough in collecting broken glass and visible powder, scoop up glass fragments and powder using stiff paper or
cardboard.

Pick up any remaining small glass fragments and powder with a sticky tape, such as duct tape. Place the used tape in the
glass jar or plastic bag.

Place cleanup materials in a sealable container.

After Cleanup
After cleanup, avoid leaving any bulb fragments or cleanup materials indoors, and promptly place all of them, including
vacuum cleaner bags, outdoors in a trash container or protected area until materials can be disposed of.

Moreover, check with your local government about disposal requirements in your area, and if there is no such requirement
in your area, you can dispose of the materials with your household trash. However, some localities require fluorescent bulbs
(broken or unbroken) be taken to a local recycling center.

Furthermore, you should continue to air out the room where the bulb was broken and leave the heating/air conditioning
system shut off for several hours afterwards.

Are Nanoparticles Engineered Into GM Foods Causing Cancer?


June 26 2016 | From: WakingTimes

In modern agriculture, it is not possible to only spray weeds without spraying soy and corn crops.
Glyphosate is therefore genetically modified (GM) to kill only weeds while at the same time
enhancing the growth of crops.

However, glyphosate does not readily penetrate the leaves of weeds and crops, and therefore is mixed with
adjuvants that aid leaf penetration. For decades, nano particles (NPs) and specifically carbon nano tubes (CNTs)
that readily penetrate leaves have been used as adjuvants allowing glyphosate to be carried to plant roots for more
efficient absorption.

Related: Breast cancer survivor credits exercise and a raw food diet for her miraculous recovery

Upon human consumption of GM foods, most glyphosate and included NPs are rapidly excreted, but residues remain in the
human gut. Indeed, the important question of NPs in GM foods is the same as that of nanotechnology in general: Do NPs
contribute to the wide range of health problems?

Donald Huber, the prominent critic of GM foods claims soil-borne plant pathogens are produced that do indeed harm human
health, e.g., residents living close to sprayed GM soybeans fields in Argentina developed cancers and birth defects.

However, GM food proponents argue science is still looking for, but not found Hubers pathogen to establish the causal link
between glyphosate and human health problems.
Regardless, the question remains: Is there a causal link between NPs in GM foods and human health?

Background

In 2013, Waking Times published an article on how the food industry is poisoning the very consumers who drive their multi-
billion dollar enterprises, even spending millions against the consumers right to informed consent, i.e., truthful GMO
labeling.

Although a causal link between GM foods and cancer is not made, titanium dioxide NPs common in GM food are cited to
proliferate epithelial cells of the gut and induce tumor-like changes common to cancer.

The Problem

Today, the problem is the effect of GM foods on human health is focused almost entirely on arguments as to whether
Hubers pathogen exists, instead of identifying the mechanism by which residues of NPs in glyphosate cause cancer by
damaging human DNA. Only then would a causal link between GM foods and human health be biologically plausible.

Proposal

The causal link between ingested GM foods and human health is proposed to be the DNA damage by UV radiation from
NPs in glyphosate residues in the gut. Today, only UV radiation from the sun on exposed human skin is known to cause
cancer, but the gut is hidden from solar UV.

How then do NPs in GM food produce UV radiation?


Currently, damage to human DNA by UV radiation from NPs has not been recognized because classical physics always
allows the atoms in NP to have the heat capacity to conserve heat from the gut by a slight increase in temperature, a
consequence with insignificant DNA damage.

Hence, DNA is now thought damaged upon direct contact with the NP material, but this notion can be dismissed as
chemically inert NPs are also known to damage the DNA.

Quantum mechanics (QM) differs from classical physics by allowing electromagnetic (EM) radiation to be created in NPs.
Unlike classical physics, QM requires the atoms in NPs to have vanishing heat capacity and therefore NP temperatures
cannot increase upon absorbing heat in the gut.

Instead, the NPs conserve heat by emitting EM radiation that causes the DNA damage, and if not repaired may lead to
cancer. Similarity is found with ovarian cancer from NPs in talcum powder products used in cleaning genital areas.

Discussion

Vanishing heat capacity of the atom by QM is not new, but the consequence of the Planck law was formulated over a
century ago. For heat capacity to vanish, however, the NP must be placed under high EM confinement, but the NP does not
provide any physical is not physical confinement. Instead, NPs having high surface-to-volume ratios require absorbed heat
to be momentarily confined to their surface thereby providing high EM confinement over nanoscale dimensions.

Since the NP temperature cannot increase by QM, conservation proceeds by quantum electrodynamics (QED) converting
the surface heat into EM waves standing between diametrically opposite NP surfaces. QED stands for quantum
electrodynamics.

But QED here differs from the complex light-matter interaction theory advanced by Feynman and others. Simply stated:

Absent heat capacity, heat supplied to a NP of diameter d is conserved by creating standing EM waves having
half-wavelength / 2 = n d, where n is the NP refractive inde

x. Once the surface heat is expended in forming the standing waves, the EM confinement vanishes allowing the
NP to emit EM radiation that damages the DNA of adjacent cells, e.g., zinc oxide NPs having diameter d = 50 nm
and n = 2.5 emit UV-C radiation at about 254 nm, a lethal level for the DNA damage in all living systems as the
pyrimidine dimers are formed that block DNA replication. Smaller NPs emit even higher frequency EM radiation.
See diverse QED applications at, Ibid, 2010 2016."
Conclusion

Hubers pathogen that links GM foods to human health is unlikely to exist as the problems (cancer, autism, birth defects,
Parkinsons, etc.) are widely diverse and cannot be linked to any single pathogen.

Indeed, the diversity of health problems suggests the presence of many different pathogens as the mechanism for their
creation is the scrambling of genes from damaged DNA.

The causal link between NPs in GM food and health problems is clearly the UV radiation emitted by NPs.

To protect consumers, DNA damage tests, say comet assays, should be performed on GM foods and safe concentrations of
NPs labelled accordingly.

Related: Top 10 ways food is being used RIGHT NOW as a chemical delivery system to poison brains

Consumed The Movie: Showing Now


June 5 2016 | From: ConsumedTheMovie

Consumed is a dramatic thriller that explores the complex world of genetically modified food.
The story is anchored by a working-class, single Mother on a hunt to uncover the cause of her son's mysterious
illness.

Interwoven are the stories of an Organic farmer, the CEO of a biotechnology corporation, two Scientists on the verge of a
major discovery, and an ex-Cop caught in the middle of it all.
Click here to buy or Rent the film

Eugenics & The Depopulation Agenda

Part One: Click here

Part Two: Click here

http://www.wakeupkiwi.com/eugenics-depopulation.shtml

Eugenics & The Depopulation Agenda

Part One: Click here

Part Two: Click here

Weaponized Cell Towers Are Directly Related To Why Chemtrails Are Sprayed
June 5 2016 | From: StateOfTheNation

Beginning with his 1905 United States patent number 787,412, Nikola Tesla pioneered the use of a
certain type of electromagnetic energy called extremely-low frequency (ELF). This is a specific type
of energy known to be used in the New Manhattan Project; the other being very-low frequency (VLF)
electromagnetic energy.
If youve read the following two articles already, then youll know all about the nefarious nature of where this is all
leading

Related: Why Are Weaponized Cell Phone Towers Being Constructed Everywhere?

Related: More on Why Weaponized Cell Phone Towers Are Popping Up Everywhere

Related: Claim: Cell towers across the USA are broadcasting brain resonance frequencies to disrupt human minds,
says former DARPA scientist
The previous post titled, More on Why Weaponized Cell Phone Towers Are Popping Up Everywhere covered the first
two important following topics in PART I & PART II. This post will contain PART III: The involvement of Chemtrails
and the role they play.

Before diving headfirst into those topics, check out, Chemtrails: The Secret War, for a background on the chemtrail
phenomena.

Related: Chemtrails the Secret War

If you remember nothing else about all of this technology, remember this: Be afraid. Be very, very, afraid. There simply is no
better way to sum up everything that follows better than those few words.

This is the mother load of all posts dealing with Chemtrails and related matters. Brace yourselves. My post will draw from two
previously written and well footnoted articles written by Peter A. Kirby at Activist Post.
As for any skeptics you hear jawing about conspiracy this, or conspiracy that, usually know-it-all pilots in my experience,
hand them all the footnotes to both articles and ask that they please place ALL the footnotes in their mouths to prevent
spreading their ignorance until theyve read the material.
There is no question that the U.S. government is presently involved in various forms of Geo-Engineering around the world,
and we know that because at different times, various government agencies have admitted to doing as much, contrary to what
every pilot you know [less ONE maybe - You know who you are!] has to say on the issue of Chemtrails.

How many times have you heard, Well Im a pilot, and I know for a fact there is no such thing as Chemtrails, only contrails,
and you people are a bunch of tin foil hat wearing conspiracy loons
No. You're just an uninformed boob that flies. Remind any skeptics to put the footnotes in their mouths.

You dont have to be a pilot to recognize whether a trail in the sky is or is not a Chemtrail any more than you need to be an
ant to determine if a little grey pile of sand between sidewalk blocks with ants pouring out of it is an anthill.

With all that said, unfortunately for We the People, is the fact that our governments have a very lousy track record of being
honest, so, whatever the government admits to doing, multiply that number times several factors of 10 to get the magnitude of
what is really going on, and as for the motives, prepare to be horrified.
All kidding aside, the remainder of this posting gets REAL dark, so try to hang in there. In a previous article by Peter A.
Kirby at Activist Post, Kirby revealed the following that ought to definitely shut up any of those loud pilots still pissing and
moaning about your tin foil hat:

U.S. patent #4,686,605 Method and Apparatus for Altering a Region in the Earths Atmosphere, Ionosphere
and/or Magnetosphere shows how stratospheric and tropospheric aerosols can be manipulated using
electromagnetic energy in order to modify the weather.

The ground-based antennas (known as ionospheric heaters) needed to produce the appropriate electromagnetic
energy exist. For a detailed discussion, please see the authors previous article:

Smoking Gun: The HAARP and Chemtrails Connection.

To fully comprehend what Kirbys new article has to say, it really helps to have already read his previous post
titled, Chemtrails Exposed: A History of the New Manhattan Project.

Before getting into Peters most recent findings, which are in keeping with research Ive done very recently and will share as
well, first Ill briefly summarize the previous article, and you can watch the video titled Chemtrails: The Secret War. After the
video, Ill highlight the areas covered in the remainder of this article.
The main topics dealt with in Kirbys previous post titled, Chemtrails Exposed: A History of the New Manhattan Project, are
as follows:
The Origins of Weather Modification
Early American Involvement
Nikola Teslas Role
The Beginning of the Scientific Era and Weather Modification
The Origins of Weather Modification:

The idea of man controlling the weather is far from new. Its been around as long as man. Early efforts were attempted by
mystics or local shaman, perhaps rain dances, or even animal sacrifice, but the point is, this is not a new idea. As for the
origins of weather modification from a militaristic sense, Kirby says the following:

The 1996 U.S. military document Weather as a Force Multiplier: Owning the Weather in 2025 outlines a program
using aerosols sprayed from airplanes which are then manipulated with electromagnetic energy in order to modify
the weather. This document will be discussed shortly.
The common thread here is weather modification; or as the Library of Congress calls it, weather control. Lots of
other evidence supporting this assertion exists as well, but these two documents are the most salient.
Motives are plenty. Most notably, significant direct benefits can be gained by playing financial markets which rise
and fall with the weather such as the weather derivatives and catastrophe reinsurance mark

Early American Involvement in DARPA / HAARP / Weather Control:


In essence, since America has been the worlds technological leader; especially in the area of military technology, America
has been the one leading the way on the New Manhattan Project from the beginning, and continues to do so to this day.

Nikola TeslaS Role:

Beginning with his 1905 United States patent number 787,412, Nikola Tesla pioneered the use of a certain type of
electromagnetic energy called extremely-low frequency (ELF). This is a specific type of energy known to be used in the New
Manhattan Project; the other being very-low frequency (VLF) electromagnetic energy.
If youve read the following two articles already, then youll know all about the nefarious nature of where this is all leading
Why Are Weaponized Cell Phone Towers Being Constructed Everywhere?
More on New Slow-Kill Directed Energy Weapons Appearing On Fake Cell Towers
More on Why Weaponized Cell Phone Towers Are Popping Up Everywhere (Video)

The Beginning of the Scientific Era:


The scientific era of weather modification began famously in 1946 with a trio of scientists from General Electric Laboratories:
Irving Langmuir, Vincent Schaefer and Bernard Vonnegut. Leading the group was the world famous Nobel Peace Prize
winning scientist Irving Langmuir (1881-1957)
So far we have only discussed the New Manhattan Projects most obvious aspect: weather control. Just in that aspect alone,
the New Manhattan Project is easily the biggest scientific endeavor in Human history. Believe it or not, it appears that quite a
few other massive projects have been piggybacked upon this global weather modification scheme.
They are already spraying us with megatons of aluminum, barium, and strontium. That right there is enough to put people
away in prison for the rest of their lives, or worse. So why stop there? The people responsible for the New Manhattan Project
(NMP) have apparently gone for broke.
What else might one accomplish by spraying stuff all over Gods creation and/or shooting electromagnetic energy all over the
place? What else have these mad scientists been up to? As opposed to the more understandable weather modification
aspects of the NMP, this article examines the NMPs more unbelievable aspects.
From mind control to Morgellons to Nikola Teslas death ray and more, this article examines the New Manhattan Projects
other agendas.
If you do not know what the New Manhattan Project is, please refer to the authors previous article "Chemtrails Exposed: A
History of the New Manhattan Project."

Chemtrails Used to Aid in Mind Control:

Other than weather modification, the most probable purpose of the New Manhattan Project is mind control. It is well
documented that certain types of electromagnetic energy waves can remotely manipulate peoples thoughts and feelings. The
relevant field here is known as psychotronics and psychotronic weaponry.
A cursory overview is presented here with an emphasis upon the potential use of these technologies as part of the New
Manhattan Project.

Attempts to Control the Minds of the American Public Not New to the US Government:

If anyone has ever called you a Conspiracy Theorist, then you are almost certainly already familiar with Operation
Paperclip , a crime against humanity perpetrated by the United States government in the aftermath of World War II that still
continues to plague the world today both in its lingering affects on victims, and also in what some would say is the continuity
of many of those programs to this day operating as black ops.
If youre not already familiar with Operation Paperclip, you can follow the link for a detailed article, or even the most basic
Google search will provide realty crushing truth for some people about just how evil the U.S. government can be. Once you
know the truth, consider how much technology has evolved since Operation Paperclip.
Arguably, the MK Ultra mind control program is the most well known program to come out of Operation Paperclip, largely
because of references to it in modern pop culture movies and television hits like The X-Files.

The following video also gives a horrifying, but brief, overview of the program, which should begin to put the Fake
Cell Phone Towers into context. In the video below, Youtuber Dark5 gives a breakdown of the 5 Most Shocking CIA
Experiments of Project MKULTRA (that weve been able to uncover).

Not only can electromagnetic frequencies influence ones mind, they can also affect the rest of our bodily functions. Research
by Dr. Robert Becker, Dr. Thomas Valone, and many others have strongly correlated the Human bodys functions to
electromagnetic fields. This correlation is due to the fact that the Human body is a complex bioelectric organism highly
susceptible to electromagnetic energies and fields.

The ionospheric heaters used as part of todays New Manhattan Project can produce the extremely low frequency (ELF)
signals that affect our moods, thoughts and bodily functions. Not only that, but the two most important New Manhattan Project
scientists (Bernard Vonnegut and Gordon J.F. MacDonald) were into it.
The ELF waves referred to are something I covered in detail in my post titled: Why Are Weaponized Cell Phone
Towers Being Constructed Everywhere? In that post, prior to the following video I said:

One thing thats important to note up front: Whether were talking about weaponized cell phone towers, Googles
Humanoid Robots That Can Hunt Down Humans Even in Dense Woods, or were talking about one of Googles
otherMachines Designed to Hunt Humans (both shown below), all were designed with the same outcome in mind,
and thats total control over their subjects.

The US militarys involvement in these types of technologies originated with something called Project Sanguine. Project
Sanguine was a proposed, mid- to late-1950s Navy project developing a long-distance submarine communications system.
The proposed project involved burying tens of thousands of miles of wires a few feet underground.

These wires were to send extremely low frequency (ELF) signals to submerged submarines many thousands of miles away.
Although Project Sanguine was never implemented, a similar type of operation (this time using above ground wires) in
northern Michigan and Wisconsin exists today and has been in use since the mid-1970s.

Project Sanguine and todays facilities in Wisconsin and Michigan was and are not about mind control; only Naval
communications. But Project Sanguine was the first inkling of what was to come.
Some years later in 1961, along with two other scientists, that great pioneer of the New Manhattan Projects weather
modification aspects, Bernard Vonnegut also laid the groundwork for future mind control experiments. He conducted
experiments pertaining to the effects of electromagnetic energy, propagated through an aerosol, upon the effigy of a mans
head. In their 1961 report titled Research in Electrical Phenomena Associated with Aerosols, the trio wrote:

"One can make an estimate of the concentration of the field around an object or man by considering the potential
in space in which it exists. For example, in a field of 100 volts cm a mans head is in a region where the potential
is about 20,000 V with respect to ground. Because of the relatively high conductivity of the body the mans head is
at ground potential and therefore a corresponding amount of charge has passed from the ground up to his head.

If we approximate the head as a sphere of 10 cm radius, its capacity is about 10 farads so the induced charge
on it is about 2 x 10 coulombs and the field at its surface is approximately 2000 volts cm. Accordingly, we see
that the field and hence the rate of aerosol deposition should be about 20 fold greater on the mans head than on
the ground."

Seven years later, that other great scientific champion of the New Manhattan Project, Dr. Gordon J.F. How to Wreck the
Environment MacDonald wrote:

"The enhanced low-frequency electrical oscillations in the earth-ionosphere cavity relate to possible weapons
systems through a little-understood aspect of brain physiology.

Electrical activity in the brain is concentrated at certain frequencies, some of it extremely slow, a little around five
cycles per second, and very conspicuous activity (the so-called alpha rhythm) around ten cycles per second. Some
experiments have been done in the use of a flickering light to pull the brains alpha rhythm into unnatural
synchrony with it; the visual stimulation leads to electrical stimulation.

There has also been work on direct electrical driving of the brain. In experiments discussed by Norbert Wiener, a
sheet of tin is suspended from the ceiling and connected to a generator working at ten cycles per second. With
large field strengths of one or two volts per centimeter oscillating at the alpha-rhythm frequency, decidedly
unpleasant sensations are noted by human subjects.
The Brain Research Institute of the University of California is investigating the effect of weak oscillating fields on
human behavior. The field strengths in these experiments are of the order of a few hundredths of a volt per
centimeter. Subjects show small but measurable degradation in performance when exposed to oscillating fields for
periods of up to fifteen minutes.
The field strengths in these experiments are still much stronger, by a factor of about 1000, than the observed
natural oscillations in the earth-ionosphere cavity. However, as previously noted, the intensity of the natural
fluctuations could be increased substantially and in principle could be maintained for a long time, as tropical
thunderstorms are always available for manipulation.

The proper geographical location of the source of lightning, coupled with accurately timed, artificially excited
strokes, could lead to a pattern of oscillations that produced relatively high power levels over certain regions of the
earth and substantially lower levels over other regions. In this way, one could develop a system that would
seriously impair brain performance in very large populations in selected regions over an extended period.
The scheme I have suggested is admittedly far-fetched, but I have used it to indicate the rather subtle connections
between variations in mans environmental conditions and his behavior. Perturbation of the environment can
produce changes in behavior patterns.

Since our understanding of both behavioral and environmental manipulation is rudimentary, schemes of behavioral
alteration on the surface seem unrealistic. No matter how deeply disturbing the thought of using the environment to
manipulate behavior for national advantage is to some, the technology permitting such use will very probably
develop within the next few decades."

The mind control technologies detailed here by MacDonald have been in development by the Stanford VLF Group.
In 1978, electromagnetics expert Robert C. Beck penned a paper titled Mood Modification with ELF Magnetic Fields in which
he writes:

"Coherent ELF energies have the unique and interesting property of almost lossless propagation within the earth-
ionosphere cavity waveguide, and attenuation of these signals due to distance from transmitter sites is negligible.
Power losses are .8 dB per Mm (million meters). The magnetic vectors, unlike electrical (E-wave) components,
permeate any substance and cannot be effectively shielded, even by iron, mu-metal, lead, copper, Faraday
cages, etc.
The established physics of radio propagation therefore suggests that vast geographical areas can be readily
mood-manipulated by transmissions of EM energy within the earth-ionosphere cavity waveguide."

The 1986 book Low-Intensity Conflict and Modern Technology features a paper by Navy Captain Paul E. Tyler titled The
Electromagnetic Spectrum in Low-Intensity Conflict.

This paper is all about using electromagnetic energy against


an enemys mind. Shortly after referencing a Southwest
Research Institute document speaking to the ability of
radiofrequency radiation to, completely interrupt mental
functioning and, sensitize large military groups to
extremely dispersed amounts of biological or chemical
agents to which the unirradiated population would be
immune., Captain Tyler writes:

"Some of these potential uses include dealing with


terrorist groups, crowd control, controlling breeches
of security at military installations, and antipersonnel
techniques in tactical warfare. In all of these cases
the EM systems would be used to produce mild to
severe physiological disruption or perceptual
distortion or disorientation.

In addition the ability of individuals to function could


be degraded to such a point that they would be
combat ineffective.

Another advantage of electromagnetic systems is


that they can provide coverage over large areas with
a single system. They are silent and
countermeasures to them may be difficult to
develop.

The 1995 paper On the Possibility of Directly Accessing Every Human Brain by Electromagnetic Induction of Fundamental
Algorithms by Professor Michael A. Persinger, PhD says that relatively weak atmospheric signals (such as those used for cell
phone communications) can have a great influence upon the way people think and feel. The New Manhattan Projects
ionospheric heaters can produce such signals.
A most recent addition to this body of evidence is very thorough. Michael Aquino, PhD penned a 2013 tome titled Mind
Wars in which he writes:

EMR [electromagnetic radiation] in the brain occurs in waves measured according to cycles per second (Hz). 1-3
Hz = delta waves, characteristic of deep sleep. 4-7 Hz = theta waves, characteristic of high emotion, violence, and
frustration. 8-12 Hz = alpha waves, characteristic of meditation, relaxation, and searching for patterns. 13-22 Hz =
beta waves, characteristic of frontal brain activity, deliberate effort, and logical thought.
He failed to mention Gamma waves (22-80 Hz) which are produced by the brains of experienced meditators and are
associated with enhanced neuro-plasticity (brain changes). Mr. Aquino continues:

EMR [electromagnetic radiation] in the brain occurs in waves measured according to cycles per second (Hz). 1-3
Hz = delta waves, characteristic of deep sleep. 4-7 Hz = theta waves, characteristic of high emotion, violence, and
frustration. 8-12 Hz = alpha waves, characteristic of meditation, relaxation, and searching for patterns. 13-22 Hz =
beta waves, characteristic of frontal brain activity, deliberate effort, and logical thought.

Brain waves are subject to the principle of resonance. Energy-waves reaching the brain through any medium eyes, ears, or
flesh will tend to induce the brain-waves to cycle at the same wavelength.
A Human brain resonating with externally produced energy waves is known as brain entrainment. He then goes about
describing how this knowledge might be applied to a Mind War scenario:

Brainwave resonance (BWR) is significant to SLIPC [subliminal involuntary psycontrol] in both passive and active
contexts. Passively a human-interactive environment may be permeated with EMS [electromagnetic spectrum]
waves at one or more of the BWR ranges, inclining those within it to their induced characteristics without their
conscious awareness.

Attempting a relaxed, pleasant, cooperative discussion of a mutual problem is more possible in an alpha BWR than
in a non-BWR one, and much more possible than in a beta one. Trying to accomplish anything complex or create
immersed in delta is exhausting and fruitless.

