Health & Wellness

Gates Foundation Funds Surveillance of Anti-Vaccine Groups

Sayer Ji
GreenMedInfo
Wed, 29 Aug 2012 11:00 UTC

The Bill & Melinda Gates foundation launched the Grand Challenges in Global Health (GCGH) in partnership with the National Institutes of Health in 2003 which, according to the GCGH website, is aimed at "creating new tools that can radically improve health in the developing world." So far, 45 grants totaling $458 million were awarded for research projects involving scientists in over 30 countries.¹

But where has all the money actually gone? Towards developing water purification systems? Or nutritional support aimed at immune optimization? How about providing shelter and medical facilities for the homeless? Not even close.

For example, a $100K grant was recently disbursed to Seth C. Kalichman, professor at the Department of Psychology, University of Connecticut, for "Establishing an Anti-Vaccine Surveillance and Alert System," which intends to "establish an internet-based global monitoring and rapid alert system for finding, analyzing, and counteracting misinformation communication campaigns regarding vaccines to support global immunization efforts." [emphasis added]

We can only wonder what organizations might be labeled as "misinformation communication campaigns" considering the fact that Bill Gates, in a Feb. 4^th, 2011 interview on CNN with Sanjay Gupta said that "anti-vaccine groups "kill children."" It is quite possible that any dissenting voice not in support of universal vaccination campaigns may be included in this type of "surveillance and alert system" as a potentially endangering the lives of others, i.e. "killing children."

The Straight Dope on Cholesterol: 10 Things You Need to Know - Part 1

Peter Attia
marksdailyapple.com
Wed, 29 Aug 2012 12:37 UTC

This is a guest post by Peter Attia and is a summary based on a 10-part series of the same name that you can find at The Eating Academy.

To put this summary post and, more importantly, this 10-part series in perspective, let's examine one of the most pervasive pieces of dietary advice given to people worldwide:

"Eating foods that contain any cholesterol above 0 mg is unhealthy."

- T. Colin Campbell, PhD, author of The China Study.

No summary of this length can begin to fully address a topic as comprehensive as cholesterol metabolism and the pathogenesis of atherosclerosis. In fact, those of us who challenge conventional wisdom often find ourselves needing to do exactly what Frederic Bastiat suggested:

"We must admit that our opponents in this argument have a marked advantage over us. They need only a few words to set forth a half-truth; whereas, in order to show that it is a half-truth, we have to resort to long and arid dissertations."

So, at the risk of trying to minimize the "long and arid" part of this process, below are the 10 things you need to know to be the judge - for yourself - if the conventional advice about cholesterol is correct.

The Great Organic Deceivers

Alliance for Natural Health
Tue, 21 Aug 2012 11:54 UTC

Which organic brands really believe in organic - and which are working behind the scenes to betray natural health consumers? It's time for a boycott.

Many natural and organic brands are actually owned by huge conglomerates that don't support sustainable, organic, non-GMO, non-toxic agriculture. In fact, their product labels are often designed to mislead consumers just so they can grab a share of the lucrative health-conscious consumer market.

Even worse, many of the conglomerate companies that produce so-called natural foods - and even some labeled "organic" - are allied with the biotech industry fighting by any means to defeat "Label GMO," a.k.a. Prop 37, the California Right to Know 2012 Ballot Initiative. Why are they doing such a thing? Because they sell more food that has GMO ingredients than organic food, and don't want consumers to have a choice about the GMO. They especially don't want consumers to know what is actually in their so-called "natural" products.

Avoiding GMOs in Your Daily Life

Anthony Gucciardi
Natural Society
Thu, 23 Aug 2012 11:18 UTC

As California remains the proverbial battlefield for GMO labeling, an increased interest is growing over ways to actually start avoiding GMOs in your daily life. By far the best tip, which may not be applicable at all times, is to stick to high quality organic sources. Preferably 100% organic or locally grown by organic-based farmers. This certainly is not always an option, so I've compiled a quick 'cheat sheet' of the top genetically modified crops and substances that you can remember when avoiding GMOs in your daily life.

Big Chem, Big Harm?

Nicholas D. Kristof
New York Times
Sat, 25 Aug 2012 11:01 UTC

New research is demonstrating that some common chemicals all around us may be even more harmful than previously thought. It seems that they may damage us in ways that are transmitted generation after generation, imperiling not only us but also our descendants.

Yet following the script of Big Tobacco a generation ago, Big Chem has, so far, blocked any serious regulation of these endocrine disruptors, so called because they play havoc with hormones in the body's endocrine system.

One of the most common and alarming is bisphenol-A, better known as BPA. The failure to regulate it means that it is unavoidable. BPA is found in everything from plastics to canned food to A.T.M. receipts. More than 90 percent of Americans have it in their urine.

Caveman Diet: Grain Free, Disease Free

Lana Lokteff
Red Ice Creations
Wed, 13 Jun 2012 00:00 UTC

Most people freak out without their morning wheat toast. However, more and more people are beginning to turn to the wheat-free diet, experiencing liberation from chronic health ailments, weight and blood sugar spikes. In the book, Wheat Belly, preventative cardiologist William Davis explains how eliminating wheat from our diets is the key to achieving permanent weight loss and relief from a range of health issues.

After witnessing over 2,000 patients regain their health after giving up wheat, Davis reached the disturbing conclusion that wheat is the single largest contributor to the nationwide obesity epidemic - and its elimination is key to dramatic weight loss and optimal health.

Comment: For more information read:
The Addictive Opioids in Wheat and Dairy Foods
Gluten: What You Don't Know Might Kill You
The Myth That Vegetables Are Good For You

More Infants Born Addicted to Prescription Drugs

Sheila Eldred
Discovery News
Tue, 28 Aug 2012 18:09 UTC

Instead of the healthy cries of newborns, hospitals are now hearing an increase in shrieking just after birth -- just one sign in a rising epidemic of infants born addicted to prescription drugs.

Nationally, the rate of newborns suffering withdrawal, or "neonatal abstinence syndrome," rose 330 percent from 2000 to 2009, according to a study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association last spring.

In some states, it's much worse: In Kentucky, the rate rose 2,400 percent. In Florida, it rose 500 percent between 2004 and 2011, the Sun Sentinel reports. And those figures are likely on the low side, since they don't include infants without immediate symptoms who go home with parents who don't report their drug use.

"It's a silent epidemic that's going on out there," Audrey Tayse Haynes, secretary of the Kentucky Cabinet for Health and Family Services, told USA Today in its story on the issue. "You need to say: 'Stop the madness. This is too much.'"

It's no surprise that the numbers are high in Kentucky and other states with rampant prescription drug abuse. Still, when Van Ingram, executive director of Kentucky's Office of Drug Control Policy, requested statistics on infant hospitalizations, he was shocked.

"I was blown away," he told USA Today. "We need to slow the tide."

Why Broth is Beautiful: Essential Roles for Proline, Glycine and Gelatin

Kaayla T. Daniel, PhD, CCN
Weston A. Price Foundation
Wed, 18 Jun 2003 11:14 UTC

Several years ago Knox Gelatin introduced a new product named Nutrajoint with great fanfare. This supplement contains gelatin, vitamin C and calcium, and advertisements touted "recent scientific studies" proving that gelatin can contribute to the building of strong cartilage and bones.

In fact, the evidence goes back more than a century, and not only established gelatin's value to cartilage and bones but also to the skin, digestive tract, immune system, heart and muscles.

These early studies, however, have fallen off the radar screen of Knox as well as that of nearly everyone else. So it was not surprising in 1997 when the editors of the Tufts University Health & Nutrition Letter advised consumers not to buy Nutrajoint or similar supplements because the idea that gelatin can contribute to the building of strong cartilage and bones "is a theory that has yet to be investigated." As for the theory itself, they sniffed that it "sounds tidy--rather along the lines of 'you are what you eat.'" In conclusion, they stated that even if Nutrajoint worked as claimed, it would be totally unnecessary because "the body can manufacture its own proline and glycine as needed and therefore suffers no shortfall."¹

The notion that the body can create proline and glycine is, of course, the reason that neither amino is considered "essential." The ability to manufacture them easily and abundantly as needed, however, is probably true only of people enjoying radiant good health.Common sense suggests that the millions of Americans suffering from stiff joints, skin diseases and other collagen, connective tissue and cartilage disorders might be suffering serious shortfalls of proline, glycine and other needed nutrients.

Blind To The Truth: The Eye-Damaging Effects of Statins

Sayer Ji
GreenMedInfo
Tue, 28 Aug 2012 09:00 UTC

Newly published research has raised concern about the possibility that statin drugs are damaging the eyes of those taking them. Titled, "Age-related cataract is associated with type 2 diabetes and statin use," and published in the journal Optometry and Vision Science, researchers found that those taking statin drugs had 48% higher risk of pathological eye lense changes (nuclear sclerosis and cortical cataract) associated with increased opacity, i.e. cataracts.

As far back as 1990 research published in the journal of Experimental Eye Research discussed the potential that statin drugs have cataractogenic properties noting "[statin drugs] may result in an increased concentration of inhibitor [statin] in the outer cortical region of the lens where cholesterol synthesis is critical, thereby resulting in the development of opacities."[i] Other studies can be found supporting the cataract-statin link, which are located for your convenience on our database here: Statin-Cataract Research.

Statin drugs have now been linked to over 300 adverse health effects, including, ironically, statin-induced cardiotoxicity itself. Beyond the obvious problem of statin-associated muscle damage (78 studies) - remember, the heart is a muscle - there is the equally concerning problem of statin-induced neurotoxicity (53 studies).

Given the fact that that the heart is a highly innervated muscle, that is, nerve-dense muscle, the primary justification for prescribing them appears to be defunct, especially considering that the chemical class is, according to an accumulating body of clinical evidence, contributing to two orders of magnitude greater adverse health effects than their purported therapeutic ones.

Lack of Sleep Found to Be a New Risk Factor for Aggressive Breast Cancers

ScienceDaily
Tue, 28 Aug 2012 13:46 UTC

Lack of sleep is linked to more aggressive breast cancers, according to new findings published in the August issue of Breast Cancer Research and Treatment by physician-scientists from University Hospitals Case Medical Center's Seidman Cancer Center and Case Comprehensive Cancer Center at Case Western Reserve University.

Led by Cheryl Thompson, PhD, the study is the first-of-its-kind to show an association between insufficient sleep and biologically more aggressive tumors as well as likelihood of cancer recurrence. The research team analyzed medical records and survey responses from 412 post-menopausal breast cancer patients treated at UH Case Medical Center with Oncotype DX, a widely utilized test to guide treatment in early stage breast cancer by predicting likelihood of recurrence.

All patients were recruited at diagnosis and asked about the average sleep duration in the last two years. Researchers found that women who reported six hours or less of sleep per night on average before breast cancer diagnosis had higher Oncotype DX tumor recurrence scores. The Oncotype DX test assigns a tumor a recurrence score based on the expression level of a combination of 21 genes.

What I don't understand is that, there seems to be the controlled opposition trying to saturate alternative media with the notion that covid is a...

Qafsiel

'WTF IS IN PFIZER VACCINE?' [Link]

parzival

For some levity in this sad time, a very funny series of text messages from and to some idiot snowflake who can't figure out how to make Ramen...

Rowan Cocoan

We should be taking inspiration from these heroes rather than deleting our past. Those who tried to erase the past always started to erase...

codis

Only the remaining 10% of The Great Jab lottery are supposed to go through the "cold, dark winter".

codis

Health & Wellness

Gates Foundation Funds Surveillance of Anti-Vaccine Groups

The Straight Dope on Cholesterol: 10 Things You Need to Know - Part 1

The Great Organic Deceivers

Avoiding GMOs in Your Daily Life

Big Chem, Big Harm?

Caveman Diet: Grain Free, Disease Free

More Infants Born Addicted to Prescription Drugs

Why Broth is Beautiful: Essential Roles for Proline, Glycine and Gelatin

Blind To The Truth: The Eye-Damaging Effects of Statins

Lack of Sleep Found to Be a New Risk Factor for Aggressive Breast Cancers

Latest News

Picture of the Day

Quote of the Day

Recent Comments

Quantum Quirk

Contact Us