Health & Wellness


What are we doing to ourselves? 84,000 chemicals, and only 1% have been tested

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.

Comment: The Food and Drug Administration, which oversees the cosmetics industry, to regulate the ingredients in cosmetic products, is pathetic to say the least as the author clearly states: Like the FDA, the EPA is similarly toothless when it comes to protecting the public from dangerous chemicals.

For more information about dangerous ingredients, chemicals and toxins in many commonly used cosmetic products read the following articles: Interested in finding out what chemicals are in your favorite beauty product check out the Environmental Working group's Skin Deep Database

2 + 2 = 4

Stupidity and intelligence: Science, GMOs and our food

© fossen_42/flickr/cc
The intelligence of both human farmers and the natural world itself, writes Dr. Shiva, "is being thwarted by the false construction of the living Earth as dead matter, to be exploited limitlessly for human control, domination and greed."

How industrial-scale farming is actually becoming anti-science.

"Science" is derived from the scire - "to know".

Each of us should know what we are eating, how it was produced, what impact it has on our health.

The knowledge we need for growing food is knowledge of biodiversity and living seed, of living soil and the soil food web, of interaction between different species in the agroecosystem and of different seasons. Farmers have been the experts in these fields, as have ecological scientists who study the evolution of microorganisms, plants and animals, the ecological web and the soil food web.

Comment: Dr. Vandana Shiva has written and lectured extensively regarding the failed science surrounding the biotechnology industry, the genetic modification of plant and animal genes, and the growing concern of bio-piracy. Read the following articles written by Dr. Shiva to learn more about the control and corruption of the world's food/seed markets based on flawed GMO science.
When corporates take patents, Dr. Shiva says, they are not creating anything."You cannot invent a plant, you can only introduce a toxic gene and introducing a toxic gene is pollution not invention."


No independent diabetes research: Only 6% of all publications without "conflict of interest"

In a new study, Frits Holleman and colleagues searched PubMed for all randomised controlled studies (RCTs) on glucose lowering treatments for diabetes from 1993 to 2013.

In total, they identified 3,782 articles with 13,592 authors.

The top 110 authors were named in a third (32.4%) of all articles, and they authored 991 RCTs, equivalent to 20 RCTs per author.

Of these 110 authors, 44% were employed by pharmaceutical companies and 56% were academics who worked closely with the industry. And of the 991 RCTs, 906 were commercially sponsored.

More than 80% of the top 110 authors came from four countries -- the USA, Italy, the UK or Germany.

A group of 11 authors, referred to as 'supertrialists', contributed to 397 (10%) of all articles, including 354 RCTs, equivalent to 42 publications each.

Overall, 704 articles could be assessed for conflicts of interest, and only 42 (6%) were considered fully independent. In articles with at least one pharmaceutical author, 89% of the co-authors had a conflict of interest.

Comment: Unfortunately, that's true not only for diabetes research, but for all medical research at large. The goal of medical science is not to heal the patient, much less prevent disease in the first place, but mainly to sell drugs and other therapies, with billions of profit for pharmaceutical companies and detriments to the patient's health. Up to half of all published studies are deficient in methodology, sample size, statistical analysis, or are outright fraudulent.

For further information see:
Flawed medical research may be ruining your health
Big Pharma Researcher Admits to Faking Dozens of Research Studies for Pfizer, Merck
The medical cartel: too big to fail, too evil to expose
Corruption of science: Breakthrough research that turns out to be fraudulent

Arrow Down

Authoritarians at work: Texas clinic refusing to accept un-vaccinated patients

© Dees Illustration
The Austin Regional Clinic takes the lead in Central Texas when it comes to vaccines after the clinic announced they will no longer accept children as patients if the child isn't vaccinated starting Wednesday.

The clinic said the recent measles outbreak at Disneyland in California demonstrates just how quickly infectious diseases can spread. That outbreak started with just one case and led to more than 115 cases in at least 21 states.

"That's a huge group of people that we had at Disneyland at that moment but yet so many of them got sick because these diseases are incredibly, incredibly infectious," said Alison Ziari, co-chief of pediatrics at ARC.

Comment: Pretending to care about the health and well-being of their patients is quite deceptive, considering the statistics showing that vaccines often cause the very diseases they were designed to prevent and that the side effects are often life threatening, particularly to infants and young children. These administrators are simply following the dictates of the pharmaceutical industry which is the main beneficiary of these mandates.


Digesting gluten products releases molecules that survive digestion and pass through gut lining

© Desconocido
Biologically active molecules released by digesting bread and pasta can survive digestion and potentially pass through the gut lining, suggests new research. The study, published in the journal of Food Research International, reveals the molecules released when real samples of bread and pasta are digested, providing new information for research into gluten sensitivity.

The research is in vitro -- in the lab rather than in humans -- and the authors of the study, from the University of Milan, Italy, say that more research is needed to determine what biological effect these molecules have on the body once they pass into the bloodstream.

"Previous lab tests have been done on pure gluten, but for the first time we have simulated digestion using real bread and pasta bought from the supermarket to see if these molecules are produced," said Dr. Milda Stuknytė, one of the authors of the study. "We show that not only are these molecules produced during digestion, but they can also pass through the gut lining, suggesting that they could indeed have a biological effect."

Comment: Researchers are still discovering the multiple pathways that gluten takes in damaging the health of millions of people, many of whom are still unaware of its toxicity. The New England Journal of Medicine listed fifty-five diseases that can be caused by eating gluten, among them are depression, schizophrenia, epilepsy, migraines, neuropathy, anxiety, dementia, and autism.


Russian epidemiologists find link between Ebola, Hepatitis B

© East News/ AP Photo/Keystone,Jean-Christophe Bott
Russian epidemiologists have made a series of discoveries, while studying the Ebola virus in Guinea, establishing a link between Ebola and hepatitis B, the head of Russia's state health watchdog, Rospotrebnadzor, said Tuesday.
"As a result of their [colleagues in Guinea] active work, we have obtained new scientific information and have established a statistically significant association between Ebola and hepatitis B. Hepatitis B was much more frequently recorded in the cases of those infected with Ebola," Anna Popova said during the second day of the Civil BRICS Forum taking place in Moscow.
Popova revealed that another way the Ebola virus could spread was through long-term preservation of the virus in breast milk.

Comment: See also:

Red Flag

Proposal to temporarily sterilise all NZ teenage females should raise serious red flags

© Kyrre Gjerstad
Yesterday the NZ media featured coverage of a new proposal that has been put forward by two "senior" academics from the University of Otago, who would like to see all young New Zealand females temporarily sterilised with long-acting chemical contraceptive implants.

In their ideal vision for the future of New Zealand young people, these academics would like temporary sterilisation to be the default policy that young girls would have to deliberately be opted out of if they didn't want their new and still-developing fertility to be chemically shut down for months or years at a time.

No, this is not the plot of some dystopian novel or film, this really is a policy that a couple of NZ academics apparently now seriously consider to be a good idea.

To put things mildly: there is a lot to be concerned about with this proposal.

Firstly, these academics don't seemed to have considered the possible impacts that temporarily sterilising an entire population of females from a very young age could have.

As far as I am aware, no attempt at the population-wide temporary sterilisation of very young females, whose physiology is still new and still developing, has ever been attempted - meaning that the outcome of such an experimental scheme is totally unknown.

We are talking here about synthetic hormonal interference with the female fertility system while that system is still very young and developing, and there is no reliable way of knowing how such interference could turn out (for all of us) in the long-run.

We already know that chemical contraceptives are an environmental pollutant that end up in waterways, and from there cause harms to wildlife populations. Imagine how devastating this environmental impact could become if every female in NZ was temporarily sterilised with these agents at a young age?

Then there are the eugenic memories from recent history that make mass sterilisation (even if it is reversible) a very unpalatable idea for most people today - the Nazis experimented with ways of trying to sterilise entire female Jewish populations, and in Apartheid South-Africa a similar sterilisation scheme was attempted on Black Africans.

Then there were the forced sterilisations of those considered to be 'defective' that took place in the United States of America prior to, and after World War II - not to mention those that took place in other parts of the world as well last century.

I think people are right to be extremely wary of any attempt to introduce any sort of mass sterilisation programmes - even temporary chemical sterilisations - because these can very easily morph into state-mandated sterilisation programmes for economic or social reasons (the old saying: 'absolute power corrupts absolutely' is still as true today as it was the day when it was first uttered.)

And none of this even touches on the negative impact that synthetic hormonal contraceptives can have on female health and wellbeing, or the fact that such a scheme would not actually do anything to alleviate the far more serious problem of sexually transmitted diseases.

(By the way, I hoped everyone took notice of the fact that these academics have rightly pointed out that condoms have a failure rate of 18% per annum (that's 18 pregnancies per year, for every 100 couples using condoms) - which makes condoms only 4% more effective than the woefully unreliable withdrawal method! This is important, because pregnancy can only occur for a very limited window each month (due to the way that female fertility works). Sexually transmitted diseases, on the other hand, can be transmitted 24/7 - meaning that condoms are a far less reliable form of protection against sexual disease than some people wrongly believe and tout them to be.)


Sepsis: Largely unknown complication of infection that hospitalizes a million patients yearly in U.S.

Diagnosing sepsis isn’t easy.
Most Americans have never heard of it, but according to new federal data, sepsis is the most expensive cause of hospitalization in the US.

Sepsis is a complication of infection that leads to organ failure. One million patients are hospitalized for sepsis each year (across all types of health insurance). This is more than the number of hospitalizations for heart attack and stroke combined. Sepsis can be a particular risk for older people. In 2013 alone, 400,000 Medicare beneficiaries were hospitalized because of sepsis at a cost of US$5.5 billion.

And it is deadly. Between one in eight and one in four patients with sepsis will die during hospitalization. In fact sepsis contributes to one-third to one-half of all in-hospital deaths.

Despite these grave consequences, fewer than half of Americans know what the word sepsis means.

Comment: Researchers have been studying additional methods for improving sepsis treatment which may provide alternatives to antibiotic therapy. Dr. Karel Tyml and his colleagues at The University of Western Ontario and Lawson Health Research Institute have found that vitamin C can not only prevent the onset of sepsis, but can reverse the disease. Dr. Kevin Tracey, director and chief executive head of Center for Biomedical Sciences at the Feinstein Institute, and his associates are testing the effects of vagus nerve stimulation in blocking the inflammatory response that leads to sepsis.


Study: Low-dose exposure to chemical mixes could impact cancer-causing pathways

© Maine Today Media
The chemicals that we're exposed to in our daily lives are often approved by the government under the assumption that they're safe in small doses, even over a long period of time. For years, regulators relied on the old adage "the dose makes the poison" to try to explain their logic. While that might have appeared true for certain chemicals for many years, we now live in a world where exposure to a large variety of chemicals is unavoidable and it's finally becoming clear that we can't evaluate these chemicals in isolation.

Think about a simple picnic in a city park. The air you breathe is filled with particulate matter from car exhaust, the landscaping was likely treated with chemical fertilizers and Roundup or another weedkiller, the plastic surrounding your food or drink items might contain BPA or phthalates, your drinks could contain preservatives, the antibacterial spray you use on your hands after eating might contain triclosan and the sunscreen you apply on your skin probably contains nanomaterials. Now extrapolate that scenario to each and every activity you partake in on a daily basis.

Comment: Getting the EPA and scientists to test only one toxin at a time is an ingenious way for the chemical industry to avoid regulation, when in fact we are being bathed in a mix of chemicals every day with unknown and potentially devastating consequences for our health and the environment.


Nutritional preventive medicine: Don't ignore this most undervalued aspect of prepping

© Danny Lawson/PA Wire
I find it absolutely fascinating when I meet new folks of like mind who offer to teach me numerous additional skills that would be beneficial in the bleak future that seems likely. I adore the idea of exchanging knowledge. It is not possible to learn every skill in life via books or YouTube videos (though I have certainly tried). Regardless of how much an individual may try, there are topics that come easier to some people than others. For instance, I only know a little about radio communications, and although I have my ham license, I find the area of radio waves to be a tad confusing. But give me a sickly plant and I will nourish it back to health in no time if I have the right tools. We all have skills we excel at and lack at. Thus forming communities with people with different skills is ideal, as no one individual has to know it all. While it is impractical to become an expert in all areas, it is not a bad idea to develop a basic understanding of all the key areas you will need to survive.

But there is one area of prepping that is not too difficult, and yet, I see relatively few people try to develop the knowledge and skills for it, and even fewer practicing it: nutritional preventive medicine.

Comment: For more on prepping for your health listen to this episode of the Health and Wellness Show. If a disaster strikes and you find yourself under stressful conditions, which would you rather be: a sugar-burner or a fat-burner?