Lastly, Dr. Aquino discloses how these energies might be applied remotely:
Active employment of BWR utilizes frequency generators to project desired BWR into a MW [mind war] operational
environment, to adjust the emotions and awareness of all individuals therein.

Such generators may be strategic satellite-based platforms which transmit BWR both directly and through intrusion
into existing, localized electronic media systems. BWR can, for instance, be inserted into the Internet to be
passively and indetectably (absent such sensors) received and radiated by any accessing device, from television
station to desktop computer or cellular telephone.

Michael Aquino is a very interesting character. As of Jan. 1, 2015, his extremely extensive bio notes his latest position as Lt.
Colonel, Psychological Operations, First Special Forces Regiment, U.S. Army. He has since been sheep dipped retired from
this position. He is a Knight Eagle of the Boy Scouts of America.

His Ph.D. dissertation was on the neutron bomb. He has served as a Space Activities Officer. He has been given many
military decorations and awards. He goes by the title of the 13th Baron of Rachane. He writes that he is a first degree
satanist, a second degree warlock, and the high priest of the Temple of Set.
The following video also comes from my post titled: Why Are Weaponized Cell Phone Towers Being Constructed
Everywhere?
The first video from that post (directly above) spent everything after the 1:45 mark of the video explaining how powerful some
of these new cell phone towers are, and how their current configuration with mega cables is NOT set up for
telecommunications or data transfer.

After watching the video, and considering what the video makers said in conjunction with all the other information weve
covered, I certainly wouldnt put ANYTHING past the uber global elites. or the board rooms of multinational corporations, but
Im not so gullible that Ill believe anything, so I kept digging.
It was not easy to find information, and a few of the articles I found were several years old and most likely outdated, but I did
find a few worth noting. The best one included the following video which does an EXCELLENT job of putting the highly
technical supporting information below into laymans terms.

I n short: The video gives you an idea of the full scope of how powerful these towers are, whether you understand the
technical mumbo jumbo below or not.

Heres the Takeaway from All This: The U.S. Government is Obsessed with Mind Control
Those last few distinctions are the ones which have given him the most notoriety. The Temple of Set is a satanic church
operating in the authors hometown of San Francisco, CA. San Francisco is also where Dr. Aquino says he lives. You can visit
the Temple of Set website if you dare: www.xeper.org
In the late 1980s, Dr. Aquino became embroiled in a highly publicized satanic ritual abuse scandal which, among other things,
landed him on the Oprah Winfrey Show and the Geraldo Rivera Show. These interviews are available on YouTube. He
published a 2014 book all about it titled Extreme Prejudice: The Presidio Satanic Abuse Scam.

Voice to Skull:
Making people hear things that no one else around them
can hear through the use of atmospheric radio waves is
called voice to skull technology.

This technology involves beaming sounds and speech


directly into a subjects head. This technology is well
documented and well known.

It has been demonstrated in many movies and television


shows such as the movie Kingsman: The Secret
Service and the TV show The X-Files.

The New Manhattan Projects ionospheric heaters can do


this.

An early book titled Microwave Auditory Effects and


Applications by James C. Lin, Ph.D. revealed the method.
1989s U.S. patent #4,877,027 Hearing System defines
this technology. Many scientific papers on the subject are
available.

Voice to skull technology has been weaponized into the Navys MEDUSA program. Click here for the Wikipedia listing.

Light From the Gods:


My science advisor Ginny Silcox mentions current research into how ionospheric heaters such as HAARP could be used in
combination to produce lightning or lightning-like energy beams capable of completely destroying individuals, buildings or
large areas. This type of technology was first hypothesized by Nikola Tesla and is commonly referred to as his death ray.
There are a few ways Teslas death ray might be accomplished. It may be accomplished by tapping into the ionosphere,
generating it independently, or a combination of both.
The ionosphere (about 50-375 miles above earths surface) is home to Earths auroral electrojet. The auroral electrojet is
comprised of extremely powerful magnetic energy encircling our planet. If lightning taps into that power by creating a circuit
from the auroral electrojet down to the Earth, it will be incredibly powerful.
This may happen naturally. A 1982 article co-written by the great New Manhattan Project scientist Bernard Vonnegut recounts
the experiences of pilots who have witnessed lightning extending upwards, above storm clouds, presumably to the
ionosphere.
Man might also make this happen. It is conceivable that the New Manhattan Projects ground-based ionospheric heaters
(possibly in conjunction with other, similar space-based antennas) could induce lightning from the ionosphere. These antenna
arrays could create a conductive path known as a waveguide which would cause the ionospheres energy to flow down to
Earth.

These waveguides can also direct the energy more accurately. The metals found in todays chemtrails allow for better
propagation of these energy waves. The Stanford VLF Group has been active in this area as well.
Teslas death ray may also be entirely man-made. As part of the proposed overhaul of Air Force (USAF) operations outlined
in the 1996 Air Force 2025 documents, the UASF produced a paper titled Space Operations: Through the Looking Glass
(Global Area Strike System). Air Force 2025 is the set of documents containing the infamous Weather as a Force Multiplier:
Owning the Weather in 2025 paper. The authors describe Nikola Teslas death ray as a probable future Air Force capability.
The report reads:

"Once again a small but capably armed country is threatening to seize its smaller but resource-rich neighbor. The
Global News Network reports that the border has been violated. "

The same old story? No, the plot twists as a sophisticated satellite surveillance and reconnaissance system tracks the
belligerent nations leader. As he steps to the podium to incite his troops to greater violence, a blinding light from above
vaporizes him and his podium leaving even his bodyguards untouched.

His smarter brother, the second in command, countermands the invasion orders and in 12 hours the borders are restored.
Stability, if not peace, reigns again.
This is not science fiction, but a mission well within the capabilities of Space Operations in 2025.
A little later in the piece, the authors expound upon the usefulness of such a weapon. Although they are writing about a laser
generated from a space-based platform as opposed to the NMPs network of ground-based ionospheric heaters, the concept
is the same and ground-based ionospheric heaters can do similar things.

As previously noted, lasers from satellites may also be used as waveguides which can increase the accuracy of
electromagnetic waves produced from the more powerful, terrestrial ionospheric heaters. They explain:
At slightly higher powers, the enhanced heating produced by the laser can be used to upset sensitive electronics (temporarily
or permanently), damage sensor and antenna arrays, ignite some containerized flammable and explosive materials, and
sever exposed power and communications lines.

The full power beam can melt or vaporize virtually any target, given enough exposure time.
Comment: And with the two hundred year old archaic technology we have been landed with there are so many ways that this stone age tech can be
interfered with it is beyond a joke. Seriously - we are still dealing with aerodynamics and the principles of negative pressure for lift? Fuck off - what an
absolute degenerate crock of arse. Your Lear jet, your Gulfstream G5 is an antiquated piece of shit...

Related: Explosive Expos: The Secret Government, Anti-Gravity Technology And Black Budget Projects

With precise targeting information (accuracy of inches) and beam pointing and tracking stability of 10 to 100 nanoradians, a
full-power beam can successfully attack ground or airborne targets by melting or cracking cockpit canopies, burning through
control cables, exploding fuel tanks, melting or burning sensor assemblies and antenna arrays, exploding or melting munitions
pods, destroying ground communications and power grids, and melting or burning a large variety of strategic targets (e.g.,
dams, industrial and defense facilities, and munitions factories) - all in a fraction of a second.
Space Operations: Through the Looking Glass also speaks to ground-based antennas capable of producing electromagnetic
pulses that can disable electronic devices and jam communications known as high-power microwave weaponry. The
ionospheric heaters of todays New Manhattan Project can be used in this capacity. The authors write:

"A high-power microwave (HPMW) device also employs electromagnetic radiation as its weapon effect. Not as
powerful as nuclear-driven EMP weapons, HPMW weapons create a narrower band of microwave electromagnetic
radiation by coupling fast, high energy pulsed power supplies to specially designed microwave antenna arrays.

Microwave frequencies (tens of megahertz to tens of gigahertz) are chosen for two reasons: the atmosphere is
generally transparent to microwave radiation (all-weather capability) and modern electronics are particularly
vulnerable to these frequencies."

They continue:

"The level of pulsed, electrical power required to produce weapon-level microwave fluxes is now becoming
available (for ground-based systems).

Compact, scaleable [sic] laboratory sources of narrow-band, high-power microwaves have been demonstrated that
can produce gigawatts of power for 10 to a few hundred nanoseconds. Ultrawideband microwave sources are less
well developed, but research in this area appears promising. A HPMW weapon should, however, be able to
temporarily disrupt circuits and jam microwave communications at low-power levels."
Lastly, the authors of Space Operations: Through the Looking Glass specifically mention the Iridium satellite constellation as
one that would be suitable for producing high-power microwaves. The Iridium satellite constellation is noted in the authors
previous work "C4: Command, Control, Communications, and Computers of the New Manhattan Chemtrail Project"as
particularly suitable for the New Manhattan Projects remote sensing needs.

Microwave energy, like that which is employed in the New Manhattan Project, can also be weaponized into systems like
Raytheons heat ray. Here is the Wikipedia listing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Active_Denial_System
Judy Wood, PhD in her book Where Did the Towers Go?, documents 1400 burned cars up to one half mile away from
ground zero. Nothing else near them was damaged. Trees still had leaves on them. There were reams of unburned sheets of
paper. Though they were covered with ash, no humans were burned.

The exceptional thing about the cars, she notes, was the fact that they were not grounded while everything else was. Was
some sort of electromagnetic weapon used on 9/11? If so, how did cave dwellers from Afghanistan get one of those?
Maybe the original purpose of Raytheon is to come up with just such a weapon. Raytheon means light from the gods.
Raytheon has been all about microwave technologies all along. Raytheon acquired E-Systems; the company that built
HAARP.
Genetic Modification Using Microwaves and Chemtrails:

"Somebody has apparently been planning ahead. If, from the megatons of aluminum and other toxins released into
our biosphere, our environment becomes wrecked beyond being able to sustain life as we know it, dont worry!
People have been genetically modifying plants to be able to thrive in an aluminum-ravaged biosphere! Aluminum is
the number one chemtrail ingredient.
A certain genetically modified sorghum seed has been developed to thrive in aluminum contaminated soils.

The makers of this sorghum seed reassure us that this type of genetic manipulation may also work well with many
other food crops such as: wheat, barley, rice, maize, cotton, peanut, sunflower, tobacco, rye, alfalfa, tomato,
cucumber, soya, sweet potato, grapes, rapeseed, sugar beet, tea, strawberry, rose, chrysanthemum, poplar,
eggplant, sweet pepper, walnut, pistachio, mango, banana, and potato. It appears that sorghum is just the
proverbial camels nose under the tent."

The abstract of U.S. patent #7,582,809 Sorghum Aluminum Tolerance Gene, SBMATE reads:

"The major aluminum tolerance gene, the SbMATE gene, encodes a root citrate efflux transporter that is Al-
inducible at the level of gene transcription and is also Al-activated at the level of protein function. High level of
expression of the SbMATE gene and the protein was found in roots.

SbMATE orthologs with high degree of sequence homology were found in other higher plants, including rice.
Successful transformation of Arabidopsis provides strong evidence that SbMATE can work across species to
enhance tolerance to Al in other important crops grown in localities worldwide where Al3+ cations are present in
acid soils and are toxic to plants."

It is curious that this patent is assigned to (along with Brazilian officialdom) the United States of America as represented by
the Secretary of Agriculture. One might think that this would be right up Monsantos alley. There may be some sort of
deception going on here.
We do know that historically the Department of Agriculture has acted like it works for Monsanto. As described in Marie-
Monique Robins 2010 masterpiece The World According to Monsanto, the collusion between our Department of Agriculture
and Monsanto has been pervasive.

Maybe some sort of back room deal has been struck between Monsanto and corrupt elements of our federal government
enabling Monsanto to profit from the rollout of these aluminum resistant seeds; a rollout designed to appear as a benevolent
government action.
If you noticed, one of the plants mentioned in patent #7,582,809 is poplar; a tree. If food crops dont grow in an aluminum-
ravaged environment, one can expect that trees wont either. This is why we can thank our lucky stars that there is a
corporation called ArborGen producing and selling genetically modified trees.
They arent saying that their trees are specifically resistant to aluminum contaminated soils yet, but its good to know that they
might help us in our future hour of need.

Lastly, you can bet that the geoengineers will be here to help too. Our friends have developed wholly mechanical trees that
can do what natural trees have traditionally done; remove CO2 from the atmosphere. For confirmation, search carbon
capture trees. Who needs Mother Nature? We can have giant multinational corporations that will take care of everything!

Other Sprays Emitted in Chemtrails:

We are all but guinea pigs in their satanic Human experimentations. While todays super-secret New Manhattan Project
saturates our atmosphere with aluminum, barium, and strontium, the conventional weather modifiers have also admittedly
been spraying us with a myriad of substances (other than silver iodide) ranging from urea (urine) to carbon black to lead
iodide and much more.

The books Clouds of Secrecy by Leonard A. Cole and In the Name of Science by Andrew Goliszek document hundreds of
open air tests of all types of chemicals and biologicals on unsuspecting American citizens. In fact, our militarys position is that
they get to spray us with whatever they want, whenever they want as long as they classify their activities as research.
Knowing this, it is understandable that, for many decades now, we have been getting hit with everything under the sun.
Title 50, chapter 32, subsections 1520a & b of United States Code (law) state:
(a. Prohibited Activities:
The Secretary of Defense may not conduct (directly or by contact)
(1. any test or experiment involving the use of a chemical agent or biological agent on a
civilian population; or
(2. any other testing of a chemical agent or biological agent on human subjects.
(b. Exceptions:
Subject to subsections (c), (d), and (e) of this section, the prohibition in subsection (a) of this section does not apply to a test
or experiment carried out for any of the following purposes:
(1. Any peaceful purpose that is related to a medical, therapeutic, pharmaceutical, agricultural, industrial, or research activity.
Thats right. As long as they classify their mass murder as
a, peaceful purpose that is related to a medical, therapeutic,
pharmaceutical, agricultural, industrial, or research activity, they
get to legally spray us with whatever they want whenever they
want.

As we can see now, this is exactly what they have done.


It is interesting to note that this law was passed in 1997; right
around the time that the New Manhattan Projects large-scale
spraying operations began.

But thats probably just a coincidence.

Dont think too much. Its not healthy for the establishment.
Reports of all types of strange substances apparently being
sprayed from aircraft are abundant and readily available.

William Thomas groundbreaking 2004 book Chemtrails


Confirmed provides early examples.

The book reads:

"Human blood cells were found by a hospital lab


technician in samples of gel-like material dropped over
the tiny town of Oakville, Washington (pop. 665),
covering a 20 square-mile area three times within a six-
week period."

It continues:

"Officer David Lacey was on patrol with a civilian friend at 3 am when the sticky downpour began. We turned our
windshield wipers on, and it just started smearing to the point where we could almost not see, Lacy said. We both
looked at each other and we said, Gee this isnt right. Were out in the middle of nowhere, basically, and where did
this come from?"

Pulling into a gas station, officer Lacey pulled on a pair of latex gloves to clean his windshield. Lacey: The substance was
very mushy, almost like if you had Jell-O in your hand. Within hours, Lacey was in hospital unable to breathe.
Chemtrails Confirmed goes on to recount multiple other instances of this human blood cell goo (presumably dropped from
airplanes) splattering all over people, property, and the Earth.
Thomas book also references a 2001 World Net Daily article titled Californians Confused Over Chemtrails. In this article, as
reproduced in Chemtrails Confirmed, reporter Lance Lindsay recounts the experience of a former military radar technician
named Gene Shimer. It reads:
One morning, about two years ago, Shimer spotted a long, thin string resembling a spider web floating in the sky, he said. It
was about 20 feet in length and could only be seen in the reflection of the sun. He looked up, saw trails, and then saw
something that appeared to be a glob of foam falling from the sky.

"It came floating down, free-floating, Shimer says. I caught it with a spatula, scooped it off the ground, and I
watched it as it shrank. It was about the size of my fist when it first started. It looked like a cross between soap
bubbles and cotton candy."

What Mr. Shimer described is not unlike something that was captured on video. You truly have to see it to believe it. Behold
the first cloud that fell to earth:
What was captured on video looks like what might be causing one of the most widely documented other sprays; chem-webs.
As noted in William Thomas book and in a myriad of online reports (the author has even been told this by people with first-
hand experiences), a spider web-like substance is sometimes found covering grass, bushes, and trees.

The substance is usually described as completely foreign to the particular environments; i.e., it is not spider webs. Despite
what the shills claim, this stuff was probably sprayed from an airplane.

If all this isnt weird enough, our United States Air Force has written about spraying what is commonly referred to as smart
dust. The seminal 1996 Air Force document Weather as a Force Multiplier: Owning the Weather 2025 mentions using
smart materials for the purpose of weather modification. On page 17 it reads:

"With regard to seeding techniques, improvements in the materials and delivery methods are not only plausible but
likely. Smart materials based on nanotechnology are currently being developed with gigaops computer capability at
their core. They could adjust their size to optimal dimensions for a given fog seeding situation and even make
adjustments throughout the process.

They might also enhance their dispersal qualities by adjusting their buoyancy, by communicating with each other,
and by steering themselves within the fog. They will be able to provide immediate and continuous effectiveness
feedback by integrating with a larger sensor network and can also change their temperature and polarity to
improve their seeding effects."

As mentioned above, UAVs [unmanned aerial vehicles] could be used to deliver and distribute these smart materials.
Anything that contains semi-conductor material is laced with dangerously toxic elements like cadmium and germanium. If
these particles are small enough to float in the air, they will be inhaled by people and animals.
This type of technology is also known as microelectromechanical systems. Although the current, known state of the art
pertaining to smart dust is motes (pieces of smart dust) as small as a few millimeters in size, secret technologies bringing the
size of such machines down to the micrometer scale may be available. As one can see from the above passage, they are
working on it.
In fact, in this area, a PhD scientist is claiming a breakthrough. In his report titled Global Environmental MEMS Sensors
(GEMS): A Revolutionary Observing System for the 21st Century, John Manobianco, PhD writes:
Technological advancements in MicroElectroMechanical Systems (MEMS) have inspired a revolutionary observing system
known as Global Environmental MEMS Sensors (GEMS). The GEMS concept features an integrated system of MEMS-based
airborne probes that will be designed to remain suspended in the atmosphere for hours to days taking in situ measurements
over all regions of the Earth with unprecedented spatial and temporal resolution.
Related:

The GEMS concept is revolutionary because it foresees the future integration of evolving technologies to realize an observing
system with scalability and applicability over a broad range of weather and climate phenomena. GEMS have the potential to
expand our understanding of the Earth and improve weather forecast accuracy and efficiency well beyond current capability.

Resulting improvements in forecast accuracy will translate directly into cost benefits for weather-sensitive industries
worldwide, and mitigate the risk factors associated with life-threatening weather phenomena.
Lastly, other engineered particles called niobate ring resonators could conceivably be sprayed from aircraft for surveillance
purposes. Lithium is highly toxic to Humans and can cause tremors, nervous-system collapse, and death.

Morgellons:
Reports of fibers growing out of peoples skin along with sores and subdermal crawling sensations have been pouring in.
According to the Mayo Clinic, these symptoms generally occur along with severe fatigue, difficulty concentrating and short-
term memory loss.
The Mayo Clinic also notes that this, is a relatively rare condition that most frequently affects middle-aged white women.
Although the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) officially categorizes it as an Unexplained Dermopathy, amongst us
common folk, this disease is being called Morgellons.
Many people are claiming that Morgellons disease is caused by chemtrails. Whether or not Morgellons is caused by the usual
chemtrails consisting of aluminum, barium, and strontium, or is caused by other sprays is unclear. But people have been
drawing connections between heavy chemtrail spraying and Morgellons. There is an overwhelming amount of information
available online.
A man named Clifford Carnicom has been at the forefront of investigating Morgellons. He suggests that a substance at least
similar if not identical to the aforementioned goo consisting of Human blood cells may be causing Morgellons.

He suggests that Morgellons is not a skin condition, but rather a systemic condition not limited to our bodies. He suggests that
every living thing on this planet is currently being affected by whatever is causing Morgellons.
The possibilities here are absolutely terrifying, mind-boggling, and currently beyond the scope of this investigation.
Regrettably, this area of research promises to be greatly expanded in years to come. This may have been what George Bush
Sr. was talking about when he said, If the American people knew what we have done, they would string us up from the lamp
posts.

Along with his other continuing research, Mr. Carnicom is conducting a study by providing a web-based form for actively
infected individuals to fill out.
Related: CarnicomInstitute

Holography, Project Blue Beam, and the Great Deception

First: A Little Background on Holograms and Blue Beam:


New Manhattan Project operations create a situation conducive to the production of holograms. The substances sprayed into
our atmosphere (particularly barium) can act as a three dimensional reflective screen onto which beams of electromagnetic
energy can be projected. This is how holograms are made.

As weapons of deception, the aforementioned document Space Operations: Through the Looking Glass (Global Area Strike
System) has a small section devoted to holography. The authors write:

It is certainly possible to make holograms of troop concentrations, military platforms, or other useful objects, although the
larger the scene the more difficult it is to produce the proper conditions to create a convincing hologram. No credible
approach has been suggested for projecting holograms over long distances under real-world conditions, although the
Massachusetts Institute of Technologys Media Lab believes holographic color projection may be possible within 10 years.
Holographic and other, less high-technology forms of illusion may became [sic] a potent tool in the hands of the information
warriors

Not long before his death, Canadian journalist Serge Monast made public something he said he had uncovered called Project
Blue Beam. He said it was an establishment plan to destroy all national sovereignty and religions; replacing them with a
dictatorial one world government and a satanic one world religion.

This was largely to be accomplished, he claimed, by the use of incredibly realistic holographic imagery, projected in the sky
and on the Earth, depicting an alien invasion. This fake alien invasion was to be used as a catalyst for all the people of the
world to give up their countries and religions in favor of only one religion and only one government in order to unite against
the perceived alien threat.

The chemtrails sprayed as part of todays New Manhattan Project have the potential to serve as the screen upon which the
Project Blue Beam movie is projected. The aforementioned voice to skull technology could be broadcast over the audience as
well to create a show with both images and sound.

Global Depopulation Agenda

We know that mass murder is taking place. We also know that two of the worlds most prominent geoengineering advocates
are also population reduction advocates.

There are also abundant calls for depopulation from many high-ranking establishment types. Considering all this in total, it is
reasonable to believe that the many deaths caused by geoengineering are not simply an unfortunate side-effect, but rather
part of a global depopulation agenda.
Just in America alone, it is reasonable to assert that at least hundreds of thousands of people have been murdered by
geoengineering activities. This is probably a very conservative estimate. This estimate is simply what the best available
information shows. This is simply what can be proven at this time. Please see the authors previous article "New Manhattan
Chemtrail Project Biological Impacts."
Related: Sinister Sites: The Georgia Guidestones

John P. Holdren is the sitting Presidential science advisor. He is also a geoengineering advocate. He regurgitates the same
talking points that the geoengineers do. Without admitting that solar radiation management geoengineering (chemtrails) is
currently happening, he says that it might be a good thing to do because global warming is such a big problem. He, of course,
couches this assertion in all sorts of disclaimers just like the geoengineers do.

But the fact remains that, under certain circumstances, he recommends it. There are many reports of Mr. Holdrens position
available online.
John Holdren is also a population reduction advocate. In fact, he is possibly the most prominent population reduction
advocate. Back in 1977, Holdren co-authored a book called Ecoscience. In this book, he and his co-authors advocate for
population reduction; a.k.a. mass murder. Holdren and his cohorts call for forced abortions, mass sterilizations, and a United
Nations Planetary Regime with the power of life and death over American citizens.

William Gates III, the co-founder of Microsoft, is another geoengineering advocate of the highest profile also advocating for
population reduction.

Bill Gates funds geoengineering. On Stanford Universitys website, it says that Bill Gates funds solar radiation management
geoengineering research through something called the Fund for Innovative Climate and Energy Research (FICER).

His geoengineering advocacy is further detailed in a 2012 Guardian article.

Like John Holdren, Bill Gates also advocates for population reduction. He has stated this position many times in many venues
such as on CNN and during a TED talk. He says vaccines and other so-called health care services such as those embodied
in Obamacare can help in this area. For confirmation, go to YouTube and search Bill Gates population reduction.

His father was the head of Planned Parenthood; an organization that has been reducing the population quite effectively for
many years now.

Now that Mr. Gates has conquered the world of business, he has apparently become a philanthropist. He wants to help all
right. He wants to help us into our graves.
Bill Gates isnt the only top-level crony capitalist calling for population reduction. Hes got plenty of company. Prince Philip,
Duke of Edinburgh, leader of the World Wildlife Fund said, If I were reincarnated I would wish to be returned to earth as a
killer virus to lower human population levels.
Ted Turner, the founder of CNN said, A total population of 250-300 million people, a 95% decline from present levels, would
be ideal. There are many other examples.
Depopulation is a theme common among the socio-economic elite and their brainwashed sycophants. What most of these
people fail to understand is that the problem is not overpopulation. The problem is the establishments extremely poor
management. It is a known fact that better education results in fewer births and smaller family sizes while they promote
dumbed-down garbage like Common Core.

Clean, free energy technologies have been brutally suppressed for over 100 years in favor of their pollution-spewing
multinational oil and gas conglomerates while they tell us we have to give up our quality of life because of pollution and the
supposedly resultant Global Warming. Many other examples of the establishments extreme mismanagement abound.
Another book could be written.
The Georgia Guidestones is a massive monument located in Elbert County, Georgia. Consisting of 5 granite slabs (plus a
capstone) over 19 feet high and weighing over 21 tons each, the same message to Humanity is carved in 8 different
languages. Along with some other rubbish, the stones read, MAINTAIN HUMANITY UNDER 500,000,000 IN PERPETUAL
BALANCE WITH NATURE.

The current population of the Earth is over 7,000,000,000. Maybe if the makers of the Georgia Guidestones do a really good
job with vaccines and other health care services like Bill Gates suggests, they can kill 6.5 billion people.

Be Sure to Check Out the Following:

What Dark Secrets Are The Georgia Guide Stones Hiding From Humanity

Secret Identity of Georgia Guide Stones Founder Revealed

As shown in the above information, geoengineering is apparently not the only way the establishment is going about mass
murdering us. But it sure is an effective one. In fact, short of thermonuclear war, the most effective way to mass murder a
population is to spray megatons of toxic garbage all over them and their land. This is what the geoengineers are doing, and
probably a lot more.
Peter A. Kirby is a San Rafael, CA researcher, writer, and activist. Check out his ebook Chemtrails Exposed: A New
Manhattan Project.

Notes:

The Body Electric: Electromagnetism and the Foundation of Life a book by Robert Becker and Gary Selden, published
by William Morrow, 1998 Bioelectromagnetic Healing: A Rationale for its Use a book by Thomas Valone, published by
Integrity Research Institution, 2000
Bioeffects of Selected Non-lethal Weapons an addendum to Nonlethal Technologies Worldwide (NGIC-1147-101-98) by
the Department of Defense
Mega Brain: New Tools and Techniques for Brain Growth and Mind Expansion a book by Michael Hutchison, self-
published, 2013 Angels Dont Play this HAARP: Advances in Tesla Technology a book by Dr. Nick Begich and Jeane
Manning, published by Earthpulse Press, 1995
Extremely Low Frequency Transmitter Site Clam Lake, Wisconsin a report by the United States Navy, 2001
Sending Signals to Submarines an article by David Llanwyn Jones, published in New Scientist, July 4, 1985
Signaling Subs an article by T.A. Heppenheimer, published in Popular Science, April, 1987
Research in Electrical Phenomena Associated with Aerosols a report by Bernard Vonnegut, Arnold W. Doyle, and D. Read
Moffett, produced and published by Arthur D. Little, Inc., 1961
How to Wreck the Environment a paper by Gordon J. F. MacDonald as it appeared in Unless Peace Comes: A Scientific
Forecast of New Weapons a book edited by Nigel Calder, published by The Viking Press, 1968
Mood Modification with ELF Magnetic Fields a paper by Robert C. Beck, published in Archaeus, 1986
The Electromagnetic Spectrum in Low-Intensity Conflict a paper by Captain Paul E. Tyler as it appeared in Low-Intensity
Conflict and Modern Technology a book edited by Lt. Col. David J. Dean, USAF, Published by the Air University Press,
Center for Aerospace Doctrine, Research, and Education, Maxwell Air Force Base, Alabama, 1986
Final Report on Biotechnology Research Requirements for Aeronautical Systems Through the Year 2000 a report by the
Southwest Research Institute, published by the Southwest Research Institute, 1982
On the Possibility of Directly Accessing Every Human Brain by Electromagnetic Induction of Fundamental Algorithms a
paper by Professor Michael A. Persinger, published in Perceptual and Motor Skills, June 1995
Mind Wars a book by Michael A. Aquino, Ph.D., self published, 2013
Michael A. Aquino Vitae, 2015
Extreme Prejudice: The Presidio Satanic Abuse Scam a book by Michael A. Aquino, self published, 2014 Microwave
Auditory Effects and Applications a book by James C. Lin, Ph.D., published by Charles C. Thomas, 1978
U.S. patent #4,877,027 Hearing System by Wayne B. Brunkan, 1989
Auditory Response to Pulsed Radiofrequency Energy a paper by J.A. Elder and C.K. Chou, published
by Bioelectromagnetics, 2003
Transmission of Microwave-Induced Intracranial Sound to the Inner Ear Is Most Likely Through Cranial Aqueducts a paper
by Ronald L. Seaman
Tesla Man Out of Time a book by Margaret Cheney, published by Simon & Schuster, 1981 Planet Earth: The Latest
Weapon of War a book by Rosalie Bertell, published by Black Rose Books, 2001
Lightning to the Ionosphere? an article by Otha H. Vaughn, Jr. and Bernard Vonnegut, published by Weatherwise, 1982
Weather as a Force Multiplier: Owning the Weather in 2025 by Col. Tamzy J. House, Lt. Col. James B. Near, Jr., LTC
William B. Shields (USA), Maj. Ronald J. Celentano, Maj. David M. Husband, Maj. Ann E. Mercer and Maj. James E. Pugh,
published by the United States Air Force, 1996
Space Operations: Through the Looking Glass (Global Area Strike System) a paper by Lt Col Jamie G.G. Varni, Mr. Gregory
M. Powers, Maj Dan S. Crawford, Maj Craig E. Jordan, and Maj Douglas L. Kendall, published by the United States Air Force,
1996
Where Did the Towers Go? Evidence of Directed Free-energy Technology on 9/11a book by Judy Wood, published by
The New Investigation, 2010
U.S. patent #7,582,809 Sorghum Aluminum Tolerance Gene, SBMATE by Leon Kochian, Jiping Liu, Jurandir Vieira de
Magalhaes, Claudia Teixeira Guimaraes, Robert Eugene Schaffert, Vera Maria Carvalho Alves, and Patricia Klein
The World According to Monsanto: Pollution, Corruption, and the Control of the Worlds Food Supply a book by
Marie-Monique Robin, published by The New Press, 2010
Weather Modification Programs, Problems, Policy, and Potential a report by the Congressional Research Service, published
by the University Press of the Pacific, 2004, reprinted from the 1978 edition
Interdepartmental Committee for Atmospheric Sciences reports 1960-1978, published by the Federal Council for Science and
Technology
Clouds of Secrecy a book by Dr. Leonard A. Cole, published by Rowman & Littlefield, 1988 In the Name of Science a book
by Andrew Goliszek, published by St. Martins Press, 2003 Chemtrails Confirmed a book by William Thomas, published by
Bridger House Publishers, 2004
Weather as a Force Multiplier: Owning the Weather in 2025 by Col. Tamzy J. House, Lt. Col. James B. Near, Jr., LTC
William B. Shields (USA), Maj. Ronald J. Celentano, Maj. David M. Husband, Maj. Ann E. Mercer and Maj. James E. Pugh,
published by the United States Air Force, 1996
The Environmental Applications of Wireless Sensor Networks a paper by Ima Ituen and Guno Sohn
Global Environmental MEMS Sensors (GEMS): A Revolutionary Observing System for the 21st Century a report by John
Manobianco, PhD, prepared for NASA Institute for Advanced Concepts, published by ENSCO, Inc., 2002
Electro-optically Tunable Microring Resonators in Lithium Niobate a paper by Andrea Guarino, Gorazd Poberaj, Daniele
Rezzonico, Riccardo DeglInnocenti, and Peter Gunter of the Nonlinear Optics Laboratory, Institute of Quantum Electronics,
Zurich, Switzerland, published by Nature, July, 2007
Ecoscience a book by Paul R. Ehrlich, Anne H. Ehrlich, and John P. Holdren, published by W.H. Freeman, 1977 The
Georgia Guidestones a book by Bill Bridges, published by Elberton Granite Finishing, 1981

Pharmacist Speaks Out: Get Off Prescription Drugs, Avoid Vaccines


June 4 2016 | From: ThePeoplesChemist
You gotta meet Margaret*. I changed her name to protect her privacy. She recently emailed me to
vent against Western Medicines push to get everyone hooked on drugs and stab kids with risky,
ineffective vaccines! Interestingly enough, she has seen medicine from an angle that most people
arent privy too.
Margaret is a pharmacist. With a Pharmacy (PharmD) degree, and over two decades working in the field of
pharmacy, shes seen firsthand how guideline-driven medicine has artificially forced every patient into the same
clinical box, thereby hooking them on drugs.

The result is that Doctors dont THINK anymore - they just do what theyre told, which is to put people on
meds. So many people in medicine (doctors, nurses, pharmacists) dont really question anything, says Margaret. Theyre
so busy that they just do what the guidelines say to do, rather than look at individuals and what makes sense.
A former employee of a major pharmaceutical company, Margaret left her job so she could spend more time with her family.
At the time, she questioned her former employers huge marketing budget and now believes the marketing of drugs to the
general public - along with guidelines-driven medicine - needs to stop.

"We never get the flu shot, she adds, referring to herself and her family. Ive read the entire package insert and
can take on anyone who tries to tell me that it is useful with just that information alone. My years in pharma taught
me just how clinical trials are designed to show the planned outcome - they arent real studies at all.

In a world where most parents dont even bother READING the flu vaccine insert, Margaret is a refreshing example of a
mother who takes charge.
She initially contacted me to ask: Shane, what has been the response been to what you write about vaccines? For those of
us with licenses to protect, we dont feel very safe voicing concerns about vaccines.
I understood completely.
Big Pharma fires anyone who speaks out. They work hard to cover up the truth.
I told Margaret what I tell everyone: The science cant be disputed. And since my job doesnt depend on parroting the status
quo, Ive had no problems whatsoever. My four kids are all unvaccinated and are strong, healthy, and vibrant. Attending
school has never been an issue, and who cares anyway, health comes first.
Curious to learn more about Margarets experience as a pharmacist, I asked for an interview.

She generously agreed to share more of her perspective as a pharmacist. What follows is a candid interview in which
Margaret encourages parents to stop, THINK, and get a reality check when it comes to vaccinating their kids. Commenting
on how vaccines are pushed - and sometimes even forced - on everyone, she says, Theyve done a very good job of
psychological indoctrination.
She also shares her thoughts on what needs to change in mainstream medicine, and why she chose to stop vaccinating.
*Not her real name. Name changed to protect her privacy.

1. Please summarise your overall pharmacy experience and how youve generally worked with
patients / clients.
Pharmacist: Im a pharmacist, but not one who is into mainstream medicine. I have broad pharmacy experience, and many
years working in Pharma (just like you, Shane)!

I heard the mantra, Todays drugs fund tomorrows discoveries but after a while, that didnt justify the huge
marketing budget in my opinion. I quit working at one of the worlds largest pharmaceutical companies without a job lined up.
I had my first child, and I wanted to hang out with him and figure out next steps.

I think I like retail pharmacy best, because its so important to talk to patients about their medications, especially people who
want to make lifestyle changes to get OFF their medications. But many people prefer to take a pill rather than change.

2. Why did you choose to become a pharmacist?

Margaret: I really stumbled into it! I never thought of myself as a science person, but I took some science classes and found
I liked them. Pharmacy is just more science.

3. What are you most proud of when it comes to your career?

Margaret: Ive enjoyed helping people. Especially if people are interested in lifestyle changes to get off medications - thats a
pleasure to help them.

4. What has shocked you the most, while working as a pharmacist?

Margaret: Even in pharmacy school, my professors stressed that things would change in our careers and we had to be
adaptable. Yet so many people in medicine (doctors, nurses, pharmacists) dont really question anything. Theyre
so busy (the workloads are so heavy!) that they just do what the guidelines say to do, rather than look at
individuals and what makes sense.
When I was a student, clinical pathways or guidelines were a new thing, and now theyve become essentially law - if you
dont follow treatment guidelines with what you recommend for a patient, you can be sued. The art of medicine has, for all
practical purposes, disappeared. Now its the Law of Medicine.

5. What is your biggest critique of mainstream medicine?

Margaret: Guideline-driven medicine. Most people have no idea about this and the effect on their health. It makes everyone
fit into the same box, and it drives your doctors treatment within that box instead of individualizing it. [Everyone gets same
drug, same dose.]
Doctors dont THINK anymore - they just do what theyre told. The only guideline I think is unquestionable is the one for
cardiac arrest - follow that emergency clinical pathway, for sure. Otherwise, its all about hooking patients on drugs.

6. Have you chosen to vaccinate anyone in your family?

Up to 6 months, yes. But not all of them. At that point, I pulled the plug on vaccines (see here why), as well as our
pediatrician. Now I use religious waivers. Unfortunately, after the vaccines, one of my children became very lethargic. I had
been researching them a lot up until then, and I decided to stop vaccinating. From that point on I focused on nursing and
boosting immunity naturally.
Later in life, my child was allergic to virtually all nuts and sesame. It didnt run in our family. I researched the sesame and
found that the allergy is increasing in places like Asia and Israel, where most vaccines are in sesame oil.
Oils in vaccines dont have to be labeled because theyre considered not active ingredients, and they may vary on
the lot. Manufacturers break up lots of vaccines and ship them all over, so that theres no pattern to any
reactions. Unfortunately, this can lead to the onslaught of allergic reactions.

7. Do you get the flu shot?

Margaret: We never get the flu shot. Ive read the entire package insert and can take on anyone who tries to tell me that it is
useful with just that information alone.
It doesnt work.
If you read the package insert, youll see that in the non-treated group, 4% got the flu. In the treatment arm, about
2% got the flu. So your risk of getting the flu is only 4% anyway. They got the 50% reduction in flu from simple math
2% is half of 4%. But your odds of NOT getting the flu are 96%.
If you put it that way, then the shot is not very compelling, is it? But they made it sound like it was, by telling you your risk
was reduced by 50% without telling you what the real odds of getting the flu were in the first place.

My years in pharma taught me just how clinical trials are designed to show the planned outcome they arent real studies
at all.

8. You mentioned, My years in pharma taught me how clinical trials are designed to show the
planned outcome - they arent real studies at all. Can you explain what this means for the average
American with respect to vaccines?

Margaret: Study design is not complicated. You have your null hypothesis, which supposes that there is no difference. And
you have your hypothesis, which supposes that there IS a difference.
To prove your hypothesis, you usually need such a big number of people that the study is too expensive to conduct. So they
go cheap and do smaller studies that show numerical differences, but not statistically significant differencesand they run
with that. All they ever need to do is show that their drug is not worse than the other drug, and they win. Then they can do a
marketing spin with the data, like they have with the flu vaccine.

9. In your experience, how is the truth about vaccines being covered up?

Margaret: Studies and the lack of studies. The studies that are currently out there - even those for vaccine approvals - quite
clearly show there are serious side effects. We dont know who is most at risk, yet the uniform mandate that all these
vaccines be given is forced on all of us.
People deny that there are serious side effects, and that makes me crazy because the package insert for the vaccines
themselves say there are side effects! There is not one other drug where the dose is the same no matter how big the
child isand that is troubling. We should be studying why some children react badly. There are genetic differences
among us that influence the efficacy or safety of other drugsyet if you question vaccines, youre called Jenny McCarthy
or youre told you dont know the science.
But I DO know the science, and the science is not being examined at all. Thats irresponsible.

10. In your professional opinion, should ALL people be required by law to take vaccines?

Margaret: No. Unlike most other drugs that you could stop taking if you had a reaction, you cant take back a vaccine. A
persons body is so precious, and even if hes a total looney tunes, he has a right to say no to a drug. Its not like saying no
to breathing! And its not like smoking around children- that is so clearly dangerous, we all know that.
At one time, smoking was said to be helpful to athletes and was even promoted for athletic performance! The tide turned on
smoking, once someone blew that whistle.
There have been whistle-blowers for vaccines, yet the train for mandates keeps on going. When you look at the incidence of
chronic conditions among children today, you have to ask, Why? Is it our food quality? Is it vaccines? Is it air and water
pollution? Is it chemicals in our homes? Because we dont know for sure, it should not be mandated.

11. What do you think about how vaccines are being pushed - and sometimes even forced - on
everyone?

Margaret: Theyve done a very good job of psychological indoctrination. Most people believe vaccines have saved
millions of lives from HORRIBLE diseases like measles, mumps, and even chickenpox. But when I ask people why they
think those diseases were chosen for vaccines, as opposed to something like HIV, they have no answer. The answer is
simplemaking a vaccine for measles was easy. Making one for HIV is very hard. So drug development went the path of
least resistance.

Then once a vaccine existed, suddenly the disease was proclaimed to be killing millions when it never did. Chickenpox is a
great example. Everyone in my childhood had chickenpox and not one person I knew died or even had serious
complications. By the way, the rationale for the development of the chickenpox vaccine was entirely economic to
avoid parents missing work. It was never about the disease itself being fatal.

But once they had the vaccine, they then proclaimed that chickenpox was such a serious disease.

12. What is your biggest concern about vaccines and our kids today?

Margaret: We dont know the long-term impact of what theyve been given. We know now that there were simian viruses in
the measles vaccines given in the 60s, and those simian viruses were oncogenic, meaning cancer-causing.

There are also some very good animal studies that show an increase in autoimmune diseases in vaccinated primates. I
worry most about the link with autoimmune diseases like MS, Rheumatoid arthritis, and lupus.

13. What would you like parents to know about vaccines?

Margaret: I think people have to stop and take a reality check. Depending on the age of your parents, ask them if they had
measles, mumps, chickenpox, or pertussis. Ask them if it was really bad or if they knew anyone who died. Dont ask about
polio. (Polio, by the way, still exists today under different names, so it was not eradicated by the vaccine, and most cases of
polio are not paralytic.) I asked my own parents, and they said they had all those diseases, and they really werent a big
deal.
The best treatment for measles is vitamin A. Its a disease that is quite mild if you have adequate vitamin A. Everyone used
to know that, which is why so many kids back in the day took Cod Liver oil. Being sick sometimes is a part of life.

We have to decide if were so terrified of ordinary diseases like measles that we would rather vaccinate against it and risk
worse consequences like autoimmune diseases or cancer. Id take measles over cancer any day.

We also need to educate parents that some of these diseases are actually MEANT to happen to children. Having some of
these diseases triggers developmental processes in children. Just like a longitudinal study I saw where it was noted that
children had growth spurts after they recovered from being ill. Being sick occasionally may actually be necessary for normal
development.

14. What do you think needs to change in mainstream medicine?

Margaret: Stop the guidelines. Doctors are now reimbursed on their adherence to guidelines, which is why they
push vaccines. They are paid less by insurance carriers if their vaccine rates decline, so they kick patients out who wont
do what theyre told to do.

Thats why you should offer to pay cash (if you can) when you see your doctors so that they have less incentive to
promote these things on you.
And stop allowing the marketing of drugs to the public. When that was approved, all of this craziness was unleashed.
Its been very detrimental ever since, because the media will never question something they make money from. Once
they no longer make advertising money from drug companies, then the real questions will be asked.

If people think the only reason any drug or vaccine was developed was to do good, they need to think again. Drug
companies have marketing departments just like any other industry. Its all about sales and how to convince (or force) you to
take this drug, or get that vaccine.

Iodine - Suppressed Knowledge That Can Change Your Life


May 30 2016 | From: Sott
Given the highly toxic state most people find themselves in, the rapidly changing environment
which we live in, and the incredible ability that iodine has to strengthen people's health and
improve their lives, I decided to write the following summary about iodine supplementation as an
introduction to the subject.
The information presented here is based on preliminary research available on this forum discussion thread on
iodine and on the books Iodine: Why You Need It, Why You Can't Live Without It (5th Edition) by Dr. Brownstein,
and The Iodine Crisis by Lynne Farrow.

Related: Iodine: The Miracle Mineral For Brain, Body And Spirit

Iodine is an essential micro-nutrient. This means every single cell of every single person needs it. Evolutionary
biologists reckon that seafood consumption, and thus iodine absorption, played an important role in human brain
development and evolution. Iodine also has excellent antibacterial, anticancer, antiparasitic, antifungal, and antiviral
properties.

Unfortunately, iodine deficiency in the general population is of pandemic proportions in our modern world due to
iodine's displacement in our bodies by environmental toxins such as bromide, pesticides, and food additives. Modern
farming techniques have also led to deficiencies of iodine and other minerals in the soil. Thus, crops grown in iodine-
deficient soil are deficient in iodine.
Certain diets and lifestyles can also predispose a person to develop iodine deficiency. Those who eat a lot of bakery
products (breads, pasta, etc), which contain high amounts of bromide, are at risk. So are vegetarians and those who don't
like sea food, sea vegetables or salt.

According to Dr. Brownstein, author of Iodine: Why You Need It, Why You Can't Live Without It, about one-third of the global
populations live in a region of iodine deficiency. He and other iodine researchers have tested thousands of people, and
found consistent results: approximately 96% of patients test low for iodine.
The World Health Organization has recognized that iodine deficiency is the world's greatest single cause of preventable
mental retardation. Iodine deficiency has been identified as a significant public health problem in 129 countries and up to
72% of the world's population is affected by an iodine deficiency disorder.

The following illnesses are related to iodine deficiency:

Breast cancer
Thyroid cancer
Ovarian cancer
Uterus cancer
Prostate cancer
Autoimmune thyroid illnesses
Hypothyroidism
Fibrocystic breast disease
ADHD
Chronic fatigue
Fibromyalgia

What's more, iodine has been used to treat the following conditions:

ADHD/ADD
Atherosclerosis
Breast diseases
Dupuytren's conctracture
Excess mucous production
Fibrocystic breasts
Goiter
Hemorrhoids
Headaches and migraine headaches
Fibromyalgia
Chronic fatigue
Hypertension
Infections
Keloids
Liver diseases
Nephrotic syndrome
Ovarian disease
Parotid duct stones
Peyronie's disease
Prostate disorders
Sebaceous cysts
Thyroid disorders
Vaginal infections
Syphilis
Uterine fibroids
Heavy metal poisoning (mercury, lead, arsenic)
Scarlet fever
Bronchitis and pneumonia
Obesity
Depression
Breast pain
Eczema
Malaria
Genito-urinary diseases
Rheumatism
Tonsillitis
Cough
Stomach pains
Brain fog
Allergies
Menstrual irregularities
Gum infection
Psoriasis
Heart arrhythmia
High cholesterol
Constipation
Hair thinning
Type 2 diabetes
Eye problems
GERD
Multiple sclerosis
Gastroparesis
Small intestine bacterial overgrowth
Etc, etc...

The broad cross-section of conditions improved thanks to iodine supplementation is a big clue to the nutrient's
importance and widespread deficiency.

According to Lynne Farrow, author of The Iodine Crisis, iodine's medicinal use dates back 15,000 years. It was the first
treatment of choice in the 19th century for tumors and aggressive diseases of obscure origin. Farrow also argues that the
notion that refined iodized salt is sufficient to meet our daily needs has been the most dangerous misconception about
iodine.
According to Farrow's and Brownstein's research, only 10% of the iodine in salt gets absorbed, at best. Most people today
avoid refined salts due to health concerns, and due to the misconception that salt (of any kind) is bad for cardiovascular
health.

Iodine's RDA is 150mcg (micrograms, which equals 0.15mg), an established calculation based on how much iodine the
thyroid gland needs to avoid goiter. Other organs' requirements aren't factored into this number. In addition to that, the
effects of widespread iodine-blocking pollutants introduced during the last century were never considered in this calculation.

Our Toxic World

Even if you manage to consume some four pounds of fresh seafood daily in order to meet your iodine requirement, you
can't live in a clean bubble on this planet. The Fukushima nuclear plant disaster alone is likely to have contaminated
much of the world's seaweed, an important source of dietary iodine. Then there are the 2,053 nuclear explosions conducted
all over the world from the 1940s to the 1990s, and more recently the depleted uranium munitions used in America's wars.
Let's not forget about Chernobyl either.

It is known that radioactive iodine, used in many medical procedures, will further exacerbate an iodine deficiency problem.
Also, exposure to many chemicals that inhibit iodine binding in the body (e.g., bromide, fluoride, chloride) further
worsens the problem. Many countries still fluoridate their water despite evidence of its health hazards. What's worse is that
fluoride is even more toxic when there is an iodine deficiency.
The good news is that iodine supplementation in the proper amounts increases urinary excretion of heavy metals
such as lead and mercury, and has a detoxifying effect by increasing excretion of fluoride, bromide and chloride
derivatives. This is very important since bromine, fluoride, and chloride are toxic halides, which compete with each other for
absorption and receptor-binding in the body.

Perchlorate - a chlorine compound - damages the iodine transport system in our bodies. It may cause cancer and
weakening of the immune system, even at low levels. Perchlorate is used in countless industrial products - from everyday
applications like car air bags and leather tanning to rocket fuel.

Bromine intoxication is associated with delirium, psychomotor retardation, schizophrenia and hallucinations. People who
ingest bromine feel dull and apathetic and have difficulty concentrating. Bromide can also cause severe depression,
headaches and irritability. These symptoms can be present even with low levels of bromine in the diet.

Dr. Brownstein explains how bromine interferes with iodine utilization in the thyroid, and anywhere else iodine concentrates
in the body. Due to their interference with iodine-binding in the body, bromine and fluoride are known as "goitrogens" - they
promote the formation of goiter. Bromine and fluoride are toxic substances with no therapeutic use in our bodies.
Bromine, a known carcinogen, can also bind to iodine receptors in the breast. Women with breast cancer have much larger
amounts of the toxic halides bromine and fluoride compared to women without breast cancer. On the other hand, iodine has
anti-carcinogenic properties.

Women's breasts are major sites for iodine storage. Maintaining adequate iodine levels are necessary to ensure an
adequately functioning thyroid gland and normal breast architecture, as well as maintaining normal structure in all glands
throughout the body.

As Dr. Brownstein reports:

"All of the glands of the body depend on adequate iodine levels to function optimally. Animal studies have shown
problems with the adrenal glands, the thymus gland, the ovaries, the hypothalamus and pituitary axis, as well as
the entire endocrine system, when there is an iodine deficient state.

In fact, the ovaries have the second highest concentration of iodine in the body next to the thyroid gland. An iodine-
deficient state will lead to an imbalanced hormonal system. lt is impossible to have a balanced hormonal
system without ensuring an adequate iodine intake.

Large amounts of iodine are also stored in many other areas of the body including the salivary glands,
cerebrospinal fluid and the brain, gastric mucosa, choroid plexus,breasts, ovaries, and the ciliary body of
the eye. In the brain, iodine concentrates in the substantia nigra, an area of the brain that has been
associated with Parkinson's disease."

Medical 'Iodo-Phobia'

According to Dr. Guy E. Abraham, 'medical iodophobia' - the unwarranted fear of using and recommending inorganic, non-
radioactive iodine/iodide - may have caused more human misery and death than both World Wars combined by
preventing meaningful clinical research in the daily amount of iodine needed for optimal physical and mental health.

Abraham was one of the world's leading researchers on iodine, suggesting that the required daily intake of iodine necessary
for maintaining iodine sufficiency for the whole body was 13mg per day.
At sufficiency, the thyroid gland holds a total of approximately 50mg of iodine. The thyroid gland needs approximately
6mg/day of iodine for sufficiency.

The breasts need at least 5mg of iodine; that leaves 2mg of iodine for the rest of the body. Others suggest, based on Dr.
Guy E. Abraham's research, that healthy individuals need 1-3 mg/day as a maintenance dose. This is still well above the
RDA of 150ug/day of iodine!

Many healthcare professionals are scared of iodine due to ignorance of its biochemistry and physiology. They've been led
to believe that iodine causes hypothyroidism, when in reality it helps to normalize thyroid function. One of the
reasons for this misconception is due to high TSH levels in iodine therapy. TSH (Thyroid-stimulating hormone) is a test to
monitor thyroid function. It usually rises when there is hypothyroidism. However, as Dr. Brownstein explains:

"TSH has another function besides stimulating thyroid hormone production. It also helps stimulate the body's
production of the iodine transport molecules - the sodium-iodide symporter (NIS). Without adequate
amounts of NIS, iodine would not be able to enter the cells and be utilized. [...]

[An] iodine-deficient patient's body does not require a large amount of NIS since there is little iodine that needs to
be transported into the cells. However, when this individual begins to supplement with iodine, the extra iodine now
needs to be transported into the cells. One way the body will accomplish this is to increase the production of TSH
to stimulate more NIS. [...]

How long does TSH stay elevated? l have found that TSH may remain elevated for up to 6 months before lowering
to normal. How high do TSH levels rise? The normal TSH level ranges from 0.5-4.5mlU/L. l have witnessed TSH
levels elevated to 5-30mlU/L for a period of time sometimes up to six months-before falling back to the normal
range. [...] The TSH will decline back to the reference range after the thyroid gland is saturated with iodine."

Iodine does not cause hypothyroidism. On the contrary, the main thyroid hormones, T4 and T3, require enough iodine in
order to be produced. When an individual is iodine-deficient, hypothyroidism results because there is not enough raw
material to produce T4 and T3.

Supplementing with iodine can improve or even heal hypothyroidism without the use of synthetic drugs. Moreover, research
suggests that taking thyroid hormone when iodine deficiency is present can worsen the iodine deficiency as the body's
metabolic rate increases.

Dr. Brownstein reports how taking thyroid hormone when iodine deficiency is present increases the risk of breast cancer and
possibly other cancers as well. Anything that lowers the body's iodine stores or increases the body's need for it could be
predicted to make things worse.

Another misconception is that iodine is contraindicated in autoimmune thyroid diseases such as Grave's disease and
Hashimoto's. In reality, it is those who are iodine-deficient who are at an increased risk of developing antibodies against the
thyroid gland.

Autoimmune disorders - including thyroid ones - are examples of excess oxidative stress in the body. Oxidative
stress is inflammation in the body and it is akin to a fire burning. You can put the fire out with the appropriate "water": anti-
oxidants, unrefined salt, nutrients, an anti-inflammatory diet (gluten-free, non-GMO, moderated in carbohydrates AND with
plenty of animal fat).

People afflicted with autoimmune thyroid disorders need to take specific nutrients along with iodine in order to heal the
damage done by so much oxidative stress and lack of iodine.

Is there a condition when iodine is actually dangerous? Yes, and it is extremely rare. My main past concerns on
iodine are related to what Dr. Brownstein shared in his book:

"Does iodine therapy cause hyperthyroidism? l was taught in medical school that it did, especially in patients
suffering from autoimmune thyroid disorders such as Graves' or Hashimoto's disease. Young doctors-in-training
are still taught this today. So, let me answer the question: Very rarely.

Between my partners and myself, we estimate that over 12 years, less than 10 patients out of thousands
treated became hyperthyroid when treated with iodine.
When I lecture to doctors, l tell them one particular condition can predispose to iodine-induced hyperthyroidism.
This condition occurs in a patient who has an autonomously functioning nodule in their thyroid. Sometimes
this is referred to as a hot nodule on a thyroid scan.

An autonomously functioning nodule is not under the feedback control of the pituitary and the hypothalamus.
It functions independently of the thyroid gland. When iodine is present, these nodules can take up the iodine
and produce copious amounts of thyroid hormone leading to hyperthyroidism. This condition can be diagnosed
with a thyroid scan. However, it is most frequently diagnosed after a trial of iodine therapy is given and the
patient becomes hyperthyroid after taking the first couple of doses.

How do you treat a patient with an autonomously functioning thyroid nodule? These patients must avoid iodine
supplements and food (such as seaweed ) that is high in iodine UNTIL the nodule is surgically removed."

Given the pervasive misconceptions about such an extremely beneficial substance as iodine, one may wish to consider how
greater knowledge and use of it may be purposefully suppressed. As has previously been observed and analyzed on
Sott.net, there are numerous ways in which the Western allopathic approach to medicine has led so many individuals astray
on the road to living a truly healthy life.

Among those we've seen are the benefits of a low-carb, high animal fat diet, supplementation with vitamins and other vital
nutrients, the modes and reasons for detoxification, etc.

But given the huge amounts of money and power that Big Pharma and other health-related industries stand to make by
actually keeping people in poor health, it is no wonder that so many of us still are!

Still, at the end of the day, whether the ignorance of the larger modern medical community to employ iodine and other
holistic healing approaches is due to simple ignorance, or more nefarious reasons, the fact is that now, in light of this
invaluable information about iodine, we can choose to take responsibility for our own health with this powerhouse approach.
But the choice is ours to make of course.

Iodine Protocol
Take enough iodine. As mentioned above, the RDA for iodine does not provide nearly enough for the body. Most people
need from 12-50mg/day of a combination of iodine and iodide in the form of lugol's solution or tableted lugol's
solution. Others need much less.

There are several percentages available of lugol's solution, but don't angst over them. You can use the following table as a
rough guide:

Lugol's content per drop Iodine Iodide Total

2% 1.0mg 1.50mg 2.50mg

3% 1.5mg 2.25mg 3.75mg

5% 2.5mg 3.75mg 6.25mg

7% 3.5mg 5.25mg 8.75mg

10% 5.0mg 7.50mg 12.50mg

15% 7.5mg 11.25mg 18.75mg

Start with a single drop of lugol's solution after breakfast and build up by one drop every three days until a balance of
general well being is achieved. Starting with the lowest dose and building up while detox reactions are managed would be
the reasonable thing to do.

Avoid taking lugol after 4pm as it can energize and give insomnia if taken too late. Antimicrobial doses for lugol's solution
and potassium iodide are also discussed in the forum thread on iodine.

Take vitamins B2 (riboflavin) and B3 (niacinamide) in order to stimulate the proper functioning of the NADPH system - this
will help metabolize iodine properly, decrease the formation of damaging auto-antibodies and ensure enough energy
production in the form of ATP. How much? 100mg of B2 and 500mg of B3 twice per day.

Take antioxidants in order to decrease the fire of oxidative damage. Vitamin C 3-10 grams throughout the day. Take 3
grams of vitamin C at least one hour after your lugol dose, preferably two hours later. You can repeat the dose according to
bowel tolerance if there are strong detox reactions triggered by the iodine. Avoid taking vitamin C after 4pm as it can give
insomnia due to its energizing effects.
Take magnesium, 300-600mg per day. Magnesium helps with detox reactions as it participates in +300 detox pathways in
the body. Magnesium also acts against excess intracellular calcium levels which fuel oxidative stress. Magnesium glycinate
is a favored one.

Take selenium or L-selenomethionine 200mcg per day. Safe range: 100mcg-400mcg. Adequate selenium levels are
necessary for regulating thyroid function and iodine metabolism. If selenium is deficient, autoimmune thyroid disorders can
develop. Selenium is important for activating thyroid hormones and it decreases side effects of iodine therapy.

Protect the liver. Take N-acetylcysteine (600-1200mg per day), alpha lipoic acid (200-600mg) or milk thistle.

Drink enough water and take unrefined salted water in order to detoxify bromide. Chloride is an effective competitive
inhibitor of toxic bromide and unrefined salt is sodium chloride. It is impossible to lower bromide compounds in the body if
you don't ingest unrefined salt, some 1-1.5 teaspoons per day. An adequate intake of unrefined salt in the body is also
essential to minimize inflammatory oxidative stress. Take at least 1/4 teaspoon of unrefined salt in 8 oz. of water upon rising
and at least twice a day. Make sure to take your lugol away from the salted water, at least 40 min-1 hour.

In short:
1/2 to 1 tsp of sea salt in a tall glass of water upon arising.

Lugol's (start with lowest dose) after breakfast or meals, don't take it after 4pm (it energizes you).

200 mg of B2 (riboflavin) per day. Can be taken in two doses with your lugols.

1000 mg of B3 (niacinamide) taken in two doses with lugols.

200 mcg selenium (not more!) ONCE a day with morning dose.

3 to 10 grams of vitamin C - divide into two doses taken an hour after lugols.

500 mg of magnesium - glycinate is excellent - taken at night.

Protect the liver with NAC, ALA and/or milk thistle.

Chest Infections: Bronchial & Pneumonia


Comment: It has been noted that a super supplement combination of Iodine + MSM (see below) + Magnesium is
extermely powerful in defeating the serious and long lasting chest infections that have become prevalent in recent
years.

Related: The Health & Healing Benefits Of Organic Sulphur (Sulfur): MSM (Methylsulfonylmethane)

Detox Troubleshooting

Symptoms of bromide toxicity can be present even with low levels of bromide in the diet. If there is an iodine deficiency,
bromide toxicity is accelerated. Unfortunately, bromide toxicity is very common. It is used as an antibacterial agent for pools
and hot tubs. It is also used in pesticides and in some medications.
Bromide toxicity leads to thyroid problems including autoimmune ones. The body can eliminate bromide only when there is
sufficient iodine available.

One single drop of lugol's solution will start to detoxify the bromide accumulated in your body.

Bromide detox reactions triggered by iodine may include:

Eye lid twitching


Foot twitching
Tingling in hands or feet
Dark thoughts
Depression
Anxiety
Emotionalism
Mouth and tongue sores and cuts
Acne-like lesions (zinc can sometimes help with these)
Skin cuts
Hair loss
Brain fog
Aches
Rash
Metallic taste
Sinus ache
Cherry angiomas
Runny nose
Headache
Sedation
Lethargy
Odd swallowing sensation
Body odor
Unusual urine color or odor
Dry mouth
Urethral spasm
Frequent urination which is commonly mistaken for urinary infection
Diarrhea
Constipation
Vision changes
Irritability
Increased salivation
Dream changes
Hormone changes
Kidney pain
Breast tenderness

And so forth...

In order to palliate these detox symptoms, make sure you drink enough salted water and take at least the recommended
supplements listed above. You can do pulse-dosing iodine where you stop taking iodine for at least 48 hours to let your body
and kidneys clear out the bromide. Notice that if the detox symptoms developed when you were increasing your iodine dose,
you can always back off your dose to a lower one.

If you have a FIR sauna blanket, you can use it in order to help detoxify any toxic mobilized by the iodine.

Always Do Your Own Research

This article does not constitute medical advice or serve as a substitute for doing your own research to acquire the
appropriate knowledge on iodine therapy.

It is our conclusion that widespread knowledge of the many benefits of iodine is being suppressed. Even if iodine is
generally well known, it has now become clear how grossly undervalued it is and how little is known about its potential to
transform human health.

Further Reading

Iodine: Why You Need It, Why You Can't Live Without It (5th Edition) by Dr. Brownstein.

The Iodine Crisis by Lynne Farrow.

Iodine and Potassium Iodide thread, Cassiopaea forum.


Iodine publications at optimox.com.

Related Articles:

Iodine treats breast cancer and more, overwhelming evidence

Iodine deficiency linked to thyroid and breast cancer, fibrocystic breast disease, infertility, obesity, mental retardation &
halide toxemia
Living in a toxic world: Iodine to the rescue

Iodine for Health

Iodine: An old life-saving medicine - rediscovered!

Comment: We encourage readers to do their own research about this substance and, as always, first consult with their
physician before experimenting with iodine supplementation.

The 20 Biggest Cancer Lies You've Been Brainwashed To Believe By The For-Profit
Cancer Industry + Cancer Cures Exposed: Natural Medicine Revealed As The Answer
May 24 2016 | From: NaturalNews / GreenMedInfo
You've been taught all sorts of lies about cancer by the "cancer profiteers" - the institutions,
cancer doctors, oncology centers and chemotherapy drug makers who profit from cancer.

In order to keep their profits flowing, they have to keep you in the dark about cancer truths: How it originates, how
it can be prevented and how it can even be reversed!

Related: Disturbing: Researchers Finally Confirm That Cancer Is A Purely Man-Made Disease
If you or a loved one have been diagnosed with cancer (or even suspect you might have cancer), it's crucial to learn how the
for-profit cancer industry has been lying to you. Remember, cancer doctors like the criminal oncologist Dr. Farid Fatafalsely
diagnosed people with cancer to make money off "treating" them with deadly chemicals known as "chemotherapy." Dr.
Fata, who worked out of a state-of-the-art cancer center in Detroit, is now a convicted felon.

Related: U.S. Dept. of Justice publishes horrifying statements from victims of the criminal cancer industry -
Constant, unbearable pain while oncologist made millions

But there are more criminals working inside the cancer industry: Oncologists, cancer surgeons, breast cancer specialists
and mammography con artists. Their goal is to scare you with a false positive diagnosis, then convince you to undergo
surgery, chemotherapy or radiation therapy that you don't even need!

To avoid all that and maybe even save your own life, learn and remember these top 20 biggest cancer lies you've been
brainwashed to believe.

And when you're ready for an even greater dose of the truth about cancer, register for this amazing upcoming summit called
The Truth About Cancer, which begins in just a few days. After hearing these astonishing interviews with pioneering holistic
cancer doctors and researchers, you'll never be victimized by the cancer industry again!

The Top 20 Cancer Lies Told by the Cancer Establishment

LIE #1. Cancer is caused by spontaneous bad luck, not cause and effect
TRUTH: Cancer always has a cause. There is no such thing as "spontaneous" cancer without cause, and the cancer
doctors who claim such phenomena exist are practicing nothing but "cancer voodoo" or pushing anti-science "disease
magic" rooted in mysticism rather than reality.

LIE #2. There is no cure for cancer


TRUTH: There are thousands of cures for cancer that already exist in the natural world and are being used every day all
across the planet, outside the controlled monopolies of pharmaceutical medicine and toxic chemotherapy.

Your body already knows how to cure cancer! It just needs the resources (and avoidance of toxic chemicals) to accomplish
it.

Related: Incredible Remission of Terminal Cancers with Gerson Therapy

LIE #3. Chemotherapy treats cancer


TRUTH: Chemotherapy is a kind of "chemical carpet-bombing" approach to barbaric medicine that poisons the entire
body. The measurable shrinkage of cancer tumors isn't a "treatment" for cancer at all. Unless the cancer tumor stem cells
are removed or destroyed, the tumor just grows back.
And once the body is poisoned by chemotherapy, its immune response to cancer is permanently compromised, which is
why cancer tends to return in multiple organs within 12-24 months after a person undergoes chemotherapy.

Learn the real story on cancer cures, cancer prevention and cancer industry fraud in The Truth About Cancer docu-series,
beginning in just a few days.

LIE #4. There's no such thing as an anti-cancer food or herb


TRUTH: Anti-cancer medicines have been created by Mother Nature since the beginning of life on our planet. There are
literally thousands of anti-cancer plant nutrients found in the foods at every grocery store (in just the fresh produce section!).
The anti-cancer properties of these powerful foods (like turmeric, garlic, onions, ginger and broccoli) rarely receive any
media attention because they can't be patented and turned into high-profit drugs.

LIE #5) None of the chemicals used in personal care products cause cancer
TRUTH: Popular personal care products are absolutely loaded with cancer-causing chemicals, including hormone
disruptors, known carcinogens and fragrance chemicals that promote mutagenesis.
Nearly all popular laundry detergents and fabric softeners are little more than cancer-causing cocktails of dangerous
chemicals marketed in happy-looking boxes.

LIE #6. Pesticides and herbicides don't cause cancer, either


TRUTH: Pesticides only work because they interfere with metabolic processes and kill organisms. By definition, they are
deadly, or they wouldn't be used as pesticides.
The world's most popular herbicide, glyphosate, is molecularly very similar to VX Nerve Gas, the most toxic substance ever
created by humankind... and developed as a weapon of mass destruction.

LIE #7. You're destined to get cancer and there's nothing you can do to stop it
TRUTH: There's nothing in your genes that programs you to have cancer. Your genetic code is actually a blueprint for
perfect health.
But when your body's cells are bathed in toxic, cancer-causing chemicals found in food and personal care products, it
causes good genes to turn bad (through mutations), leading to cancer. You have remarkable control over your exposure to
(or avoidance of) cancer-causing chemicals.

LIE #8) Cancer doctors want to help you eliminate cancer


TRUTH: Cancer doctors earn huge profits on chemotherapy, surgery and radiation treatments. It is in their financial
interests that you have recurring cancer, creating repeat business for them.
If they helped you eliminate cancer, they would lose your business and lose out on all the money they can make off your
disease!

LIE #9. Mammograms catch cancer early and thereby "save lives"
TRUTH: Mammograms emit ionizing radiation that causes cancer. The more mammograms you get, the more like you are
to eventually be diagnosed with cancer... caused by the mammography!
Additionally, there are so many false positives in mammography that statistics show mammograms ultimately harm 10
women for every 1 woman they might help.

LIE #10. A cancer diagnosis is always true and accurate


TRUTH: Cancer diagnoses are frequently exaggerated or fabricated out of thin air by cancer doctors looking to make
money off medically unjustified cancer treatments. Dr. Farid Fata, for example, was found guilty of criminal fraud for falsely
diagnosing healthy people with cancer at his popular oncology clinic in Detroit.
He deliberately lied to every patient who walked into his clinic, telling them they had cancer and that they would die without
his chemotherapy. He poisoned thousands of people and is now serving time in federal prison for his crimes. (He's just one
of many criminal cancer doctors in the industry...)

LIE #11. The drug companies want to find a cure for cance
TRUTH: The drug companies want to keep milking cancer for profits, and they have no interest whatsoever in eliminating
their revenue stream by curing cancer.
To do so would be financial suicide.

Related: Top 25 pharmaceutical companies by oncology sales

LIE #12. Komen for the Cure raises money to try to eliminate cancer
TRUTH: The corrupt, dishonest Komen group is a front for the cancer industry. It rakes in money from donations and uses
most of it to run mammography clinics in poor, inner city neighborhoods where people can be diagnosed with cancer and
turned over to chemotherapy treatments for sick profits.

Komen for the Cure is running a medical racket and has zero interest in curing cancer. It's the same racket we've been
promised since the 1960s: If we just had a few more billion dollars in funding, we'd find a cure!

LIE #13. Cancer is an "enemy" that has "invaded" your body, and it should be eliminated by
attacking the body with chemical weapons
TRUTH: Cancer is actually just your body's own cells multiplying out of control. It's not something you "catch" or something
that "infects" your body.

Modern medicine's makes a huge mistake in treating cancer like an infectious disease, bombarding the body with chemicals
to try to eradicate the cancer. But the cancer is your body's own cells gone haywire, so to kill the cancer, they have to very
nearly kill YOU at the same time!

LIE #14. Once the drug companies find a cure for cancer, they'll give it to the world for free
TRUTH: The drug companies are interested in profits, not saving humanity. The very idea that drug companies would
spend billions of dollars developing a drug and then give it awa