Health & Wellness
While wireless technology is progressing at a break-neck pace, with newer, better, faster innovations seemingly appearing every year, little attention is paid in the mainstream as to the possible negative repercussions.
It seems that technological progress is treated as of ultimate importance, with almost no attention paid to the health consequences. While many scientists (backed up by over 28,000 scientific studies) are sounding the alarm on the negative health effects of wireless communication, its infrastructure and devices; they are ignored by the regulatory bodies, industry and governments who continue to push things forward - beholden to the almighty dollar.
With promises of a 5G digital utopia just around the corner, is anyone listening to these very real concerns? Are we on the verge of a health apocalypse? Is 5G really that bad? Can anything be done on an individual level to mitigate the damage?
Join us as we talk to Scott Ogrin of Scottie's Tech.Info, who has done a deep dive on the research and helps us answer some of these questions and more.
Running Time: 01:21:29
Download: MP3 - 74.2 MB

"I still do not favor giving up on liberty for a false sense of security," Sen. Rand Paul said during the Senate health committee hearing, where he was the only lawmaker to raise doubts over vaccinations.
Paul (R-Ky.), a doctor, said he and his children are vaccinated and that he believes the benefits of vaccines outweigh the risks. "But I still do not favor giving up on liberty for a false sense of security," Paul said during the Senate health committee hearing, where he was the only lawmaker to raise doubts over vaccinations.
Paul, who made similar comments during his 2016 presidential bid, argued that vaccines aren't always effective - pointing to the seasonal influenza vaccines that protect only against certain strands - and said it is "wrong to say there are no risks to vaccines," drawing applause from anti-vaccination advocates attending the hearing.
Comment: For the first installment, see: Vaccination: Do your own research, exercise due diligence and reserve judgment
In Part 1 we looked at some of the evidence which casts doubt upon the common narratives asserted by those who unquestioningly support all vaccines. This included evidence that vaccines had minimal impact upon the eradication of Smallpox, that claims of Poliovirus being 'defeated' by vaccines are dubious and that improvements in public health practices were far more influential in the overall reduction of disease than vaccines appear to have been.
We looked at the lack of evidence to support the hypothesis of 'herd immunity.' We also considered the medical evidence which makes any notion that vaccines can ever achieve the 'herd effect' extremely unlikely.
I am not suggesting that all vaccines are useless, nor potentially dangerous. Vaccines come in a variety of forms and human susceptibility, both to contracting and spreading infection, is unique to the individual. As are our immune system's responses to inoculation. Contracting viruses naturally is a vital component for the healthy development of our individual immune systems. At a very basic level, some skepticism regarding the potential risks of interfering with this natural process is warranted.
Having received some feedback on the post from the Twitterati, the problem we face in establishing any kind of reasonable dialogue about vaccines was painfully apparent. I wrote Part 1, partly out of my own interest, but also to respond in full to those who, contrary to my understanding, insisted there was no empirical evidence questioning vaccines.
The research shows head-to-toe harm, from heart and lung disease to diabetes and dementia, and from liver problems and bladder cancer to brittle bones and damaged skin. Fertility, foetuses and children are also affected by toxic air, the review found.
The systemic damage is the result of pollutants causing inflammation that then floods through the body and ultra-fine particles being carried around the body by the bloodstream.
Air pollution is a "public health emergency", according to the World Health Organization, with more than 90% of the global population enduring toxic outdoor air. New analysis indicates 8.8m early deaths each year - double earlier estimates - making air pollution a bigger killer than tobacco smoking.
Comment: The numbers of 'deaths from tobacco' are dubious at best, if not outright lies:
The Food and Drug Administration issued the warning to tattoo artists, ink retailers and anyone "considering a new tattoo," saying the inks could cause serious infections or other injuries.
It said six inks manufactured by Scalp Aesthetics, Dynamic Color and Color Art could be contaminated with microorganisms that can be dangerous when injected into the skin.
Almost 14,000 individuals have now been screened in the district outside Larkana where the sudden spike in HIV incidence was first detected, said Dr Sikandar Memon, the regional coordinator of the Aids Control Programme.
Of those testing positive, 410 are children, Dr Memon told Pakistani newspaper Dawn. He said that another 29 patients tested positive in the most recent round of blood screening on Wednesday at the main hospital in Rato Dero, 25km outside Larkana, seen as the centre of the epidemic.
A doctor accused of infecting his patients through repeated use of a single, contaminated syringe remains in custody since the outbreak was first reported in late April. Dr Muzaffar Ghangharo, who officials said is himself living with HIV, has been charged but denies the allegations.
Authorities are also not ruling out the possibility that the outbreak is the result of gross, widespread negligence in a region which has a high prevalence of shady medical practices.

