The hot new craze in Internet access is Wi-Fi and its soon-to- be big brother Wi-Max. Wi-Fi is a wireless connection that allows users to access the Internet without the computer being connected to a cable. And yes, it’s very convenient. Imagine walking from the sofa to the bedroom with your laptop and never loosing your connection. Imagine the freedom and flexibility afforded schools and office workers. No more ugly bothersome cables to tie you down. You’re free to roam the Internet with your fingers while roaming your home, school or office with your feet. Freedom to move and freedom to surf. Perfect for the individual who is on the go and up to date with the latest technology. You can even have free Internet access at your local coffee shop. Same for airports.

What a great idea. Or is it?

What exactly is Wi-Fi? Wi-Fi is a common term that stands for ‘wireless fidelity.’ It simply means that a computer can access the Internet without wires or cables. In other words, it allows one to have a wireless connection to the Internet. It’s like taking a cell phone base station and placing it in your home, schoolroom or office area. Wi-Fi is basically the same type of connection as used to operate a cell phone. It’s a product of convenience as it allows one to access the Internet with a desktop or laptop computer without the need for connecting cables. Moving from room to room with a laptop computer and no cables is a nice convenience although it certainly isn’t a necessity.

How does Wi-Fi work?
Wi-Fi is really very similar to your cell phone. Radio signals are transmitted from the computer or Bluetooth device to a wireless router, sometimes called a wireless access point (WAP) or wireless local area network (WLAN). The router then sends the signal to the Internet through a cable modem. So this router or wireless access point is really the device responsible for transmitting the harmful radio waves. Any number of computers or devices can be configured to connect to one wireless router to make Internet connections. The workable distance is about a range of 300 feet or more from the wireless access point while most distances for good connections are maintained at about 100 feet. And, of course there are many variables that can affect this connection. Laptop computers and Personal Digital Assistants (PDAs) are the most common devices utilizing Wi-Fi technology.

Wi-Fi Emits Radio Frequencies
Wireless connections emit radio frequency signals, or radiation, just like cell phones, cell phone towers and other wireless devices. Wi-Fi usually transmits its signal at frequencies in the range of 2.4GHz to 5 GHz. Cordless phones often transmit in the 2.4GHz to 5 GHz range, too, and this often causes the cordless phone to interfere with a wireless internet connection to a nearby computer. The Wi-Fi frequency is considerably higher than the frequencies used for cell phones which operate in the 850 MHz to 1900 MHz range. This higher frequency allows more data to be carried. However, as we’ll see later, it is not the frequency of the signal that does the damage to our health. So the higher Wi-Fi frequency isn’t really the issue at all when it comes to health considerations.

Wi-Fi Hotspots Now In Schools
Wi-Fi has become popular in the home, office, the airport and coffee shops. Many cities are now installing “hot spots” where one can take a laptop computer and freely access the Internet over the provided network. This is what is known as a “hot spot.” It’s a place to make a wireless connection to the Internet. And they are springing up everywhere. Entire cities are becoming wireless allowing one to connect to the Internet from anywhere in the city. And due to the ease of convenience Wi-Fi connections in schools are now becoming quite popular, too. No longer are computers hard-wired to a connection in a classroom. Connections are now virtual and allow the user, student or teacher, the freedom to connect anywhere in the school without the burden of being restricted by cable connections.

Why Wireless Connections Are Harmful
There are two potentially harmful mechanisms in which Wi-Fi users, including school children, may be harmed. The first mechanism involves the exposure to radiation from the distance or proximity of the user to the computer monitor. This form of exposure originates from the electromagnetic field being given off by the monitor itself and has nothing to do with the wireless connection. Electromagnetic radiation is given off by the computer screen regardless of whether the connection is wired or wireless. Any and all computer screens produce electromagnetic radiation. These electromagnetic fields can be substantial in strength and can reach levels much higher than the 1 milligauss (1 mG) threshold level of exposure recommended by experts as being safe. Such a field can easily be measured with an inexpensive instrument called a gauss meter.

The second mechanism of harm comes from the radiation or radio wave itself. The wireless signal, oscillating at 2.4 to 5 GHz, moves much too fast for the body to recognize. So this wave isn’t doing the damage. However, anytime any data or information is transmitted, say through our voice, through text messages or through the sending of information, the data is packaged and “piggy-backed” onto the first wave. This creates a second carrier wave and this wave is called the information- carrying radio wave, or ICRW. It is the information-carrying radio wave that is producing the harm. Here’s how this happens.

This second carrier wave, or ICRW, oscillates in a much lower Hertz (Hz) range that is easily recognized by the body. When the ICRW comes in contact with the body the body recognizes this wave and responds to it as if this carrier wave were some type of foreign invader. When this happens certain physiologic changes occur which are very significant. First, at the cellular level, the cell membrane becomes hard and inflexible. This occurs because the active transport channels shut down as the cell goes into a protection mode. This hardening effect of the cell membrane also causes the cell to lose its permeability, meaning needed nutrients can’t get inside the cell where they are needed. In other words, the cell doesn’t get nourished.

Conversely, since the cell membrane is hardened and less permeable, the toxins and free radicals that build up inside the cell, as a natural part of our daily metabolism, can’t get out. The buildup of toxins and free radicals inside the cell causes other problems. These toxic products damage the mitochondria in the cell. If you’ll remember from biology class the mitochondria are where energy for the body is produced. When this energy-producing process is damaged the cell begins to lose its ability to function.

In addition, cells lose their ability to communicate with one another. When one cell can’t communicate with another cell and messages don’t get sent or received the body can’t respond properly to any type of stress, injury, or invasion. Furthermore, the DNA inside the cell becomes damaged. Fragments of DNA break off and form something called micronuclei.

Micronuclei are precursors to cancer formation. And when enough energy is lost and when enough malnourishment occurs the cell eventually becomes dysfunctional and dies. When enough cells die the tissues are affected. When enough tissue is affected organs become damaged and don’t work properly. And the cascade of damaging events begin that can lead to a multitude of symptoms and failure of the body’s defense mechanisms to act appropriately.

The Wi-Fi Problem Think of Wi-Fi this way. It’s really nothing more than a small version of a cell phone tower placed in the classroom or office. Or, it could be similar to having a cordless phone in your home with multiple handsets throughout the house. The base station is the access point and all the peripheral phones connect with it wirelessly.

The radio frequency radiation being emitted is the same. The information-carrying radio wave is being transmitted continuously 24 hours a day. The connections from the computers and other wireless devices throughout the school, office or home to the wireless access points cause any user around them, (children, teacher, staff, etc.) to be continuously exposed. Everyone in the building is caught in the crossfire of the continual access to the wireless access points. Even non-users are exposed because of the blanketing effect of these wireless access points throughout the building. So no one escapes the exposure.

In understanding the danger of Wi-Fi we must remember that it is not the type of device, in this case a wireless access point or router that is important. Rather it is the type of radio frequency radio waves that are being produced by the device that are significant. Whether from a wireless router, a cell phone, a cell phone tower, or personal digital assistant (PDA), electromagnetic frequencies are produced by all these devices. We must look at the technology being used by these devices and not the device itself as the problem. This should be the primary concern as we evaluate their safety, particularly in the classroom.

Another important aspect of Wi-Fi exposure is that of modulation. Modulation refers to whether or not the signal frequency is constant or pulsed. The new digital cell phones operate on a pulsed frequency, as does all wireless technology. Studies have shown that these pulsed signals are a greater risk than analog, non-pulsed signals. 1

Certainly, by the addition of any type of wireless we are adding to the burden of electropollution we are all currently exposed to. Special consideration should be given to the additional exposure that Wi-Fi technology would bring to those in a classroom, including the instructors, teachers, staff and certainly students.

Children Are More Vulnerable
Concern about the increased vulnerability to electropollution by children has valid reasoning. Since the skull bones of the head don’t fully harden until about age 22 the skull bones of a child’s head are softer than that of an adult. A softer head bone translates to easier penetration through the skull and into the head by radio frequency radiation. Furthermore, the head of a child contains more water since the brain is not fully developed. It would make sense then that water will act as a conductor to electromagnetic radiation increasing the possibility of even further damage. And since a child’s brain and nervous system is still developing it only stands to reason that the potential damage would be greater since cells that are in a growing phase are more easily damaged.

And finally, exposing children in the elementary schoolroom will add to both the amount of electromagnetic radiation exposure and the accumulated length of exposure over their lifetime that they will be exposed. No one can argue that the children of today’s generation will be exposed to far greater amounts of electromagnetic radiation and will be exposed to it for a much longer period of time than any generation before. We simply don’t know the consequences of this increased and cumulative exposure. And it’s an experiment that we shouldn’t place our children in. Why set up these networks without understanding any of the long-term consequences? Did we not learn a lesson from the tobacco and asbestos industries?

Stay tuned for Part 2…

It’s “Sunburn Season” – July and August are vacation months and the time for fun in the sun before returning to school or buckling down on the job. Some people get more sun in these months than the rest of the year.

Naturally, that leaves them susceptible to sunburns. But did you know that many medications increase your chances of getting sunburned?

This article by pharmacist, Suzy Cohen, explains which drugs can cause serious sun photosensitivity.

Many people find themselves in a catch 22 – they don’t want to get sunburned, but they know they are more susceptible. Even so, it’s not a good idea to avoid the sun entirely.

Getting sunlight is very important. We get our Vitamin D through sunlight, not food. Vitamin D is very important to the healthy functioning of out body from healthy bones, heart, mental health, colds and flu and much more. Avoiding the sun and/or using too much sunblock prevents Vitamin D from forming and contributes to deficiencies.

Vitamin D is created on the skin when it exposed to sunlight. This doesn’t happen through glass, only with direct exposure. Dr. Mercola recently wrote how surprized he was to discover that it takes 48 hours for the Vitamin D to be fully absorbed from the skin. He recommended only using soap under the arms and in the groin area. That may not be practical for most people, but it’s nice to know that skipping a shower now and then can contribute to your health!

Sunburn Remedies:

Quick remedies for sunburn include Aloe Vera, LavaDerm™ Cooling Mist, Lavender essential oil and MMS. Everybody’s skin reacts differently to sunburn and sunburn remedies. Here are a few to try – one of them is bound to do the trick for you:

Aloe Vera: If you have an aloe plant in the garden, break off a spear and gently rub the juice over your burn. Some varieties work better than others.

LavaDerm™ Cooling Mist: Specially formulated with lavender essential oil and aloe vera – two of nature’s most soothing, rejuvenating and healing substances. It soothes, protects and brings powerful relief to stressed and burned skin with its blend of gentle, skin- soothing ingredients.

Lavender Essential Oil Put a few drops of lavender essential oil on your sunburned skin for quick relief.

MMS (Miracle Mineral Solution) It’s surprising that this solution works so well on burns, but I get the most relief and the fastest healing from burns when I use MMS. It’s inexpensive and easy to use: http://tinyurl.com/bec2ya

Spread a few drops of MMS over the burned skin, wait 5 minutes and wash off (it’s very important to wash it off after 5 minutes). It will burn or sting a bit at first, but then subside.

Repeat a few hours later or the next day. If the burn is a bad one, apply the MMS again a third time, but this time, leave it on. It will make your skin smell a little odd, but not bad.

Hopefully, you won’t suffer a sunburn this season, but if you do, these tips can help your skin feel better faster and recover better from your sunburn.

Who is right?

Here’s a reprint of a report written by Jeffrey M. Smith, author of “Seeds of Deception” from Spilling the Beans that helps shed light on the subject…

Doctors Warn: Avoid Genetically Modified Food
By Jeffrey M. Smith, author of “Seeds of Deception”

On May 19th, the American Academy of Environmental Medicine (AAEM) called on “Physicians to educate their patients, the medical community, and the public to avoid GM (genetically modified) foods when possible and provide educational materials concerning GM foods and health risks.”[1] They called for a moratorium on GM foods, long-term independent studies, and labeling. AAEM’s position paper stated, “Several animal studies indicate serious health risks associated with GM food,” including infertility, immune problems,[20] accelerated aging, insulin regulation, and changes in major organs and the gastrointestinal system. They conclude, “There is more than a casual association between GM foods and adverse health effects. There is causation,” as defined by recognized scientific criteria. “The strength of association and consistency between GM foods and disease is confirmed in several animal studies.”

More and more doctors are already prescribing GM-free diets. Dr. Amy Dean, a Michigan internal medicine specialist, and board member of AAEM says, “I strongly recommend patients eat strictly non-genetically modified foods.” Ohio allergist Dr. John Boyles says “I used to test for soy allergies all the time, but now that soy is genetically engineered, it is so dangerous that I tell people never to eat it.”

Dr. Jennifer Armstrong, President of AAEM, says, “Physicians are probably seeing the effects in their patients, but need to know how to ask the right questions.” World renowned biologist Pushpa M. Bhargava goes one step further. After reviewing more than 600 scientific journals, he concludes that genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are a major contributor to the sharply deteriorating health of Americans.

Pregnant women and babies at great risk Among the population, biologist David Schubert of the Salk Institute warns that “children are the most likely to be adversely effected by toxins and other dietary problems” related to GM foods. He says without adequate studies, the children become “the experimental animals.”[2]

The experience of actual GM-fed experimental animals is scary. When GM soy was fed to female rats, most of their babies died within three weeks – compared to a 10% death rate among the control group fed natural soy.[3] The GM-fed babies were also smaller, and later had problems getting pregnant.[4]

When male rats were fed GM soy, their testicles actually changed color-from the normal pink to dark blue.[5] Mice fed GM soy had altered young sperm.[6] Even the embryos of GM fed parent mice had significant changes in their DNA.[7] Mice fed GM corn in an Austrian government study had fewer babies, which were also smaller than normal.[8]

Reproductive problems also plague livestock. Investigations in=2 0ther state of Haryana, India revealed that most buffalo that ate GM cottonseed had complications such as premature deliveries, abortions, infertility, and prolapsed uteruses. Many calves died. In the US, about two dozen farmers reported thousands of pigs became sterile after consuming certain GM corn varieties. Some had false pregnancies; others gave birth to bags of water. Cows and bulls also became infertile when fed the same corn.[9]

In the US population, the incidence of low birth weight babies, infertility, and infant mortality are all escalating.

Food designed to produce toxin

GM corn and cotton are engineered to produce their own built-in pesticide in every cell. When bugs bite the plant, the poison splits open their stomach and kills them. Biotech companies claim that the pesticide, called Bt-produced from soil bacteria Bacillus thuringiensis-has a history of safe use, since organic farmers and others use Bt bacteria spray for natural insect control. Genetic engineers insert Bt genes into corn and cotton, so the plants do the killing.

The Bt-toxin produced in GM plants, however, is thousands of times more concentrated than natural Bt spray, is designed to be more toxic,[10] has properties of an allergen, and unlike the spray, cannot be washed off the plant.

Moreover, studies confirm that even the less toxic natural bacterial spray is harmful. When dispersed by plane to kill gypsy moths in the Pacific Northwest, about 500 people reported allergy or flu-like symptoms. Some had to go to the emergency room.[11],[12]

The exact same symptoms are now being reported by farm workers throughout India, from handling Bt cotton.[13] In 2008, based on medical records, the Sunday India reported, “Victims of itching have increased massively this year . .20. related to BT cotton farming.”[14]

GMOs provoke immune reactions

AAEM states, “Multiple animal studies show significant immune dysregulation,” including increase in cytokines, which are “associated with asthma, allergy, and inflammation”-all on the rise in the US .

According to GM food safety expert Dr. Arpad Pusztai, changes in the immune status of GM animals are “a consistent feature of all the studies.”[15] Even Monsanto’s own research showed significant immune system changes in rats fed Bt corn.[16] A November 2008 by the Italian government also found that mice have an immune reaction to Bt corn.[17]

GM soy and corn each contain two new proteins with allergenic properties,[18] GM soy has up to seven times more trypsin inhibitor – a known soy allergen,[19] and skin prick tests show some people react to GM, but not to non-GM soy.[20] Soon after GM soy was introduced to the UK, soy allergies skyrocketed by 50%. Perhaps the US epidemic of food allergies and asthma is a casualty of genetic manipulation.

Animals dying in large numbers

In India, animals graze on cotton plants after harvest. But when shepherds let sheep graze on Bt cotton plants, thousands died. Post mortems showed severe irritation and black patches in both intestines and liver (as well as enlarged bile ducts). Investigators said preliminary evidence “strongly suggests that the sheep mortality was due to a toxin. . . . most probably Bt- toxin.”[21] In a small follow-up feeding study by the Deccan Development Society, all sheep fed Bt cotton plants died within 30 days; those that grazed on natural cotton plants remained healthy.

In a small village in Andhra Pradesh, buffalo grazed on cotton plants for eight years without incident. On January 3rd, 2008, the buffalo grazed on Bt cotton plants for the first time. All
13 were sick the next day; all died within 3 days.[22]

Bt corn was also implicated in the deaths of cows in Germany, and horses, water buffaloes, and chickens in The Philippines.[23]

In lab studies, twice the number of chickens fed Liberty Link corn died; 7 of 20 rats fed a GM tomato developed bleeding stomachs; another 7 of 40 died within two weeks.[24] Monsanto’s own study showed evidence of poisoning in major organs of rats fed Bt corn, according to top French toxicologist G. E. Seralini.[25]

Worst finding of all – GMOs remain inside of us

The only published human feeding study revealed what may be the most dangerous problem from GM foods. The gene inserted into GM soy transfers into the DNA of bacteria living inside our intestines and continues to function.[26] This means that long after we stop eating GMOs, we may still have potentially harmful GM proteins produced continuously inside of us. Put more plainly, eating a corn chip produced from Bt corn might transform our intestinal bacteria into living pesticide factories, possibly for the rest of our lives.

When evidence of gene transfer is reported at medical conferences around the US, doctors often respond by citing the huge increase of gastrointestinal problems among their patients over the last decade. GM foods might be colonizing the gut flora of North Americans.

Warnings by government scientists ignored and denied

Scientists at the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) had warned about all these problems even in the early 1990s. According to documents released from a lawsuit, the scientific consensus at the agency was that GM foods were inherently dangerous, and might create hard-to-detect allergies, poisons, gene transfer to gut bacteria, new diseases, and nutritional problems. They urged their superiors to require rigorous long-term tests.[27]

But the White House had ordered the agency to promote biotechnology and the FDA responded by recruiting Michael Taylor, Monsanto’s former attorney, to head up the formation of GMO policy. That policy, which is in effect today, denies knowledge of scientists’ concerns and declares that no safety studies on GMOs are required. It is up to Monsanto and the other biotech companies to determine if their foods are safe. Mr. Taylor later became Monsanto’s vice president.

Dangerously few studies, untraceable diseases

AAEM states, “GM foods have not been properly tested” and “pose a serious health risk.” Not a single human clinical trial on GMOs has been published. A 2007 review of published scientific literature on the “potential toxic effects/health risks of GM plants” revealed “that experimental data are very scarce.” The author concludes his review by asking, “Where is the scientific evidence showing that GM plants/food are toxicologically safe, as assumed by the biotechnology companies?”[28]

Famed Canadian geneticist David Suzuki answers, “The experiments simply haven’t been done and we now have become the guinea pigs.” He adds, “Anyone that says, ‘Oh, we know that this is perfectly safe,’ I say is either unbelievably stupid or deliberately lying.”[29]

Dr. Schubert points out, “If there are problems, we will probably never know because the cause will not be traceable and many diseases take a very long time to develop.” If GMOs happen to cause immediate and acute symptoms with a unique signature, perhaps then we might have a chance to trace the cause.

This is precisely what happened during a US epidemic in the late 1980s. The disease was fast acting, deadly, and caused a unique measurable change in the blood-but it still took more than four years to identify that an epidemic was even occurring. By then it had killed about 100 Americans and caused
5,000-10,000 people to fall sick or become permanently disabled. It was caused by a genetically engineered brand of a food supplement called L-tryptophan.

If other GM foods are contributing to the rise of autism, obesity, diabetes, asthma, cancer, heart disease, allergies, reproductive problems, or any other common health problem now plaguing Americans, we may never know. In fact, since animals fed GMOs had such a wide variety of problems, susceptible people may react to GM food with multiple symptoms. It is therefore telling that in the first nine years after the large scale introduction of GM crops in 1996, the incidence of people with three or more chronic diseases nearly doubled, from 7% to
13%.[30]

To help identify if GMOs are causing harm, the AAEM asks their “members, the medical community, and the independent scientific community to gather case studies potentially related to GM food consumption and health effects, begin epidemiological research to investigate the role of GM foods on human health, and conduct safe methods of determining the effect of GM foods on human health.”

Citizens need not wait for the results before taking the doctors advice to avoid GM foods. People can stay away from anything with soy or corn derivatives, cottonseed and canola oil, and sugar from GM sugar beets-unless it says organic or “non-GMO.” There is a pocket Non-GMO Shopping Guide, co- produced by the Institute for Responsible Technology and the Center for Food Safety, which is available as a download, as well as in natural food stores an d in many doctors’ offices.

If even a small percentage of people choose non-GMO brands, the food industry will likely respond as they did in Europe – by removing all GM ingredients. Thus, AAEM’s non-GMO prescription may be a watershed for the US food supply.

International bestselling author and independent filmmaker Jeffrey M. Smith is the Executive Director of the Institute for Responsible Technology and the leading spokesperson on the health dangers of GMOs. His first book, Seeds of Deception is the world’s bestselling book on the subject. His second, Genetic Roulette: The Documented Health Risks of Genetically Engineered Foods, identifies 65 risks of GMOs and demonstrates how superficial government approvals are not competent to find most of them. He invited the biotech industry to respond in writing with evidence to counter each risk, but correctly predicted that they would refuse, since they don’t have the data to show that their products are safe.

——————————————————
© copyright Institute For Responsible Technology 2009.
——————————————————
Spilling the Beans is a monthly column available at www.responsibletechnology.org. The website also offers eater- friendly tips for avoiding GMOs at home and in restaurants.

The Institute for Responsible Technology is working to end the genetic engineering of our food supply and the outdoor release of GM crops. We warmly welcome your donations and support.

Go to ResponsibleTechnology.org if you’d like to make a tax-deductible donation.

Support truth about Genetically Modified Food.

Does this grilled chicken have additives?

Do you feel funny after eating processed and fast food?  Or even the grilled or roasted chicken you can get in a grocery store that says it doesn’t have the usual culprits like MSG?

I do…

I don’t eat junk food as a rule, and I stay as far away as I possibly can from fast food restaurants and grocery store grilled chicken.  However, on occassion, I do have to eat in restaurants.  Every time I do, I’ve noticed that I don’t feel well afterwards – especially from hotel restaurant dinners, no matter how expensive they might be.  

This is not to say that the food gives me food poisoning (although that has happened – but that’s much more “violent” and obvious).

I just experience a certain malaise with bloating, heaviness, discomfort, mild headache, grogginess, excessive thirst, digestive disturbances and the sorts of things one would associate with an overload of chemicals or additives in the system.

I’ve spoken to several different hotel managements about it, and they adamantly assure me that their food has no additives.

Then I ran across a new study, “Study finds hidden phosphorous in fast food” that reports that researchers have just discovered that, “It has become an increasingly common practice by food manufacturers to include phosphate salts to processed foods.”  These additives can be extremely harmful for people with advanced kidney disease.

These additives are used to enhance flavor and shelf life — particularly in meats (even in meats you would not think need additives like chicken and steak), cheeses, baked goods, and beverages — and it is very hard for consumers to know whether or not these additives are present in products.

High blood levels of phosphorus can lead to heart disease, bone disease, and even death among patients with advanced kidney disease.  I don’t have advanced kidney disease, yet I do suffer from the phosphorus additives. And even without kidney disease, I FEEL THE ILL EFFECTS of the additives. It takes me a long time to get this stuff out of my system after the fact.

I realise that I’m more sensitive than others to food additives, chemicals and the like.  But that doesn’t mean that if you’re not sensitive it’s not affecting you – it is, you just don’t feel it.

So far, no one is saying the practice of adding phosphorus additives to food should stop.  At least the investigators are recommending mandating listing phosphorus content on food labels.  But the best advice is to avoid junk food and fast food restaurants altogether.

Sometimes travel can not be avoided.  The only solution I’ve found for myself is to try to only stay in hotels with refridgerators in the room and bring enough wholesome food to last through my stay – but that can’t always be done.

So I at least try to minimize restaurant meals and balance those meals with organic produce whenever I travel.  Then I flush my system well with lots of pure water and do some sort of cleanse when I get home.

“Take XXX drug to prevent XXX (disease condition)…”

“Prevention is taking a prescription drug on a regular basis to reduce your chances of getting a disease.”

Wait a minute!

Since when did “prevention” mean taking a drug on a regular basis? Whatever happened to the trusted advice of “get plenty of rest, exercise regularly, watch your diet, and be sure to eat plenty of fruits and vegetables?”

This commercial, which sounds “educational” is being broadcast to millions of people over the air — teaching them that wise lifestyle choices don’t matter – that prevention has nothing to do with their dietary, fitness, or attitudinal choices – that the only real method of prevention is taking a prescription drug!

Repeated enough times, most people will accept this belief. They will never question its logic, wisdom or the reason behind it. They will become “conditioned” and totally accept this way of thinking as fact. And they will never see through it enough to know it for what it is – a marketing campaign designed to increase sales of prescription drugs for the life of the customer… as well as to increase dependency on drugs for common sense things people used to do for themselves.

Did you know that there are strong links between news agencies and drug manufacturers? Dr. Mercola recently discussed the connection between GlaxoSmithKline and Reuters:

“… a Texas attorney provided me with some documentation that shows a strong link between Glaxo and Reuters. As shown on the GlaxoSmithKline Web site, Sir Christopher Hogg is Glaxo’s non- executive chairman. Sir Christopher Hogg was born in 1936 and has an MBA from Harvard. Interestingly, Sir Christopher is also the non-executive chairman at Reuters.”

“It does not take much intelligence to understand that Reuters, the world’s primary source of news information, is heavily prejudiced in favor of the drug company.”

- END SIDEBAR -

Take the Avian Flu scare, for instance. Remember how we were conditioned to expect it, even though there was no real outbreak anywhere. Every so often, it crops up in the news again as soming “coming our way soon.”  And we’re being told that the only prevention is the vaccine – a vaccine that is not only worthless but extremely risky! It’s known that a certain percentage of the people receiving the vaccine will come down with the Avian flu from the vaccine itself.

The news is worse for nasal vaccines – a nasally administered vaccine for the Avian flu causes sneezing and has a 21 day shedding (highly contagious) period for children (even longer for adults), when it exposes everyone in contact to the germs.  The vaccine is currently “under development.”

The only thing the Avian Flu vaccine can do right now is START an Avian flu epidemic. And that may happen.

But that doesn’t mean you are powerless. There are many ways to prevent catching the Bird flu or any flu naturally. First of all, take daily doses of anti-oxidants, especially those in the form of dark berries – wolfberries, chokeberries, elderberries. But be careful you’re not getting berry juice loaded with high fructose corn syrup or any corn product. That’s not a berry juice – it’s sweetened and flavored water. On the other hand, NingXia Red Juice is an excellent, top-quality antioxidant juice.

Have plenty of Vitamin C on hand. For information on how Vitamin C cures Bird Flu, see the website of Robert F. Cathcart, M.D.: http://orthomed.com/bird.htm

This online article: Avian Influenza: Are You Prepared also discusses preparing for Bird Flu and may also be of interest.

A friend of mine was recently shocked when she smelled a fruity and distinctly artificial fragrance from her new bar of Ivory soap. I recognized the scent immediately. It’s a common scent found in many personal care products today. I can only describe it as “Cherry Puke.”

A quick look at the package turned up the phrase “just a little scent” and fragrance/parfum in the ingredients list. What happened to Ivory being “pure?”

This particular package of soap was packaged for sale in Canada. I don’t know if they are selling the same formula in the U.S., but I would guess they are – or something similar. Proctor and Gamble probably feels they can’t compete with all the other soaps on the market that are scented.

And the truth is, the olfactory glands of the average American are so plugged they can’t smell anything unless hit over the head with a “fragrance” sledge-hammer.

How many hits of the “fragrance” sledge-hammer will it take to knock them down?

How long will it take people to figure out that many of their illnesses, poor memory, alzheimers symptoms, etc…are caused by toxic artificial fragrances?

How long will it take them to stop buying this destructive puke?

Could be a long time. The more artificial fragrance they smell, the duller their brain gets and the less they can reason or figure things out.

Researchers are now discovering that public water supplies and waterways in India, where many pharmaceutical drugs are made, are being poisoned by the dumping of pharmaceutical chemicals.

Mike Adams, of NaturalNews reports:

Many of the pharmaceuticals consumed in the United States are made in India, where labor is cheap and environmental laws are lenient on powerful corporations. U.S. drug companies are exploiting this situation to manufacture hundreds of millions of doses of high-profit pharmaceuticals in India, where ingredients purchased for a few cents can be re-sold to U.S. health patients for hundreds of dollars (the markup on some drugs is literally over 500,000%).

…Big Pharma’s manufacturing facilities dump millions of doses of toxic pharmaceutical chemicals directly into India’s waterways.

Researchers were recently stunned to discover that 100 pounds of a powerful antibiotic called ciprofloxacin was being dumped into a local stream every day! That’s a quantity of antibiotics that could treat an entire city of 90,000 people every day.

All in all, the Associated Press reports that same waterway contained an astonishing 21 pharmaceutical chemicals – some reaching levels 150 times the highest levels of contamination found in U.S. waterways.

Note, the levels found in U.S. water were ALREADY quite alarming. Plus, it was found that the public water supplies are contaminated with pharmaceutical chemicals in virtually ALL U.S. cities tested.

Besides poisoning the ecosystem and food supply, these toxins eventually either land in the drinking water supply, or poison the drinking water to the degree that it is undrinkable.

As a society and world population, we need to open our eyes to the disturbing realization that the pharmaceutical industry is a global corporate polluter quietly dumping toxic chemicals into the world’s waterways.

And we thought manufacturers were the worst polluters.

How can we allow this? And what can we do about it?

In a raid last week, Port Organic Products Ltd. of Bakersfield, a major producer of fertilizer for California’s organic farmers, was searched. It is estimated they produced up to half of the liquid fertilizer used on California’s organic farms recently.

“Kern County records dating back to 2005 show Port Organic has stocked thousands of gallons of aqua ammonia, a common source of synthetic nitrogen.”

“The company’s fertilizers were ostensibly made from ground-up fish carcasses. But documents obtained by The Bee show that California Department of Food and Agriculture officials suspected the company of using synthetic nitrogen back in October 2007.”

“Port Organic is the latest in a series of fertilizer makers to be accused of passing off chemical fertilizers as organic.”

Why do they do it? It’s cheaper… and they’ve been able to get away with it for quite a while. “…synthetic nitrogen is as much as 20 times cheaper than approved nutrient sources such as ground-up fish and chicken feathers.” And it’s very difficult to detect with standard laboratory analyses.

Think this problem is limited to California? Doubtful. If it’s happening in California, it’s happening in other states. Not only that, but some of the spiked organic fertilizer is sold to other states. And food grown in California ends up on grocery shelves throughout the country.

The government has been allowing the industry to police itself – a practice that must have been taken from the “allowing the fox to guard the henhouse” model!

A Senate hearing will be held on Feb. 3 to look into the Department of Food and Agriculture’s slow responses. Maybe in a few years, they’ll come up with a solution… but then again, maybe not.

In the meantime, grow as much as you can yourself or find organic farmers at local farmer’s markets and visit their farms to see how they run their farms (I’ve done that a few times).

We have local llama and ostrich farms that practically give away as much poop farmers or home gardeners can shovel into a truck. Chicken manure is also great if the chickens are free range and eat naturally. Horse and cow manure has to sit a season before use or it will burn your plants.

Generally speaking, chicken and ostrich manure, bat guana or llama or rabbit poop is prefered to horse or cow manure.

Read full Sacramento Bee article: “Federal raid heightens concerns about fake organic fertilizer”

In the article entitled, “Organic Farms Unknowingly Used A Synthetic Fertilizer” by Jim Downing, the Sacramento Bee reports:“For up to seven years, California Liquid Fertilizer sold what seemed to be an organic farmer’s dream, brewed from fish and chicken feathers.

The company’s fertilizer was effective, inexpensive and approved by organic regulators. By 2006, it held as much as a third of the market in California.

But a state investigation caught the Salinas-area company spiking its product with ammonium sulfate, a synthetic fertilizer banned from organic farms.”

That meant that much of California’s 2006 harvest of what was supposed to be organic fruits, nuts and vegetables wasn’t organic at all.  The fertilizer went to some of the biggest farms, including Earthbound Farm.
 
Although the Sacramento Bee notified the California Department of Food and Agriculture as early as June 2004 of their findings, the company wasn’t ordered to remove it’s counterfeit product from the organic market until January of 2007.

Hmm, it doesn’t seem like the California Department of Food and Agriculture is terribly interested in organic food violations….

Read full article: 
http://www.sacbee.com/capitolandcalifornia/story/1501772.html

How many other organic farms are using synthetic fertilizer that’s falsely labeled organic?  How much has landed on your table?

The difference in this study is that the researchers included ALL screen time as well as general sedentary time.  They included text messaging, reading, homework and even sedentary hobbies in their results.  Most previous studies only included playing computer games and watching TV.

They found that a child’s level of aerobic fitness is strongly associated with their level of ’small screen time’ and overall sedentary behavior.

Interestingly, girl’s fitness was more likely to drop with sedentary behavior vs older boys, who were less affected.

The researchers recommend that children swap excess ’sitting time’ for ’active time’ and limit their total time in front of a screen to less than two hours a day in order to maintain fitness levels.   Even better would be establishing “No screen days” when no computer screens or TVs can be watched (perhaps on school days).

In 2001, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) issued guidelines which suggested a two hour limit of sedentary behavior for children.  The AAP were based on expert opinion. These recent findings mark the first physiological evidence supporting the AAP guidelines.

Additional Reasons For Limiting TV And Computer Time

In the Winter 2008 issue of Natural Health and Vegetarian Life, naturopath Linda Maher lists seven additional reasons for restricting children’s television viewing time:

• Television inhibits visual development
• Television retards brain development
• Television retards the development of muscles
• Television encourages the overproduction of alpha brain waves (passive state)
• Television has been linked with childhood obesity
• Along with computers and videos, television encourages difficulty in adjusting to the routine and structure of school life and the learning process
• Television can cause difficulties in interpersonal relationships, both within and outside the family.