9/11 Conspiracy Author Phillip Marshall, His Dog and 2 Kids Found Dead in California

Phillip Marshall, a former airplane pilot and author whose works included the 2003 novel Lakefront Airport,”  – “False Flag 911: How Bush, Cheney and the Saudis Created the Post-911 World (08)” and The Big Bamboozle: 9/11 and the War on Terror,” a 2012 publication in which Marshall theorized it wasn’t al-Qaida but rather U.S. and Saudi government officials who orchestrated 9/11, was found dead along with his two children in their Murphrys-area home in California – 2013. Reports indicate all 3 died of gunshot wounds.

article-2275258-176A89CF000005DC-353_634x373

Friends of Marshall’s kids, Alex 17 and Macaila 14, discovered the gruesome scene after showing up to check on them on Saturday after not having heard from them for numerous days.

 

The Calaveras County Sheriff’s Office reported that both children as well as the family dog were shot once in the head with a handgun.

Marshall’s estranged wife and mother of the 2 kids was traveling abroad at the time of the shootings.

fcuk_00000-640x90

Security Agency Officer Wayne Madsen says the 9/11 investigative author Philip Marshall and his children were killed in a “black ops hit” by the CIA, dismissing the suicide hypothesis. Marshall was afraid of being silenced for his revelations about 9/11, Madsen said, noting that a side door the investigator never used was wide open when his dead body was found.

Marshall believed the former US President George Bush had pulled off the 9/11 attack to foment a government coup. In his fourth book, he was supposed to disclose blockbuster information.

Press TV has conducted an interview with Dr. Kevin Barrett, an American author and political expert in Madison, Wisconsin, to further discuss the issue. Barrett is joined by Lee Kaplan, investigative journalist from Berkley.

Watch the video below:

This article was originally published in 2013 and is frequently updated

http://www.anonews.co/phillip-911-cons/




The Difference Between A Cold And Flu – Try Nature’s Flu Shot

By Dave Mihalovic

There is no question that the cold virus is more stable in cold temperature, so it survives and lingers airborne much longer due to the dry, cold conditions. There is a difference between symptoms related to the cold virus and flu virus, but possibly the number one reason the human body is susceptible to the cold virus in the winter is its virulence.

Cold, low humidity air dries out the nasal passages and makes virus transmission more likely. Researchers have found that in winter, even the flu virus wears a coat, and it’s a coat that helps the virus spread through the air.

The symptoms we get during a viral illness are often the body’s attempt to get rid of the virus and to minimize damage. Sneezing ejects the virus from the nose, cough from the lungs and throat, vomiting from the stomach, and diarrhea from the intestines.

What most people don’t realize is that the flu is not very common at all. The symptoms of influenza infection can be hard to distinguish from those caused by other viruses that trigger the common cold. Chances are that if you’re 30 or over, it may be a cold. That’s the message from research showing that people aged 30 or more can expect just two bouts of flu per decade for the rest of their lives. Since the two illnesses share some similar symptoms, and both come during “cold and flu season,” the two often run together in people’s minds, but they are not the same.

 

With more than 200 viruses known to cause influenza-like illness (ILI), a person can get a flu shot and still become sick with what is described as “the flu”. According to CDC data, almost 90% of all influenza-type illnesses are NOT caused by the influenza virus, thus influenza viruses are ONLY active 14% of the time.

The symptoms we get during a viral illness are often the body’s attempt to get rid of the virus and to minimize damage. Sneezing ejects the virus from the nose, cough from the lungs and throat, vomiting from the stomach, and diarrhea from the intestines. Fever makes it difficult for the virus to reproduce. The topic of viral illnesses will always remain somewhat confusing, since the body has a relatively small number of symptoms with which to respond to an ever-changing, wide variety of viruses. While colds and flus may overlap, the differences between them are important.

The common cold is centered in the nose.

Over 200 different types of viruses can cause a cold. Rhinoviruses, which means “nose viruses”, are the most common cause. Respiratory syncitial viruses (RSV) and a host of others can produce colds. Of note, influenza viruses occasionally cause illnesses with symptoms of the common cold.

The three most frequent symptoms of a cold are nasal stuffiness, sneezing, and runny nose. Throat irritation is often involved (but not with a red throat). Adults and older children with colds generally have minimal or no fever. Infants and toddlers often run a fever in the 100 to 102 degree range.

Depending on which virus is the culprit, the virus might also produce a headache, cough, postnasal drip, burning eyes, muscle aches, or a decreased appetite, but in a cold, the most prominent symptoms are in the nose. (By the way, forcing a child to eat with a decreased appetite due to a cold is both unnecessary and unhelpful, but do encourage drinking plenty).

If anything, using the term “common” with cold is an understatement. Colds are the most prevalent infectious disease. Children average 3 to 8 colds per year (younger children and boys are on the higher end of the range). Colds occur mostly in the winter (even in areas with mild winters). In areas where there is no winter, colds are most common in the rainy season. Parents get about half as many colds as their children do. Moms tend to get at least one more cold per year than Dads.

When someone has a cold, the nasal secretions are teeming with cold viruses. Coughing, drooling, and talking are all unlikely ways to pass a cold. But sneezing, nose-blowing, and nose-wiping are the means by which the virus spreads. You can catch a cold by inhaling the virus if you are sitting close to a sneeze, or by touching your nose, eyes, or mouth after you have touched something contaminated by infected nasal secretions.