Coca-Cola Bottling Co. Consolidated has named David Katz president and chief operating officer of the Charlotte-based company. He replaces Henry Flint, although J. Frank Harrison will remain chairman and CEO.
The agreements USC signed with Coca-Cola provided $1.2 million in obesity research funding in 2013 and 2014, but allowed the company to abruptly cancel research, provide comments before publication and keep research data, according to documents released by the report's authors.
"This quote-unquote science isn't science, it's public relations," said study co-author Gary Ruskin. "That's a problem with research ethics."
Comment: Coca-Cola has a long and sordid history of influencing studies, funding research to get the 'right' results, influencing public health policy and much more. All to deceive the public into believing their toxic beverages can be part of a healthy diet. They can't.
See also:
- British Medical Journal report says Coca-Cola influencing China's obesity policy
- Study: How Coca-Cola declared war on the 'public health community'
- Corruption of Science: Coca-Cola's Shady Record in Obesity Research - 'Dracula in Charge of the Blood Bank'
- Coca-Cola sued over deceptive advertising tactics targeting children and hiding health effects of sugar
- Coca-Cola & Pepsi sponsored about 100 health orgs in 5yrs, primary interest of improving profit, at the expense of public health
- Soda politics: CDC executive resigns - caught colluding with Coca-Cola

While less dangerous, even chronic exposure can "accelerate the ageing of retinal tissue, contributing to a decline in visual acuity and certain degenerative diseases such as age-related macular degeneration," the agency concluded.
New findings confirm earlier concerns that "exposure to an intense and powerful [LED] light is 'photo-toxic' and can lead to irreversible loss of retinal cells and diminished sharpness of vision," the French Agency for Food, Environmental and Occupational Health & Safety (ANSES) warned in a statement.
The agency recommended in a 400-page report that the maximum limit for acute exposure be revised, even if such levels are rarely met in home or work environments.
The report distinguished between acute exposure of high-intensity LED light, and "chronic exposure" to lower intensity sources.
While less dangerous, even chronic exposure can "accelerate the ageing of retinal tissue, contributing to a decline in visual acuity and certain degenerative diseases such as age-related macular degeneration," the agency concluded.
Comment: Blue Light: Is it making you sick?
Infrared and near-infrared light from the sun help repair and regenerate your cells and you don't get that from artificial light sources. Excess blue light creates Reactive Oxygen Species (ROS) and this creates inflammation, even during the day. It also diminishes the function of your mitochondria and then your body has less energy to do the things it needs to do.
Exposure to blue light at night turns off your body's production of melatonin and this reduces the quality of sleep. And melatonin does more than help you sleep. It's also an antioxidant that protects your brain and increases mitochondrial function.
Lowered melatonin on a chronic basis leads to neurodegeneration and less energy output. This is why you can sleep for eight hours and wake up feeling tired and needing your Starbucks before you can really get going.
[...]
What can you do?
- Look at the sun first thing in the morning and take breaks throughout the day to expose your eyes to natural sunlight. This re-syncs your eye clock.
- Morning sun also creates dopamine, serotonin, and melatonin in your eye.
- Install f.lux on your computer to reduce blue light emitted from your screen. The ScreenShader Chrome extension is another option.
- Turn on Night Shift on your iPhone or install Twilight if you have an Android.
- If working on a computer or under blue lights all day, strongly consider wearing blue- blocking glasses, such as BluTech or the equivalent. You can also purchase Uvex blue- blocking glasses at low cost, however, they are not considered to be stylish by all.
- Ditch energy-efficient bulbs and opt for incandescent bulbs.
- Use red bulbs at night.

Drawing of various people cooking and serving food including meat and fish.
Comment: Understatement of the century.
While true blue vegans swear by almond milk, non-dairy ice-cream, scrambled tofu, flaxseed, maple syrup, fortified plant milk etc., 'pure' vegetarians get into a sublime trance over thayir saadham , molagu maanga , poosanika pachadi, kurkure mushroom, malai chaap rolls, tandoori paneer momos, achaari tikka* etc. Meanwhile, the People for Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) are going ballistic over the extreme cruelty meted out on animals by the meat-eating, leather wearing, animal experimenting sections of society.
By a strange but not unnatural coincidence, caste and class sit closely aligned in each of these groups - with the 'pure' vegetarians lauding the vegan army, and also claiming to be PETA activists in their spare time. It's also this same group that occupies large tractlands on social media with little cognizance or sensitivity on how little the other groups are represented in these spaces.
Discussions on social media around nutrition and food choice get cluttered with multiple issues. The modus operandi seems to be to shout, abuse, play the victim card and/or share links of google search documents that validate one's own pet prejudices.
Comment: See also:
- Toddler fed a vegan diet was so malnourished she had no teeth; parents face prison
- Is a vegan diet safe for infants and children?
- Charged with neglect: Vegan parents almost starve their five-month-old son to death
- The vegan lobby - Meat-free diet for everyone
- The Health & Wellness Show: The Vegan Putsch - They're Coming For Your Meat!
- Vegan diets are adding to malnutrition in wealthy countries
- A comprehensive list of reasons why vegan and vegetarian diets easily ruin your body
Children are far more vulnerable to the damaging effects of electromagnetic fields than we are. Your child's brain absorbs two to three times as many EMFs as yours, and sources of exposure are everywhere. What can you do?
Is your child's favorite pastime screen time? Are you concerned about how much cumulative exposure your kids have to electromagnetic radiation at home and at school from computers, cell phones, tablets, electronic toys, cell towers, power lines and the like?
If not, you should be!
Children are more vulnerable than adults to the effects of EMF (electromagnetic frequencies or fields) for a number of reasons, and most are submerged in an electrosmog soup all day, every day. What are the risks?











Comment: Cold facts to counter the measles hysteria and demands for mandatory vaccination: