Welcome to Sott.net
Wed, 28 Sep 2016
The World for People who Think

Health & Wellness


CDC using the Zika virus to justify forced vaccinations, quarantines and mass aerial spraying

On August 15, 2016 the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) invited "public comment" on an especially disturbing edict that will allow the federal agency alongside the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to quarantine entire geographic areas of the United States, restrict the movement and behavior of inhabitants in these areas, and ultimately require they undergo vaccination - in a voluntary manner of course - or face criminal prosecution.

In fact, municipalities need only be given a vague "precommunicable" designation to undergo an overall loss of civil liberties that can include mandatory vaccination.

This action is being unilaterally undertaken by a bureaucracy that in recent months has proceeded in a thoroughly irresponsible manner to hype the alleged dangers of the Zika virus, even promoting the aerial dispersion of a toxic substance on South Florida populations to control Zika without any scientific evidence such a measure is safe or effective.

Accompanying this, in July the Obama administration sought $1.9 billion from Congress to "fight" the Zika virus. When it failed to secure such lavish funding Obama's HHS funneled $81 million for Zika "research." To be sure, Zika's vague and difficult-to-diagnose symptoms make it an especially apt vehicle for creating widespread hysteria that could without much difficulty provide the basis for at least limited implementation of the CDC's quarantine and vaccination project.

Comment: See also: Center for Disease Control gives itself unconstitutional powers to round up and detain citizens en masse


Shocking research confirms vaccines are contaminated with Monsanto's RoundUp herbicide

© everydayhealth.com
Folks, I have written about the problems with vaccines in previous blog posts.

Now, a new serious contamination problem with our vaccines has been identified.

Researcher Anthony Samsel has published five peer-reviewed articles on the herbicide Glyphosate (the active ingredient in Roundup). A yet-to-be published sixth paper found various commonly-used vaccines contaminated with the herbicide glyphosate.

Yes, you read that correctly: Our vaccines are contaminated with an herbicide that the World Health Organization characterized as"probably carcinogenic to humans."

How can this happen? That answer is easy.

Many vaccines contain animal byproducts such as gelatin, bovine casein, bovine serum, bovine calf serum, or chicken egg protein. The animals from which these products come from are fed grains sprayed with glyphosate. It does not take a rocket scientist to come to the conclusion that these animals, fed glyphosate in their diet, would contain glyphosate in their byproducts.

Samsel sent a letter to Congress that stated:
"I have run numerous groups of vaccines and identified several vectors of contamination. These include the excipient gelatins, egg protein and or similar substrates used to grow vaccines. I have found gelatins and egg proteins contaminated with Glyphosate-based herbicides from animals fed a glyphosate contaminated diet. This contamination carries into thousands of consumer products i.e. vitamins, protein powders, wine, beer and other consumables which use gelatins as part of the product or in fining and processing."


The updated Toxic Substances Control Act - what you need to know

© blog.nema.org
"This is a big deal," said President Barack Obama as he signed into law the bill that updates — for the first time in 40 years — the nation's main chemical safety legislation. Called the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act to honor the late senator for whom this was a special cause, the law revises the Toxic Substances Control Act that gives the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency authority to regulate chemicals used commercially in the United States.

As Obama noted at the June 22 signing ceremony, TSCA was supposed to ensure that chemicals used in the U.S. were safe for human health and the environment. But, said the president, "Even with the best of intentions, the law didn't quite work the way it should have in practice."

In fact, TSCA allowed the approximately 62,000 chemicals already on the market when it was passed in 1976 to continue being used without safety testing. It also placed enormously high hurdles for the EPA to clear before demonstrating a chemical was hazardous enough to ban. Even asbestos has failed to meet those requirements. It was widely agreed, by industry and environmental advocates alike that TSCA was badly in need of revision.

Comment: Additional information about TSCA to consider:
The US is set for the first legislation to regulate toxic industrial chemicals in 40 years.

You might think this would be cause for celebration. However, the bill updating the Toxic Substances Control Act continues to put the industry's interests above those of the public. It does make some improvements, such as requiring new chemicals to be safe before being sold and giving the Environmental Protection Agency the power to demand safety data. But on balance, it does too little to protect Americans from chemicals that cause cancer and nervous system disorders, impaired fertility, immune system dysfunction and a host of other health problems.

In the first year under the new law, the EPA will be required to review just 10 of the tens of thousands of chemicals used in commerce that have never been tested for safety. The law fails to give the agency adequate resources and clear legal authority to take timely action. Companies could further delay things by taking the EPA to court. In short, people will still be routinely exposed to hazardous chemicals!
To the applause of the chemical industry lobby, Congress is sending a new Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) bill to President Obama. Anyone familiar with this law knows that it is the weakest of all U.S. environmental statutes, leaving the majority of the 85,000 chemicals in our toys, clothes, homes, schools, and workplaces unregulated and untested for their health effects.

And if Congress and the chemical lobby have their way, none of that will change.

Because TSCA hasn't empowered the EPA to act for the last 40 years, 38 states began regulating dangerous chemicals, including BPA,f ormaldehyde, lead, mercury and toxic flame retardants. In many cases, these state rules have benefited people across the country, especially when national firms removed dangerous chemicals from their products.

But instead of nationalizing that trend, Congress is ignoring environmental, public health, worker safety, and environmental justice leaders who have championed chemical policy reform for decades. Instead, they chose to listen to the chemical lobbyists from Dow, DuPont, Exxon and their trade associations, like the American Chemistry Council (ACC).

Why? In the ACC's own words, the chemical lobby wants "predictability, consistency, and certainty." Translation: they wanted to stop states from restricting toxic chemicals.


Herd mentality is for the birds

… the herd is never protected, because, at any one point in time, there are very large portions of the herd that are not immune, because either the vaccine-induced immunity did not take, or it waned.
Many of you have heard about the so-called "herd immunity" theory of immunity.1 Forget it. It's a myth. Yes, I know, what about all those doctors, scientists and public health officials that are constantly parroting the theory on television, radio and printed media? Well, they're wrong. It's not the first time the "experts" have gotten it wrong and it won't be the last.

Remember cigarettes?2 Remember all those recalled prescription drugs that have harmed countless people? How about all those multi-billion dollar lawsuits against pharmaceutical companies? Remember all those pesticides and herbicides they told us were perfectly safe, no problem? DDT, Agent Orange?

How about all those contaminated vaccines (the "bad batches") that you periodically hear about in the news?3,4 Look up SV-40.5 Research the countless people who were given a vaccine to prevent them from contracting an infectious disease, and then actually ended up getting the disease from the vaccine. (Here's a neat word for you to ponder and investigate: shedding, as in viral vaccine shedding)6 Start with the Salk and Sabin polio vaccines.7,8

Then check out some of the casualties of the herd immunity myth, all those once healthy teenage girls, in the tip top physical prime of their life, who got injected with the Gardasil HPV vaccine and are now little more than a shadow of their former selves.9 They can barely get up and walk. Their lives ruined. And for what?


The nutritional value of light - unusual ways light can increase your wellbeing

Light has a profound affect on our mood and our physiology, it also nourishes many of the plants that give us sustenance. Yet, how often do we consciously consider light as part of a healthy diet? Here is a mindful approach to using light to nourish your body, mind, and spirit.

Circadian Rhythm, the Pineal Gland, and Melatonin

Humans did not evolve indoors under artificial light, our biology developed in harmony with the cycles of the sun, moon and seasons. For this reason, we have a built-in clock for physical, mental, and behavioral changes that follow a roughly 24-hour cycle. Plants, animals, microbes, and most other living organisms, also have a circadian rhythm which is primarily influenced by a relationship with light.

Comment: Read more about how artificial light affects mood and physiology:


What's that dangly thing in the back of your throat?

© shutterstock
Your uvula is the dangly bit of flesh that hangs at the back of your throat, a body part that has prompted many to wonder, "Why is that even there?" Fittingly, the word uvula comes from the Latin word "uvola," which means "small bunch of grapes."1

In ancient times, the uvula was believed to play a role in speech and immunology. It was also somewhat feared and regarded as a potentially hazardous organ that could cause apnea and death.2,3

Writing in the journal Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, researchers suggested in the 1990s that the most important function of the uvula may be due to the muscularis uvula, which is the muscle that moves the uvula up and down.

"Its function could be related to drinking while bending over," they stated, citing a previous assumption that the uvula may be leftover from mammals that drink while bending their neck downward.4

However, when they studied the soft palate (the soft tissue at the back of the roof of the mouth) of eight different mammals, "a small underdeveloped uvula" was found in only two baboons. In other words, it seems most other mammals do not have uvulas, which pretty much debunked the drinking while bending over theory.


Physicians are prescribing time in nature, fruits and vegetables for patients instead of Big Pharma drugs

© nutribob.wordpress.com
In an age where pharmaceutical drug use is off the charts, a thoughtful group of physicians are using a novel approach and advising their patients to "take a hike" — literally. Park prescriptions have been around since 2008, but the idea is now spreading more widely throughout the U.S. — and around the world — as obesity and mental health disorders have continued to climb. In a similar vein, doctors are also writing prescriptions for fruits, vegetables and other wholesome food, which patients can "fill" at their local market. The result of these unconventional interventions is nothing short of inspiring.

The Healing Power of Nature

A whole new spin on writing prescriptions for patients has people moving — through green spaces, parks and forests, in lieu of popping pharmaceutical meds for what ails them. And it works.

San Francisco physician Daphne Miller is known for writing out "park prescriptions" like this:
Drug: Exercise in Glen Canyon Park

Dose: 45 minutes of walking or running

Directions: Monday, Wednesday, Friday and Saturday at 7am

Refills: Unlimited
Dr. Miller feels it's easier to maintain an exercise program when we're outdoors, possibly because of the changing scenery, fresh air or, what she refers to as, "the camaraderie of the trail." She's written hundreds of park prescriptions for her patients — which have had great success in curbing a variety of health complaints. And she's not alone in her unusual prescriptions. Many physicians — particularly pediatricians — are dispensing thousands of these prescriptions to not only get some exercise, but to do it out in nature.

Comment: Read more about the healing powers of nature:
Since ancient times, humans have assigned healing and transformational properties to water. In early Rome, baths were an important part of cultural life, a place where citizens went to find relaxation and to connect with others in a calming setting. In ayurveda, the ancient Indian medicinal wisdom, and traditional Chinese medicine, the water element is crucial to balancing the body and creating physical harmony. Rivers have long been seen as sacred places, and in a number of different spiritual contexts, water has symbolized rebirth, spiritual cleansing and salvation.

Today, we still turn to water for a sense of calm and clarity. We spend our vacations on the beach or at the lake; get exercise and enjoyment from water sports like surfing, scuba diving, sailing, and swimming; refresh ourselves with long showers and soothing baths, and often build our lives and homes around being near the water...

"We are beginning to learn that our brains are hardwired to react positively to water and that being near it can calm and connect us, increase innovation and insight, and even heal what's broken," Nichols writes in Blue Mind: The Surprising Science That Shows How Being Near, In, On, or Under Water Can Make You Happier, Healthier, More Connected, and Better at What You Do, published in July. "We have a 'blue mind' -- and it's perfectly tailored to make us happy in all sorts of ways that go way beyond relaxing in the surf, listening to the murmur of a stream, or floating quietly in a pool."

2 + 2 = 4

ADHD: Fake disease treated with real drugs

According to Neurologist Richard Saul who has written a book called "ADHD Does Not Exist: The Truth About Attention Deficit and Hyperactivity Disorder", the amount of people who are suffering from Attention Deficit and Hyperactivity Disorder is zero.

Richard Saul is a neurologist who has had a long career in examining patients who have been having trouble with short attention spans and inability to focus. From his first hand experience, he feels that ADHD is nothing more than a fake disorder that is really only an umbrella of symptoms and not actually a disease. He strongly feels that it should not be listed as a separate disorder in the American Psychiatric Association's Diagnostic & Statistical Manual, all detailed in his book which is set to release in February 2014.

As it stands, ADHD is defined as a psychiatric disorder that is neurodevelopmental. In order for diagnosis, significant issues with attention and/or hyperactivity and acting impulsively that are not appropriate for a person's age must be present. The number of ADHD diagnoses has increased greatly in recent years due to the fact that doctors are using the disorder as a simple means to not only explain lack of focus or attention but also to allow the use of medication which can mean direct benefit for the doctor. Saul feels that many parents these days are looking for any way to get their kids to sit down and remain quiet and ADHD, and the medications that go along with it, can be the quick fix they are looking for. Currently, 1 in 9 children are labelled as ADHD and of that, two-thirds of them are on some sort of drug.

Comment: Medical professionals' over-diagnosing and treatment ADHD ignores childhood trauma, individual differences and the natural exuberance of youth while profiting off of medicating children.


Prescription drugs: The unhealthy dynamic between doctors & drug companies

© easyhealthoptions.com
The potential influence of marketing strategies used by drug production companies on the prescribing habits of doctors has been the subject of recent intense debate. Currently, doctors' groups and the manufacturers themselves espouse professional and industry self-regulation in the marketing of drugs or medical equipment to doctors.

The argument is that these voluntary measures, teamed with personal integrity, clinical objectivity and being current with the latest evidence-based therapies are sufficient to guard against any favouritism that company gifts (monetary or otherwise) and sponsorship of professional meetings might engender.

The social science of giving and receiving gifts suggests otherwise. A recent article in the Journal of the American Medical Association (2006;295:429-433) contends that giving even small monetary value items such as office stationery items, desktop toys and drug samples subtly increases the likelihood of a doctor prescribing that company's drugs.

Positive prescribing habits are more pronounced with drug company gifts and sponsorships of a greater value, such as subsidies for medical education including medical conference funding, funds for travel to conferences, speaker bureau fees, ghost writing of drug-related research articles, consultancies and research projects.

Comment: For a more in depth look at the unhealthy dynamic between doctors & drug companies read the following articles:


Landmark study shows high death rates from chemotherapy treatment, not the cancer itself

No matter how much doctors push the treatment, chemotherapy might not be the best option in the fight against cancer, as a new study shows up to 50 percent of patients are killed by the drugs — not the disease, itself.

Researchers from Public Health England and Cancer Research UK performed a groundbreaking study examining for the first time the numbers of cancer patients who died within 30 days of beginning chemotherapy — indicating the treatment, not the cancer, was the cause of death.

Looking at those death rates in hospitals across the U.K., researchers found an alarming mortality rate associated with chemotherapy.

Across "England around 8.4 per cent of patients with lung cancer, and 2.4 per cent of breast cancer patients died within a month," the Telegraph reported.

"But in some hospitals the figure was far higher. In Milton Keynes the death rate for lung cancer treatment was 50.9 per cent, although it was based on a very small number of patients."

Comment: The dangers of chemotherapy are legion: