Confirmed: Fukushima disaster contaminated ocean with 50 million times normal radiation, leaks still ongoing

(NaturalNews) Things are suddenly heating up again with Fukushima. As we reported yesterday, the southern wall of Fukushima reactor #4 apparently collapsed over the past few days, calling into question the structural integrity of the remainder of the containment building (http://www.naturalnews.com/034387_Fukushima_nuclear_reactor_collapse.html). The mainstream media has said absolutely nothing about this development, continuing its pattern of downplaying news involving Fukushima, radiation or the flawed structure of nuclear power plants. This is hardly surprising, given that many of the largest media outlets (such as NBC and MSNBC) are owned by corporations such as General Electric, the designer of many of the world’s nuclear power plants. (http://www.freepress.net/ownership/chart/main) Photos of the failed structure have emerged on Enenews.com, where a report explains that a once-intact wall is now essentially “missing” and that further degradation of the structure could lead to mass evacuations in Japan (http://enenews.com/report-confirmed-wall-reactor-4-lost-south-side-photos). As this report is still not confirmed by other sources, we continue to take this with a sense of caution here at NaturalNews. We will continue to monitor the situation and report any relevant developments. 50 million times higher radiation levels What has hit the mainstream media, however, is a report entitled Impacts of the Fukushima Nuclear Power Plants on Marine Radioactivity , authored by Ken Buesseler, Michio Aoyama, and Masao Fukasawa (http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/es202816c). This report, published in Environmental Science and Technology , reveals that levels of radioactive cesium reached 50 million times normal levels in the ocean water off the coast of the Fukushima Dai-ichi facility. Even more concerning, the abstract of this paper concludes, “…the concentrations through the end of July remain higher than expected implying continued releases from the reactors or other contaminated sources, such as groundwater or coastal sediments.” This, of course, contradicts mainstream media reports which for the most part stated that the radiation was “contained” and was not leaking directly into the environment. Only the alternative press has covered the real story on Fukushima, which has now become the worst radiological accident in the history of human civilization. This same study ultimately concludes that this level of radiation contamination of the ocean is essentially harmless, stating, “…dose calculations suggest minimal impact on marine biota or humans due to direct exposure in surrounding ocean waters, though considerations for biological uptake and consumption of seafood are discussed and further study is warranted.” That’s a conclusion to be viewed with skepticism and caution, of course, as it says on one hand that “it’s no problem” and yet on the other hand, maybe you shouldn’t eat the seafood because we really don’t know what quantity and concentration of radioactive elements may be ingested and concentrated by seafood sources. Radioactive strontium admittedly leaked into the ocean Another important development now surfacing is that TEPCO has finally admitted that alarming quantities of radioactive strontium (which has roughly a 30-year half life) have leaked into the ocean — and that the leaks are ongoing! According to TEPCO, which has repeatedly and deliberately lied to the public in order to downplay any “bad news” about radiological leaks, “26 billion becquerels of radioactive materials” have leaked into the ocean due to the Fukushima accident. (http://www.japantoday.com/category/national/view/radioactive-water-containing-strontium-leaked-into-pacific-tepco) “This suggests that the releases have not ended, so that is of concern,” said Ken Buesseler from the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution . “If the contaminants end up in the marine sediments / muds, then they will remain there for decades to come, and thus potentially be of concern for benthic biota and consumers of benthic fish/shell fish, i.e. any local filter feeders near the source waters at the coast.” (http://www.smartplanet.com/blog/intelligent-energy/fukushima-ocean-radiation-could-pose-sleeper-threat/11042) The worst may be yet to come What’s clear from all this is that: • The Fukushima facility remains highly unstable and could dramatically worsen, especially if another earthquake or tsunami strikes the area and causes further degradation of the structural integrity of containment buildings which still house nuclear fuel rods. • The Fukushima catastrophe is, without question, the most massive radiological disaster ever recorded in human history. • The mainstream media has consistently (intentionally?) downplayed the severity of the Fukushima disaster, perhaps to try to calm fears by denying the true extent of the problem. • TEPCO routinely and habitually lied about the status of Fukushima during the meltdown and in the days and weeks following that meltdown. • We therefore cannot rely upon official sources to accurately inform us of the actual status of the Fukushima facility. The risk of being misled by those official sources is very high. If you want the truth, don’t trust official sources Under such circumstances, the wise thing to do is stay informed and get prepared in case the Fukushima situation suddenly worsens. Hopefully everyone in North America knows by now that another release of radiation from Fukushima could widely contaminate the West Coast of the United States with radioactive fallout. Given that government agencies in both the United States and Japan have altered the definitions of allowable radiation exposure limits (http://naturalnews.com/031963_radiation_exposure.html), it hardly seems reasonable to think that these government are erring on the side of caution. In fact, by all accounts these governments are proactively working to downplay the severity of any future radiological event by claiming that levels of contamination previously considered poisoning are now suddenly “within safe limits.” But within whose definition of safe limits? After all, the U.S. government also thinks it’s perfectly safe for you to drink fluoride, microwave your body at TSA checkpoints, eat genetically modified organisms, get yourself repeatedly injected with chemical adjuvants in vaccines and drink aspartame. Aw, c’mon. What’s a little radiation on top of all that?

FDA withdraws approval for breast cancer drug Avastin after declaring it medically useless, but says doctors can still prescribe it

(NaturalNews) Several years after declaring it to be not only medically useless but also dangerous, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has officially withdrawn approval for the $100,000 breast cancer drug Avastin. In a statement, FDA Commissioner Margaret Hamburg said that Avastin has never been proven to be safe or effective, but also in the same breath noted that doctors can still prescribe the drug if they feel like it. “FDA recognizes how hard it is for patients and their families to cope with metastatic breast cancer and how great a need there is for more effective treatments,” Hamburg is quoted as saying by The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review . “But patients must have confidence that the drugs they take are both safe and effective for their intended use.” After being rapidly approved for use by the FDA back in 2007, Avastin quickly generated more than $1.7 billion for its producer Genentech within the first year. When the FDA finally got around to actually reviewing the drug after approving it, though, the agency discovered that Avastin does not lengthen the lives of breast cancer patients, and that it carries with it severe side effects that include death (http://www.naturalnews.com/023524_drug_avastin_cancer.html). In her 69-page report on Avastin, Hamburg wrote that Avastin’s side effects include high blood pressure, bleeding, heart attack or heart failure, and the development of perforations in the nose, stomach and intestines. In at least one case, a patient taking Avastin has died from infection. But the way the FDA is handling the situation shows how blatantly biased it is towards the drug industry. Avastin was proven dangerous and ineffective several years ago, but the FDA allowed it to remain on the market. Now, it has decided to withdraw approval for Avastin, but is still allowing it to remain on the market. If Avastin had been a dietary supplement in the same predicament, the agency would have immediately withdrawn its approval (if it would have approved it in the first place), and demanded that it be removed from the market. The agency likely would have also shut down Avastin’s manufacturer, as it has done a lot worse to supplement companies that produce safe and effective natural treatments. Sources for this article include: http://www.lef.org/news/LefDailyNews.htm?NewsID=11921&Section=Disease

FDA withdraws approval for breast cancer drug Avastin after declaring it medically useless, but says doctors can still prescribe it

(NaturalNews) Several years after declaring it to be not only medically useless but also dangerous, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has officially withdrawn approval for the $100,000 breast cancer drug Avastin. In a statement, FDA Commissioner Margaret Hamburg said that Avastin has never been proven to be safe or effective, but also in the same breath noted that doctors can still prescribe the drug if they feel like it. “FDA recognizes how hard it is for patients and their families to cope with metastatic breast cancer and how great a need there is for more effective treatments,” Hamburg is quoted as saying by The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review . “But patients must have confidence that the drugs they take are both safe and effective for their intended use.” After being rapidly approved for use by the FDA back in 2007, Avastin quickly generated more than $1.7 billion for its producer Genentech within the first year. When the FDA finally got around to actually reviewing the drug after approving it, though, the agency discovered that Avastin does not lengthen the lives of breast cancer patients, and that it carries with it severe side effects that include death (http://www.naturalnews.com/023524_drug_avastin_cancer.html). In her 69-page report on Avastin, Hamburg wrote that Avastin’s side effects include high blood pressure, bleeding, heart attack or heart failure, and the development of perforations in the nose, stomach and intestines. In at least one case, a patient taking Avastin has died from infection. But the way the FDA is handling the situation shows how blatantly biased it is towards the drug industry. Avastin was proven dangerous and ineffective several years ago, but the FDA allowed it to remain on the market. Now, it has decided to withdraw approval for Avastin, but is still allowing it to remain on the market. If Avastin had been a dietary supplement in the same predicament, the agency would have immediately withdrawn its approval (if it would have approved it in the first place), and demanded that it be removed from the market. The agency likely would have also shut down Avastin’s manufacturer, as it has done a lot worse to supplement companies that produce safe and effective natural treatments. Sources for this article include: http://www.lef.org/news/LefDailyNews.htm?NewsID=11921&Section=Disease

B vitamins and omega fat ratio are critical to prevent Alzheimer’s disease

(NaturalNews) Proper nutritional status, attained by consuming a healthy diet teamed with natural vitamins and minerals along with optimization of omega fat lipid ratios, can help to prevent cognitive decline associated with Alzheimer’s disease (AD) pathology. Researchers studying the effects of nutrition at Oxford University in England found that daily supplementation with folic acid and vitamins B6 and B12 lowered levels of homocysteine, a known risk factor leading to decline in cognition and memory. Further evidence published in the journal Molecular Nutrition and Food Research explains that a disproportionate ratio of omega-6 to omega-3 fatty acids plays a crucial role in the development of AD in later life. Cellular nutritional saturation from diet and appropriate supplementation with B vitamins and omega-3 fats may provide the cornerstone to prevent this most feared memory-robbing disease. Reporting in the International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry , scientists examined the proposed link between elevated homocysteine levels and cognitive decline. Homocysteine has already been shown to dramatically increase the risk of heart disease and heart attack in prior studies. Researchers examined 266 people over the age of 70 with established mild cognitive impairment, and broke them into two groups. One group was supplemented with folic acid, vitamin B6 and B12, vitamin cofactors that lower homocysteine levels, while the second group received a placebo. B Vitamin Supplementation Shown to Lower Homocysteine by 30% and to Slow Brain Atrophy Brain wasting or atrophy is a common sign of cognitive impairment and is closely associated with Alzheimer’s dementia. The rate of brain atrophy is increased by higher concentrations of homocysteine in the blood and brain tissue. Researchers examining the results of this study found that the group, which supplemented with B vitamins for a period of two years, experienced a 30% reduction in homocysteine levels. They found dramatic improvements in mental tests including global cognition and episodic memory (69% improvement in word recall memory) compared to the control group. The standard American diet (SAD) includes large quantities of oxidized omega-6 fats from fried and processed foods when compared to omega-3 fat consumption (from fish, nuts and seeds). The ratio of omega-6 to omega-3 fatty acids ranges from 20:1 to as high as 50:1 (ideal range is no more than 4:1), creating a perpetual degree of inflammation throughout the body. Researchers have determined that this imbalance creates a disturbance in brain chemistry affecting neurotransmitter balance and electrical firing in the brain that sets the stage for amyloid tangles and cognitive decline. Reestablishing omega fat homeostasis by balancing toward a 1:1 intake ratio and by correcting B vitamin nutritional deficiencies provide deep insight toward understanding and controlling the development of many forms of dementia including Alzheimer’s disease. Most middle aged adults will want to include a high potency B vitamin supplement (preferably formulated from natural food sources) and to include omega-3 fats from diet or fish oil consumption to lower dementia risk factors. Sources for this article include: http://www.nutraingredients.com/Research/New-review-backs-nutrient-modification-for-Alzheimer-s-prevention/ http://www.chemeurope.com/en/publications/276027/dietary-lipids-and-their-oxidized-products-in-alzheimer-s-disease.html http://www.nutraingredients.com/Research/B-vitamins-may-slow-cognitive-decline-Oxford-University-study/ http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/gps.2758/abstract

USDA gives half million in taxpayer dollars to AquaBounty to promote GM salmon

(NaturalNews) Biotechnology company AquaBounty has had quite a bit of trouble getting quick regulatory approval for its genetically-modified (GM) salmon, called AquAdvantage, because the “frankenfish” is not always sterile as claimed and could spread its corrupted genes into the wild. So in order to help move things along, the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) has awarded the company nearly $500,000 in taxpayer funds to conduct research on how to fully sterilize the fish, according to Grist . Neither the USDA nor the FDA seem to care that the public remains overwhelmingly opposed to AquaBounty’s GM salmon regardless of whether or not it is sterile. Not only do consumers not want to eat the fake fish, which has been shown to be highly allergenic, but they also most certainly do not want their hard-earned cash handed over to AquaBounty on a silver platter to ensure that the unwanted salmon eventually makes it to grocery store shelves (http://www.naturalnews.com/GM_salmon.html). But this is exactly what the USDA has done. While AquaBounty’s president and CEO Ronald L. Stotish sneers at those who rightfully oppose his company’s intention to force dangerous GM salmon into the food supply against the will of the people, the USDA is busy giving the company the people’s money. And eventually, this generous donation may result in AquAdvantage getting full approval, rather than plunging into oblivion as it was on course to do. In other words, American taxpayers are now subsidizing the research and development that AquaBounty itself cannot afford to undertake. The company, after all, has already lost $2.8 million and three board members since its inception, as it has failed to produce a safe product that appeals to, well, anyone. So now the government is artificially propping up the failing company with a cash infusion to ensure that AquAdvantage eventually makes its way to market. The US government, of course, has absolutely no business using taxpayer dollars to fund the development of a GM fish that nobody in the public wants to see released, and definitely does not want to consume. AquaBounty was well on its way to extinction, as it should have been, until the nation’s corrupt regulatory bodies decided to intervene and change its course. Commenting on the FDA’s potential approval of the GM salmon, regardless of whether or not a sterile version is developed, Colin O’Neil, regulatory policy analyst for the Center for Food Safety, said it best. Grist quotes him as saying that it is “reckless for the FDA to approve genetically engineered salmon given the large number of environmental, human health, animal welfare and economic risks that have been raised by scientists, members of Congress and members of the FDA’s own Advisory Committee.” Sources for this story include: http://www.grist.org/food/2011-09-29-feds-help-gmo-salmon-swim-upstream

Steve Jobs dead at 55, his life ended prematurely by chemotherapy and radiotherapy for cancer

(NaturalNews) It’s is extremely saddening to see the cost in human lives that modern society pays for its false belief in conventional medicine and the cancer industry in particular. Visionary Steve Jobs died today after being treated for cancer with chemotherapy at the Stanford Cancer Center in Palo Alto, California . In recent months, he appeared in public photos as a frail shadow of his former self. The thin legs, sunken cheek bones and loss of body weight are all classic signs of total body toxicity observed in chemotherapy and radiotherapy patients. Steve Jobs reportedly underwent both. His chemotherapy treatments at the Standard Cancer Center are now well known (http://www.marksmarketanalysis.com/2011/02/steve-jobs-on-chemo-may-have-only-weeks.html), and his secret radiotherapy treatments in Switzerland have now been made public by former Apple executive Jerry York. Jerry York confided in Fortune Magazine about Steve Jobs’ secret flight to Switzerland to receive radiotherapy treatment for his cancer (http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2011/01/18/steve-jobs-went-to-switzerland-in-search-of-cancer-treatment/). Fortune Magazine kept this secret until Jerry York died in March of 2010 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerry_York_(businessman)), after which Fortune Magazine decided its confidentiality agreement with York no longer applied, and it published details about Jobs’ secret visits to Switzerland (http://gawker.com/5737092/steve-jobss-cancer-secret-revealed-following-sources-death). Fortune Magazine also repeats another fact about Steve Jobs that rarely appears in the press: Namely, that Steve Jobs underwent a secret liver transplant which raised eyebrows among many who wondered why a member of the wealthy business elite could receive a liver transplant essentially on demand while everybody else had to wait on a long transplant list (http://articles.cnn.com/2009-06-24/health/liver.transplant.priority.lists_1_organ-transplant-liver-transplant-united-network?_s=PM:HEALTH). In January of this year, Roc4Life.com reported: “Jobs’ medical leave is due to cancer, but no one knows whether it stems from his 2004 battle with pancreatic cancer or complications from a secret liver transplant in 2009. According to recently deceased off-the-record source from Apple’s Jerry York, Jobs took an unpublicized flight to Switzerland in 2009 to undergo unusual treatment at the University of Basel. Switzerland’s University of Basel known for their radiotherapy treatments for neuroendocrine cancer and it’s unavailability in the U.S. Experts say Jobs’ pancreatic cancer has a history of reappearing and spreading to vital organs at a slow-growing pace, which probably explains the medical leave.” In other words, there is no question that Steve Jobs underwent multiple conventional cancer treatments , including surgery, chemotherapy and radiotherapy. In the end, however, even Steve Jobs could not overturn the laws of biochemistry. When you poison the human body, the result is the deterioration and eventual shut down of the body. Chemotherapy does not work ! This fact should now be obvious, and yet every year, more and more people choose chemotherapy to their own demise — people like Farrah Fawcett, Peter Jennings, Patrick Swayze, Michael Douglas and many others (http://www.naturalnews.com/027047_cancer_therapy_chemotherapy.html). Don’t they see that conventional cancer treatments do not work? Losing Steve Jobs is a loss of a great visionary It is striking that people who are geniuses in their own fields can understand so little about the fundamentals of human health. Steve Jobs was arguably one of the most influential visionaries of our time, and his development of human-technology interfaces revolutionized modern computing. Had he achieved another twenty years of life — and lived to 75 — he would have no doubt contributed to our world in even more profound and positive ways. Yet his remaining life was stolen from him by the cancer industry and its poisons. This is yet another frustrating example of how the modern medical system harms our society. It steals from us the longevity of visionary individuals who have so much more to offer our world in terms of creativity and innovation. Of course, you can’t blame the cancer industry for causing Jobs’ cancer in the first place. Some other cause had to have been present to get the cancer growing — probably a combination of nutritional deficiencies and exposure to environmental toxins. And yet the cancer establishment says nothing to people about correcting obvious nutritional deficiencies that lead to cancer, even when most cancers can be prevented for mere pennies a day. The simple combination of vitamin D and selenium , if taken in combination, could probably prevent more than 80% of all cancers in America (http://www.naturalnews.com/021892.html). Yet the American Cancer Society and all the mainstream cancer non-profits don’t dare advocate vitamin D or selenium. If solutions were readily available to everyone, how would the cancer industry maintain its profitability? The dark side of Apple This gets us to the dark side of Apple, because just as the cancer industry is a greed-driven monstrosity that incessantly seeks profits at the expense of others, Apple has increasingly become a corporation that has routinely chosen for-profit domination over public service. This is not so much about Steve Jobs himself as it is about those who surrounded him and ultimately exploited his talents for their own selfish agendas. Apple iPhones, for example, were recently exposed as secret tracking devices that record your location and upload that data back to Apple headquarters (http://www.naturalnews.com/032239_iPhone_tracking.html). Alex Jones even issued a special report just a few weeks ago, asking the important question: “Is Apple Evil?” (http://www.infowars.com/is-apple-evil-a-message-to-steve-jobs-infowars-special-report-w-alex-jones/) Apple has been caught intimidating journalists, blocking iPhone apps that allow people to make charitable donations, and even running manufacturing facilities in China with such poor wages and working conditions that workers there commit suicide in record numbers (http://www.infowars.com/is-apple-evil/) Apple has become the Big Brother it once opposed But most of all, Apple operates with a mindset of total monopolistic domination , requiring apps to be sold through its iTunes, where Apple takes an unfair cut of every sale. In fact, Apple has come to very much resemble the Orwellian Big Brother image that once made it famous in its January 22, 1984 Superbowl ad, which positioned Apple’s Macintosh computer as freeing people from tyranny. Watch that ad at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HhsWzJo2sN4 What’s so striking about this commercial is that, in many ways, Apple has become the very thing it once claimed to oppose — domineering control, automaton conformity, and centralized command over the expression of musicians and programmers alike. The text of the ad says, “On January 24th, Apple Computer will introduce Macintosh. And you’ll see why 1984 won’t be like “1984.” Thanks to companies like Apple, 2011 sure is a lot like 1984. A clever response to all this appears in a parody video that pits Steve Jobs in that “1984″ video as a way to show that Apple acts more like Big Brother with each passing day: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7zhHwim6cV8 Anyone who has ever owned an iPhone knows all about being locked into a technology from which there is no free choice to do what you want with it. Why aren’t iPhones sold as “unlocked” from the get-go? Why do you have to hack your own phone just to free it from Apple’s domineering control? And why does your phone track your every move even without your permission or knowledge? Live by principle, because that’s the only thing you take with you You see, the more you look into the story of Steve Jobs and Apple, the deeper it all gets. And that brings us back to Steve Jobs and the topic of principles and ethics . All the wealth in the world couldn’t save Steve Jobs from cancer, of course. Here’s a question for you: In his final days of life, would Steve Jobs have traded every bit of wealth he owned for a healthy new liver and pancreas? You bet he would! And yet he couldn’t. Because it doesn’t work that way. When it comes to organ health, there are no second chances . You’re given one set of organs to live with, and if you can’t figure out how to take care of those with nutrition, healthy foods and avoidance of environmental toxins, all the money in the world can’t save you. Importantly, you don’t take money with you when you die , so collecting dollars or cars or even gold is little more than a short-term distraction set in the physical world. What you do take is a karmic record of your actions ; a “universal log file” of your principles and ethics, if you will. And that’s what matters in whatever experience or reality awaits us beyond this one, whether you believe in Heaven, or reincarnation, or ascension to higher plane of existence. Was Steve Jobs a positive influence on our world? Yes, I think so I don’t pretend to be qualified to judge Steve Jobs on all his actions here on our planet, but the only honest question in helping to answer that is this: “Is our world better off because of Steve Jobs’ influence? Or is it worse off?” On the whole, I believe Steve Jobs himself was a creative visionary whose talents eventually became co-opted by less-than-ethical corporate interests which operated outside his core intentions. This is precisely the reason why brilliant people should always be wary of “investors” or men wearing suits, because the whole purpose of venture capital is to grant people who don’t know how to really create wealth a way to sink their claws into those who do. This is why I have consistently and successfully resisted all venture capital and buyout attempts targeting NaturalNews. To bring in big money people would destroy the heart and soul of what NaturalNews is all about, in the same way that all the big money people who eventually surrounded Steve Jobs ultimately compromised what was originally an uplifting vision for human freedom and expression. (Even in the health industry, I can’t even tell you all the stories of brilliant, visionary people who have been betrayed by investors and corporate interests. It happens almost 100% of the time.) The real lesson in Steve Jobs’ passing, then, is not “oh wow look at all these cool gadgets he left us” — because that’s the juvenile view — but rather “what can we learn from Steve Jobs about staying authentic in our own lives and our own decisions?” What I’ve learned from Steve Jobs is that staying true to your vision is far more important than being commercially successful or collecting material wealth. Walking a path that gets your face on the cover of business magazines requires too much compromise of ethics and principles. The business community, after all, doesn’t usually celebrate real geniuses who share things with the world and make nothing from it. It only celebrates those who find clever ways to extract billions of dollars from the hands of consumers. In fact, you might even say that the business world actually punishes those who bring real innovation to the world — people such as free energy inventors , most of which you have never heard about because they ended up mysteriously dead before they could bring their inventions to market. Steve Jobs was celebrated because his innovations were consistent with the culture of mass consumerism and unbridled corporate greed — buy more computing stuff, and buy it often! That makes investors rich, and that’s the name of the game in the business world. Steve Jobs was celebrated, in other words, not for who he was on the inside, but for all the other people who got rich off him along the way. And that’s a shame, because even after his passing, I feel like we never knew the real Steve Jobs at all — the Steve Jobs who probably wanted to make the world a better place yet repeatedly found his talents being distorted and leveraged for bottom-line profits in a culture of greed that only cares about finding new ways to convince consumers to part with their money. Steve Jobs may be dead, but the domineering greed of those who extorted his talent lives on. The iPhone 5 will probably be out in a year or so, so we can all throw away our old electronics which end up in a toxic landfill somewhere, and then replace it with new electronics made in a slave labor factory in China. Isn’t technology great? Either way, may Steve Jobs rest in peace. May his name never be used for commercial exploitation again.

Infant allergies found to be influenced by diet of mother

(NaturalNews) A study conducted by scientists at INRA research institute in Rennes, France, and recently published in the Journal of Physiology, has revealed a possible connection between the mother’s diet and her baby’s immune development. The scientists looked at a specific group of polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs), which can be obtained from raw, vegan sources, such as flaxseed, chia seed and walnut oil, and how it models the baby’s gut. If the mother’s diet is high in such fats, the gut of the baby will develop significantly different from that of a baby whose mother did not consume sufficient amounts of polyunsaturated fatty acids. PUFAs are responsible for training the immune system to adequately respond to the presence of bacteria and other pathogens, successfully reducing the incidence of allergies in infants. Dr Gaelle Boudry, who led the research team for this study, pointed out: “There is intense research interest in maternal diet during pregnancy. In the western diet, the group of polyunsaturated fatty acids that we have shown to help gut function are actually disappearing — our dietary intake of fish and nut oils is being replaced by corn oils which contain a different kind of fatty acid.” Until recently, scientific studies had been able to identify a clear connection between oil consumption in mothers and a reduced risk of allergy in infants, but how these two elements link together was not yet known. Past studies have also revealed that an increased consumption of polyunsaturated fats can, in fact, increase the length of the gestational period, as well as improve the development of the central nervous system of a baby – with effects on performance and intelligence becoming noticeable during childhood. The group of targeted polyunsaturated fats is known as n-3PUFA, and it is responsible for making the baby’s gut lining more permeable to foreign agents, which, upon reaching the bloodstream, trigger an immune response coupled with the production of antibodies to repel the pathogens. These types of acids, also called omega-3 essential fats, have been linked to a multitude of biological functions, ranging from brain development to cellular growth and cardiovascular health. Dr. Boudry further explained that “the end result is that the baby’s immune system may develop and mature faster, leading to better immune function and a reduced likelihood of suffering allergies”. Recent medical statistics have shown that the consumption of omega-3 fatty acids in the general population has decreased steadily over the years and that this correlates to an increased risk of allergies and hypersensitization in children. Although this specific study was conducted on piglets, the French science team plans on furthering their research to see how their findings translate to humans. Piglets were especially selected for this study, as their intestinal tracts are fairly similar to the human gut, and data obtained from them is likely relevant to humans as well. Moreover, Dr. Boudry has expressed interest for the future in studying how an increased omega-3 intake can help fight allergies during adulthood. [Editor's Note: NaturalNews is strongly against the use of all forms of animal testing. We fully support implementation of humane medical experimentation that promotes the health and wellbeing of all living creatures.] Sources for this article include: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/09/110908161444.htm http://www.upi.com/Health_News/2011/09/11/Mothers-diet-may-affect-babys-allergies/UPI-24341315714096/?spt=hs&or=hn http://medicalxpress.com/news/2011-09-mother-diet-baby-allergies-.html

National Public Radio underwritten by Monsanto?

(NaturalNews) There was a strong reaction recently observed over public radio stations touting Monsanto and running Monsanto’s promotional ads. Technically, it wasn’t NPR (National Public Radio) as most assumed, but a program called Marketplace that is underwritten by Monsanto. American Pubic Media (APM) produces Marketplace. But both NPR and Marketplace broadcast during the same time frame from stations that are public radio affiliates. They share the same network apparatus and appeal to the same audience. Monsanto’s use of the APM platform is a crafty PR maneuver to suck in gullible listeners by using the “feeding the world mantra” while ignoring Monsanto’s dark legacy of profiting from toxic destruction and harassing farmers who try to do the right thing. (Legacy in source below) Naive Public Perception of Public Radio American Public Media’s 32 million listeners, many of whom are liberal academics, accept public radio as unbiased, truthful news coverage. The same is true of NPR. They are all considered not-for-profit public radio, and they are carried by local not for profit radio stations. But why don’t APM’s or NPR’s reporters and the majority of its listeners know what’s really going on with Monsanto? There are some really well done, accurate documentaries that reveal the truth about Monsanto. “The World According to Monsanto,” “The Corporation” and “Food Inc” are examples. They have all been released during this past decade and are available on DVD. The best of those three, “The World According to Monsanto” was even available for viewing on the internet until it was taken down – by Monsanto maybe? Perhaps politically correct public radio listeners consider such information conspiracy theory rubbish. Being politically correct is more important than conspiracy reality for many. And perhaps decent paying jobs in public radio are more important to journalists than real investigative reporting. NPR escaped culpability of broadcasting Monsanto propaganda by pointing to APM’s Marketplace, which aired this type of underwriting (sponsor) announcement for two years. Marketplace is supported by Monsanto, committed to sustainable agriculture creating hybrid and biotech seeds designed to increase crop yields and conserve natural resources. Learn more at ProduceMoreConserveMore.com. A more recent short documentary, “Farmer to Farmer,” clearly showed GMO farming is unsustainable. This documentary included GMO and conventional farmers’ testimonies. So here is yet another documentary ignored by public radio. Besides being a blatant lie on all counts, this announcement pushed FFC guidelines to the limit for public broadcast. Announcing who is underwriting (sponsoring) is allowed, but promoting or allowing that sponsor to promote is not permitted. While many listeners may have winced and let those short announcements go, there was a recent Monsanto propaganda report on Marketplace that many could not ignore. The title alone is the tip of the iceberg. The Non-Organic Future The title is “The Non-Organic Future.” It was not a report registering concern over all that threatens organic agriculture, as one would expect from public radio. It condemned organic farming as a threat to topsoil while praising conventional and GMO farming as the true solutions to feeding the world. (Report broadcast transcript in sources below) There were no interviews of anyone who opposed pesticide monoculture farming or GMOs. A couple of shills for GMO and conventional farming with establishment “credentials” did all the talking. And the reporter, Adriene Hill, introduced the report with this comment regarding the concept of small organic farms around cities “This isn’t the future — not if we want to feed everyone.” Get over it? Evidently Ms. Hill and Marketplace conveniently overlooked the 2009 conclusions of the International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science, and Technology for Development (IAASTD), sponsored by the UN and World Bank. It took 4.5 years for the IAASTD’s 400 experts to arrive at the conclusion that small organic farming is the only way to maintain sustainable agriculture that could feed the world. Follow the Money According to Anna Lapp, author of Diet for a Hot Planet , the biotech friendly marketplace report was not sloppy reporting. Anna wrote, “Rather than being sloppy, it turns out that the reporting is actually a carefully constructed thank you gift for a prized advertiser.” NPR was not really the culprit this time . But let’s have a look at NPR’s association with Bill Gates and his Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. According to a Seattle Times February 19, 2011 article “Does Gates media funding taint objectivity?” a $3.6 million Gates grant went to PBS’ News Hour, another $3.3 million to Public Radio International, $1 million to PBS’ Frontline, and $5 million to NPR . The Gates Foundation distributes these funds for “influencing policy and advocacy.” The approach is sly. Influence the public to get behind tackling issues such as vaccinations and “sustainable” farming to cure the world’s ills. This is the same Bill Gates who now owns a huge chunk of stock in Monsanto valued at over $23 million in 2010. And it’s the same Gates who announced this century as the vaccine century, which he went on to say could help reduce the world population by 15%. Vaccines cause more harm than good and have been used as carriers of infertility agents in third world vaccination campaigns. Yes, appearing like a mild-mannered concerned geek gets a lot of support from the politically correct naive who don’t know the dark side of GMOs and vaccinations. Gates’ approach is sly and slick. He usually appeals to the need for actions rather than the what the actions really do. This makes it easier for public opinion to marginalize critics of GMOs and vaccinations, even when they are forced in Africa by gunpoint. (Natural News below) A financial alliance with Monsanto, directly or indirectly, is a pact with the devil. Despite public radio’s claiming their reporting is not affected by its “underwriters”, a public radio euphemism for sponsor, the Marketplace report and its Monsanto ads prove otherwise. One does not bite the hand that feeds it, especially if it’s the devil’s hand. Organic Consumer Organization’s (OCA) Millions Against Monsanto would like you to email a complaint in your name to Marketplace/APM using their form via this link. http://capwiz.com/grassrootsnetroots/issues/alert/?alertid=13418576 Sources used in this article and for your perusal: Monsanto’s dark legacy http://www.badseed.info/resources/monsanto.pdf The transcript from the “Non Organic Future” Mareketplace report http://marketplace.publicradio.org/display/web/2011/05/04/pm-the-non-organic-future/ Gates policy influence media funding amounts http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2014280379_gatesmedia.html Gates Foundation Monsanto investments http://www.infowars.com/gates-foundation-invests-in-monsanto/ Gates Foundation gunpoint forced vaccinations in Africa http://www.naturalnews.com/033119_vaccinations_gunpoint.html NPR Monsanto funding disclaimer http://www.npr.org/ombudsman/2009/06/npr_is_not_running_monsanto_sp_1.html American Public Media site http://americanpublicmedia.publicradio.org/ Monsanto targets public media to propagandize http://www.grist.org/article/national-public-propaganda

UNICEF using African refugee crisis to target 300,000 Kenyan children for vaccination

(NaturalNews) You never want a serious crisis to go to waste: these are the now-infamous words uttered by former White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel during the early days of the currently-in-motion financial meltdown, and they are ones that ring eerily true with a new vaccination campaign taking place in Kenya. Recent reports explain that the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) is taking advantage of the mass influx of refugees from Somalia into Kenya by pushing polio and measles vaccines on 300,000 Kenyan children. Extreme famines, religious persecution, and various other factors have driven hundreds of thousands of Somalians into nearby Kenya over the past several months. Many of the refugee camps taking in these migrants are now at the brink of, or have already exceeded, their maximum capacity. But even worse, say authorities, is the fact that the mass relocation is bringing about a host of new diseases, and the need to protect the children is greater than ever. On the surface, such concern and effort makes perfectly logical humanitarian sense. After all, who would oppose protecting children against potentially life-threatening illnesses? Unfortunately, UNICEF’s plan for helping during this crisis has been birthed out of the same train of thought as that of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, whose partners have literally held women and children at gunpoint to force vaccinations on them (http://www.naturalnews.com/033119_vaccinations_gunpoint.html). Nevertheless, UNICEF says it is pushing vaccines on children at this time in order to “prevent an outbreak of disease,” according to a recent Associated Press (AP) report. Refugees are potentially harboring these life threatening diseases, they say, and this is why UNICEF has announced that it will hold a two-week vaccine drive to push the shots in various parts of northern Kenya where refugees are most prevalent, including at Dadaab, the world’s largest refugee camp. UNICEF pushing for same ‘Millennium Development Goals’ as Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, which include mass vaccinations The United Nations (UN), which presides over UNICEF, has been on a stated mission to “end poverty” as part of its eight “Millennium Development Goals” (MDG). And this international quasi-government has reined in many organizations and foundations to help achieve its goals: the other seven of which include universal education, gender equality, child health, maternal health, combating HIV and AIDS, environmental sustainability, and global partnership. And one of the group’s allies is the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Why is this a big deal? Two MDGs in particular, child health and maternal health, both involve vaccinating children against diseases like measles and polio. And this does not imply vaccinating just some children, either — it means all of them. The Child Health Fact Sheet, for instance, clearly states that “[c]onsiderable progress” has been made in increasing measles vaccination rates among African children, as the 70 percent rate in 2000 has now eclipsed 81 percent in 2008. But the obvious goal is 100 percent, as the group is petitioning for ever-more money to fund its universal vaccine campaign (http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/childhealth.shtml). Likewise, the Maternal Health Fact Sheet, though it does not specifically mention vaccines, talks about increasing expectant mothers’ access to “reproductive health services, equipment, supplies and skilled healthcare workers.” These healthcare workers will not only help pregnant women achieve delivery in a safe environment, but they will also gain an easier footing in convincing mothers that their newborns need to be immediately vaccinated in order to prevent more disease (http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/maternal.shtml). Both the Child Health and Maternal Health sections appear to have been designed for the purpose of decreasing sickness and mortality, as well as improving quality of life for Africans — and on the surface, this is an admirable mission. But the devil is in the details, as one of the primary thrusts behind the UN’s health initiatives is simply to get more people vaccinated. A recent incident in Malawi, for instance, where children were forced at gunpoint to receive measles vaccines, illustrates precisely the type of “child health” that international organizations like UNICEF and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation are promoting (http://www.naturalnews.com/033119_vaccinations_gunpoint.html). This implies that MDGs are not optional — in other words, they will be imposed by force if necessary. Worse, one of the MDG’s stated partnerships is with the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization (GAVI Alliance), whose stated purpose is to “accelerate access to vaccines, strengthen immunization systems and introduce innovative new immunization techniques.” Bill Gates made his now-infamous statements about vaccinating every child on the planet, for instance, at a recent GAVI Alliance conference (http://www.naturalnews.com/032900_Bill_Gates_vaccinations.html). So when you put all the pieces together and read between the lines, it is clear that the MDG goal of improving the health of women and children means something entirely different than simply providing them access to healthcare options. There is a much more sinister agenda at play here that involves essentially forcing things like pharmaceuticals and vaccines on the unwitting poor for profit and political gain. And UNICEF’s current efforts in Kenya appear to be just another step towards implementing universal compliance with its vaccine agenda. Sources for this story include: http://old.news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110727/ap_on_he_me/af_east_africa_vaccines

Common class of pain drugs reduces severity of postpartum breast cancers

During involution — the process during which milk-producing cells are killed and replaced by fat cells — the breast is especially susceptible to the development of aggressive cancers. This study shows that NSAIDs like ibuprofen reduce the severity of these cancers.

Next Page »