Once you have “caught” a cold, the symptoms begin in 1 to 5 days. Usually irritation in the nose or a scratchy feeling in the throat is the first sign, followed within hours by sneezing and a watery nasal discharge.

Within one to three days, the nasal secretions usually become thicker and perhaps yellow or green — this is a normal part of the common cold and not a reason for antibiotics. During this period, children’s eardrums are usually congested, and there may well be fluid behind the ears — whether or not the child will end up with a true bacterial infection. Yes, antibiotics are too frequently prescribed for this as well.

The entire cold is usually over all by itself in about 7 days, with perhaps a few lingering symptoms (cough) for another week. If it lasts longer, consider another problem, such as a sinus infection or allergies.

While it lasts, the common cold is primarily a head cold. While you may feel tired or have aches, the illness is centered in the nose, and most of the symptoms are above the neck.

With the flu, you are sick all over.

The flu can be a much more serious illness. The most deadly recent worldwide outbreak was the flu epidemic at the beginning of this century and killed more than 20 million people. Even today, more than 36,000 people in the United States die from the flu each year — primarily those who are weak from advanced age or a major illness.

A single family of viruses — the influenza viruses — causes the flu. Most people get the flu once every year or two or three, and the illness is unpleasant but not usually dangerous. Unlike the common cold, both adults and children with the flu generally have a fever.

The flu can take many forms, but here we will describe the most typical:

Classically, the flu begins abruptly, with a fever in the 102 to 106 degree range (with adults on the lower end of the spectrum), a flushed face, body aches, and marked lack of energy. Some people have other systemic symptoms such as dizziness or vomiting. The fever usually lasts for a day or two, but can last five days.

Somewhere between day 2 and day 4 of the illness, the “whole body” symptoms begin to subside, and respiratory symptoms begin to increase. The virus can settle anywhere in the respiratory tract, producing symptoms of a cold, croup, sore throat, bronchiolitis, ear infection, and/or pneumonia.

The most prominent of the respiratory symptoms is usually a dry, hacking cough. Most people also develop a sore (red) throat and a headache. Nasal discharge and sneezing are not uncommon. These symptoms (except the cough) usually disappear within 4 to 7 days. Sometimes there is a second wave of fever at this time. The cough and tiredness usually lasts for weeks after the rest of the illness is over.

Inhaling droplets from coughs or sneezes is the most common way to catch the flu. Symptoms appear 1 to 7 days later (usually 2-3 days). The flu is airborne and quite contagious, and with its short incubation period it often slams into a community all at once, creating a noticeable cluster of school and work absences. The flu usually arrives in the winter months. Within 2 or 3 weeks of its arrival, most of the classroom has had it.

The other major difference between the common cold and the flu is that the flu is preventable. In any given year, two or three different strains of influenza virus cause most of the flu around the world.

9 Ways To Keep Your Immune System Strong Against The Cold Virus

1) USE NATURE’S FLU SHOT

Recipe:
8 Fresh Lemons
2 Fresh Oranges
2 Cups Pineapple Juice
2 Tbsp. Ground Ginger
1 Tbsp. Apple Cider Vinegar
1/2 tsp. Ground Tumeric
1/2 tsp. Cayenne Pepper
2 Tbsp. Raw Honey
1 bulb Garlic (can increase to 2 if tolerated)

Blend all ingredients and store in a glass jar. This recipe works exceptionally well if you start taking it just as you start to feel symptoms. At that point, take 1 cup 3 times per day until symptoms resolve.

2) LIVE IN A WARMER CLIMATE

Unfortunately, this is the number one and best preventive defense against the cold virus, but not much consolation to those living far from equator. Sorry Minnesota.

3) TAKE THE SUNSHINE VITAMIN

Vitamin D is shown to reduce the risk of flu to a third of what it would otherwise be. The correct daily dose of vitamin D3 for adults is approximately 5,000 IU/day, not the 200 to 600 IU recommended by the Institute of Medicine, the National Institutes of Medicine and the FDA. You may even be shocked to know that there are many physicians in both Canada and the United States who prescribe as much as 50,000 IU of vitamin D daily as a treatment for a long list of chronic diseases.

4) TAKE PROBIOTICS

Probiotics are live bacteria and yeasts that are good for your health, especially your digestive system. High potency Probiotic supplements such Laktokhan contain the exact ratio needed of live microorganisms that contribute to a natural healthy gut flora, which benefits health. Laktokhan helps to manage acute infectious diarrhea, and it reduces the risk of, and helps manage, antibiotic-associated diarrhea.

5) STAY AWAY FROM SUCROSE

Its ability to impair and depress the immune system is unparalleled.

6) STAY AWAY FROM ALL VACCINES, ESPECIALLY THE FLU SHOT

Flu vaccines still contain mercury and only work to depress the immune system. Regardless of what statistics your government has released, the actual chances of a flu vaccine preventing the flu are less than 4 percent

7) USE VIRUS-FIGHTING HERBS

Some of the best immune stimulants are anti-viral herbs. Virus-fighting herbs include purple coneflower, pot marigold and black elder. Other important antiviral herbs include yarrow herb (Achillea millefolium), hyssop herb (Hyssopus officinalis), lemon balm herb (Melissa officinalis), St. Johnswort (Hypericum perforatum) marjoram herb (Origanum majorana), oregano herb (Origanum vulgare), heal-all herb (Prunella vulgaris), rosemary herb (Rosmarinus officinalis) and blue vervain herb (Verbena hastata). It is important to begin taking the herbs as soon as you think you are getting sick. Take your formulation four to six times per day until you are better.

8) DETOX

Probably nothing else you do will make a greater difference in your overall health than a detox. The liver is so important to our well-being that many healers maintain that most diseases cannot develop in the body with a clean liver, so a liver detox is essential at times. Supplementing for liver health is vital but there are plenty of foods that can also detox the entire body.

9) DEEP ACTING IMMUNE TONICS

Another group of herbs that help to improve and optimize immune function are the immune tonics. These herbs are deeper acting than immune stimulants, but take longer to work. They include North American ginseng root (Panax quinquefolius), lacquered polypore or reishi mushroom (Ganoderma lucidum), artist’s conk (Ganoderma applanatum), Chinese milkvetch root (Astragalus membranaceus) and Siberian ginseng root (Eleutherococcus senticosus). Combine two or three immune tonics and take them three to four times per day for two to three months. Immune tonics are not suitable for treating infections in progress. They are used for preventive purposes or to optimize immune function and work best after first doing several cycles of immune stimulants.

There are also many other important antioxidant nutrients that support immune functioning. These include the carotenes, flavonoids and other polyphenols such as those found in green tea, grape seed, pine bark and various berry extracts. The best food sources of immune-enhancing nutrients are fresh fruits, vegetables, and mushrooms.

Sources:
plos.org
sciencedaily.com
cdc.gov

Also Read: The Top 12 Best Foods and Antioxidants While You Are Sick With A Cold or Flu

Dave Mihalovic writes for PreventDisease.com, where this article first appeared.




Could Your Fitbit Data Be Used To Deny You Health Insurance?

fit bitBy Andrew Boyd, University of Illinois at Chicago

Wearing a fitness tracking device could earn you cash from your health insurance company. At first, this sounds lucrative for the people who participate, and good for the companies, who want healthier insurance customers. But it’s not quite so simple.

Under the program, people who have certain health insurance coverage plans with UnitedHealthcare can elect to wear a Fitbit activity tracker and share their data with the insurance company. The data would be analyzed by Qualcomm Life, a company that processes medical data from wireless sensors for doctors, hospitals and insurance companies. Depending on how active participants are, as measured by the Fitbit, they could earn as much as US$1,500 toward health care services each year.

Interest in wearable fitness trackers is booming. More than half of people who already own one believe their devices will help them increase their life expectancy by 10 years – even though it’s impossible to actually know that because the clinical trials necessary would take at least a decade. Adding free money to the mix only makes the devices seem more attractive.

Before we celebrate this new partnership, though, it’s important to consider potential costs to the patients. We are not far from days when wearable health devices will be able to diagnose illnesses. While this is not legal now, if Obamacare were repealed, as Republicans have vowed to do, corporate partnerships like this one with UnitedHealthcare and Fitbit could pave the way for insurance companies to use fitness tracker data to deny coverage or hike up rates for consumers.

 

Diagnosis by device

There are positive elements to pairing wearable fitness trackers with health data.

An existing flu treatment medication works best when administered within 24 hours of onset of symptoms. But it’s difficult to catch the flu so quickly. A Fitbit could make that much easier. If the device measures a sudden decrease in the number of steps the person takes per day, plus perhaps an elevated resting heart rate, that could signal the presence of a virus.

If an insurance company has access to those data, it could send a message to the patient. If the person really was feeling poorly (rather than just having decided to watch TV all day or gotten snowed in), she could be directed to go to her doctor or an urgent care clinic. The person could see a health professional quickly, get an effective treatment and be on the mend sooner – thanks to her Fitbit data.

This ability will only increase in the future. There are more than 20 clinical trials using Fitbits underway, studying the role of activity in treating pediatric obesity and cystic fibrosis, and even how it can boost chemotherapy’s effectiveness and speed in recovery from surgery. As those studies are published in the coming years, researchers and doctors will get even better at identifying signals of specific diseases in wearable devices’ data.

Beyond the Fitbit

Similar efforts include one to detect influenza with a portable heart-rate monitor. Other researchers are analyzing voice and speech patterns to reveal neurological disorders and other diseases – and are using calls to a health insurance company as a data source. Even eye-tracking software could measure cognitive understanding, which could identify signs of dementia. Detecting symptoms earlier through Fitbit data could allow faster, more effective treatment.

The biggest push, though, is coming from Qualcomm, which has offered a $10 million prize to the team who can develop a specific type of multifunction medical device. Without involving a health care worker or facility, the device must be able to accurately diagnose 13 health conditions, including pneumonia and diabetes. It must also be able to capture in real time five vital signs, such as heart rate and breathing rate, and process the data locally.

The global competition is down to finalists; the winner will be announced early this year. That could bring wearables’ insights to doctors – and insurance companies – much sooner than we might think.

Cause for concern

Wearables’ data can definitely be used to help patients. But it could also be used to harm them, particularly in light of recent political developments. With the passage of the Affordable Care Act (also called Obamacare), insurance companies were barred from denying coverage to customers who had preexisting medical conditions at the time they signed up for insurance. If that rule is lifted by Republicans in Congress, insurers might look to wearable devices for evidence they could use to refuse to pay for patients’ health care.

This development would have enormous consequences. According to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, as many as half of all Americans have some sort of condition that could be used to exclude them from coverage, such as asthma, cancer or mental illness. Might insurance companies ask prospective customers for their Fitbit data, in addition to – or even in lieu of – a physical exam or laboratory tests? If that provision of Obamacare were repealed, could insurance companies set rates based on what those data show – or deny coverage entirely?

Car insurance companies are already using similar methods. Some insurers provide their customers with devices to install in their cars, measuring drivers’ behavior and calculating the risk involved – and the rate they pay for coverage.

Assembling the data

At the moment, the algorithms connecting activity tracker data and health conditions are still under development. But the biggest thing UnitedHealthcare would need is a large data set of customer Fitbit measurements, so it can link them to insurance claims. Its new cash-for-data program will begin to assemble that information.

As insurance customers signed up to use a Fitbit and get some extra cash for sharing their data, United would be able to match their Fitbit measurements with any health conditions identified in their medical records. Over time, the company could build up enough information from, say, people with asthma and people without it to be able to tell asthma patients apart by looking just at their data. The company could do this for other common diseases, too, or even adapt the algorithms from the contestants in the Qualcomm competition.

It’s unclear what the company would do with what it learned. But one possibility is that when evaluating a prospective customer, the company could look at his data and know all about any preexisting conditions. That might mean a person doesn’t get insurance, or has to pay more for coverage.

Making coverage decisions

The financial power of the health insurance industry is enormous. Not only are there many large companies, but they have the ability to determine whether a sick person gets well or doesn’t – and whether the cost is ruinous or merely expensive.

Would people feel able to object if insurance companies required customers to wear fitness trackers or other monitoring devices? Would new patients provide access to past data a Fitbit collected? Could an insurance company consider it fraud if a user didn’t wear the device?

If used – and regulated – well, the devices can help individual patients change their daily habits to become healthier, saving insurance companies money, and passing some of those savings along to customers. Alternatively, the devices could provide justification for denying coverage to the inactive or unhealthy, or boosting their insurance rates.

Consumers should not assume their insurance companies will use their data only to improve patient care. With millions of dollars on the line, insurers will be sorely tempted. With the legal landscape around preexisting conditions in flux, people should think twice before signing up.

Editor’s note: This article was updated to correct the spelling of UnitedHealthcare’s corporate name and the fact that Fitbits cannot detect tremors, and also to reiterate that the Affordable Care Act presently bars insurance companies from denying coverage to patients with preexisting conditions.

Andrew Boyd, Assistant Professor, Biomedical and Health Information Sciences,University of Illinois at Chicago

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

Image Caption and Credit: A log of your preexisting conditions? Timo Newton-Sims/timo_w2s/flickr, CC BY-SA

Originally Posted: http://www.naturalblaze.com/2017/02/could-your-fitbit-data-be-used-to-deny-you-health-insurance.html




YOU are remarkable! The Health Ranger reveals why your voice, your actions and your very existence really matters

One of the primary goals of the fakestream (fake news) media is to demoralize humanity and make people think their efforts to change the world for the better are hopeless. They want to create a society of obedient sheeple who are bullied into surrendering to the sick agendas of depopulation, destruction of liberty and anti-humanism.

Today, I’m releasing a podcast that explains why they’re WRONG. You are remarkable! Your voice, your actions and your very existence really matter.

You are more powerful than you can imagine. Sometimes, you just need to be reminded of it. That’s why I’ve released this podcast that starts off with a “thank you” to all Natural News supporters, then gets into the greater truth of why your life really matters so much in this world, even though it can often seem like you’re flailing in a sea of uncertainty.

Listen to my full podcast at The Health Ranger Report, or hear it below:

Source: http://www.naturalnews.com/2017-02-19-you-are-remarkable-the-health-ranger-reveals-why-your-voice-your-actions-and-your-very-existence-really-matters.html




Fight 9 Types Of Cancer Using Cannabis

Cannabis has been used for medicinal purposes for many centuries. And now science has proved that we can use it to treat various diseases, especially cancer.

The compounds in cannabis called cannabinoids have a drug-like effect on our bodies. Research shows that they can relief headaches, nausea, vomiting, and increase appetite. In fact, the FDA has approved use of dronabinol and nabilone (cannabinoids), to treat vomiting and nausea caused by chemotherapy.

The best thing about cannabinoids is that they fight cancer. Here are 9 cancers you can treat and prevent using cannabis.

Fight breast cancer

According to research, cannabidiol can prevent the growth of breast cancer. Another study confirmed that use of cannabinoids and THC slow growth of breast cancer cells. Cannabis can also reduce the size of breast cancer tumors.

Fight prostate cancer

Studies show that cannabis can kill prostate cancer cells and hinder their growth.

Fight brain cancer

Researchers say that brain tumors have a high resistance against treatment. But one study found that THC could safely reduce the size of tumor cells in brain cancer patients. Note that other cannabinoids have also been proven to fight brain cancer.

Fight liver cancer

According to research THC can lower risk of liver cancer and inhibit proliferation of liver cancer cells.

Fight colon cancer

In an animal study, researchers found that cannabinoids can fight inflammation in the colon and consequently lower risk of colon cancer.

Fight blood cancer

Cannabis can fight and prevent leukemia. In this study conducted by Swedish researchers, it was discovered that cannabinoids inhibit spread of blood cancer cells.

Fight lung cancer

According to a study conducted by Harvard researchers, cannabinoids (especially THC) can be used to treat lung cancer. In another study, cancer cells reduced in patients who used cannabinoids.

Fight oral cancer

You can kill oral tumors using cannabis, research shows.

Fight pancreatic cancer

Studies show that cannabis can hinder growth of pancreatic cancer cells and prevent it from spreading.

Go here to see the cannabis oil recipe that has been used to treat cancer in thousands of patients.

Source: http://blogs.naturalnews.com/fight-9-types-cancer-using-cannabis/

 




Thousands Of Dead Bees Wash Up On Florida Beach

South Florida beachgoers might not have expected to be stung by a bee in the surf, however, that’s exactly what’s been happening. In a rare occurrence, thousands of dead and dying bees have been washing up onto a popular beach in Naples, FL. Martha Duff, a Naples, FL resident told NBC Miami, “I’ve been stung a couple of times and at first, I didn’t know what it was and then I realized and then I had an allergic reaction.” Residents are confused and concerned asking questions like those posed by Duff: “Why are there bees? Where are they coming from? And why are they in a very specific area of the beach?” Some visitors to the area, local residents, as well as families with children are avoiding the beach due to concerns about bee stings, causing concern throughout the local community regarding the impact the unexpected event could have on tourism.

Local news station NBC2 reported that Naples City crews and facilities maintenance department were investigating the problem earlier this week in an effort to find answers to these questions. Reporters from NBC2 reached out to bee experts for an opinion on what might have caused this phenomenon. Local pesticide spraying could have forced the bees into the water though some have suggested that the swarm succumbed to exhaustion in transit over the ocean and simply dropped into the water.

 

However, the link between the use of certain pesticides and mass bee death is well-established, suggesting the blanket use of pesticides were to blame as pesticides are often sprayed overhead in Florida in significant amounts as part of the state’s mosquito control policy.

Great concern over the death of bees has arisen in recent years as bees are an essential component of many key ecosystems. Bees are responsible for a majority of pollination, which is essential to propagating nearly one-sixth of all flowering plant species world-wide. These plants account for approximately 400 different types of crops and other culinary plants. For instance, agricultural production relies on bees to pollinate broccoli, asparagus, melons, pumpkins, berries, nuts, apples and cherries just to name a few of the products which would cease to exist should bees disappear from the food chain.

What are your thoughts? Please comment below and share this news!


This article (Thousands of Dead Bees Wash Up on Florida Beach) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to the author and True Activist.




University Study Laments “Just The Facts” Aren’t Enough To Convince Women Of GMO Safety

gmosBy Brandon Turbeville

A recent series of focus groups conducted by researchers at the University of Adelaide is now demonstrating two things clearly: first, that Big Ag is growing increasingly desperate in its attempts to convince average consumers to continue purchasing their toxic products and remain unaware of any potential dangers. Second, that the unhealthy obsession with academia under the misapplied name of science is more akin to a religion than anything involving critical thought.

The results of the focus groups conducted by Dr. Heather Bray and Professor Rachel Ankeny was published in the journal New Genetics and Society and essentially acts as a brainstorming effort as to how big corporations through their minions at the university level can be more effective at convincing most people to trust GMOs.

The academics were primarily focused on women because as they state, previous studies have shown women as tending to be more opposed to GMOs than men. Like any good marketing strategist, the professors sought out the reason why.

“GM foods are an important issue for the community, and with women still playing greater roles in the provision of home care and food preparation, we need to better understand how women are thinking and what their values are in relation to these issues,”  Professor Rachel Ankeny said.

 

The results presented as represented in a press release by University of Adelaide called  “GM foods: Why presenting ‘just the facts’ won’t work” are as follows:

“All of the women with science backgrounds used evidence to support their stance, but the way they did so came as a surprise to us,” says co-author Dr Heather Bray, also from the University’s School of Humanities and Senior Research Associate in the Food Values Research Group.

“Women who had backgrounds in plant science said the lack of evidence of harm meant that GM food was safe to eat. But the women in health sciences said it was a lack of evidence of safety that made them cautious about consuming GM food. These perceptions are based on two very different concepts of risk, despite both groups being highly educated in science.

“For women without science backgrounds, GM food presented ‘unknown’ risks, and hence was to be avoided. There was a range of other issues apart from the science that arose in our study, a major one being a general lack of trust of science,” Dr Bray says.

Notice, however, that Bray attributes concerns of women without “science backgrounds” to a “general lack of trust of science.” Clearly, Bray, PhD that she is, is so wrapped up in the false appeal to authority that much of her career field rests upon, that she seems incapable of acknowledging the fact that women without science degrees might have legitimate concerns.

For Bray, an “uneducated woman” who distrusts GMOs is an uneducated woman who distrusts science. Obviously for Bray, GMOs equals science.

And this is at the crux of the recent and massive volley of propaganda regarding questions of health and safety, the environment and even culture. The debate, not about what has the most evidence, but what is presented as “science” or anti-science. What is considered “science” by most academics is not science at all. Likewise this is the case regarding the “science” presented in the mainstream media, government and corporations.

Burn belly fat by avoiding this one food (Ad)

Science, for the managing class does not mean the practice of rigorous study and experimentation – it means a politicial philosophy and a common idealogy held throughout these fields and industries. Thus, in the same way that religions tend to vary far away from what their original stories and figureheads represented, many science fetishists are not scientists or fans of science at all. They are fanatical adherents to an idealogy they scarcely understand. In 2017, the white lab coat is replacing the frock as a code of dress representing control of the mind. This is why we have individuals describing nature and science as the main driver for the existence of our world (earth, planetary system, ecosystem, etc.) while missing the fact that science is the study of those forces and not the force itself. For those who may decry religion, such a statement is eerily close to saying God created the world, but I digress…

What is even more telling about this specific study, however, is the fact that the researchers are so frightened of facts.

“It’s important for scientists to realise that science has economic, social, and cultural impacts, and if people are presented with ‘just the facts’, the discussion leaves out critical topics and values,” Professor Ankeny says.

“People — including people highly educated in science — come to these issues with their own ideas, experiences, and values, and they are not necessarily going to endorse particular scientific theories or applications based simply on facts being provided to them.”

In other words, Ankeny and presumably her patrons (or more accurately, the university’s patrons) are worried that the facts might not convince the average consumer. They conclude that the consumer may need a little nudging and that, admitted by the researchers themselves, is the entire purpose of the study. As for the patrons, we should mention in passing that the University of Adelaide is conducting so many studies on GMOs such as the one discussed in this article by virtue of funding by Big Ag corporations like DuPont who have a financial interest in ensuring that consumers aren’t frightened by the facts and continue to consume their products.

Indeed, in 2013 alone University of Adelaide took in $5.4 million dollars for industry linked research. It’s nice work if you can get it, even if you do have to live from grant to grant.

While this might seem like a conflict-of-interest to anyone who has interest in actual science, or the wellbeing of the public or the environment, that certainly won’t stop academics and their tiny community of colleagues from screaming heretic! and assembling the stakes no matter the fact that their “science” is grossly tainted with a conflict-of-interest, something that at one time would have prevented the study from being taken seriously.

But that was an older time where science was not as well developed. Concerns over conflict-of-interest are so passe. Just think about it. Scientists of that bygone era were busy concerning themselves with evidence and results when they could have been greasing their pockets, promoting products and lowering the standards of education to the point that a college degree is not so much a sign of education but a sign of someone who can successfully regurgitate dogma about racism, sexism, homophobia and a litany of questions about theories surrounding gender.

Science? Who needs it? Let’s let the industry do the hard work while the scientists sit back in their modern day temples and accept the first fruits of young college loans as a sacrifice of the people.

But before you think that I am using hyperbole, this study is not just about GMOs, the authors actually say that the information that they have gathered from these focus groups can be applied to other areas such as climate change, vaccines and water fluoridation. Even nuclear energy can benefit from understanding why some women just don’t buy the bullshit.

As Bray says, “shared values are an important foundation for science communication, and we hope that our work cancontribute to the development of better engagement strategies for both scientists and the public.”

Of course, by shared values, Bray means simply uniform indoctrination. In this case, “shared value” would be the worship of “experts” and the ability to scream science! in the face of anyone who dares question the status quo and to have that person sit silently mulling over their guilt and their inherent failure to be part of the “system of shared values.”

While it is not surprising that industry science would be investigating why consumers, especially women, (first you get the women, then you’ve got the children, so follow the men) it is a sign of confidence on the part of industry and a sign of shame on the general public that such statements would be uttered openly.

Yet the movement is at hand and the new religion is gathering more converts by the day. Not because it has better evidence or better reasoning but because it has “shared values” and many magnetic personalities behind it.

But this coordinated campaign is a much bigger agenda than this study or conflict-of-interest, Big Ag, academia and government. For that reason we certainly don’t want to put too much blame on the researchers of this study. After all, everyone has to eat, even if their food is genetically modified.


Image modified by Natural Blaze via thedailyenglishshow – CC BY, Clipartkid

Get a nifty FREE eBook – Like at Facebook, Twitter and Instagram.

Brandon Turbevillearticle archive here – is an author out of Florence, South Carolina. He is the author of six books, Codex Alimentarius — The End of Health Freedom, 7 Real Conspiracies,Five Sense Solutions and Dispatches From a Dissident, volume 1 and volume 2, The Road to Damascus: The Anglo-American Assault on Syria,and The Difference it Makes: 36 Reasons Why Hillary Clinton Should Never Be President. Turbeville has published over 950 articles dealing on a wide variety of subjects including health, economics, government corruption, and civil liberties. Brandon Turbeville’s podcast Truth on The Tracks can be found every Monday night 9 pm EST at UCYTV. He is available for radio and TV interviews. Please contact activistpost (at) gmail.com.

Originally posted: http://www.naturalblaze.com/2017/02/study-laments-just-the-facts-convince-women-gmos-safety.html




IPT: Hard on Cancer, Easy on Patients

Cancer is a world-wide problem but is there another approach to this disease that makes scientific sense? At LifeWorks Wellness Center, we think so. Here are the details.

What Makes a Cancer Cell Different?

A cell became cancerous because it has been damaged by various environmental toxins and infections and is no longer a good member of the body. In a way, its own plan is take over the body by sending its daughter cells all over as mercenary soldiers. Eventually this takes over the body and the person dies.

In order to accomplish this, the cancer cell must change its metabolism and anatomy. While a normal cell gets its energy using glucose and oxygen, the cancer cell prefers glucose and no oxygen. We call this anaerobic – or non oxygen using- metabolism.

When a normal cell uses glucose and oxygen it can produce 38 units of energy (called ATP). The cancer cell that makes energy without oxygen can only make 2 units of energy ATP. That’s not much energy, so to survive it needs a lot more sugar.

Now that sugar cannot just enter the cancer cell by itself. It must pass through a door and that door is opened by a natural hormone called insulin. Our body produces insulin when we eat a meal that has any kind of carbohydrate (sugar) in it. In order for the cancer cell to get more sugar, it manufactures many more insulin doors so it can take in much more sugar. Many cancer cells have as many as 10X the number of insulin doors.

We can take advantage of this in treating cancer.

Insulin Potentiation Therapy (IPT)

Here is how it works….

If we give the person with cancer, insulin, we can open the doors of the cell. Then, if we give chemotherapy, the cancer cells will take up many times more of the chemo than the healthy cells. Thus we can give a very small amount of the chemo (usually 10% of the regular dose) and flood the cancer cell, while the healthy cell only gets a very small dose. This small dose does not usually affect the healthy cell so bone marrow suppression and hair loss is uncommon. The immune system stays healthy and active while the cancer is attacked. 

To further support the immune system we use high dose Vitamin C, Ozone, minerals, lipoic acid and Pulsed electromagnetic field therapy. This combination of therapies and healing diets and detoxification may dramatically increase the cancer treatment effects. 

IPT – Treating Patients, Not Cancer

When a person is diagnosed with cancer it can be frightening because of the uncertainty of recovery and the difficulty of a treatment regimen that may require surgery, radiation and chemotherapy.

At LifeWorks our approach is different. We maximize the potential for recovery by optimizing the diet and lifestyle, enhancing the immune system with IV and oral nutritional supplementation, supporting detoxification, and utilizing low dose Insulin Potentiated Chemotherapy to reduce the tumor burden. We believe this approach gives patients who want a holistic approach to overcoming their cancer a viable option and an intelligent choice.

Dr. David Minkoff is co-founder and Medical Director LifeWorks Wellness Center. He is one of the first US doctors trained in IPT by Dr. Donato Garcia, the grandson of the discoverer of the technique.

At LifeWorks, we are continually helping patients either prevent or fight cancer and we would love to help you in any way we can. Call 727-466-6789 today for an appointment or more information.




Nature Comes To The Rescue Again – Peppertree Disarms Most Dangerous Bacteria

By Karen Foster

Superbugs are without a doubt a major threat affecting all health care systems. Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) infection is caused by a type of staph bacteria that’s become resistant to many of the antibiotics used to treat ordinary staph infections. Despite attempts by new antibiotics to neutralize the effects of MRSA, none have succeeded. But nature did.

The red berries of the Brazilian peppertree — a weedy, invasive species common in Florida — contain an extract with the power to disarm dangerous antibiotic-resistant staph bacteria, scientists at Emory University have discovered.

The journal Scientific Reports is publishing the finding, made in the lab of Cassandra Quave, an assistant professor in Emory’s Center for the Study of Human Health and in the School of Medicine’s Department of Dermatology.

“Traditional healers in the Amazon have used the Brazilian peppertree for hundreds of years to treat infections of the skin and soft tissues,” Quave says. “We pulled apart the chemical ingredients of the berries and systematically tested them against disease-causing bacteria to uncover a medicinal mechanism of this plant.”

 

The researchers showed that a refined, flavone-rich composition extracted from the berries inhibits formation of skin lesions in mice infected with MRSA. The compound works not by killing the MRSA bacteria, but by repressing a gene that allows the bacteria cells to communicate with one another. Blocking that communication prevents the cells from taking collective action, a mechanism known as quorum quenching.

“It essentially disarms the MRSA bacteria, preventing it from excreting the toxins it uses as weapons to damage tissues,” Quave says. “The body’s normal immune system then stands a better chance of healing a wound.”

While infections are becoming increasingly difficult to beat, no new class of antibiotic has been discovered since 1987. In contrast, a new infection emerges on an almost yearly basis.

The discovery may hold potential for new ways to treat and prevent antibiotic-resistant infections, a growing international problem. Antibiotic-resistant infections annually cause at least two million illnesses and 23,000 deaths in the United States, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The United Nations last year called antibiotic-resistant infections a “fundamental threat” to global health and safety, citing estimates that they cause at least 700,000 deaths each year worldwide, with the potential to grow to 10 million deaths annually by 2050.

Bacteria are rife in conventionally grown US meat including antibiotic-resistant bacteria also known as superbugs. Almost half of beef, chicken, pork and turkey in samples tested from US grocery stores contained staph bacteria reported the Los Angeles Times in 2011 including the resistant MRSA staph bacterium (methicillin-resistant S. aureus). Pork tested by Consumer Reports in 2013 also contained MRSA and four other kinds of resistant bacteria.

Blasting deadly bacteria with drugs designed to kill them is helping to fuel the problem of antibiotic resistance. Some of the stronger bacteria may survive these drug onslaughts and proliferate, passing on their genes to offspring and leading to the evolution of deadly “superbugs.”

In contrast, the Brazilian peppertree extract works by simply disrupting the signaling of MRSA bacteria without killing it. The researchers also found that the extract does not harm the skin tissues of mice, or the normal, healthy bacteria found on skin.

“In some cases, you need to go in heavily with antibiotics to treat a patient,” Quave says. “But instead of always setting a bomb off to kill an infection, there are situations where using an anti-virulence method may be just as effective, while also helping to restore balance to the health of a patient. More research is needed to better understand how we can best leverage anti-virulence therapeutics to improve patient outcomes.”

Quave, a leader in the field of medical ethnobotany and a member of the Emory Antibiotic Resistance Center, studies how indigenous people incorporate plants in healing practices to uncover promising candidates for new drugs.

The Brazilian peppertree (Schinus terebinthifolia) is native to South America but thrives in subtropical climates. It is abundant in much of Florida, and has also crept into southern areas of Alabama, Georgia, Texas and California. Sometimes called the Florida holly or broad leaf peppertree, the woody plant forms dense thickets that crowd out native species.

“The Brazilian peppertree is not some exotic and rare plant found only on a remote mountaintop somewhere,” Quave says. “It’s a weed, and the bane of many a landowner in Florida.”

From an ecological standpoint, it makes sense that weeds would have interesting chemistry, Quave adds. “Persistent, weedy plants tend to have a chemical advantage in their ecosystems, which help may protect them from diseases so they can more easily spread in a new environment.”

Also Read: 1000-Year-Old Recipe Can Kill Antibiotic-Resistant Superbugs

Karen Foster writes for PreventDisease.com, where this article first appeared.

Image Credit: Pixabay.com




Alarming new study warns that Chinese air pollution is already killing people

Air pollution in China is nothing new; in late 2015, the country was even forced to issue a “red alert” for the high levels of pollution. You know the air quality is bad when you have to close schools and place a travel ban for half the cars in a city. An assessment of Beijing’s daily air quality index even showed that the air was “unhealthy” to breathe 49 percent of days, between the years 2008 and 2015. In those seven years, Beijing’s air was only rated as “good” for a dismal 2 percent of the time.

Now, new research shows that the air in China is so bad that it is actually contributing to cardiovascular and respiratory disease-related deaths.  The air is making people sick and killing them.

In what is described by Science Daily as the “largest epidemiological study conducted in the developing world,” scientists have concluded that as citizens are increasingly exposed to small-sized particulate in the air across 272 of China’s cities, the incidence of cardiovascular and respiratory disease-related mortality increases as well.

The study was recently published online by the American Thoracic Society’s American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, prior to the printed release.

Shocking findings reveal immense pollution in China

The study’s senior author Maigeng Zhou, PhD, is also the  Deputy Director of the National Center for Chronic and Non-communicable Disease Control and Prevention at the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention. Zhou explains, “Fine particulate [PM2.5] air pollution is one of the key public health concerns in developing countries including China, but the epidemiological evidence about its health effects is scarce.” Zhou says that a new monitoring network has allowed them to assess and evaluate short-term associations between PM2.5 and cause-specific deaths across China.

The research team discovered that the national average of PM2.5 exposure in China was a devastating 56 micrograms per cubic liter (μg/m3)  — more than five times higher than the World Health Organization’s air quality guidelines of 10 μg/m3 , annually.

Their findings also revealed that for every 10 μg/m3 increase in PM2.5, there was a 0.22 percent increase in all non-accident related death. The same increase in PM2.5 exposure was also associated with 0.29 percent increase in all respiratory death, and a 0.38 percent increase in mortality specifically from chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, which is also known as COPD.

The team also found that cities with higher average temperatures exhibited a stronger association between PM2.5 and mortality. The researchers believe that this may be because people living in warmer climates may spend more time outside and open their windows at home more often.

Study co-author Haidong Kan, MD, a Professor of Public Health at Fudan University in China, believes that their findings may be helpful for forming new public health policies and ambient air quality standards in developing countries, and will hopefully help reduce PM2.5-related disease occurrence.

“Further massive investigations, especially looking at the long-term effect studies, are needed to confirm our results and to identify the most toxic components of PM2.5 in China,” Kan added.

Air pollution deaths in China may keep rising

The United States-based Health Effects Institute (HEI) found that in 2015, there were some 4.2 million deaths attributable to air pollution across 195 different countries. Of those, half of the deaths occurred in China and India alone.  China individually represented roughly 25 percent of global air pollution-related deaths in 2015, with 1.1 million instances of pollution-related mortality.

In 2016,  the Paris-based International Energy Agency released a report that estimated China’s air pollution death toll will continue to increase. The report states that Chinese pollution will extend far into the future, and they expect that mortality attributable to air pollution in China will increase along with it, even in spite of the countries efforts to quell their environmental contamination.

They expect that the air pollution-related death rate in China will reach 2.5 million deaths per year, by the year 2040.

It’s clear that China needs to take a more stringent approach to their environmental clean-up efforts if they want to make a difference. Countless scientific studies have shown that air pollution in China (and worldwide) is a growing problem that has substantial, negative health effects; something needs to be done, before it’s too late.

Sources:

ScienceDaily.com

BBC.com

CBC.ca

WHO.int

RFA.org

Originally Posted: http://www.naturalnews.com/2017-02-14-alarming-new-study-warns-that-chinese-air-pollution-is-already-killing-people.html
Author: