Myths About E-Cigarettes

Myths About E-Cigarettes

Myths About E-Cigarettes

I personally think E-cigs are great but advocates tout that e-cigarette are a clean alternative to old-fashioned tobacco, one that can even help people quit smoking. But although the companies making these largely unregulated products promote e-cigarettes as safe and pure, the reality is a little more complicated. Here are four common misconceptions about e-cigarettes, and the scientific evidence against them.

Myth 1: Vapor from e-cigs is pure.

The liquid “vaped” in an e-cigarette contains nicotine, water and a solvent (usually glycerine or propylene glycol). It may also contain flavoring agents, such as oil of wintergreen. Although this mixture may sound pure enough, neither the liquid (called the e-liquid) nor the device’s delivery system are regulated; this means e-cigarettes could produce harmful chemicals.

In fact, recent studies have identified impurities ranging from formaldehyde to heavy metals in e-cig vapor. And vaporized propylene glycol is a known eye and respiratory irritant.

One recent study found formaldehyde, acetaldehyde and acetone in the vapor of several different e-cigarette models and liquid nicotine products found formaldehyde, acetaldehyde and acetone. “We found nicotine, of course, but we also found some potentially dangerous compounds,” said study researcher Maciej Goniewicz, an assistant professor of oncology at Roswell Park Cancer Center in Buffalo, New York.

What’s more, users can amp up the voltage of an e-cig delivery device, resulting in a denser, more nicotine-rich vapor. Goniewicz and his team found that at a higher voltage and hotter temperature, levels of harmful chemicals increased, too.

The vapor had a lower chemical content than tobacco smoke, but there was “huge variability” among the products tested, Goniewicz told Live Science. “It doesn’t mean that each product will expose users to high levels of formaldehyde, but there is a risk for sure,” he said.

Myth 2: E-cigs are safe.

In addition to potential toxicity from chemical byproducts, which could harm users over the long term, e-cigs carry another safety risk. Liquid nicotine is extremely toxic when swallowed, and in some case reports, infants and children have accidentally ingested the substance.

The chances of this happening may increase with flavored liquid nicotine, which may come in enticing-looking packages and can smell tempting, according to new research.

“It mistakenly has this reputation for being safe because it’s purchased over the counter, but it easily can be fatal if it’s taken in high doses,” said Dr. Robert A. Bassett, a medical toxicologist and emergency medicine physician at Einstein Medical Center in Philadelphia. Bassett and his colleagues reported a case of liquid nicotine poisoning in a 10-month-old infant in the May 7 issue of JAMA.

The boy recovered within a few hours, but nicotine poisoning could easily be fatal, Bassett said. A teaspoon of standard liquid nicotine would be enough to kill a person who weighs 200 pounds (90 kilograms), Bassett and his colleagues noted in their report.

Myth 3: E-cigs can help you quit smoking.

The few studies looking at whether or not using e-cigs helps people kick the habit have had mixed results. Some studies have found people who tried e-cigs wound up smoking fewer regular cigarettes, but they were no more likely to give up smoking entirely.

Overall, the authors of a recent scientific review conclude, “studies that reflect real-world e-cigarette use found that e-cigarette use is not associated with successful quitting … Taken together, the studies suggest that e-cigarettes are not associated with successful quitting in general population-based samples of smokers.”

And there is even some evidence that e-cigs may get non-smokers hooked on nicotine. Studies have found as many as one-third of young e-cigarette users have never tried conventional cigarettes.

Myth 4: E-cigs don’t produce harmful second-hand smoke.

A main selling point of e-cigs is that they can be used anywhere, because they don’t produce toxic smoke that puts others at risk. But breathing in second-hand vapor,  also known as “passive vaping,” may not be harmless. In fact, experts say although The level of toxic chemicals in second-hand vapor is smaller than that in second-hand smoke. But experts say e-cig smoke contains a similar amount of tiny particles of heavy metals and other substances that can damage the lungs.

The Food and Drug Administration has proposed a rule that would permit the agency to regulate e-cigarettes and similar products. If the proposal becomes final, the agency said, it will be able to use regulatory tools, such as age restrictions and rigorous scientific review of new tobacco products and claims to reduce tobacco-related disease and death.



Your Weight Jumps Around Daily

why your weight jumps around so much from day to day

why your weight jumps around so much from day to day

If you’ve ever gotten into the habit of weighing yourself every day, you’ll have noticed something a little strange about the numbers on your bathroom scales. They’re all over the place. From day to day, it almost like you’re weighing a different person. The numbers seem to yo-yo up and down irrespective of how much you eat, drink, or exercise.

And if you’re actively trying to lose weight it, it’s not just confusing – it can be downright disheartening too. Nothing kills diet motivation and willpower quite like seeing those numbers go up when all your hard work and snack-sacrificing means they ought to be going down.

But according to Martin Robbins at The Guardian, it makes perfect sense that the numbers on your bathroom scale don’t make any sense. Why? Because there’s simply way too many things going on in your body all the time for individual measurements taken at any particular moment to be at all meaningful when viewed in isolation.

“Weight measurements are like opinion polls – individual results don’t tell you anything because there’s just too much random noise, error and variation,” he says. “It’s only when you have a few dozen that you can start to reliably pick out a trend.”

To get a better sense of all the ups and downs occurring in his weight, Robbins set himself an ambitious task: over a three-day long weekend, he weighed himself every waking hour to see what his body was up to. He also accurately recorded the specific weight of everything he ate and drank over the period, and even weighed the urine he passed. “I estimated the, er, other stuff – I do have some dignity,” he says.

At the end of three and a half days (from 6pm on Friday night to 9am on Tuesday morning), Robbins ingested a whopping 14.86 kg of consumables, consisting of 3.58 kg of food and 11.28 kg of drink. While that might sound like a lot – and it is – it’s not like he was all-out gorging himself the entire time. At the end of his experiment, he’d actually lost 1.86 kg, meaning his body had disposed of some 16.72 kg over the course of the weekend.

“7.4 kg of that was accounted for by urine, and an estimated 1.8 kg by, well, crap, but that still leaves a whopping 7.52 kg of mass that just vanished into thin air,” he says. “Where did it go?”

In his analysis, Robbins points out that we’re losing weight all the time in ways we never think about – ways that have nothing to do with eating healthily or going to the gym. Admittedly, a couple of 5 km runs he took over the weekend saw him displace over a kilogram in sweat. But there were still several kilograms of unaccounted weight loss: 69 grams per hour (1.65 kg every 24 hours) that couldn’t be otherwise explained.

“In fact, I really was evaporating into thin air. Humans breathe in oxygen, and breathe out carbon dioxide – oxygen plus a carbon atom. All those carbon atoms have to come from somewhere, and they add up pretty quickly – over the course of a day, with a good work out thrown in, someone my size breathes out maybe half a kilo of carbon,” he says.

Robbins estimates that we lose about the same amount again in exhaled water vapour, and then yet again by leaking water from our skin. Once he added up the estimated losses from these sources over the weekend, the riddle of his mystery weight loss over the weekend was solved.

“It also reveals another surprising truth; that when it comes to ditching mass from your body the anus really does bring up the rear end,” Robbins says. “My penis, lungs and skin all managed to outperform my posterior when it came to taking out the trash.”

Robbins’s conclusion is that in light of all the things our bodies are doing that results in us losing weight, there’s little or no point getting hung up on a number you don’t like taken from one seemingly random weigh-in taken at one point during the day.

“None of this is massively surprising of course, but what I think it shows is just how unreliable any single measurement of weight is,” he says. “On any given day my weight varied by about four pounds [1.8 kg], with a dozen pounds [5.4 kg] passing in and out of the giant meat tube that is me at only vaguely predictable times. When you consider that a sensible weight loss target is maybe 0.25 lbs [110 grams] per day, you can see how on most days that’s just going to be swallowed up in the noise.”

The best way to weigh yourself then – especially if you’re the kind who’s going to be at all emotional about it, which is probably most of us – is to stand on the scales but not attribute any particular importance to the number you see. Instead, just jot it down and calculate long-term trends over time, as that’s the closest we can get to seeing how our bodily weight is really changing.

“Weigh yourself every morning, but ignore the number that comes up on the scales,” says Robbins. “Instead take the average of the last seven days (preferably ten or fourteen), and after several weeks look at how that average is changing over time. That’s where the real truth lies.”



Baking Soda kills Cancer

Baking Soda kills Cancer

Baking Soda kills Cancer

Even the most aggressive cancers which have metastasized have been reversed with baking soda cancer treatments. Although chemotherapy is toxic to all cells, it represents the only measure that oncologists employ in their practice to almost all cancer patients.

In fact, 9 out of 10 cancer patients agree to chemotherapy first without investigating other less invasive options.

Doctors and pharmaceutical companies make money from it. That’s the only reason chemotherapy is still used. Not because it’s effective, decreases morbidity, mortality or diminishes any specific cancer rates. In fact, it does the opposite. Chemotherapy boosts cancer growth and long-term mortality rates and oncologists know it.

A few years ago, University of Arizona Cancer Center member Dr. Mark Pagel received a $2 million grant from the National Institutes of Health to study the effectiveness of personalized baking soda cancer treatment for breast cancer.

Obviously, there are people in the know who have understood that sodium bicarbonate, that same stuff that can save a person’s life in the emergency room in a heartbeat, is a primary cancer treatment option of the safest and most effective kind.

Studies have shown that dietary measures to boost bicarbonate levels can increase the pH of acidic tumors without upsetting the pH of the blood and healthy tissues. Animal models of human breast cancer show that oral sodium bicarbonate does indeed make tumors more alkaline and inhibit metastasis.

Based on these studies, plus the fact that baking soda is safe and well tolerated, world renowned doctors such as Dr. Julian Whitaker have adopted successful cancer treatment protocols as part of an overall nutritional and immune support program for patients who are dealing with the disease.

The Whitaker protocol uses 12 g (2 rounded teaspoons) of baking soda mixed in 2 cups water, along with a low-cal sweetener of your choice. (It’s quite salty tasting.)

Sip this mixture over the course of an hour or two and repeat for a total of three times a day. One man claims he has found a cure for cancer using baking soda and molasses and actually successfully treated his own disease by using baking soda.

When taken orally with water, especially water with high magnesium content, and when used transdermally in medicinal baths, sodium bicarbonate becomes a first-line medicinal for the treatment of cancer, and also kidney disease, diabetes, influenza and even the common cold.

It is also a powerful buffer against radiation exposure, so everyone should be up to speed on its use. Everybody’s physiology is under heavy nuclear attack from strong radioactive winds that are circling the northern hemisphere.

Dr. Robert J. Gillies and his colleagues have already demonstrated that pre-treatment of mice with baking soda results in the alkalinization of the area around tumors. The same researchers reported that bicarbonate increases tumor pH and also inhibits spontaneous metastases in mice with breast cancer.

The Baking Soda Formula for Cancer

To make the baking soda natural cancer remedy at home, you need:

  • maple syrup,
  • molasses or
  • honey
  • to go along with the baking soda.

In Dr. Sircus’ book, he documented how one patient used baking soda and blackstrap molasses to fight the prostate cancer that had metastasized to his bones. On the first day, the patient mixed 1 teaspoon of baking soda with 1 teaspoon of molasses in a cup of water.

He took this for another 3 days after which his saliva pH read 7.0 and his urine pH read 7.5.

Encouraged by these results, the patient took the solution 2 times on day 5 instead of once daily. And from day 6 – 10, he took 2 teaspoons each of baking soda and molasses twice daily.

By the 10th day, the patient’s pH had risen to 8.5 and the only side effects experienced were headaches and night sweat (similar to cesium therapy).

The next day, the patient had a bone scan and too other medical tests. His results showed that his PSA (prostate-specific antigen, the protein used to determine the severity of prostate enlargement and prostate cancer) level was down from 22.3 at the point of diagnosis to 0.1.

Another baking soda formula recommends mixing 90 teaspoons of maple syrup with 30 teaspoons of baking soda.

To do this, the maple syrup must be heated to become less viscous. Then the baking syrup is added and stirred for 5 minutes until it is fully dissolved.

This preparation should provide about 10-day worth of the baking soda remedy. 5 – 7 teaspoons per day is the recommended dose for cancer patients.

Care should be taken when using the baking soda remedy to treat cancer. This is because sustaining a high pH level can itself cause metabolic alkalosis and electrolyte imbalance. These can result in edema and also affect the heart and blood pressure.

One does not have to be a doctor to practice pH medicine. Every practitioner of the healing arts and every mother and father needs to understand how to use sodium bicarbonate.

Bicarbonate deficiency is a real problem that deepens with age so it really does pay to understand and appreciate what baking soda is all about.

Do you have baking soda in your house?



Cancer Kill Switch

Cancer kill switch

Cancer kill switch

What if you could just flick a switch and turn off cancer? It seems like something you would see in a sci-fi flick, but scientists are working towards a future where that could be a reality. At the Mayo Clinic in Jacksonville, Florida, a group of researchers have made a discovery that could be a kill switch for cancer. They have found a way to reprogram mutating cancer cells back to normal, healthy cells.

Panos Anastasiadis, PhD, head of the Department of Cancer Biology at the Mayo Clinic, and his team were studying the role of adhesion proteins in cells. Anastasiadis’ primary focus was on the p120 catenin protein and long held hypothesis on it being a major player in the suppressor of tumors. The team found that p120, along with another adhesion protein, E-cadherin, actually promoted cancer growth. “That led us to believe that these molecules have two faces — a good one, maintaining the normal behavior of the cells, and a bad one that drives tumorigenesis.”

In that research, however, Anastasiadis made a remarkable discovery, “an unexpected new biology that provides the code, the software for turning off cancer.” That would be a partner to the P120 protein, dubbed PLEKHA7. When introduced to tumors, PLEKHA7 was able to “turn off” the cancerous cells’ ability to replicate and return it to a benign state. It stopped the cancer in its tracks.

How it all works is pretty straightforward. Normal, healthy cells are regulated by a sort of biological microprocessor known as microRNAs, which tell the cells to stop replicating when they have reproduced enough. Cancer is caused by a cell’s inability to stop replicating itself, and eventually grows into a cluster of cells that we know as a tumor. Anastasiadis’ team found that PLEKHA7 was an important factor in halting the replication of cells, but that it wasn’t present in the cancerous cells. By reintroducing PLEKHA7, what were once raging cancerous cells returned to normal.

This was done by injecting PLEKHA7 directly into the cells, under a controlled lab test. Anastasiadis said they still need to work on “better delivery options,” as these tests were done on human cells in a lab. They did find success, however, in stopping the growth in two very aggressive forms of cancer: breast and bladder. While this isn’t being tested on humans yet, it represents a huge step forward in understanding the nature of cancer and we can cure it.



Zionist Ideological Warfare



The single greatest feat of Israel and its overseas missions has not been material success, or the military conquest of millions of unarmed Palestinians, it has been ideological – the widespread acceptance in the US of a doctrine that claims ‘Jews are a superior people’.

Apart from small extremist rightwing sects who exhibit visceral anti-Semitism and denigrate everything Jewish, there are very few academics and politicians willing to question this supremacist doctrine. On the contrary, there is an incurable tendency to advance oneself by accepting and embellishing on it.

For example, in August 2015, US Vice-President Joseph Biden attributed ‘special genius’ to Jews, slavish flattery that embarrassed even New York’s liberal Jewish intellectuals.

Israel’s dominant role in formulating US Middle East policy is largely a product of its success at recruiting, socializing and motivating overseas Jews to act as an organized force to intervene in US politics and push Israel’s agenda.

What motivates American Jews, who have been raised and educated in the US to serve Israel?

After all, these are individuals who have prospered, achieved high status and occupy the highest positions of prestige and responsibility. Why would they parrot the policies of Israel and follow the dictates of Israeli leaders (a foreign regime), serving its violent colonial, racist agenda?

What binds a majority of highly educated and privileged Jews to the most rabidly rightwing Israeli regime in history – a relationship they actually celebrate?

What turns comfortable, prosperous American Jews into vindictive bullies, willing and able to blackmail, threaten and punish any dissident voices among their Gentile and Jewish compatriots who have dared to criticize Israel?

What prevents many intelligent, liberal and progressive Jews from openly questioning Israel’s agenda, and especially confronting the role of Zionist zealots who serve as Tel Aviv’s fifth column against the interest of the United States?

There are numerous historical and personal factors that can and should be taken into account to understand this phenomenon.

In this essay I am going to focus on one – the ideology that ‘Jews are a superior people’. The notion that Jews, either through some genetic, biologic, cultural, historical, familial and/or upbringing, havespecial qualities allowing them to achieve at a uniquely higher level than the ‘inferior’ non-Jews.

We will proceed by sketching the main outline of the Jewish supremacist ideology and then advance our critique.

We will conclude by evaluating the negative consequences of this ideology and propose a democratic alternative.

Jewish Supremacism

Exponents of Jewish Supremacism (JS) frequently cite the prestigious awards, worldly successes and high honors, which, they emphasize, have been disproportionately achieved by Jews.

The argument goes: While Jews represent less than 0.2% of the world population, they have produced 24% of the US Nobel prize winners; over 30% of Ivy League professors and students; and the majority of major US film, stage and TV producers.

They cite the ‘disproportionate number’ of scientists, leading doctors, lawyers and billionaires.

They cite past geniuses like, Einstein, Freud and Marx .

They point to the founders of the world’s great monotheistic religions – Moses and Abraham.

They lay claim to a unique learning tradition embedded in centuries of Talmudic scholarship.

Jewish supremacists never miss a chance to cite the ‘Jewish background’ of any highly accomplished contemporary public figures in the entertainment, publication, financial fields or any other sectors of life in the US.

Disproportionately great accomplishments by a disproportionate minority has become the mantra for heralding a self-styled ‘meritocraticelite’…. and for justifying its disproportionate wealth, power and privileges – and influence…

Challenging the Myths of Jewish Supremacists

There are serious problems regarding the claims of the Jewish Supremacists.

For centuries Jewish ‘wisdom’ was confined to textual exegesis of religious dogma – texts full of superstition and social control, as well as blind intolerance, and which produced neither reasoned arguments nor contributed to scientific and human advancement.

Jewish scholarship of note occurred among thinkers like Spinoza who revolted against the Jewish ghetto gatekeepers and rejected Jewish dogma.

Notable scientists emerged in the context of working and studying with non-Jews in non-Jewish institutions – the universities and centers of learning in the West. The majority of world-renowned Jewish scholars integrated and contributed to predominantly non-Jewish (Moslem and Christian) and secular institutions of higher learning.

Historically, highly talented individuals of Jewish origin succeeded by renouncing the constraints of everyday Jewish life, rabbinical overseers and Jewish institutions. Most contemporary prestigious scientists, including the frequently cited Nobel Prize winners, have little or nothing to do with Judaism! And their contributions have everything to do with the highly secular, integrated culture in which they prospered intellectually – despite expressions of crude anti-Semitism in the larger society.

Secondly , Jewish Supremacists persist in claiming ‘racial credit’ for the achievements of individuals who have publically renounced, denounced and distanced themselves from Judaism and have dismissed any notion of Israel as their spiritual homeland. Their universal prestige has prevented them from being labeled, apostate or ‘self-hating’. Albert Einstein, often cited by the Supremacists as the supreme example of ‘Jewish genius’, denounced Israel’s war crimes and showed disdain for any tribal identity. In their era, Marx and Trotsky, like the vast majority of emancipated European Jews, given the chance, became engaged in universalistic organizations, attacking the entire notion that Jews were a ‘special people’ chosen by divine authority (or by the latter-day Zionists).

Thirdly, Supremacists compile a very selective list of virtuous Jews, while omitting areas of life and activity where Jews have disproportionately played a negative and destructive role.

After all is it Jewish ‘genius’ that makes Israel a leading exporter of arms, high tech intrusive spy systems and sends military and paramilitary advisers and torturers to work with death squad regimes in Africa and Latin America?

Among the winners of the Nobel Peace Prize are three Israeli Prime Ministers who waged wars of ethnic cleansing against millions of Palestinians and expanded racist ‘Jews only’ settlements throughout the occupied Palestinian territories. These include Menachem Begin (notorious career bomber and terrorist), Yitzhak Rabin (a militarist who was assassinated by an even more racist Jewish terrorist) and Shimon Peres. Among Jewish American Nobel ‘Peaceniks’ is Henry Kissinger who oversaw the brutal and illegal US war in Indo-China causing 4 million Vietnamese deaths;who wrote the ‘template for regime change’ by overthrowing the democratically elected government of Chilean President Allende and condemned Chile to decades of police state terror; and who supported Indonesia’s destruction of East Timor!

In other words, these Nobel recipients, who Supremacists cite as ‘examples of Jewish Supremacy’, have sown terror and injustice on countless captive peoples and nations – giving the Nobel Peace Prize a dubious distinction.

Among the greatest billion dollar swindlers in recent US history, we d find a disproportionate percentage of American Jews – curiously not mentioned by the Supremacists in their usual litany: Bernard Madoff pillaged over $50 billion from his clients, Ivan Boesky, Michael Milken and Marc Rich are well-known names adding the distinction of ‘Jewish genius’ to a list of financial mega-felons.

Among the less respectable notables whose material successes have been tarnished by personal weaknesses – we have the billionaire and pedophile pimp, Jeffry Epstein; IMF Boss Dominique Strauss Kahn, entrepreneur and ‘nudist’ Dov Charney, New York Governor and ‘repeat customer’ Elliot Spitzer, Congressman and exhibitionist Anthony Weiner and the fun-loving sports impresario who brought down FIFA, the piratical Chuck Blazer. Curiously, none of these extraordinarily successful notables have been cited as examples of Jewish Supremacy.

As we contemplate the millions of war refugees driven from the Near East and North Africa, we should credit the role of US neo-liberal and neo-conservative ideologues and policymakers –a disproportionate percentage of whom are Jews. Millions of Chilean workers suffered as Milton Friedman and his Chicago Boys ‘advised’ Chilean Dictator Augusto Pinochet on dismantling the welfare state (even if it required the murder of trade unionists!). Ayn Rand (Alyssa Rosenbaum) and her fanatical free market epigones have savaged all progressive social legislation and turned the most retrograde forms of selfishness into a religion of ‘superiority’!

The biggest financial crisis since the Great Depression was largely due to the financial policies of Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan. The trillion-dollar bailout of Wall Street by Ben Shalom Bernacke and Stanley Fischer, while Janet Yellen ignored the plight of millions of Americans who lost their homes because of mortgage foreclosures. In sum, Jewish Supremacists should proudly take credit for the American Jews who have been disproportionately responsible for the largest economic and foreign policy failures of the contemporary period – including the horrific suffering these have entailed!

Back in the more normal world of crime, Russian-Jewish mobsters dominate or share supremacy with the Italian Mafia in New York, Los Angeles, Las Vegas, Miami and scores of cities in between. They display their unique genius at extortion and murder – knowing they can always find safe haven in the ‘Promised Land’!

On the cultural front, the finest Jewish writers, artists, musicians, scientists have emerged outside of Israel. A few may have immigrated to the Jewish state, but many other intellectuals and artists of note have chosen to leave Israel, repelled by the racist, intolerant and repressive apartheid state and society promoted by Jewish Supremacists.


The record provides no historical basis for the claims of Jewish Supremacists:

What has been cited as the disproportionate ‘Jewish genius’ turns out to be a two-edged sword – demonstrating the best and the worst.

Claiming a monopoly on high academic achievement must be expanded to owning up to the Jewish authors of the worst financial and foreign policy disasters – they too are ‘high achievers’.

Donations from financial billionaires, all ‘geniuses’, have financed the war crimes of the Israeli state and made possible the expansion of violent Jewish settlers throughout occupied Palestine – spreading misery and displacement for millions.

In fairness, the most notorious Jewish swindler in contemporary America was even-handed: ‘Bernie’ Madoff swindled Jews and Goys, Hollywood moguls and New York philanthropists – he wasn’t picky about who he fleeced.

The latest fashion among Jewish Supremacist ‘geneticists’ is to extoll the discovery of uniquely special ‘genes’ predisposing Jews to experience the ‘holocaust’ and even inherit the experience of suffering from long dead ancestors. Such ‘scientists’ should be careful. As Jazz artist and essayist, Gilad Altzmon wryly notes, ‘They will put the anti-Semites out of business’.

Ultimately, Jews, who have assimilated into the greater society or not, who inter-marry and who do not, are all products of the social system in which they live and (like everyone else) they are the makers of the roles they decide to play within it.

In the past, a uniquely disproportional percentage of Jews chose to fight for universal humanist values – rejecting the notion of a chosen people.

Today a disproportionate percentage of educated Jews have chosen to embrace an ‘ethno-religious’ Supremacist dogma, which binds them to an apartheid, militarist state and ideology ready to drag the world into a global war.

Never forget! Racialist supremacist doctrines led Germany down the blind ally of totalitarianism and world war, in which scores of millions perished.

Jews, especially young Jews, are increasingly repelled by Israel’s crimes against humanity. The next step for them (and for us) is to criticize, demystify and stand up to the toxic supremacist ideology linking the powerful domestic Zionist power configuration and its political clones with Israel.

The root problem is not genetic, it is collective political dementia: a demented ideology that claims a chosen elite can forever dominate and exploit the majority of American people. The time will come when the accumulated disasters will force the American people to push back, unmasking the elite and rejecting its supremacist doctrines. Let us hope that they will act with passion guided by reason.



14-Million Year Old Vehicle Tracks

 14-Million-Year-Old Vehicle Tracks

14-Million-Year-Old Vehicle Tracks

According to a statement from a Russian geologist: these traces were left by vehicles that belonged to an advanced ancient civilization that inhabited our planet 14 million years ago.

We all know that numerous religious texts speak of giants that roamed the Earth in the distant past.

Even though experts in different fields have different opinions about this possibility, there are others who believe that Ancient Giants did exist and that we can find many traces of their existence today.

Geologist Alexander Koltypin believes that the mysterious markings that extend along the Phrygian Valley, in central Turkey, were made by an intelligent race between 12 and 14 million years ago
“We can assume that ancient vehicles with “wheels” were driven into the soft ground, perhaps a wet surface,” said the geologist.

“Because of the great weight of these vehicles, they left behind very deep grooves which eventually petrified and turned into evidence.”

Geologists are familiar with such phenomena as they have found petrified footprints of dinosaurs that were preserved in the same way.

Together with three colleagues, Dr. Koltypin, director of the Natural Science Scientific Research Centre at Moscow’s International Independent Ecological-Political University, traveled to the site in Anatolia, Turkey where these markings can be found.

Upon returning from his trip, he described the observed as ‘petrified tracking ruts in rocky tuffaceous [made from compacted volcanic ash deposits’.

Dr Koltypin said: ‘All these rocky fields were covered with the ruts left some millions of years ago… we are not talking about human beings.’

‘We are dealing with some kind of cars or all-terrain vehicles. The pairs of ruts are crossing each other from time to time and some ruts are more deep than the others,’ he added.

According to Dr Koltypin, these tracers were left behind by vehicles 14 million years ago. These mysterious ruts are between 12 to 14 million years old.

‘The methodology of specifying the age of volcanic rocks is very well-studied and worked out,’ he said.

Dr Koltypin is one of few experts that actually believes that science needs to change their approach on different matters. He believes that there are many archaeologists who avoid touching this matter since it would ruin all classic theories.

‘As a geologist, I can certainly tell you that unknown antediluvian [pre-Biblical] all-terrain vehicles drove around Central Turkey some 12-to-14 million years ago.’ said Dr. Koltypin.

He said: ‘I think we are seeing the signs of the civilisation which existed before the classic creation of this world. Maybe the creatures of that pre-civilisation were not like modern human beings.’

According to Dr. Koltypin and many other archaeologists and experts which have adopted new ways of thinking these ancient “car tracks” are one of the best preserved pieces of evidence which undoubtedly prove the existence of highly advanced ancient civilizations that inhabited our planet in the distant past.

Many researchers believe that there are several pieces of evidence pointing towards the existence of highly advanced ancient civilizations that existed on Earth millions of years ago.

“There was no comprehensible system for the tracks but the distance between each pair of tracks ‘is always the same,” added Dr Koltypin.

‘The maximum depth of a rut is about three feet (one metre). On the sides of ruts there can be seen horizontal scratches, it looks like they were left by the ends of the axles used for ancient wheels.

‘We found many ruts with such scratches,’ he said.

Is it possible that Dr Koltypin is right? And is it possible that mainstream scientists have ignored these giant pieces of evidence in hopes of preserving their classic and old thinking methods?

Is it possible that mainstream experts are afraid of adopting a new approach to ancient history?

There are many who believe that with a classic approach, science is becoming less objective.



Scientists grow 5-week-old human brain

Scientists successfully grow human brain in lab

Scientists successfully grow human brain in lab

Growing brain tissue in a dish has been done before, but bold new research announced this week shows that scientists’ ability to create human brains in laboratory settings has come a long way quickly.

Researchers at the Ohio State University in the US claim to have developed the most complete laboratory-grown human brain ever, creating a model with the brain maturity of a 5-week-old foetus. The brain, which is approximately the size of a pencil eraser, contains 99 percent of the genes that would be present in a natural human foetal brain.

“It not only looks like the developing brain, its diverse cell types express nearly all genes like a brain,” Rene Anand, professor of biological chemistry and pharmacology at Ohio State and lead researcher on the brain model, said in a statement.

“We’ve struggled for a long time trying to solve complex brain disease problems that cause tremendous pain and suffering. The power of this brain model bodes very well for human health because it gives us better and more relevant options to test and develop therapeutics other than rodents.”

Anand turned to stem cell engineering four years ago after his specialized field of research – examining the relationship between nicotinic receptors and central nervous system disorders – ran into complications using rodent specimens. Despite having limited funds, Anand and his colleagues succeeded with their proprietary technique, which they are in the process of commercializing.

The brain they have developed is a virtually complete recreation of a human foetal brain, primarily missing only a vascular system – in other words, all the blood vessels. But everything else (spinal cord, major brain regions, multiple cell types, signalling circuitry is there). What’s more, it’s functioning, with high-resolution imaging of the brain model showing functioning neurons and brain cells.

The researchers say that it takes 15 weeks to grow a lab-developed brain to the equivalent of a 5-week-old foetal human brain, and the longer the maturation process the more complete the organoid will become.

“If we let it go to 16 or 20 weeks, that might complete it, filling in that 1 percent of missing genes. We don’t know yet,” said Anand.

The scientific benefit of growing human brains in laboratory settings is that it enables high-end research into human diseases that cannot be completed using rodents.

“In central nervous system diseases, this will enable studies of either underlying genetic susceptibility or purely environmental influences, or a combination,” said Anand. “Genomic science infers there are up to 600 genes that give rise to autism, but we are stuck there. Mathematical correlations and statistical methods are insufficient to in themselves identify causation. You need an experimental system – you need a human brain.”

The research was presented this week at the Military Health System Research Symposium.



Summing up Fukushima

Summing up Fukushima

Summing up Fukushima

Summing up Fukushima

About 60 people died immediately during the actual evacuations in Fukushima Prefecture in March 2011. Between 2011 and 2015, an additional 1,867 people in Fukushima Prefecture died as a result of the evacuations following the nuclear disaster. These deaths were from ill health and suicides.

From the UNSCEAR estimate of 48,000 person Sv, it can be reliably estimated (using a fatal cancer risk factor of 10% per Sv) that about 5,000 fatal cancers will occur in Japan in future from Fukushima’s fallout. This estimate from official data agrees with my own personal estimate using a different methodology.

In sum, the health toll from the Fukushima nuclear disaster is horrendous. At the minimum

  • Over 160,000 people were evacuated most of them permanently.
  • Many cases of post-trauma stress disorder (PTSD), depression, and anxiety disorders arising from the evacuations.
  • About 12,000 workers exposed to high levels of radiation, some up to 250 mSv
  • An estimated 5,000 fatal cancers from radiation exposures in future.
  • Plus similar (unquantified) numbers of radiogenic strokes, CVS diseases and hereditary diseases.
  • Between 2011 and 2015, about 2,000 deaths from radiation-related evacuations due to ill-health and suicides.
  • An as yet unquantified number of thyroid cancers.
  • An increased infant mortality rate in 2012 and a decreased number of live births in December 2011.

Non-health effects include

  • 8% of Japan (30,000, including parts of Tokyo, contaminated by radioactivity.
  • Economic losses estimated between $300 and $500 billion.

New evidence from Fukushima shows that as many as 2,000 people have died from necessary evacuations, writes Ian Fairlie, while another 5,000 will die from cancer. Future assessments of fatalities from nuclear disasters must include deaths from displacement-induced ill-heath and suicide in addition to those from direct radiation impacts.

“The Fukushima accident is still not over and its ill-effects will linger for a long time into the future … 2,000 Japanese people have already died from the evacuations and another 5,000 are expected to die from future cancers.”

Official data from Fukushima show that nearly 2,000 people died from the effects of evacuations necessary to avoid high radiation exposures from the disaster.


The uprooting to unfamiliar areas, cutting of family ties, loss of social support networks, disruption, exhaustion, poor physical conditions and disorientation can and do result in many people, in particular older people, dying.

Increased suicide has occurred among younger and older people following the Fukushima evacuations, but the trends are unclear.

A Japanese Cabinet Office report stated that, between March 2011 and July 2014,56 suicides in Fukushima Prefecture were linked to the nuclear accident. This should be taken as a minimum, rather than a maximum, figure.



1% of 84,000 Chemicals Have only Been Tested

women make-up

women make-up

There are around 84,000 chemicals on the market, and we come into contact with many of them every single day. And if that isn’t enough to cause concern, the shocking fact is that only about 1 percent of them have been studied for safety.

In 2010, at a hearing of the Senate Subcommittee on Superfund, Toxics and Environmental Health, Lisa Jackson, then the administrator of the EPA, put our current, hyper-toxic era into sharp perspective: “A child born in America today will grow up exposed to more chemicals than any other generation in our history.”

Just consider your morning routine: If you’re an average male, you use up to nine personal care products every single day: shampoo, toothpaste, soap, deodorant, hair conditioner, lip balm, sunscreen, body lotion and shaving products — amounting to about 85 different chemicals. Many of the ingredients in these products are harmless, but some are carcinogens, neurotoxins and endocrine disruptors.

Women are particularly at risk because they generally use more personal care products than men: 25 percent of women apply 15 or more products daily, including makeup and anti-aging creams, amounting to an average of 168 chemicals. For a pregnant woman, the risk is multiplied as she can pass on those toxins to her unborn child: 300 contaminants have been detected in the umbilical cord blood of newborns.

Many people don’t think twice about the chemicals they put on their bodies, perhaps thinking that the government regulates the personal care products that flood the marketplace. In reality, the government plays a very small role, in part because it doesn’t have the legal mandate to protect the public from harmful substances that chemical companies and manufacturers sell in their products. Federal rules designed to ensure product safety haven’t been updated in more than 75 years. New untested chemicals appear on store shelves all the time.

“Under federal law, cosmetics companies don’t have to disclose chemicals or gain approval for the 2,000 products that go on the market every year,” notes environment writer Jane Kay in Scientific American. “And removing a cosmetic from sale takes a battle in federal court.”

It’s high time these rules are revisited. Not only have thousands of new chemicals entered the market in the past several decades, there is overwhelming evidence that the public is unnecessarily exposed to health hazards from consumer products. In 2013, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists issued a report that found “robust” evidence linking “toxic environmental agents” — which includes consumer products — to “adverse reproductive and developmental health outcomes.”

Formaldehyde is a good example. It is a known carcinogen used as a preservative to kill or inhibit the growth of microorganisms in a wide range of personal care products, from cosmetics, soaps, shampoos and lotions to deodorants, nail polishes and hair gels. It is also used in pressed-wood products, permanent-press fabrics, paper product coatings and insulation, and as a fungicide, germicide, disinfectant and preservative. The general public is also exposed to formaldehyde through automobile tailpipe emissions. Formaldehyde has been linked to spontaneous abortion and low birth weight.

While the main concern about formaldehyde exposure centers around industrial use (e.g., industrial workers, embalmers and salon workers), the Cosmetic Ingredient Review, an independent panel of experts that determines the safety of individual chemical compounds as they are used in cosmetics, recommends that for health and safety reasons cosmetics should not contain formaldehyde at amounts greater than 0.2 percent. It’s a small amount, but the problem is that the FDA doesn’t regulate the use of formaldehyde in cosmetics (except for nail polish), and companies aren’t required by law to follow CIR’s recommendations.



NSA planned to infect Samsung with spyware


NSA planned to infect Samsung with spyware

NSA planned to infect Samsung with spyware

If you’re in the business of writing spyware or malware, smartphones are a tempting target. For many people, their phone or tablet is now the primary compute device they use to surf the web, access content, and explore new software. Google has had problems keeping the Google Play store free from malware and spyware, but new information suggests that both Google and Samsung almost faced a much more potent opponent — the NSA itself.

A report from The Intercept highlights how the NSA explored options for hacking the App Store and Google Play over several workshops held in Australia and Canada between November 2011 and February 2012. The projects used the Internet-monitoring Xkeyscore system to identify smartphone traffic, then trace that traffic back to app stores. This led to a project dubbed Irritant Horn, the point of which was to develop the ability to distribute “implants” that could be installed when the smartphones in question attempted to connect to Google or Samsung app stores.

The NSA has targeted mobile devices ever since the post-Patriot Act era made such warrantless comprehensive spying legal, but it’s never been clear how the organization managed to tap certain hardware in the first place. The goal was twofold: First, use app stores to launch spyware campaigns and second, gather information about the phone users themselves by infiltrating the app stores in question.

The reference to “Another Arab spring,” refers to the fact that the events of 2010-2011 apparently caught western intelligence agencies off-guard, with few resources that could quickly be brought to bear. The NSA wanted to be aware of future events before they happened. Note, however, that this has precious little to do with the direct goal of protecting the United States from terrorism.

Few would argue that the US should not monitor the activities of known threats, but where was the threat from internal strife and the possible toppling of autocratic governments? It’s true that in the longer run, some new governments might pursue policies that the United States found less desirable than those of the previous regime, but there’s an enormous leap between “We don’t like Country X’s new trade policy,” and “Country X is actively assisting terrorist groups to carry out an attack on the United States.”

 The NSA was primarily interested in the activities of African countries. But in the course of investigating these possibilities, it discovered significant security flaws in a program called UC Browser, used by nearly half a billion people in East Asia. Instead of disclosing the security vulnerability, the NSA and other foreign intelligence groups chose to exploit it — thereby increasing the chances that other criminal elements would have time to find and exploit it as well.

These issues are at the heart of the debate over what the NSA’s role should be in the future. There’s always been tension over whether the NSA should weaken or strengthen the cryptographic standards that allow for secure communication. That discussion may be even more nuanced when it involves software produced by foreign companies. There are few signs, however, that such nuanced discussions of capability have ever occurred. Instead, we continue to see intelligence resources deployed with the goal of vacuuming up all information from any source, regardless of legal precedent or cooperation.

The future of the Patriot Act and the scope of NSA’s future powers remains in some doubt. Senator Rand Paul gave a 10-hour speech yesterday aimed at derailing support for the Patriot Act (his actions were not properly a filibuster, because a vote on the renewal of Section 215 wasn’t actually before the chamber at the time). Others in the House of Representatives have called for a full appeal of the Patriot Act’s provisions, and the Federal Appeals Court for the Second Circuit recently ruled that the current spying program is illegal under the Patriot Act as it stands.




800 terabecquerels of Cesium by 2016

800 terabecquerels of Cesium- 137 by 2016.

800 terabecquerels of Cesium- 137 by 2016.

A professor from Japan’s Fukushima University Institute of Environmental Radioactivity (Michio Aoyama) told Kyodo in April that the West Coast of North America will be hit with around 800 terabecquerels of Cesium- 137 by 2016.

EneNews notes that this is 80% of the cesium-137 deposited in Japan by Fukushima, according to the company which runs Fukushima, Tepco:

(a petabequeral or “PBq” equals 1,000 terabecquerels.)

This is not news for those who have been paying attention.  For example, we noted 2 days after the 2011 Japanese earthquake and tsunami that the West Coast of North America could be slammed with radiation from Fukushima.

We pointed out the next year that a previously-secret 1955 U.S. government report concluded that the ocean may not adequately dilute radiation from nuclear accidents, and there could be “pockets” and “streams” of highly-concentrated radiation.

The same year, we noted that 15 out of 15 bluefin tuna tested in California waters were contaminated with Fukushima radiation.

In 2013, we warned that the West Coast of North America would be hit hard by Fukushima radiation.

And we’ve noted for years that there is no real testing of Fukushima radiation by any government agency.

Indeed, scientists say that the amount of the West Coast of North America could end up exceeding that off the Japanese coast.

What’s the worst case scenario? That the mass die-off of sealife off the West Coast of North America – which may have started only a couple of months after the Fukushima melt-down – is being caused by radiation from Fukushima.



Reprogrammed bacteria able to detect cancer

Bacteria to detect cancer

Reprogramming bacteria to detect cancer

The fight against cancer has risen to a fever pitch in the last decade, with new research avenues increasing almost by the day. If we are to believe Ray Kurzweil and the singularity folk, the specter of cancer may soon be a thing of the past. Lending credence to such optimism, new research by a team at MIT and UC San Diego employs genetically engineered bacteria to detect cancer, and perhaps someday treat it as well. Enlisting the help of bacteria in the battle against cancer may prove key in turning the tables on this awful menace.

The basis for this new form of cancer diagnosis is the unusual relationship between cancer and bacteria. Whereas healthy human tissue will aggressively fight off most bacterial infestations, the immune system within tumors has been compromised by the many mutations taking place there, and so bacteria accumulate in them at a higher-than-normal rate. The researchers exploited this characteristic to devise a means of detecting tumors long before other methods could catch them.

By removing a snippet of DNA programming found in fireflies and transferring it to a harmless form of E. Coli bacteria, the researchers were able to cause these bacteria to fluoresce at the critical concentrations that occur within tumors. The analogy would be to that of creating a flashlight that automatically turns on when it finds a tumor. The ability to detect tumors as small as one cubic millimeter makes this one of the most sensitive diagnostic tools to date. In treating cancer, early detection is pivotal, since the sooner a tumor is detected, the easier it is to contain and eliminate.

But before letting out a collective sigh of relief, it should be kept in mind that this method has only been successfully applied to liver cancers. Early on in the study, the researchers realized the orally ingested bacteria would not reach sufficient concentrations throughout the whole body to successfully detect all tumors therein. For instance, the blood brain barrier prevents the bacteria from entering the human brain as would be necessary for this method to detect brain tumors. The liver, however, proved an exception, in that the E. Coli bacteria in question naturally occurs there and would multiply rapidly in the presence of a tumor.

Despite its limitations, this is nonetheless a significant development. Many tumors that begin in the colon quickly spread to the liver, where they prove difficult to detect and go on to infect other parts of the body. Therefore, catching liver cancer early can play a key role in preventing cancers in many other place of the body.

The scientists involved in the study, including Tal Danino and Arthur Prindle, are now hopeful that the same bacteria can be programmed to fight cancer as well. The goal is to engineer the bacteria to cause genetic disruption of cancer cell function, deliver drugs, or signal the immune system to destroy the cancer itself. In the future, the cup of yogurt you have in the morning may not only improve digestive health, but simultaneously track down and eliminate cancers growing within the body.




Monsanto Poisoned Residents With Agent Orange

Monsanto Ordered To Pay $93 Million

Monsanto Ordered To Pay $93 Million

Monsanto Ordered To Pay $93 Million For Poisoning Residents With Agent Orange.

Approved last year, the details were only recently worked out a few weeks ago as to how the funds would be dispersed.

As mandated in the settlement:

  • $9 million will be spent to clean dioxin contaminated dust from 4500 homes.
  • $21 million will be spent to test to see if people have been poisoned with dioxin.
  • Citizens will be monitored for such poisoning for 30 years, not just a few months.
  • An additional $63 million is to be allotted if additional tests for dioxin contamination testing is necessary.
  • Anyone who lived in the Nitro area between Jan. 1, 1948, and Sept. 3, 2010 will be tested for dioxin. Although they must show proof they lived in the area, they will be eligible for testing even if they no longer live in Nitro.
  • Former or present employees of Monsanto are not eligible for any of these benefits.
  • An office will be set up to organize testing for Nitro citizens. The registration of participants is to be overlooked by Charleston attorney Thomas Flaherty, who was appointed by the court.
  • Residents have a right to file individual suits against Monsanto if medical tests show they suffered physical harm due to dioxin exposure.

Such goes to show that little towns CAN deal big blows to giant corporations.

As reported by Natural Society, Monsanto was producing the toxic herbicide Agent Orange in Nitro, and dioxin is a chemical byproduct of the substance. Known to cause serious health conditions, residents were not too pleased when they received word they were in close proximity with the toxin.

The factory which produced Agent Orange was opened in the West Virginian town in 1948 and remained operational until 2004 – even after it was found to be fatal to millions when used in Vietnam and other Asian countries.

Said Arnold Schecter and Jon Constable, “There is no doubt that during and after the war, many Vietnamese absorbed this very toxic material [dioxin]. It is our belief from toxicological research and epidemiological studies from many countries that this dioxin probably resulted in significant health effects in Vietnam.

The politics of dioxin has been bitterly debated since the Vietnam War, but … we know that there is a health issue there and hopefully people will get their houses cleaned and the risk will come to an end and those exposed in the past will have the benefit of keeping an eye on their health.”

Attorney Stuart Calwell told The Charleston Gazette that “It’s been a real long haul.” Caldwell represented Nitro area residents in a class action suit that prompted the biotech giant, Monsanto, to make the settlement.

In order to receive the benefits outlined in the settlement, residents of Nitro still need to fill out a register. And due to the serious importance of this landmark case, residents in the area are urged to participate as fully as possible to set a precedent for other class action suits that farmers and consumers of GMO foods around the world might ignite against Monsanto in the future.

If enough people join together to raise awareness and support for efforts against Monsanto, inevitably the corporate giant will pay for its deeds.



100,000 German Call for GMO Ban

GMO Cultivation Ban

GMO Cultivation Ban

German beekeepers have called for a nationwide ban on cultivating GM plants, reports the German NGO

The call by the German Beekeepers Association (DIB), which represents almost 100,000 beekeepers, comes after Europe adopted controversial legislation enabling member states to opt-out of the cultivation of GMOs that have been approved at the EU level.

Under the law, a member state can ban a GMO in part or all of its territory. But the law has come under heavy criticism for failing to provide a solid basis for such bans.

The beekeepers are urging Agriculture Minister Christian Schmidt (CSU) to implement a Germany-wide ban on cultivation. The Minister pleads, however, for letting each state decide individually.

The beekeepers counter that a piecemeal approach will not work. Bees fly up to eight kilometres in search of food, the DIB said, so a juxtaposition of GM crop cultivation zones and GMO-free zones within Germany would be “environmentally and agriculturally unacceptable”.

“Bees know no borders,” the DIB added.

The beekeepers’ demand for a nationwide ban could bring them into direct conflict with the new opt-out law, as experts warn that such bans may not be legally solid.

National GMO cultivation bans will be tough to uphold

At a conference on the new European legislation hosted by the Hungarian Ministry of Agriculture in Budapest, Hungary, in April 2015, Dr H.-Christoph von Heydebrand of the German Federal Ministry of Food and Agriculture warned that a nationwide ban on GMO cultivation would be much harder to justify under the new law than a regional or local ban.

A lawyer from the EU Council, Matthew Moore, speaking at the same conference in a personal capacity, agreed that it would be far easier under the law to defend national measures that “do not extend to the whole territory”.

Mr Moore gave an example of the type of challenge that would-be opting-out countries will be faced with. If they argue that GMOs threaten small-scale and agroecological farmers in their nation, they could be asked: “Is the entirety of your agricultural sector really composed of small farmers whose domination by a large agro-industrial company and its single pesticide motivated you to act?”

Mr Moore explained that the principle of proportionality is written into the new law, as well as being a general principle of EU law.

This means that the ECJ will be more inclined to accept GMO cultivation opt-outs “in relation to a defined region than in relation to the entirety of the territory of a country the size of Hungary”. Any measure taken by an opting-out country to ban or restrict the cultivation of GMOs must not go beyond what is necessary to achieve the stated aim.

Mr Moore made clear that if opt-outs were challenged, for example, by the GMO industry, the case would end up in the European Court of Justice. And the ECJ has a presumption in favour of the EU single market.

In simple terms, that means the ECJ could take a lot of convincing to allow a country or even a region to opt out of cultivating a GMO that the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) asserts is safe. Such an opt-out, if allowed to stand, could create divisions in the European single market and might bring the member state into conflict with the ECJ.

The current situation in Germany, with beekeepers ranged against government officials and pro-GMO farmers, also suggests that the new opt-out law will create internal divisions within a country.

The GMO industry may go down in history as having broken apart the European Union and set one sector of the food and agriculture industry against another.



Jewish agenda “Gay Marriage” dismantle Christian culture

Not everyone agrees with Gay Marriage!

Not everyone agrees with Gay Marriage!

“Why Jews Push Gay Marriage
By Brother Nathanael Kapner”.


With the Supreme Court Hearings last week on homosexual unions—and Obama’s own endorsement—Jews are at the forefront in promoting ‘gay’ marriage.

Jewish leaders like billionaire’s Sheldon Adelson, Michael Bloomberg, and Marc Stern of the American Jewish Committee, have all come out in favor of what has traditionally been looked upon as sexual depravity.

Even Elena Kagan at the Supreme Court, yes, Jewish, an alleged lesbian at that, is reportedly known for “queerifying Harvard” when Dean of the Law School by introducing “transgender law courses”

Two Jewish groups in particular: The Anti-Defamation League, together with the American Federation of Teachers, have been promoting the homosexual agenda in our public schools.

Books like Daddy’s New Roommate, (Ken), Daddy’s Wedding, (Daddy marries Ken), King and King, are part of the ADL’s Early Learning Program, molding the minds of impressionable little children to accept and embrace deviant sexual acts.

But Jews prefer sending their kids to private schools. It gives their children better standing for admittance to Ivy-League colleges and shields them from homosexual propaganda.

Believe me, for I grew up as a Jew, for a Jewish son or daughter to announce to their parents that they are ‘gay’ is one of the worst things that could ever happen.

You see, Jews look upon marriage for their own as sacrosanct, as paramount for the perpetuity of the Jewish race.

[Clip: “I’m going to tell you the most important thing you have to remember, about all that I learned in the world this is it, no matter what happens you marry a Jewish girl.” [audience laughs] “That’s right, your mother was right. You marry a Jewish boy. There’s nothing more important in the whole than this. And there’s another reason you better marry a Jewish girl. So you mother doesn’t break both your legs.”]

Indeed according to my own Jewish upbringing, there’s nothing ‘gay’ about two men having sex in each other’s rectums and two women using dildos to imitate the act of procreation.

And we heard during the Sabbath Torah Readings the passage from Leviticus, “Thou shalt not lie with mankind as with womankind, it is an abomination, saith the Lord.”

Why then are Jews pushing gay marriage? It’s for the Goys, that’s why.

I’ll never forget the day that a ‘gay’ movie came to Brookline Mass. with homosexual images plastered all over the marquee.

As I stood across the street in disgust, a Hasidic rabbi came walking by.

I pointed to the movie and said, “Isn’t it horrid that we’re assaulted with these lewd images and titles?”

The rabbi laughed and scorned and said, “It’s for the Goys! Who cares!”

You see, Jews have no special love for queens, transvestites, and cross-dressers. They look upon them as “dreck”…as repulsive.

But to dismantle a Christian culture in America that opposes Jewry, that’s what the Jews are after.

Homosexuality is for the Goys! But the Regime is for the Jews.




Gay Marriage Study Faked!

Not everyone agrees with Gay Marriage!

Not everyone agrees with Gay Marriage!

We’ve heard it over and over again in the main stream media – a majority of Americans now support “same-sex” marriage.  It is the rationale those pushing for this radical change to U.S. culture are using to press ahead with their agenda.

But, a new report just out shoots down this assumption being hammered home by the left.  The Daily Caller reports:

A study purporting to show that people’s views on gay marriage could change simply by meeting gay people has been retracted following revelations that its data was fabricated.

The study was published last December in Science, and prior to publication drew a great deal of attention from the American media. Vox, for instance, described the findings in the study as “kind of miraculous.” As it turns out, that’s exactly what they were, because they were apparently made up.According to the study, people from communities hostile to gay marriage could have their opinions shift dramatically after spending just a few minutes speaking with a gay person who canvassed their neighborhood promoting gay marriage. Not only that, but this could have a spillover effect, making not just the people themselves more pro-gay but also other people who lived in the same household.

The study, among other things, lent support to the notion that those opposed to gay marriage simply don’t know or interact with open homosexuals. More broadly, it was seen as an important development in the science of how people can be convinced to change their minds on ideologically-charged issues.

I don’t know why this should surprise us.  The left always plays “fast and loose ” with the facts to spew their propaganda.  Perception is reality as far as they are concerned.

The Daily Caller provides more details:

The study began to fall apart when students at the University of California at Berkeley sought to conduct additional research building off of it, only to find major irregularities in how its research was apparently conducted. For example, thermometers used to measure participants’ attitudes produced consistent, reliable information, even though they are known for producing relatively unreliable numbers.

Also, the data recovered had an exceptionally consistent distribution, with not a single one of the 12,000 supposed participants providing anomalous or unusual results. In other words, the study’s data was too perfect to be believable.

Donald Green, a professor at Columbia University and a co-author of the paper, made the decision to retract it after having a confrontation with co-author Michael LaCour, a graduate student at UCLA. While LaCour maintained that he hadn’t fabricated the data, he was also unable to produce the original source files supposedly used to produce it. When he failed to write-up a retraction, Green took the initiative and did so himself.

“I am deeply embarrassed by this turn of events and apologize to the editors, reviewers, and readers of Science,” Green told Retraction Watch, a science watchdog website.

How much damage this “fake” study has already inflicted on America is not known, but don’t look to anyone in the main stream media to correct the record.  They are completely sold on the idea of “same-sex” marriage and all of the “transgender fluidity” nonsense now being pushed by the same people who pushed for acceptance of homosexual behavior as normative.

It may take the American people some time to see through this most recent fraud, but truth has a funny way of coming out; especially when all of the lies start to fall like a house of cards.



Bullied into Gay Marriage

Not everyone agrees with Gay Marriage!

Not everyone agrees with Gay Marriage!

Being bullied into any belief is a crime!  The majority of people don’t actually support Same Sex Marriage.  So why the big push to have this in our society?  The big push comes from one of the lowest tactic’s that are available to man-kind, being “Bullied”.



“IT seems to have boiled down to this. If you don’t support the rush towards gay marriage, you are either out of touch or just a bigot. Or worse still, you’re a mean-spirited and gay-hating denier, standing in the way of love … and you ought to be ashamed.

These are familiar arguments to any politician or public commentator who has taken a stance against the ­fashionable and fast-moving tide to redefine what marriage is about.

In parliament, those who oppose a change on both sides of politics are a frightened majority.

Not that you’d know it.

A casual reader of the news could easily be left with the impression that this is all just a fait accompli.

Here we are again, back in the zone where having an ­alternative view makes you the enemy.

Speak against the fashion and be prepared to be smeared, ridiculed and bullied.

These are the climate change tactics back again.

Something is wrong with you if you haven’t decorated your Facebook photo with rainbow colours. Good luck if you have but it turns out you’ve been sucked in by yet another data-collecting exercise.

Those who resisted were “deniers”, “out of touch”, “fossils and dinosaurs”, “selfish” and “in the pocket of the oil companies”.

Same game, different story.

The left is again framing its debate so that anyone who disagrees is bashed into a lonely corner.

It’s a schoolyard tactic that has spineless politicians frightened of speaking out.

Large sections of the media have drunk buckets of the Kool-Aid and have lost all objectivity on the issue.

It’s just like the dirty game of push-polling. Keep telling them change is inevitable and if you don’t believe that, here’s another survey to prove it.

And, if that doesn’t work, pull out the “international embarrassment” card.

How many times this week have you heard that we should be there too — just like New Zealand, Ireland, and now the United States?

It’s dumb logic but it works.

Something is wrong with you if you haven’t decorated your Facebook photo with rainbow colours. Good luck if you have but it turns out you’ve been sucked in by yet another data-collecting exercise.

The marriage equality argument has come down to humiliation and ridicule and a claim that to resist is to sit on the wrong side of history.

Just like climate change, and the push towards a republic in the late ’90s, gay marriage has become the latest and greatest moral challenge of our times. The trouble is, it’s not.”




Personally, I think Gay Marriage is terrible and should not be allowed!  Being bullied into believing Gay Marriage is suitable, reflects on how appalling the whole idea is anyways.  Don’t let anyone tell you that this new push for equality is appropriate.  Don’t let anyone bully you into thinking that you are a bigot, just because you think Gay Marriage is gruesome and vile.  If you can, report any bulling to the proper authorities to stop this aggravation. Don’t let the internet brain wash you into thinking that same sex marriage the norm, because its not!



Harvest electricity from evaporating water

harvest electricity from evaporating water

harvest electricity from evaporating water

Scientists in the US have shown that evaporating water could be an abundant new source of clean, renewable energy, and it’s already powerful enough to light up a small LED and power a miniature car.

With around 70 percent of the planet covered in water that’s constantly evaporating into the atmosphere, the new technology has huge potential to help us power our homes, transportation and industries, without producing greenhouse gas emissions.

 “Evaporation is a fundamental force of nature,” lead researcher Ozgur Sahin from Columbia University said in a press release. “It’s everywhere, and it’s more powerful than other forces like wind and waves.” If the technology can be scaled up, his team believes we could one day place giant floating power generators on top of lakes, dams and rivers.

Although scientists have long known that evaporation was a constant and powerful force, they’ve struggled to find a way to use this energy to generate electricity. But last year, Sahin made a seemingly unrelated discovery – that when common soil bacteria spores shrink and swell as a result of changing humidity, they can push and pull other objects with surprising force.

With this in mind, Sahin and his team stuck Bacillus subtilis spores onto thin strips of tape, similar to cassette tape. This made the tape contract when the air surrounding it was dry, and expand when it was humid. “Several of these strips together can contract with enough force to lift small weights of 0.2 lbs to 0.7 lbs [0.09 to 0.3 kg] – 50 times the weight of the strips themselves,” writes Kiona Smith-Strickland for Discover magazine.

The researchers then used these strips – which they’re calling hygroscopy driven artificial muscles, or HYDRAs – to build a shuttered structure that floats on water. The humidity produced by the evaporating water causes the tape to expand, opening up the shutters and causing the device to dry out. As the tape shrinks again in the dry air, the shutters are pulled shut, which allows the humidity to build up again, repeating the cycle.

“When we placed water beneath the device, it suddenly came to life, moving on its own,” said Xi Chen, a postdoctoral fellow in Sahin’s lab.

The team used this opening and shutting as a rudimentary piston and linked it to a generator, producing enough electricity to cause a small LED light to flash on and off.

“We turned evaporation from a pool of water into light,” said Sahin. Chen speculates, “that an improved version with stickier plastic tape and more spores could potentially generate even more power per unit area than a wind farm”.

They also created a ‘Moisture Mill’ – a plastic wheel covered in the spore-covered tape, which is half covered in a humid environment, and half exposed to a dry environment. This change in moisture causes the tabs to curve and straighten, producing enough force to turn the wheel continuously.

Using the system, the team was able to make a small toy car weighing 0.1 kg roll forwards on its own. Sahin suggests that a larger version of this mill could produce as much electricity as a wind turbine

The research has been published in Nature Communications, and the team is now focussing on scaling up the devices and investigating other ways that the technology can help generate electricity. “Evaporation-driven engines may find applications in powering robotic systems, sensors, devices and machinery that function in the natural environment,” they write.

In the meantime they’ve put a call-out for other researchers to take their idea and run with it. Fingers crossed that further experiments confirm that the technology is as powerful as it seems, because this idea could be an exciting contender in the renewable energy space.



Root Canals Linked 97% Of All Terminal Cancer Patients

Root Canal linked to 97% of all Terminal Cancer Patients

97% of all Terminal Cancer Patients Root Canal linked to 97% of all Terminal Cancer Patients

Root-canaled teeth are essentially “dead” teeth that can become silent incubators for highly toxic anaerobic bacteria that can, under certain conditions, make their way into your bloodstream to cause a number of serious medical conditions—many not appearing until decades later.

Most of these toxic teeth feel and look fine for many years, which make their role in systemic disease even harder to trace back.

Sadly, the vast majority of dentists are oblivious to the serious potential health risks they are exposing their patients to, risks that persist for the rest of their patients’ lives. The American Dental Association claims root canals have been proven safe, but they have NO published data or actual research to substantiate this claim.

Fortunately, I had some early mentors like Dr. Tom Stone and Dr. Douglas Cook, who educated me on this issue nearly 20 years ago. Were it not for a brilliant pioneering dentist who, more than a century ago, made the connection between root-canaled teeth and disease, this underlying cause of disease may have remained hidden to this day. The dentist’s name was Weston Price — regarded by many as the greatest dentist of all time.

Most dentists would be doing an enormous service to public health if they familiarized themselves with the work of Dr. Weston Pricei. Unfortunately, his work continues to be discounted and suppressed by medical and dental professionals alike.

Dr. Price was a dentist and researcher who traveled the world to study the teeth, bones, and diets of native populations living without the “benefit” of modern food. Around the year 1900, Price had been treating persistent root canal infections and became suspicious that root-canaled teeth always remained infected, in spite of treatments. Then one day, he recommended to a woman, wheelchair bound for six years, to have her root canal tooth extracted, even though it appeared to be fine.

She agreed, so he extracted her tooth and then implanted it under the skin of a rabbit. The rabbit amazingly developed the same crippling arthritis as the woman and died from the infection 10 days later. But the woman, now free of the toxic tooth, immediately recovered from her arthritis and could now walk without even the assistance of a cane.

Price discovered that it’s mechanically impossible to sterilize a root-canaled (e.g. root-filled) tooth.

He then went on to show that many chronic degenerative diseases originate from root-filled teeth—the most frequent being heart and circulatory diseases. He actually found 16 different causative bacterial agents for these conditions. But there were also strong correlations between root-filled teeth and diseases of the joints, brain and nervous system.

Dr. Price went on to write two groundbreaking books in 1922 detailing his research into the link between dental pathology and chronic illness. Unfortunately, his work was deliberately buried for 70 years, until finally one endodontist named George Meinig recognized the importance of Price’s work and sought to expose the truth.



Doctor Who Linked Vaccines To Autism Found In River

Bradsreet  Found Floating in River

Bradsreet Found Floating in River

A prominent autism researcher and vaccine opponent was found dead floating in a North Carolina river last week under what many are calling suspicious circumstances.

A fisherman found the body of Dr. James Jeffery Bradstreet in the Rocky Broad River in Chimney Rock, North Carolina, last Friday afternoon.

“Bradstreet had a gunshot wound to the chest, which appeared to be self inflicted, according to deputies,” reported WHNS.

In a press release, the Rutherford County Sheriff’s Office announced, “Divers from the Henderson County Rescue Squad responded to the scene and recovered a handgun from the river.”

An investigation into the death is ongoing, and the results of an autopsy are also reportedly forthcoming.

Dr. Bradstreet ran a private practice in Buford, Georgia, which focused on “treating children with Autism Spectrum Disorder, PPD, and related neurological and developmental disorders.”

Among various remedies, Dr. Bradstreet’s Wellness Center reportedly carried out “mercury toxicity” treatments, believing the heavy metal to be a leading factor in the development of childhood autism.

Dr. Bradstreet undertook the effort to pinpoint the cause of the disease after his own child developed the ailment following routine vaccination.

“Autism taught me more about medicine than medical school did,” the doctor once stated at a conference, according to the Epoch Times’ Jake Crosby.

In addition to treating patients, Bradstreet has also offered expert testimony in federal court on behalf of vaccine-injured families and was founder and president of the International Child Development Resource Center, which at one time employed the much-scorned autism expert Dr. Andrew Wakefield as “research director.”

The circumstances surrounding Bradstreet’s death are made all the more curious by a recent multi-agency raid led by the FDA on his offices.

“The FDA has yet to reveal why agents searched the office of the doctor, reportedly a former pastor who has been controversial for well over a decade,” reported the Gwinnett Daily Post.

Social media pages dedicated to Bradstreet’s memory are filled with comments from families who say the deceased doctor impacted their lives for the better.

“Dr. Bradstreet was my son’s doctor after my son was diagnosed with autism. He worked miracles,” one Facebook user states. “At 16, my son is now looking at a normal life thanks to him. I thank him every day.”

“I will forever be grateful and thankful for Dr. Bradstreet recovering my son… from autism,” another person writes. “Treatments have changed my son’s life so that he can grow up and live a normal healthy life. Dr. Bradstreet will be missed greatly!”

A GoFundMe page has also been set up by one of Bradstreet’s family members seeking “To find the answers to the many questions leading up to the death of Dr Bradstreet, including an exhaustive investigation into the possibility of foul play.”

Despite his family requesting the public refrain from speculation, many are nevertheless concluding the doctor’s death to be part of a conspiracy.

“Self-inflicted? In the chest? I’m not buying this,” one person in the WHNS comments thread states. “This was a doctor who had access to pharmaceuticals of all kinds. This was a religious man with a thriving medical practice. Sorry, but this stinks of murder and cover-up.”

Another commentor had a more definitive conjecture:

“He did NOT kill himself! He was murdered for who he was speaking against, what he knew, and what he was doing about it. He was brilliant kind compassionate doctor with amazing abilities to heal. He was taken. Stopped. Silenced. Why would a doctor who had access to pharmaceuticals and could die peacefully shoot himself in the chest???? And throw himself in a river?? THIS IS OBVIOUS! MURDER!!”

Funeral arrangements for Dr. Bradstreet are still pending at the Cecil M. Burton funeral home in Shelby, Georgia.



Fukushima: Everyone From Japan Has Had Health Problems

Fukushima: Hawaii-Based Nonprofit Group Says “Every Single Person” They Hosted from Japan Has Had Health Problems

Fukushima: Hawaii-Based Nonprofit Group Says “Every Single Person” They Hosted from Japan Has Had Health Problems

Interview with Vicki Nelson, founder of Fukushima Friends (nonprofit organization which facilitates trips to Hawaii for Fukushima radiation refugees), Nuclear Hotseat hosted by Libbe HaLevy, Jun 9, 2015 (at 16:30 in):

  • Vicki Nelson, founder of Fukushima Friends (emphasis added): We have a home that’s open for them to come and experience some time of respite and eat different food. What we’ve been experiencing also is that every single person that comes has reaction to the change as soon as they come here. There’s been people who have vomited, they’ve been having nosebleeds, they’ve been dizzy, they’ve been very ashen in color.
  • Libbe HaLevy, host: This is once they have left Japan? In other words, it is the lack of the radiation that allows them to then have these reactions?
  • Nelson: It’s like it is expelling from their body. There’s diarrhea, there’s nosebleeds— almost every single person has had nosebleeds on their pillow. I find blood, and they don’t want to tell me that they have these reactions, they’re embarrassed. Tokiko’s son [from Koriyama, Fukushima] vomited the whole first week practically, and had diarrhea. We actually took him to the hospital because we felt that he was dehydrated. They did run tests, and they said yes he was dehydrated. So he was kept overnight at the Hilo hospital on the big island and cared for.

Meeting hosted by Andrew Cash, member of Canadian parliament, Dec 2012 — Japanese mother (at 2:12:30 in): “My home town is Sapporo [northernmost island in Japan]… In my city, no one thinks about radiation. I found a group of escaped mothers from Tokyo and the Fukushima area, and I was very surprised… Most of them had thyroid problems, or eye problems, or nose bleeds… They are very worried about it. In Japan we knew about the meltdowns two months after the meltdowns happened, so we can have no information about radiation. Now the government is telling us to eat food from Fukushima. We can’t rely on government. The TV said Fukushima is safe, no problem… Fukushima is good to live. They want to invite a lot of tourists to Fukushima.



  • Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) admits record radiation spike in port water from Fukushima Daiichi leak.
  • Japanese government gets pushback for plan to end rent subsidies for some Fukushima evacuees/refugees.
  • Japan plans nuke restarts despite severe volcanic activity less than 50 miles from reactor site.
  • The pro-nuclear International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) releases report that Japan’s overconfidence regarding the safety of its nuclear power plants was a major reason behind the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster.
  • AND – Japan plans for nukes to supply 20-22% of all electricity in the country by 2030.  What’s wrong with this picture?



Half Of All Jobs Will Be Automated By 2034

47% Of All Jobs Will Be Automated By 2034

47% Of All Jobs Will Be Automated By 2034

Almost half of all jobs could be automated by computers within two decades and “no government is prepared” for the tsunami of social change that will follow, according to the Economist.

The magazine’s 2014 analysis of the impact of technology paints a pretty bleak picture of the future.

It says that while innovation (aka “the elixir of progress”) has always resulted in job losses, usually economies have eventually been able to develop new roles for those workers to compensate, such as in the industrial revolution of the 19th century, or the food production revolution of the 20th century.

But the pace of change this time around appears to be unprecedented, its leader column claims. And the result is a huge amount of uncertainty for both developed and under-developed economies about where the next ‘lost generation’ is going to find work.

It quotes a 2013 Oxford Martin School study that estimates 47% of all jobs could be automated in the next 20 years:

“Our findings thus imply that as technology races ahead, low-skill workers will reallocate to tasks that are non-susceptible to computerisation – i.e., tasks requiring creative and social intelligence. For workers to win the race, however, they will have to acquire creative and social skills,” that study says.

The Economist also points out that current unemployment levels are startlingly high, but that “this wave of technological disruption to the job market has only just started”.

Specifically the Economist points to new tech like driverless cars, improved household gadgets, faster and more efficient online communications and ‘big data’ analysis to areas that humans are quickly being superceded. And while new start-ups are raising billions, they employ few people – Instagram, sold to Facebook in 2012 for $1 billion, employed just 30 people at the time.

Those conclusions are echoed elsewhere. Another study (‘Are You Ready For #GenMobile?’), to be released in full on 21 January by Aruba Networks, points out just how fast traditional working models are changing.

It says that 72% of British people now believe they work more efficiently at home, and that 63% need a WiFi network to complete their tasks – not bad for a technology that was barely standardised 10 years ago.

Meanwhile in ‘The Second Machine Age’, out this week, Erik Brynjolfsson and Andrew McAfee argue workers are under unprecedented pressure by the automation of skilled and unskilled jobs.

In a recent Salon interview Brynjolfsson said: “technology has always been destroying jobs, and it’s always been creating jobs, and it’s been roughly a wash for the last 200 years. But starting in the 1990s the employment to population ration really started plummeting and it’s now fallen off a cliff and not getting back up. We think that it should be the focus of policymakers right now to figure out how to address that.”

The BBC also produced a report earlier this month which claimed, in stark tones, that “the robots are coming to steal our jobs”.

“AI’s are embedded in the fabric of our everyday lives,” head of AI at Singularity University, Neil Jacobstein, told the Beeb.

“They are used in medicine, in law, in design and throughout automotive industry.”

That report too pointed out the change will affect jobs of all kinds – from a Chinese factory Hon Hai which has announced plans to replace 500,000 workers with robots in three years, to lawyers, surgeons and public sector workers.

Opinions remain divided on the impact and future of technological innovation on the jobs market, and wealth inequality. The Economist leader argues that governments have a responsibility to innovate in education, taxation and embracing progress, though the solutions are by no means obvious or without uncertainty.

If only we could automate the process of making and implementing those political decisions – now that would really be something.



Animals internal compass possibly found

Internal Compass

Internal Compass

Scientists have long known that animals have some kind of internal compass that allows them to use Earth’s magnetic field to navigate. This ability allows species such as the monarch butterfly to travel up to an incredible 5,000 km across the US to the exact same location, year after year, and the Arctic tern to travel 71,000 km between Greenland and Antarctica annually. But these magnetic fields are pretty much invisible to humans, and we’ve never been able to find the sensor that lets animals to detect them.

Now a team of researchers from the University of Texas at Austin in the US has identified a tiny antenna-like structure in the brain of worms that allows them to sense Earth’s magnetic field, and they suspect the same structure could be the key to helping other species navigate, too.

“Chances are that the same molecules will be used by cuter animals like butterflies and birds,” one of the researchers, Jon Pierce-Shimomura, said in a press release. “This gives us a first foothold in understanding magnetosensation in other animals.”

Back in 2012, scientists found cells in pigeons that process information about magnetic fields, but this is the first time researchers have ever found the actual sensor in animals.

“It’s been a competitive race to find the first magnetosensory neuron,” said Pierce-Shimomura. “And we think we’ve won with worms, which is a big surprise because no one suspected that worms could sense the Earth’s magnetic field.”

The team made the discovery while conducting Alzheimer’s research in small soil worms, C. elegans. They noticed that when worms from Texas soil were hungry, they moved downwards to look for food. But worms that came from other parts of the world – Hawaii England and Australia, for example – didn’t move down; they moved at a precise angle to the magnetic field that would have corresponded to down if they’d been in their home country.

The team then altered the magnetic field around the worms’ enclosure using a special magnetic coil system, and found that they changed their behaviour accordingly.

But the real breakthrough came when they worked with worms that had been genetically engineered to block a structure called the AFD neuron from forming in the brain. These worms didn’t change their behaviour when the magnetic fields around their enclosure were altered – in fact, they seemed unable to detect the magnetic fields at all.

The AFD neuron is a tiny structure at the end of a neuron that gives worms the ability to sense carbon dioxide levels and temperature while underground. To confirm its additional role in sensing magnetic fields, the team used a technique called calcium imaging to show that changes in the magnetic field caused the AFD neuron to light up. Their findings have been published in the journal eLife. 

The next step will be to confirm that this AFD neuron exists in other species and that it works in the same way. If that’s the case, we might finally have an explanation for the incredible navigation abilities of animals, and perhaps a roadmap for how humans could one day achieve the same ability.



1 in 3 American’s are Alcoholic’s

American's are alcoholics

American’s are alcoholics

About 30 percent of adults in the United States misuse alcohol at some point in their lives, but the large majority don’t seek treatment, a new study suggests.

Researchers also found that in a given year, about 14 percent of American adults misuse alcohol, which researchers refer to as having “alcohol use disorder.” This yearly rate translates to an estimated 32.6 million Americans with drinking problems during a 12-month period.

“The study found that the risk of alcohol use disorders appears to be going up in the last decade,” said George Koob, director of the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA), the agency that conducted the research.

Not only is problem drinking becoming more widespread, but the intensity of drinking is also going up, Koob said. Instead of having three drinks on a night out, more people may be drinking heavily and having at least five, or even eight or 10 drinks at a time.

“Alcohol use disorder” is a relatively new term. Prior to May 2013, people who had drinking problems were diagnosed with either “alcohol abuse” or “alcohol dependence.”

Now, rather than categorizing these problems as two separate conditions, the latest edition of the American Psychiatric Association’s “Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders” (American Psychiatric Publishing, 2013) considers the two a single diagnosis known as “alcohol use disorder.” A person with the disorder is further classified as having a mild, moderate or severe form of the condition, based on the number of symptoms the individual has. [7 Ways Alcohol Affects Your Health]

Adults who meet at least two of the 11 diagnostic criteria are considered as having an alcohol use disorder. Criteria include having strong cravings for alcohol, making unsuccessful efforts to cut down consumption and drinking causing problems at work, home or school.

The results, published online today (June 3) in the journal JAMA Psychiatry, are the first to estimate nationwide prevalence rates for alcohol misuse since the diagnostic criteria were changed.



Majority of American’s are now Obese

Most American's are Obese

Most American’s are Obese

The number of overweight and obese adults in the United States continues to rise, according to a new study that’s found more than two-thirds of adult Americans aged 25 years or older are now overweight or obese.

The research analysed data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, which ran from 2007 to 2012, and included information on a sample of 15,208 men and women. Based on the data, the researchers estimate that 39.96 percent of US men (36.3 million) are overweight and 35.04 percent (31.8 million) are obese.

 For women, the estimates are 29.74 percent (28.9 million) of them are overweight, while 36.84 percent (35.8 million) are obese. If you do the maths, sure enough, the number of obese adult Americans (67.6 million) now eclipses those who are only overweight (65.2 million).

What’s so remarkable about the research, conducted by the Washington University School of Medicine and published in The Journal of the American Medical Association, is just how stark the numbers are for the US population. Every three in four men is overweight or obese, and the same can be said for two out of every three women.

In other words, people in healthy weight ranges in the US make up only a distinct minority of the population, especially when you consider that some portion of the remainder in these figures will be people who are actually underweight.

The researchers found the African American community has the biggest problem with obesity – affecting 39 percent of black men and 57 percent of black women – followed by Mexican Americans and then whites.

A similar study was published back in 1999, finding that 63 percent of men and 55 percent of women aged 25 and older were overweight or obese, so clearly the problem has only gotten worse over the last two decades, despite efforts from the government and the health community to educate people on how to take care of themselves when it comes to food and lifestyle choices.

“This is a wakeup call to implement policies and practices designed to combat overweight and obesity,” said Lin Yang, the study’s lead, in a statement. “An effort that spans multiple sectors must be made to stop or reverse this trend that is compromising and shortening the lives of many.”

Scary stuff, but hopefully this latest research will help galvanise efforts to turn weights around in the US and put healthy eating and living squarely back on the agenda.



Human cyborgs within 200 years

cyborg women

cyborg women

Within the next 200 years, humans will have become so merged with technology that we’ll have evolved into “God-like cyborgs”, according to Yuval Noah Harari, an historian and author from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem in Israel.

Harari researches the history of the human species, and after writing a new book on our past, he now believes that we’re just a few short centuries away from being able to use technology to avoid death altogether – if we can afford it, that is.

 “I think it is likely in the next 200 years or so Homo sapiens will upgrade themselves into some idea of a divine being, either through biological manipulation or genetic engineering of by the creation of cyborgs: part organic, part non-organic,” Harari said during his presentation the Hay Festival in the UK, as Sarah Knapton reports for the Telegraph. “It will be the greatest evolution in biology since the appearance of life … we will be as different from today’s humans as chimps are now from us.”

Obviously, we should take Harari’s predictions with a grain of salt, but while they sound more suited to science fiction than real life, they’re not actually that out-there. Many researchers believe that we’ve already started down the path towards a cyborg future; after all, many of us already rely on bionic ears and eyes, insulin pump technology and prosthetics to help us survive. And with researchers recently learning how to send people’s thoughts across the web, subconsciously control bionic limbs and use liquid metal to heal severed nerves, it’s not hard to imagine how we could continue to use technology to supplement our vulnerable human bodies further.

Interestingly, Harare’s comments came just a few days after UK-based neuroscientist Hannah Critchlow from Cambridge University got the Internet excited by saying that it could be possible to upload our brains into computers, if we could build computers with 100 trillion circuit connections. “People could probably live inside a machine. Potentially, I think it is definitely a possibility,” Critchlow said during her presentation at the festival.

But Harari warned that these upgrades may only be available to the wealthiest members of society, and that could cause a growing biological divide between rich and poor – especially if some of us can afford to pay for the privilege of living forever while the rest of the species dies out.

If that sounds depressing, the alternative is a future where instead of us taking advantage of technology, technology takes advantage of us, and artificial intelligence poses a threat to our survival, as Elon Musk, Stephen Hawking, and Bill Gates have all predicted.

Either way, one thing seems pretty clear – our future as a species is now inextricably linked with the technology we’ve created. For better or for worse.



Friends genetically more similar than strangers

'We Become Friends With Genetically Similar People'

‘We Become Friends With Genetically Similar People’

Our friends seem to be genetically more similar to us than strangers, according to a new U.S. scientific study led by prominent Greek-American professor of sociology and medicine at Yale University Nicholas Christakis and James Fowler, professor of medical genetics and political science at the University of California.

The researchers, who made the relevant publication in the Journal of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), analyzed the genome of 1,932 people and compared pairs of friends with pairs of strangers.

There was no biological affinity among all these people, but only the difference in the level of social relations between them.

The study showed that, on average, every person had a more similar DNA with his friends than with strangers. The researchers noted that this finding has to do with the tendency of people to make friends with similar racial (and hence genetic) background.

The genetic similarity between friends was greater than the expected similarity between people who share a common national and genetic inheritance. It is not clear yet by what mechanisms this occurs.

But how similar are we with our friends?

On average, according to the study, a friend of ours has a genetic affinity comparable to our fourth cousin, which means that we share about 1% of our genes our friends.

“1% does not sound a big deal, but it is for geneticists. It is noteworthy that most people do not even know who their fourth cousins ​​are, but somehow, from the countless possible cases, we choose to make friends with people who are genetically similar to us,” said Prof Christakis.

Christakis and Fowler even developed a “friendship score”, which predicts who will befriend whom with nearly the same accuracy as scientists predict, on the basis of genetic analysis, the chances of a person to obesity or schizophrenia.

Focusing on individual genes, the research shows that friends are more likely to have similar genes related to the sense of smell, but different genes that control immunity; thus friends vary genetically in their protection against various diseases.

It seems to be an evolutionary mechanism that serves the society in general, since the fact that people hang out with those who are vulnerable to different diseases constitutes a barrier to the quick spread of an epidemic from person to person. Another notable finding is that the common genes we share with our friends seem to evolve more rapidly than others.

Prof. Christakis explains that probably that is why human evolution seems to have accelerated over the past 30,000 years, as the social environment with an important role of linguistic communication is a vital evolutionary factor.



Multitasking lowers your IQ

Multitasking makes you stupid

Multitasking makes you stupid

Envisage the switched-on new-millennium male – his iPhone in one hand while he switches between emails and business reports on his computer screen – a vision of productivity in this wondrous age of apps.

Wrong. He’s seriously dumbing himself down.

Several scientific studies around the world have concluded the brain doesn’t switch tasks like an expert juggler. Quite the opposite. It can reduce your IQ by as much as 10 points, cause mental blanks and reduce your productivity by 40 per cent.

Not a single study in psychology shows that women are better than men at multitasking, says Dr Julia Irwin, senior lecturer in psychology at Macquarie University.

What about women? They’re legends at multitasking and concentrating on several things at once. Nope. Not a single psychological study concludes women are better at multitasking than men, and some research indicates they can be worse.

One Australian researcher in the field, Dr Julia Irwin, senior lecturer in psychology at Macquarie University, advises people to abandon their apps, turn off their mobiles and ignore their emails while they concentrate on one task at a time. “At the end of the day, they will have been a lot more productive,” she says.

“If you’re sending an email while also working on an assignment, one downside is that withdrawing your attention from one task to another creates a split-second in which the brain’s in no-man’s land. It’s called a post-refractory pause.

“Over time these pauses add up and can mean your mind wasn’t on the job for a couple of minutes.”

Dr Irwin says such mental blanks can be dangerous when doing something of critical importance like keeping an eye out for a child in a playground. “If, in that pause, a child wobbles on their bicycle, it’s obviously a worry. You just haven’t got your attention on it.

“The other aspect is, if you’re deeply immersed in writing something and turn your attention to an email that’s just come in, there are studies that show it can take you up to 15 minutes to get yourself back into that same degree of immersion.”

One early study by the Institute of Psychiatry in London involved more than 1000 workers and found multitasking with electronic media caused a temporary 10-point decrease in IQ – a worse effect than smoking marijuana or losing a night’s sleep.

The study’s leader, an adjunct professor at the University of Nevada, Dr Glenn Wilson, called it “informania”, a condition created by using multiple electronic devices and employers’ growing demands to tackle more than one task at a time.

“This is a very real and widespread phenomenon,” he told CNN. “We have found that this obsession with looking at messages, if unchecked, will damage a worker’s performance by reducing their mental sharpness. Companies should encourage a more balanced and appropriate way of working.”

Another study, by Professor David Meyer, director of the University of Michigan’s Brain Cognition and Action Laboratory, concluded that even brief mental blocks created by shifting between tasks cost as much as 40 per cent of someone’s productive time.

Dr Irwin’s own Australian research concludes clearly that in today’s multitasking multi-app world, people should turn off their devices when doing something that merits their full attention.

One of her studies also defies a widespread belief that women are better at multitasking. “One of the very first studies I did was with young students driving and either talking to passengers or on a mobile,” she says. “I thought, oh, the women are going to ace this, but the women actually scored worse on the phones than the men.

“When I looked in the literature, there is not a single study in psychology that shows that women are better at multitasking. But what I did find in the sociological literature is that they perform multiple tasks more often.

“This has  led to the belief that women are better at multitasking, but the more studies are done, the fewer differences they find between female and male brains.”



Reality doesn’t exist, quantum experiment confirms


Reality doesn't exist

Reality doesn’t exist

Australian scientists have recreated a famous experiment and confirmed quantum physics’s bizarre predictions about the nature of reality, by proving that reality doesn’t actually exist until we measure it – at least, not on the very small scale.

That all sounds a little mind-meltingly complex, but the experiment poses a pretty simple question: if you have an object that can either act like a particle or a wave, at what point does that object ‘decide’?

Our general logic would assume that the object is either wave-like or particle-like by its very nature, and our measurements will have nothing to do with the answer. But quantum theory predicts that the result all depends on how the object is measured at the end of its journey. And that’s exactly what a team from the Australian National University has now found.

“It proves that measurement is everything. At the quantum level, reality does not exist if you are not looking at it,” lead researcher and physicist Andrew Truscott said in a press release.

Known as John Wheeler’s delayed-choice thought experiment, the experiment was first proposed back in 1978 using light beams bounced by mirrors, but back then, the technology needed was pretty much impossible. Now, almost 40 years later, the Australian team has managed to recreate the experiment using helium atoms scattered by laser light.

“Quantum physics predictions about interference seem odd enough when applied to light, which seems more like a wave, but to have done the experiment with atoms, which are complicated things that have mass and interact with electric fields and so on, adds to the weirdness,” said Roman Khakimov, a PhD student who worked on the experiment.

To successfully recreate the experiment, the team trapped a bunch of helium atoms in a suspended state known as a Bose-Einstein condensate, and then ejected them all until there was only a single atom left.

This chosen atom was then dropped through a pair of laser beams, which made a grating pattern that acted as a crossroads that would scatter the path of the atom, much like a solid grating would scatter light.

They then randomly added a second grating that recombined the paths, but only after the atom had already passed the first grating.

When this second grating was added, it led to constructive or destructive interference, which is what you’d expect if the atom had travelled both paths, like a wave would. But when the second grating was not added, no interference was observed, as if the atom chose only one path.

The fact that this second grating was only added after the atom passed through the first crossroads suggests that the atom hadn’t yet determined its nature before being measured a second time.

So if you believe that the atom did take a particular path or paths at the first crossroad, this means that a future measurement was affecting the atom’s path, explained Truscott. “The atoms did not travel from A to B. It was only when they were measured at the end of the journey that their wave-like or particle-like behaviour was brought into existence,” he said.

Although this all sounds incredibly weird, it’s actually just a validation for the quantum theory that already governs the world of the very small. Using this theory, we’ve managed to develop things like LEDs, lasers and computer chips, but up until now, it’s been hard to confirm that it actually works with a lovely, pure demonstration such as this one.


Google turns your clothes into touchscreens

Google plans on turning your clothes into touchscreens

Google plans on turning your clothes into touchscreens

Last week Google unveiled a wealth of new innovations and initiatives at its annual I/O developer conference, and one of the big reveals was Project Jacquard. It’s part of the Google ATAP (Advanced Technology and Projects) division and it’s the company’s plan for the future of clothing: touch-sensitive materials that you can interact with in the same way as your smartphone display.

Project Jacquard uses touch-sensitive, metallic yarns that are weaved in with normal material – cotton, silk or polyester – to give it the kind of capabilities that you don’t usually find outside of science fiction movies. The yarn is connected to a small receiver and controller the size of a button, with the idea that one day you might be able to tap your lapel to switch on the washing machine, or flick your cuff to change the volume on your smart television set.

One of the demos that Google showed off at I/O 2015 was a touch-enabled outfit controlling a set of Philips Hue lights. A quick tap on the clothing turned the lights on and off, while swiping left and right changed the colour, and swiping up and down adjusted the brightness. You wouldn’t have to take your phone out of your jeans pocket to do all this – the pocket itself would act as the controller.

Monitoring capabilities can be included too, so your pillow could track your breathing or your t-shirt could monitor your heart rate without the need for any other equipment. Google is expecting to work with a number of different partners on the technology in the future, and already has an agreement in place with denim manufacturer Levi Strauss & Co in the US.

What makes the technology so exciting is its invisibility. There’s no need to wear a clunky headset or a smart wristwatch to get connected – it’s essentially the ultimate in wearables. Project Jacquard is still at the early stages, but a lot of progress has been made in a short space of time, and Google thinks the interactive yarn will have an important role to play in our sartorial future.

“The complementary components are engineered to be as discreet as possible,” explains the official Project Jacquard page. “We developed innovative techniques to attach the conductive yarns to connectors and tiny circuits, no larger than the button on a jacket. These miniaturised electronics capture touch interactions, and various gestures can be inferred using machine-learning algorithms.”

The smart clothing is stretchable and washable, and Google says it’s up to the designer whether the special yarn is highlighted on the material or kept completely invisible. It can be restricted to a certain patch of clothing or spread over the whole garment.

Jacquard, by the way, is a type of loom used in the 19th century. Google says that the new touch-enabled clothing can be made at scale using equipment that already exists, so when it’s ready for the mass market it can be cheaply and easily produced.

Ultimately, we could see all kinds of smart clothing, furnishings and textiles that look identical to the ‘dumb’ versions that came before them. Google doesn’t have a timescale for launching Project Jacquard out into the world just yet, but you can sign up for updates at the project page.



Woolly mammoths genome mapped

woolly mammoth genome

woolly mammoth genome

An international team of researchers has sequenced the nearly complete genome of two Siberian woolly mammoths — revealing the most complete picture to date — including new information about the species’ evolutionary history and the conditions that led to its mass extinction at the end of the Ice Age.

“This discovery means that recreating extinct species is a much more real possibility, one we could in theory realize within decades,” says evolutionary geneticist Hendrik Poinar, director of the Ancient DNA Centre at McMaster University and a researcher at the Institute for Infectious Disease Research, the senior Canadian scientist on the project.

“With a complete genome and this kind of data, we can now begin to understand what made a mammoth a mammoth — when compared to an elephant — and some of the underlying causes of their extinction which is an exceptionally difficult and complex puzzle to solve,” he says.

While scientists have long argued that climate change and human hunting were major factors behind the mammoth’s extinction, the new data suggests multiple factors were at play over their long evolutionary history.

Researchers from McMaster, Harvard Medical School, the Swedish Museum of Natural History, Stockholm University and others produced high-quality genomes from specimens taken from the remains of two male woolly mammoths, which lived about 40,000 years apart.

One had lived in northeastern Siberia and is estimated to be nearly 45,000 years old. The other -believed to be from one of the last surviving mammoth populations — lived approximately 4,300 years ago on Russia’s Wrangel Island, located in the Arctic Ocean.

“We found that the genome from one of the world’s last mammoths displayed low genetic variation and a signature consistent with inbreeding, likely due to the small number of mammoths that managed to survive on Wrangel Island during the last 5,000 years of the species’ existence,” says Love Dalén, an associate professor of Bioinformatics and Genetics at the Swedish Museum of Natural History.

Scientists used sophisticated technology to tease bits and pieces of highly fragmented DNA from the ancient specimens, which they then used to sequence the genomes. Through careful analysis, they determined the animal populations had suffered and recovered from a significant setback roughly 250,000 to 300,000 years ago. However, say researchers, another severe decline occurred in the final days of the Ice Age, marking the end.

“The dates on these current samples suggest that when Egyptians were building pyramids, there were still mammoths living on these islands,” says Poinar. “Having this quality of data can help with our understanding of the evolutionary dynamics of elephants in general and possible efforts at de-extinction.”

The latest research is the continuation of the pioneering work Poinar and his team began in 2006, when they first mapped a partial mammoth genome, using DNA extracted from carcasses found in permafrost in the Yukon and Siberia.



Iris scanner that works 12 metres away

Iris scanner that can work at 12 metres away

Iris scanner that can work at 12 metres away

Iris scanner that can work at 12 metres away

Imagine an advertising billboard or a smart door that can recognise you from across the street – that’s the futuristic type of technology that’s on the way after researchers the US developed an iris scanner that can work at a distance of 12 metres (40 feet).

We’re starting to see primitive eye scanners appear in consumer electronics, but this new device takes the innovation one step further. The team from Carnegie Mellon University (CMU) has developed a scanning system that can spot and identify a driver sat in a car, so whether you’re traveling through a toll bridge or exceeding the speed limit, the cameras will know who you are.

That brings up a whole series of difficult questions about user privacy and the capabilities of law enforcement agencies across the world. Given a positive spin, it means a dangerous criminal getting spotted ahead of time; seen more cynically, the technology could be used to track citizens without their knowledge.

This long-range iris scanning system is primarily the work of CMU engineering professor, Marios Savvides. As our irises are as distinctive as our fingerprints, the technology is very accurate – but as with fingerprints, your eyeballs will already need to be on file for you to be spotted.

Savvides thinks the technology is helpful rather than scary. “Fingerprints, they require you to touch something. Iris, we can capture it at a distance, so we’re making the whole user experience much less intrusive, much more comfortable,” he told The Atlantic. “There’s no X-marks-the-spot. There’s no place you have to stand. Anywhere between six and 12 metres, it will find you, it will zoom in and capture both irises and full face.”

If nothing else, it could speed up queues at the airport. But in the wrong hands or used in the wrong way, it could be just as dangerous as it is convenient. There’s no chance of these types of biometric technology going backwards, so rigorous laws on how it can be used become increasingly important.

Savvides thinks we’re already in a new era of surveillance, and that his invention won’t change that. “People are being tracked,” he says. “Their every move, their purchasing, their habits, where they are every day, through credit card transactions, through advantage cards – if someone really wanted to know what you were doing every moment of the day, they don’t need facial recognition or iris recognition to do that. That’s already out there.”

Like many recent advancements in biometrics, increased convenience and accuracy comes at a cost – it’s all a question of how the technology is used. Just don’t be surprised if in the near future your office door spots you well before you reach it.



Monsanto Department discredits scientists who are against GMOs.

‘discrediting’ and ‘debunking’ scientists who speak out against GMOs.

‘discrediting’ and ‘debunking’ scientists who speak out against GMOs.

Dare to publish a scientific study against Big Biotech, and Monsanto will defame and discredit you. For the first time, a Monsanto employee admits that there is an entire department within the corporation with the simple task of ‘discrediting’ and ‘debunking’ scientists who speak out against GMOs.

The WHO recently classified glyphosate, a chemical in Monsanto’s best-selling herbicide Roundup, as carcinogenic – news that is really heating things up with biotech. So Monsanto has been demanding that the World Health Organization (WHO) and the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) retract their statements about the poisons’s toxicity to human health.

The company demands this even though a peer-reviewed study published in March of 2015 in the respected journal, The Lancet Oncology, conducted a analysis proving that glyphosate was indeed ‘probably carcinogenic.’

Monsanto’s vice president of global regulatory affairs Philip Miller told Reuters the following in interview:

“We question the quality of the assessment. The WHO has something to explain.”

It has already been explained, Mr. Miller. The study states:

“Glyphosate is a broad-spectrum herbicide, currently with the highest production volumes of all herbicides. It is used in more than 750 different products for agriculture, forestry, urban, and home applications. Its use has increased sharply with the development of genetically modified glyphosate-resistant crop varieties. Glyphosate has been detected in air during spraying, in water, and in food. There WAS limited evidence in humans for the carcinogenicity of glyphosate.

Glyphosate has been detected in the blood and urine of agricultural workers, indicating absorption. Soil microbes degrade glyphosate to aminomethylphosphoric acid (AMPA). Blood AMPA detection after poisonings suggests intestinal microbial metabolism in humans. Glyphosate and glyphosate formulations induced DNA and chromosomal damage in mammals, and in human and animal cells in vitro. One study reported increases in blood markers of chromosomal damage (micronuclei) in residents of several communities after spraying of glyphosate formulations.”

In a recent talk attended mostly by students hoping to get decent paying internships in their field, a student asked what the company was doing to negate “bad science” concerning their work.

Monsanto’s employee, Dr. William “Bill” Moar, who gives talks on Monsanto’s products to reassure everyone that they are safe, perhaps forgot the event was public when he openly revealed that Monsanto had:

“An entire department” (waving his arm for emphasis) dedicated to “debunking” science which disagreed with theirs.”

Likely, this is the first time a Monsanto employee has publicly admitted that they have immense political and financial weight to bear on scientists who dare to publish against them. Of course they don’t list this discrediting department anywhere on their website.

The company will stop at nothing to discredit and devalue the contributions of unimpeachably respected Lancet and the international scientific bodies of WHO and IARC, among others.

The stakes are high – after all, an entire industry of GMO seed (for which they currently hold more than a three-fourths monopoly share) is based on being Roundup ready. Glyphosate is their hallmark product, and it accounts for billions in sales when you account for the seed they sell to go with their best-selling herbicide.

In a single publicly made phrase, Moar has admitted that the Monsanto-funded science is sheer propaganda – essentially that they indeed have dozens, if not hundreds of employees out making sure that no science which tells the truth about their cancer-causing products ever garners any credibility whatsoever in the information age.

Monsanto has also held up the findings of regulatory bodies, particularly in the United States where the revolving door between agrochemical corporations and government seems never ending.



Japanese scientists reverse aging in human cell

By altering the behavior of two genes responsible for the production of simple amino acids in human cells, scientists have gained a better understanding of how the process of ageing works, and how we could delay or perhaps even reverse it.

The team, led by Jun-Ichi Hayashi at the University of Tsukuba, targeted two genes that produce the amino acid glycine in the cell’s mitochondria, and figured out how to switch them on and off. By doing this, they could either accelerate the process of ageing within the cell, which caused significant defects to arise, or they could reverse the process of ageing, which restored the capacity for cellular respiration. Using this technique to produce more glycine in a 97-year-old cell line for 10 days, the researchers restored cellular respiration, effectively reversing the cell line’s age.

 The finding brings into question the popular, but more recently controversial, mitochondrial theory of ageing, which puts forward the notion that an accumulation of mutations in mitochondrial DNA leads to age-related defects in the mitochondria – often referred to as the cell’s powerhouses because they are responsible for energy production and cellular respiration. Defects in the cell’s mitochondria lead to damage in the DNA, and an accumulation of DNA damage is linked to age-related hair loss, weight loss, spine curvature, osteoporosis, and a decreased lifespan.

But is this theory accurate? The results of Hayashi’s study support an alternative theory to ageing, which proposes that age-associated mitochondrial defects are caused not by the accumulation of mutations in mitochondrial DNA, but by certain crucial genes being turned on and off as we get older.

The team worked with human fibroblast cell lines gathered from young people – from foetus-age to 12 years old – and the elderly, from 80 to 97 years old. They compared the capacity for cellular respiration in the young and old cells, and found that while the capacity was indeed lower in the cells of the elderly, there was almost no difference in the amount of DNA damage between the two. This calls into question the mitochondrial theory of ageing, the team reports in the journal Scientific Reports, and suggests instead that the age-related effects they were seeing were being caused by a process known as epigenetic regulation.

Epigenetic regulation describes the process where the physical structure of DNA – not the DNA sequence – is altered by the addition or subtraction of chemical structures or proteins, which is regulated by the turning on and off of certain genes. “Unlike mutations that damage that sequence, as in the other, aforementioned theory of ageing, epigenetic changes could possibly be reversed by genetically reprogramming cells to an embryonic stem cell-like state, effectively turning back the clock on ageing,” says Eric Mack at Gizmag.

Hayashi and his team supported this theory by showing that they could turn off the genes that regulate the production of glycine to achieve cellular ageing, or turn them on for the restoration of cellular respiration. This suggests, they say, that glycine treatment could effectively reverse the age-associated respiration defects present in their elderly human fibroblasts.

“Whether or not this process could be a potential fountain of youth for humans and not just human fibroblast cell lines still remains to be seen, with much more testing required,” Mack points out at Gizmag. “However, if the theory holds, glycine supplements could one day become a powerful tool for life extension.”

We’ll just have to wait and see. The faster we can solve the debate over how ageing actually works, the faster we can figure out how to delay it.



Monsanto Lawsuit Blacked out by Media

monsanto media black out

monsanto media black out

What happens when one courageous attorney and a few citizens try to take down Monsanto? The MSM doesn’t cover it, for starters.

Efforts to publicize a class action lawsuit against Monsanto for false advertising it’s best-selling herbicide Roundup filed in Los Angeles County Court on April 20, 2015 have been rejected by almost every mainstream media outlet.

It’s no different than Fox, NBC, CNN, or ABC refusing to cover the DARK ACT which would give Monsanto legal immunity and disallow states to demand GMO labeling.

You would think that coverage of something the whole world wants to see – the first step toward the successful downfall of Monsanto –would be a hot news item; a newsworthy tidbit that every paper, radio station, and blog would want to spread across their pages with double bold headlines. But wait. . . just six corporations own ALL of the media in America, so there isn’t much luck there.

That’s why you have to go to sites like Russia Insider or Al Jazeera to find real news outside of certain alternative news channels in the US, and even those are white-washed from Facebook pages, and given secondary ratings on Google pages.

Matthew Phillips, the attorney suing Monsanto in California for false advertising on Roundup bottles, has asked the LA Times, New York Times, Huffington Post, CNN, and Reuters, one of the world’s largest news agencies to report on the lawsuit (Case No: BC 578 942), and most enforced a total media blackout.

When I spoke with Phillips over the phone, he said that he has tried posting the suit in Wikipedia’s Monsanto litigation section, but it keeps ‘disappearing.’ He says that he has also noticed posts on Facebook about this lawsuit get removed.

Phillips points out that as long as Monsanto can keep this lawsuit off of most of America’s radar, then his client base would be relegated to just the citizens of California.

If other attorneys were to follow his template-style lawsuit, which he wrote in English, devoid of extraneous legal-speak to encourage others to also take action against Monsanto, then suddenly the plaintiff count could be closer to several million. That is if you were to tally up all the citizens in the US who have purchased a bottle of Roundup from their local DIY store (Lowe’s, Home Depot or Ace Hardware, for example) in the last four years, not suspecting it could demolish their gut health.

Another possibility, according to Phillips, is that Monsanto could try to bump the case up to federal court in order to try to side-step a likely adverse judgment. But in this case the class action suit would also be open to residents other than those of just California. This is surely an idea that Monsanto doesn’t want seeded in the American psyche.

Phillips is extremely confident he has the goods on Monsanto in this case, and barring a sold out judge:

“This is a slam-dunk lawsuit that exposes Monsanto for LYING about Roundup. Contrary to the label, Roundup does indeed target and kill enzymes found in humans — in our gut bacteria — and this explains America’s chronic indigestion!”

His enthusiasm is palpable, as many well-known scientists and professors emeritus have offered to be key witnesses in this suit when it goes to trial. The attorney says he refuses to ‘settle’ the case and hopes that 49 additional attorneys in 49 states use his case as an example. He joked:

“When we allege that Roundup’s targeted enzyme is found in humans, it’s like alleging that the Golden Gate Bridge is found in California.”

The facts of the case really are that obvious.

Phillips also states that ‘false advertising’ and ‘misleading’ are synonyms in California law, so the fact that Monsanto has stated that there are enzymes in its product that don’t target humans – well that’s beyond just misleading. This obvious misjudgment by Monsanto is a well-known secret among many anti-GM scientists. This enzyme is definitely found in humans.

Here is how ‘misleading’ Monsanto’s statement that, “Round Up targets an enzyme only found in plants and not in humans or animals,” truly is:

EPSP synthase, also known as (3-phosphoshikimate 1-carboxyvinyltransferase) is found in the microbiota that reside in our intestinal tracts, and therefore the enzyme is “found in humans and animals.” It is partly responsible for immunity activation and even helps our gut and our brains communicate with one another.

EPSP synthase is among other beneficial microbes that produce neurometabolites that are either neurotransmitters or modulators of neurotransmission.

“These could act directly on nerve terminals in the gut or via ‘transducer’ cells such as enterochromaffin cells present throughout the intestinal tract and are accessible to microbes and in contact with afferent and efferent nerve terminals. Some of these cells may also signal and therefore modulate immune cell activity.”

Furthermore, although this will not be addressed in Phillip’s lawsuit:

“There is increasing evidence that exposure to Monsanto’s herbicide Roundup, may be an underlying cause of autism spectrum disorders (see [19]).  Glyphosate, the active ingredient, acts through inhibition of the 5-enolpyruvylshikimic acid-3-phosphate synthase (EPSPS synthase) enzyme in the shikimate pathway that catalyses the production of aromatic amino acids. This pathway does not exist in animals, but it does exist in bacteria, including those that live in the gut and are now known to be as much a part of our body as our own cells. A widely accepted dogma is that glyphosate is safe due to the lack of the EPSPS enzyme in our body. This however does not hold water now that the importance of our microbiota to our physiology is clear.”

Though Monsanto is only being sued for false advertising in this case, it is an important precedent to set in order to eventually take down one of the biotech giants that is poisoning the planet. It should send a clear message to Dow, Bayer, Cargill, and Syngenta as well.