© vaclib.org
SOTT
SIGNS
OF THE
TIMES
OF THE
TIMES
Welcome to Sott.net
The World for People who Think
Health & WellnessS
There are 130 official ways for an infant to die. These official categories of death, sanctioned by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the World Health Organization (WHO), are published in the International Classification of Diseases (ICD).[1-3] When a baby dies, coroners must choose from among these 130 categories.
The official causes of death listed in the ICD include nearly every imaginable -- and tragic -- possibility. However, there is NO category for infant deaths caused by vaccines.[4] This is odd because the federal government is aware that vaccines permanently disable and kill some babies -- the very reason Congress established a "death and disability" tax on childhood vaccines more than 25 years ago when the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 (Public Law 99-660) created the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP).
Books like Dr. William Davis' New York Times best-selling Wheat Belly made great progress in opening up popular consciousness to the subject of gluten's addictive properties, my own e-book The Dark Side of Wheat explored the role that wheat and grains in general played as an addictive agent, and Dr. David Perlmutter's new book Grain Brain places significant emphasis on this connection as well.
After all, if wheat is a common cause of intestinal damage ("enteropathy") both in those with celiac disease and non-celiac gluten sensitivity, it is no wonder that gluten-associated damage to the gut - sometimes called the "enteric brain," or "second brain," - could have adverse effects to the central nervous system as well.
Indeed, our research project at GreenMedInfo.com has identified in biomedical literature directly from the National Library of Medicine over 200 adverse health effects linked to gluten-containing grains, with neurotoxicity top on the list of 21 distinct modes of toxicity associated with this grain's effects.[i] These neurotoxic properties extend from neuropathy and ataxia, to distinct psychiatric conditions such as acute states of mania, and schizophrenia.
Please watch the two videos, each last about 30 minutes.
In the first video Dr Maryanne Demasi follows the road which led us to believe that saturated fat and cholesterol cause heart disease, and reveal why it's been touted as the biggest myth in medical history.
In the first video Dr Maryanne Demasi follows the road which led us to believe that saturated fat and cholesterol cause heart disease, and reveal why it's been touted as the biggest myth in medical history.
This week, though, a British Medical Journal article by cardiologist Dr Aseem Malhotra which urges us to choose butter every time hit the headlines. So, are our beliefs about the 'heart-healthy' properties of margarine built on solid scientific foundations, or just the result of slick marketing and misinformation? Is it time we got our fats straight?
Butter
While the saturated fat that makes up the bulk of butter might boost cholesterol levels in our blood, any effect here is actually irrelevant: it's the impact it has on health that counts. All the most recent, major scientific reviews of the evidence simply fail to find any link between intakes of saturated fat and risk of heart disease.
These 'epidemiological' studies fail to impugn saturated fat, but cannot be used to determine 'causality' (whether or not saturated fat causes heart disease). More enlightening are studies in which the health outcomes of individuals who cut back on saturated fat or replace it with supposedly healthier fats are compared with those who do not make these changes.
"Worse still, we have evidence that drug trials can be designed, conducted and reported in ways that obscure the truth."
In 2011, Cochrane researchers assessed the evidence relating to statin use in individuals at low risk of cardiovascular disease (defined as a less than 20 per cent risk over 10 years), and concluded that there was limited evidence of overall benefit [1]. I appeared on Channel 4 news to discuss this publication and the issues surrounding it, and you can see the discussion here.
Earlier this year, the same Cochrane group updated their data and concluded thatoverall risk of death and cardiovascular events (e.g. heart attack or stroke) were reduced by statins in low risk individuals, without increasing the risk of adverse events (including muscle, liver and kidney damage) [2]. It seems the Cochrane reviewers had had quite some change of heart. A paper published in the BMJ on 22 October questions the evidence on which this U-turn appears to have been made [3].
The authors of the BMJ piece note that although the 2013 meta-analysis included four additional trials, these trials did not substantially change the findings. The change in advice was actually based on another meta-analysis, published in 2012, conducted by a group known as the Cholesterol Treatment Trialists' (CTT) collaboration [4].
Is the role of cholesterol in heart disease really one of the biggest myths in the history of medicine?
For the last four decades we've been told that saturated fat clogs our arteries and high cholesterol causes heart disease. It has spawned a multi-billion dollar drug and food industry of "cholesterol free" products promising to lower our cholesterol and decrease our risk of heart disease.
But what if it all isn't true? What if it's never been proven that saturated fat causes heart disease?
And what if the majority of patients taking cholesterol lowering drugs won't benefit from taking these pills?
In a special two part edition of Catalyst, Dr Maryanne Demasi investigates the science behind the claims that saturated fat causes heart disease by raising cholesterol.
© Dreamstime Photo Illustration
A broken heart and a blue, bedevilled brain.
They've been twinned, metaphorically, in poetry and song for millennia.
Over the past 50 years, however, science and medicine have been contemplating the organs and their maladies on a purely biological basis.
In particular, an evolving half-century of medical wisdom came to this conclusion:
Just as coronary diseases - or those of the liver, or kidneys for that matter - were plainly the result of physiological disruptions, so too were the mental illnesses of the brain.
© Lazurite Body clocks readily reset themselves to natural sleep patterns if given the opportunity, the study found.
Our increased use of electrical light, and reduced exposure to natural light, caused modern humans to stray from our natural circadian rhythms or sleep patterns, and may be a contributor to poor quality sleep.
The findings, published in Current Biology, show that humans' internal biological clocks will synchronise to a natural, midsummer light-dark cycle if the opportunity arises. A midsummer light-dark cycle in Colorado, in the US where the study took place, is 14 hours and 40 minutes of light, 9 hours and 20 minutes of darkness in a 24 hour period.
Relying on electrical light after sunset contributes to late sleep schedules, which disturbs natural circadian rhythms and can leave us feeling not well rested.
The new study, conducted by Dr. Kenneth Wright and colleagues from the University of Colorado in the US, found that increased exposure to sunlight, as opposed to largely relying on electric light, shifted the internal clock earlier, which could help reduce the "physiological, cognitive and health consequences of circadian disruption."
© Photobucket: Cheap_Trick77
The lawsuit accuses the drugmaker of knowing there were "serious issues" with Zoloft efficacy and that early clinical studies demonstrated its pill was no better than a placebo. But Pfizer allegedly concealed this from regulators, physicians and patients with an elaborate scheme that included ghostwritten articles that were published in medical journals and a deceptive advertising initiative, according to the lawsuit.
"Pfizer engaged and continues to engage in a deliberate, systematic practice of suppressing unfavorable results for its drug and misleading the state, healthcare providers, consumers and policy makers about the actual efficacy of its drug," according to the lawsuit. "The defendant caused thousands of false and deceptive claims to be made to the state by manipulating published efficacy data, paying key opinion leaders to bolster Zoloft's efficacy and deceptively concealing Zoloft's inefficacy" (here is the lawsuit).
Thomas Verstraeten, MD, in 1999 regarding ethylmercury from thimerosal in vaccines.
The truth shall set you free. - John 8:32
Finally! After all these years of denial and damage, the truth about ethylmercury in the form of Thimerosal (49.6%) in vaccines has been revealed to a member of the U.S. Congress as a result of oversight requests that were sent to the U.S. Centers for Disease Prevention and Control (CDC) and shared with one of the foremost research groups regarding mercury in drugs, CoMeD, whose website is www.mercury-freedrugs.com.
When one clicks on CoMeD's webpage Documents, the very first document posting is "CDC Epidemic Intelligence Service (EIS) annual conference abstract submission for the EIS conference in April 2000, discovered in August of 2013 in a CDC response to a Congressional Request by an office in the U.S. House of Representatives - the abstract submission is titled, 'Increased risk of developmental neurological impairment after high exposure to Thimerosal-containing vaccine in the first month of life'" wherein this absolutely stunning information that federal health agencies conspired to keep from mainstream health information/knowledge about vaccines, and mercury in vaccines, in particular:
The truth shall set you free. - John 8:32
When one clicks on CoMeD's webpage Documents, the very first document posting is "CDC Epidemic Intelligence Service (EIS) annual conference abstract submission for the EIS conference in April 2000, discovered in August of 2013 in a CDC response to a Congressional Request by an office in the U.S. House of Representatives - the abstract submission is titled, 'Increased risk of developmental neurological impairment after high exposure to Thimerosal-containing vaccine in the first month of life'" wherein this absolutely stunning information that federal health agencies conspired to keep from mainstream health information/knowledge about vaccines, and mercury in vaccines, in particular:
Conclusion: This analysis suggests that high exposure to ethyl mercury from thimerosal-containing vaccines in the first month of life increases the risk of subsequent development of neurologic development impairment, but not of neurologic degenerative or renal impairment. Further confirmatory studies are needed. [1] [CJF emphasis added] [which apparently led to the Simpsonwood Meeting that I talk about in my book Vaccination Voodoo.]
Comment: Resources for parents, parents-to-be, and researchers can be found at vaclib.org.