The HPV vaccine – what do you really know about it?

(NaturalNews) If you are considering vaccinating your child with an HPV vaccine, what information have you read, and what questions have you asked?What do you KNOW about the human papillomaviruses (HPV) which the medical profession says causes cervical cancer? If you are going to vaccinate your child on the word of the medical profession, and don’t want any further information, then stop right here. But be aware that ignorance is not bliss. And that the medical system has deliberately not told you everything you need to know about either the viruses, or the vaccine. If you want to take responsibility for your own decisions, rather than hand over responsibility to the medical profession, then you might be interested in some of the following questions and answers, which deserve truthful answers that the vaccine industry doesn’t want to give you: Question: Publicity for Gardasil says that girls should have this HPV vaccine before sexual intercourse, because they don’t catch this virus until they are sexually active. Is this correct? No, this is not correct. Over the last 20 years, the medical profession has documented that human papillomaviruses can be transmitted during pregnancy, after pregnancy, from child to child, and adult to child. Question: Why then are we told that these human papillomaviruses can only be contracted after sex? Because adolescents are the market Merck was targeting, and to admit that the viruses can be acquired naturally before sex, doesn’t suit Merck. The medical literature for the last 20 years has also stated that to ignore the fact that HPV viruses can cause silent infection at any age ‘has implications for any vaccination programme,’ though those ‘implications’ have never been spelled out. However, they expect parents to naively believe that intelligent human papillomaviruses know they aren’t allowed to let themselves loose, until the first act of sexual intercourse. And for some reason, most parents believe this sort of nonsense statement. Question: Are these viruses implicated in cervical cancers, and other cancers? Yes they are – but primarily in people, whose innate immune system is struggling because they eat rubbish, drink alcohol, smoke cigarettes, don’t get enough sleep, and burn the candle at 12 ends. Much more than a virus is required for a woman to get cervical cancer. Question: Doesn’t everyone get human papillomavirus infections? Yes. Not only has ‘everyone’ but just about any species that breathes gets papillomavirus infections – even lizards. The medical literature shows that a good diet, correct mineral and vitamin intake, and living a healthy lifestyle, normally results in the recipient throwing off HP infections easier than a cold, and all they have to show for it, is lifelong natural immunity. Healthy lifestyles don’t fill Big Pharma bank balances, so you won’t be told about that. Question: But I’ve been told this vaccine is so important! Is that wrong This vaccine is very important for Merck’s accountants – vitally important. It’s ‘the’ product that is supposed to dig Merck out of its current financial woes. But is it important for your child? No. The cervical smear programme stopped people dying of cervical cancer long before ‘fear-no-longer’ Gardasil came along. And because the vaccine only covers two types out of at least 20 supposedly carcinogenic HP virus types (amongst at least 300 different strains), people who have cancer phobia will still want to have smears anyway. Today, 90% of all deaths from cervical cancer occur in the third world countries which don’t have such a programme, or the ability to deal with abnormal smears even if they had a smear programme. The primary drivers of cervical cancer in third world countries are chronic malnutrition, and fundamentally atrocious living conditions, which happens to create the most susceptible population with the least resources. Question: So why have I been recommended to inject my child with three Gardasil vaccines? Because if a vaccine is available the medical system tries to scare everyone into using it. After all, it’s much easier to ‘believe’ their assumption that antibodies from Gardasil will still be around 40 years from now. It’s much easier not to have to pay attention to diet, and all the other things which would make sure most people never got cancer in the first place. But the bottom line is that Merck developed Gardasil in the hope that it would be a ‘block-buster’ vaccine which would help pay for all the litigation Merck faces as the result of another Merck drug, called Vioxx, which maimed and killed lots of people, whose families then turned around and sued Merck for millions of dollars. Obviously, Merck isn’t going to make any money from the third world -the countries that really need it, according to Dr Frazer who co-patented the vaccine. So Merck decided to target all the rich countries that do not need Gardasil. By charging wealthy countries lots of money, then maybe someday about forty years from now…, they might get around to providing it to people in the third world, if they are still around. Which is a bit farcical, when in those countries, what the people could really do with, is decent food, clean water, getting rid of nepotistic dictators and warring tribes, being provided with basic healthcare, and the means of growing their own food… but all that’s much too hard. Particularly when Merck’s main aim is making money and staying in business. Question: What is in Gardasil? According to the data sheet, the vaccine supposedly contains ‘no viral DNA 1 ‘ and each 0.5 mL dose of the vaccine contains: 20 mcg of HPV 6 L1 protein 40 mcg of HPV 11 L1 protein 40 mcg of HPV 16 L1 protein 20 mcg of HPV 18 L1 protein 225 mcg aluminum (as amorphous aluminum hydroxyphosphate sulfate adjuvant2) 9.56 mg of sodium chloride 0.78 mg of L-histidine 50 mcg of polysorbate 80 (shown to induce infertility in mice, which is why it’s the main ingredient in depo-provera, and which also makes the brain blood barrier easier to penetrate) 35 mcg of sodium borate water for injection Question: What do you mean,’Supposedly’? Contrary to the manufacturers’ documents, the vaccine does actually contain Viral DNA. According to documents filed with Medsafe New Zealand, each vaccine also has a much higher amount of HPV protein than stated on the product insert, in order to ensure that as the vaccine degrades over time, at the END of the shelf life, the vaccine will actually contain the stated dose on the vial. Question: What do you mean, this vaccine has recombinant HPV viral DNA! What is recombinant HPV viral DNA? This is where small lengths of genes from two different sources, are combined to make a single recombined length of genes which will perform a specific function. Question: The New Zealand Government, the manufacturers and all the health authorities not only assured us that there is no DNA, but they say SANE Vax Inc.’s allegations of contamination with DNA are a load of smelly porkies! Explain yourself please? No-one from the Government, FDA, EMA, or Health Departments have at any time, asked to see the test results of the vaccine, which SANE Vax Inc. commissioned. So, on what basis do they think that the test results are incorrect? Gardasil was made by taking a DNA sequence (which makes the virus “envelope”) from different types of papillomaviruses found in cancerous cervical cells. This viral genetic sequence was then spliced into a plasmid 3 – a circular piece of bacterial DNA (which helps divide the bacterial chromosomes) and allows the HPV DNA to be cloned into yeast. Plasmid DNA also encourages quick manufacture of the ‘balls,’ by the HPV genes. The genetically engineered mix then makes lots of little empty balls, or ‘virus like particles’ as seen in photo 4 of the Gardasil vaccine. Then according to Merck’s patent 5 , they have a highly sophisticated process which is supposed to filter out and remove ‘contaminating biomolecules, including DNA, lipids and proteins.’ What the test results found, was that some recombinant DNA sequences originating from different types of the virus DNA used to make the vaccine, are still in the vaccine. Question: What are all those other bits in that photo? Aluminium, and presumably more mashed up virus like particles. But according to the tests commissioned by SANE Vax Inc., viral DNA used to make those little balls and mashed up pieces, are not removed from Gardasil. Question: But FDA says that these recombinant DNA are “expected” when using this process. Isn’t that true? No. If those DNA fragments were “expected” components of Gardasil, they would have been listed in the ingredients of the vaccine, and documentation should exist showing why they are a safe and ‘essential’ ingredient in the vaccine. Question: How does this fancy patented purification process tell the difference between culture medium DNA, yeast DNA and HPV DNA? You tell me and we’ll both know. Question: If SANE-vax’s tests ARE actually correct, why did a purification process which is supposed to remove DNA lipids, proteins, and biomolecules not work? I think Merck would like to know the answer to that as well. In the meantime, FDA are covering Merck’s butt for them. Question: But isn’t there a final product purity test for Gardasil? In New Zealand, according to paper work submitted to Medsafe, there are no final purity tests, because Merck believes their filtration process is good enough without them. Question: But aren’t there filtration tests designed to make sure the process is good enough? According to paper work submitted to Medsafe, there are no filtration “adequacy” tests because Merck believes their process is good enough without them. Question: Isn’t Gardasil made the same way as the Hepatitis B vaccine? Yes, and according to FDA 6 documentation, “Assays for cesium, polysaccharides, DNA, pyrogens and sterility are performed” on the Hepatitis B bulk product. You’d think the same would be done for Gardasil, wouldn’t you? Question: Does the Hepatitis B vaccine also contain genetically engineered, recombinant DNA? It would appear that the Hepatitis B vaccine could ALSO contain a similar kind of genetically manipulated DNA (in spite of tests to ensure DNA removal). Such recombinant DNA in the Hepatitis B vaccines is also not mentioned in its data sheet or constituent list. FDA, in its reply to SANE Vax Inc., intimated that Hepatitis B vaccine also contains recombinant DNA, and that such unstated DNA was quite “acceptable”. So they are covering Merck’s butt for that as well. Question: FDA says these particles are no big deal because they can’t cause infection. Is that true? No it’s not. The point of a vaccine is to form antibodies to various substances called “antigens” in the vaccine. DNA doesn’t have to cause infection to spell trouble. Because the recombinant DNA is tightly bound to the aluminium, the aluminium turns the DNA into an ‘antigen,’ something the immune system has to react to. But an abnormal immune response, especially to an aluminium-bound DNA, could result in antibodies which cross react and turn against healthy DNA. That could cause autoimmune disease, brain inflammation, joint inflammation, and major disruption to energy pathways, hormone functions and a vast array of other biological pathways, which normally keep an adolescent healthy, physically and mentally. Question: But FDA says that Gardasil is very safe and doesn’t cause anything more than a sore arm. Isn’t that true? No. America’s FDA and all medical authorities say that all vaccines are safe apart from sore arms, and that everything else that happens after a vaccine is a coincidence…, and anyone who says otherwise, needs their head looked at. FDA monitors all vaccines by using a system called VAERS, short for the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System, which is known to only collect 10% of reactions at most, and reporting is voluntary, not mandatory. On the one hand, they ‘consult’ this system, but on the other, they consider that all reactions sent to this system have nothing to do with the vaccine at all. So in terms of a monitoring system, they might as well not have one at all. In fact, they might as well do away with it altogether, since to them, the fact that Gardasil reports comprise 20% of all reported reactions appears to them to be some fabricated nuisance. It doesn’t seem to occur to the FDA, that perhaps there is something badly wrong with this ‘lovely safe’ vaccine, which their crystal ball says will prevent your child from having cervical cancer, by the (average) age of 54. Question: Are you telling me, I shouldn’t trust the FDA, health authorities and governmental agencies? Why would you want to trust anyone who tells you something ludicrous like, “Human papillomaviruses have a label on their foreheads saying ‘No entry until sex’” when that is patently, proveably untrue? If FDA can spread such ridiculous comments world-wide, without corrective advice from the scientists who know that isn’t true, why would the FDA (or silent scientists) bother with the’truth’ when it came to anything else? Question: So what do I do now? I don’t know. It’s your choice. You could vaccinate your child, and see what happens. Does that sound like a good idea? If it doesn’t, you better tell your child, because in some countries, they can be vaccinated without your consent! By Hilary Butler, Contributing Author SANE Vax Inc. Sources: http://sanevax.org/ 1 DNA are genes from the virus – some of which cause infections, and others of which have other functions. The L1 gene strand used to make the vaccine, is specific in that it makes the round ball (envelope) that surrounds the DNA. 2 A toxin which sends a red alert danger message to the immune system which says, ‘Oi you, there is danger in that locker, go and deal with it.’ Without it, the immune system would just yawn and go back to sleep. 3 http://users.rcn.com/jkimball.ma.ultranet/BiologyPages/R/RecombinantDNA.html 4 http://www.nanoimagingservices.com/emailblasts/110209_landingpageHPVadjuvant.jpg 5 http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=6,602,697.PN.&OS=PN/6,602,697&RS=PN/6,602,697 6 http://www.fda.gov/downloads/biologicsbloodvaccines/vaccines/approvedproducts/ucm110155.pdf

Biotech’s dirty tricks exposed in new documentary: ‘Scientists Under Attack’

(NaturalNews) “One question means one career.” This was the harsh warning of UC Berkeley Professor Ignacio Chapela for those daring to conduct independent research on genetically engineered foods and crops. “You ask one question, you get the answer and you might or might not be able to publish it; but that is the end of your career.” Both he and biologist Arpad Pusztai dared to asked questions and do the research. And then all hell broke lose. Using stunning visuals filmed on three continents, veteran German filmmaker Bertram Verhaag tracks the fate of these two scientists at the hands of a multi-billion dollar industry that is desperate to hide the dangers of their genetically modified organisms (GMOs). Watch the trailer at: http://www.responsibletechnology.org/scientists-under-attack BR Online says of the film, “Belief in noble and incorrupt research and science is reduced to absurdity.” Arthouse says the “movie shows how purchased truth becomes the currency in the perfidious business between science and multinationals.” And GMWatch writes, “Original research showing problems with GM crops is buried under a deluge of smears and follow up studies are not done.” The insect-killing, career-ending potato “As a scientist looking at it and actively working on the field, I find that it’s very, very unfair to use our fellow citizens as guinea pigs.” — Arpad Pusztai, UK’s World in Action TV show When Dr. Pusztai voiced his concerns about the health risks of genetically modified (GM) foods during a nationally televised interview in August 1998, his was not simply just another voice in a contentious debate. Pusztai was the world leader in his field, and he had received major government funding to come up with the official method for testing the safety of GM foods. His protocols were supposed to become the required tests before any new GMO entered the European market. Pusztai was an insider, and an advocate of GM foods — that is until he actually ran those tests on supposedly harmless GM potatoes. The high-tech spuds were engineered to produce their own pesticide. “The point of the whole genetic modification experiment was to protect the potato against aphids, which are one of the major pests in Scotland,” he said. His team inserted a gene from the snowdrop plant into the potatoes, which did in fact protect the GM crop from the insects. As part of his safety studies, he fed that insecticide producing GM potato to rats, along with a complete and balanced diet. Another group of rats ate natural potatoes. A third was fed not only the natural potatoes, but they also received a dose of the same insecticide that the GM potato produced. This way, if the insecticide was harmful, he would see the same health problems in both the group that ate the GM potatoes, and those that ate the diet spiked with the insecticide. To his surprise, only those that ate the GM potato had severe problems — in every organ and every system he looked at. Massive health problems linked to GMOs “After the animals were killed and dissected,” Pusztai recalled, “we found out that in comparison with the non-genetically modified potatoes, their internal organs developed differently.” The intestines and stomach lining, for example, increased in size, the liver and kidneys were smaller, and the overall rate of growth was retarded. And the immune system suffered. Pusztai emphasized, “They found in those data 36 , 36! very highly significant differences between the GM-fed animals and the non-GM fed animals.” Since the rats that ate the natural potatoes plus the insecticide did not have these issues, there was one obvious conclusion — the process of genetically engineering the potatoes caused unpredicted side effects, turning a harmless food into a dangerous one. When Pusztai saw the extensive damage that his potatoes caused in the lab animals, he also realized that if biotech companies had done the safety studies, the dangerous potatoes would have easily made it to market. He knew this because a few months earlier, he had reviewed the confidential submissions from the biotech companies which allowed their GM soy and corn onto the market. “They were flimsy,” he said. “They were not scientifically well founded.” They would never detect the changes in GMO-fed animals. Reading the industry studies was a turning point in Pusztai’s life. He realized what he was doing and what the industry scientists were doing was diametrically opposed. He was doing safety studies. Companies like Monsanto, on the other hand, were doing as little as possible to get their foods on the market as quickly as possible. Pusztai also realized that the GM soy and corn already on the market had been produced using the same process that had created his dangerous potato. Thus, the GM crops being consumed in the UK and the US might lead to similar damage in the gut, brain and organs of the entire population. Thus, during his TV interview, Pusztai flatly stated: “If I had the choice, I would certainly not eat [GM foods] until I see at least comparable experimental evidence which we are producing for genetically modified potatoes.” Ambushed After the TV show aired, Pusztai was a hero at his prestigious Rowett Institute, where the director praised his work to the press, calling it world-class research. After two days of high-profile media coverage throughout Europe, however, the director received two phone calls from the UK Prime Minister’s Office. “It’s only when we think there was political pressure coming from the top that the situation changed,” said Pusztai. “And then the director, to save his own skin, decided that the best way to deal with the situation [was] A) to destroy me, B) to make me shut up.” Pusztai was told the next morning that his contract would not be renewed, he was silenced with threats of a lawsuit, his team was disbanded, and the protocols were not to be implemented in GMO safety assessments. And then came the attacks. Coordinated between the Institute, biotech academics, and even the pro-GMO UK government, a campaign to destroy Pusztai’s reputation was launched. They were determined to counter the negative media coverage and protect the reputation of GMOs — even if it meant promoting blatant lies and sacrificing a top scientist’s career. Because Pusztai was gagged, he said, “whatever they did say on TV, radio and wrote in the newspapers, I could not deny it, I could not correct it, I could not say what was the real situation.” “The most hurtful thing of all,” remembers Pusztai’s wife Susan, “was that he wasn’t allowed to talk to his colleagues and his colleagues were not allowed to talk to him. So whenever he entered a room, they went silent within seconds.” After seven excruciating months, a committee at the UK Parliament invited Pusztai to speak. This lifted the gag order, which allowed Pusztai to ultimately publish his research, and be interviewed for this film. Oops — GMOs weren’t supposed to be there Ignacio Chapela, a professor at the University of California at Berkeley, had “a long-term relationship with a group of indigenous communities” in Mexico. Although GM corn was not yet legally grown in the country, Chapela decided to equip the Mexicans with a laboratory that could test for its presence, in case GMOs were eventually introduced. To help with the training, his colleague David Quist brought GM corn from the US. For the non-GM control corn, Chapela said, “we thought we should just use the local corn, which, of course, is going to be clean and wonderful. And the surprise came when the negative control started coming out positive. That means we started finding transgenic materials where they were not supposed to be.” Chapela says, “The reason why our findings were so astounding was because it was thought that there was no transgenic corn being planted in Mexico at all. And people wanted it that way. . . . Why? Because Mexico is the center of origin of corn. The Mexican government was worried about maintaining the integrity of the land races.” Apparently GM corn imported as food was unknowingly being grown, and had already started contaminating the source of corn’s biodiversity. According to Chapela the industry “had been telling the world that they really had control over these crops, that if they planted . . . transgenic corn in one field, that transgenic corn would not go anywhere else. So our discovery that we were finding transgenic corn maybe a thousand miles from the nearest legal transgenic corn field was a huge problem for them because it really showed very simply, and with real evidence, that they really did not have control.” Chapela and Quist wrote up the finding, which was accepted for publication by the prominent journal Nature . This made “many people within the industry very nervous and very unhappy,” says Chapella. They “started a discreditation campaign for the paper. They did not want the paper to be published.” Unable to stop Nature , however, a Monsanto PR company — the Bivings Group — deployed plan B. “They created two fictitious characters, two doctors,” recounts Chapela. “And these two doctors went on the internet and started spreading rumors that what we had said was false and that the paper was flawed.” The disinformation campaign went viral. It put huge pressure on Nature , spread the false notion that contamination had not taken place, and resulted in a campaign against Chapela by biotech advocates in his University. “In my case,” says Chapela, “I was pushed out of the university at least three times. Every time I fought back and we managed to keep my job. But it’s been very difficult.” Trashing scientists worldwide The treatment of Pusztai and Chapela illustrates what happens around the world to scientists who discover harm from GM crops. The work of Russian scientist Irina Ermakova, for example, was viciously attacked, and there were repeated attempts to intimidate her: papers were burnt on her desk and samples were stolen from her lab. Peeking through these stories of personal attacks are the very real dangers of GMOs, which compel the audience to question the use of GMOs in their own diets. Consider the impact of Ermakova’s research on young women planning to raise a family. After she fed genetically engineered soy flour to female rats, more than half of their offspring died within three weeks. The film also unravels the claims of biotech benefits on the farm level. A visit to Brazil introduces herbicide-tolerant Roundup Ready soybeans, engineered to make weeding a field easier. Farmers can spray Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide right on the field, and the GMOs survive. But this has led to massive overuse of Roundup, which in turn has led to the emergence of herbicide-tolerant superweeds — no longer controllable with Roundup. A natural reaction to these stories might be to ask why isn’t the government telling us the truth and protecting us. Unfortunately, they are part of the problem. FDA cover-up The FDA scientists who reviewed GMOs in the early 1990s were uniformly concerned about their health impacts, according to attorney Andrew Kimbrell, who runs the D.C.-based Center for Food Safety. He was on the team that sued the FDA in 1998, forcing them to turn over nearly 60,000 pages of secret internal memos. Kimbrell extracts key memos from massive filing cabinets in his office, reading the scientists’ warnings: toxins, nutritional problems, loss of biodiversity, change in water use, etc. “So the scientists asked for these studies,” says Kimbrell. “But the politicians at the FDA and in the administration at that time said no. They suppressed the science. And these questions, these studies, have never been done.” Instead, the US government maintains the illusion that nothing is wrong, and that this science works just as the biotech companies are telling us. This is beautifully illustrated with excerpts of biotech apologist Nina Fedoroff, the former science advisor to the Secretary of State. Her bland assurances about the safety of GMOs crumble with each new revelation in the film. Unprecedented risks; no benefits “No one gets up in the morning saying I want to go buy a genetically engineered food,” says Kimbrell. “They offer no benefits, no more nutrition, no more flavor, no nothing. They only offer risks.” He says the average rational person would ask, “Why would I buy a food that offers me no new benefits but only risks?” Kimbrell, who wrote the book Your Right to Know , says it was “critical for the industry to get these foods out without anyone knowing, because if they knew, they would obviously choose not to buy them.” But as Chapela’s discovery of self-propagating GMO contamination illustrates, the risk of GMOs extends well beyond individual considerations. He warns, “We are manipulating life in a way that we really do not understand, we cannot control, and then we’re letting it go into the environment. So it’s a change that is radical, that is unprecedented, that is beyond anything we can understand, and it is irretrievable. We cannot get it back. That’s my concern!” Scientists Under Attack is recommended for all those who love nature, and for everyone who eats. To view the trailer, click the following link: http://www.responsibletechnology.org/scientists-under-attack Bonus film The Scientists Under Attack DVD includes a 30 minute bonus film Monster Salmon , also by Bertram Verhaag. It describes the efforts by the US firm AquaBounty to bring fast-growing genetically engineered salmon to market in the US. Given the FDA’s recent attempts to fast-track this controversial fish, this additional documentary is important and timely. Jeffrey M. Smith is the author of Seeds of Deception (http://www.seedsofdeception.com/Public/Home/index.cfm), the world’s bestselling book on GMOs. He is also the author of Genetic Roulette (http://www.geneticroulette.com), and the Executive Director of the Institute for Responsible Technology (http://www.responsibletechnology.org). The Institute’s Non-GMO Shopping Guide website (http://www.nongmoshoppingguide.com), iPhone app ShopNoGMO, and pocket guide, help people navigate to healthier non-GMO foods. Join the Institute’s Non-GMO Tipping Point Network (http://action.responsibletechnology.org/p/salsa/web/common/public/signup?signup_page_KEY=2925) to connect with others in your area, to bring the truth about GMOs to your friends and community.

Pharma now pushing for 20 new vaccines in next decade

(NaturalNews) The mainstream media is extremely one sided with its vaccine reporting. It is a PR outlet for the pharmaceutical industry, especially when it comes to the pharmaceutical industry’s sacred cow – vaccines. A recent example is a BBC item announcing a UK research project to come up with twenty new “improved” vaccines over the next decade. As usual, the article strongly implies that those who avoid vaccinations are loony. The history of vaccine injuries and the statistics that indicate vaccines do not offer immunization are ignored by this article. Commenting on BBC Article Highlights The BBC article reports that a group of scientists have responded to a “call to action.” They claim AIDS and malaria vaccines as top research items with other tropical diseases being considered for more research. Comment: There is statistical evidence that proves almost every infectious disease that medical science claimed was eliminated by vaccines had become almost non-existent by the time the particular vaccine was developed. Bugs come and go as environments change. The declining infectious disease occurrences coincide with improved plumbing, sanitation, waste removal, and general cleanliness. Bold vaccine success claims are bogus. The BBC article quotes the scientists as saying, “We must also consider vaccines beyond classic infections, such as insulin-dependent diabetes, cancers and degenerative diseases.” Comment: That’s interesting. They’re creating more product demand for diseases that occur mostly from toxic processed food consumption and environmental pollution. Those who understand this are able to prevent and even cure cancers and diabetes through detoxification and nutritious food. But never mind all that lifestyle change hassle. Medical authorities will provide immunity through inoculations and make themselves lots of loot! Expensive vaccines sold internationally to individuals and governments have less overhead than most other pharmaceuticals. They are cheaper to produce and are usually allowed fast track approval. The liability of lawsuits and heavy fines don’t affect the vaccine industry. They have been exempted from legal financial liability over the last couple of decades as vaccine injury complaints grew exponentially with increased vaccination protocols. Even doctors, especially pediatricians who insist on vaccinating every child often from birth, make a buck off vaccinations. They buy wholesale and sell retail, adding more profit to office visits. But it’s not just sales that have these researchers drooling. Individual researchers share patent royalty fees with vaccine companies for whatever vaccines they develop. The researcher is heavily funded for starters, then the royalty’s passive income kicks in. The Scientist Who Initiated the “Call to Action” Oxford University Professor Richard Moxon, created the series of papers calling for research action into future vaccine research. “We need to find the requisite funds for the research and development of about 20 improved or novel vaccines in the next decade or beyond,” Moxon declared. There you go. Get the funding to pay for research and your high salary during that period, then come up with a new twist on an existing vaccine “improved” to get new patent rights and royalties. This is a familiar ploy. Slightly tweak an expired patent drug and create a new patent. Of course, any totally new vaccine would become a patent windfall with the potential for further “improvements” and patents. Professor Moxon adds, “This call to action comes at a crucial time. In some communities, recent declines in vaccine uptake provide a stark reminder that public confidence and trust in immunization is fragile and requires attention.” Could vaccine immunization trust fragility have anything to do with that mumps outbreak among children and teens vaccinated with MMR (mumps, measles, rubella) inoculations in the New York/New Jersey area a year and a half ago? This incident managed to get publicized by mainstream media, which is very rare. The immediate official response was that the 77% of vaccinated mumps victims hadn’t received their required two shots. But when it was discovered that they had received both jabs, some health authorities proclaimed that the MMR schedule should be upped to three shots. So much for vaccination immunization. As a matter of fact, true life-long immunity occurs from actual exposure to infectious diseases. Either the disease is resisted initially, or the disease infects and is overcome. Then life-long immunity for that disease is established. The fact that more than one inoculation of any vaccine is required indicates true immunity is not granted by vaccination. But the dollars continue to roll in as more vaccinations are required. Maybe, professor Moxon might learn something about immunity from a retired vaccine researcher now whistle blower who said he would never vaccinate his kid. The former vaccine researcher, whose identity is concealed, explains that the immune system is a complex arrangement of skin, nasal and throat mucous membranes, organs such as tonsils and adenoids and lymph nodes as well as the intestinal flora. Intestinal flora (friendly bacteria) not only act to destroy invading pathogens, but trigger lymphocytes (killer cells) in the blood as well. Vaccines merely initiate that last line of defense by activating killer cells unnecessarily, which can create a cytokine storm, unleashing the immune system to overwhelm the person inoculated! There are thousands of vaccinated men, women, and children who’ve experienced seizures, paralysis, and even death from cytokine storms after inoculations. The whistle blower went on to say there are no safe vaccines, even without those toxic preservatives, adjuvants, thimerasol (mercury), formaldehyde, aluminum, and squalene. He added there is no way to ensure absolute purity in each dose since they contain pathogens from other mammal tissues, and that vaccinations often cause the diseases they’re supposed to prevent. So Professor Monox, get your arrogant head out of the authority mindset and its money machine. Maybe the demonstrated lack of vaccine efficacy and the thousands and thousands of unpublicized paralyzed and dead vaccine injury victims and so called SIDS (sudden infant death syndrome) babies who got jabbed with these dangerous vaccinations from birth have something to do with the emerging public vaccine wariness you think is so foolish. Sources included in this article include: (1) The Original BBC Article http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-13714224 (2) Patent fees and Paul Offit http://childhealthsafety.wordpress.com/2011/04/23/offit-congressional-reprimand/ (3) Follow the Money and the Thimerasol http://vactruth.com/2011/08/05/big-pharmas-share-in-the-consumer-price-index/ (4) Jon Rappoport 2002 interview of a former vaccine developer turned whistle blower http://educate-yourself.or/cn/rappoportinterviewvaccineresearcherjan2002.shtml (5) Stats showing disease mortalities dropping even before the vaccines were introduced http://childhealthsafety.wordpress.com/graphs/ (6) UK Site with real vaccine news http://childhealthsafety.wordpress.com/ (7) S.A.N.E. Vax – USA real vaccine news focusing on Gardasil injuries and deaths http://sanevax.org/ (8) Vaccines lower immunity http://www.naturalnews.com/032484_vaccines_immunity.html (9) Hep B shots linked to SIDS http://www.naturalnews.com/032579_hepatitis_B_vaccines.html (10) Mumps outbreak NY/NJ with vaccinated teens http://www.naturalnews.com/028142_mumps_vaccines.html (11) Another version of the same NY/NJ mumps outbreak http://www.naturalnews.com/028422_vaccines_quackery.html Educate Yourself: Choose from a long list of Natural News vaccine articles http://www.naturalnews.com/vaccines.html

Superbug horror — scientists discover gonorrhea superbug that defies all known antibiotics

(NaturalNews) The danger of superbugs — infectious germs that are resistant to a host of Big Pharma’s drug arsenal — a growing and deadly problem in the 21st century. For example, as NaturalNews covered earlier this year, the U.S. meat supply is contaminated with disease-causing bacteria, including the superbug variety (http://www.naturalnews.com/032099_poultry_superbugs.html). And hospitals are now breeding grounds for the antibiotic resistant germs. In fact, the heartbreaking truth is that newborn babies are acquiring these superbug infections at an alarming rate in neonatal units (http://www.naturalnews.com/026587_infections_infection_superbug.html). But while superbugs are resistant to most antibiotics, a new superbug strain has been found that is completely resistant to every antibiotic . That’s the finding of an international research team who just announced their discovery — a superbug form of gonorrhea — at the International Society for Sexually Transmitted Disease Research (ISSTDR) currently underway in Quebec City, Canada. In a statement to the media, Dr. Magnus Unemo of the Swedish Reference Laboratory for Pathogenic Neisseria, warned that the new strain is likely to transform a common and once easily treatable infection into nothing less than a global threat to public health. Dr. Unemo, Dr. Makoto Ohnishi and their colleagues have identified a variant of the bacterium which causes gonorrhea, Neisseria gonorrhoeae, that has never been documented before. And, as the researchers analyzed this new strain, (called H041, for short) they found genetic mutations in the bacterium that have resulted in a fearsome superbug that shows what the scientists called “extreme resistance” to all cephalosporin-class antibiotics — the only drugs that, until now, have remained effective in treating gonorrhea. “This is both an alarming and a predictable discovery,” Dr. Unemo said in the media statement. “Since antibiotics became the standard treatment for gonorrhea in the 1940s, this bacterium has shown a remarkable capacity to develop resistance mechanisms to all drugs introduced to control it.” “While it is still too early to assess if this new strain has become widespread, the history of newly emergent resistance in the bacterium suggests that it may spread rapidly unless new drugs and effective treatment programs are developed,” Dr. Unemo continued. The new superbug strain is especially dangerous because gonorrhea is one of the most common sexually transmitted diseases on the planet. According to the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the number of cases in the U.S. alone is around 700,000 annually. It’s a particularly insidious STD because it doesn’t immediately produce symptoms in around half of infected women and approximately 2 to 5 percent of men. When symptoms occur, they include a burning sensation during urination and a discharge of pus from the genitals. If it is left untreated — or, in the case of the new strain, can’t be treated, gonorrhea can cause serious, irreversible health complications in both sexes, including skin, blood, joint and heart problems leading to death. Not only can infection with gonorrhea result in chronic pelvic pain and ectopic pregnancy, it can cause infertility in women (and, to a lesser degree, in men). It also increases the risk of HIV transmission. Babies born to mothers infected with gonorrhea are at high risk for developing serious blood and joint infections and may be blind, too. While the discovery a new strain of gonorrhea superbug is worrisome, don’t panic. Remember that your first line of defense is safe sex and a healthy immune system bolstered by good nutrition and a healthy lifestyle. In addition, you can search the NaturalNews archives for natural approaches to fighting superbugs without relying on Big Pharma’s drugs. For more information: http://www2.ulaval.ca/en/press-room.html http://www.naturalnews.com/superbugs.html http://www.naturalnews.com/027879_superbugs_disinfectants.html

Cold fusion devices produce far more energy than they use; quickly approaching commercial viability

(NaturalNews) Cold fusion is real, but mass American news sources are not covering it. Experiments are currently being duplicated across the world, to add further verification to the body of scientific proof. It is now possible to create energy with commonplace resources at no cost to the environment. Power plants using cold fusion will be constructed before 2012. Natural News has been covering the developments of cold fusion for quite some time, as controlled experiments in Russia, California, Italy, and Japan have consistently proven that cold fusion is real. (Read one of the original articles here (http://www.naturalnews.com/013281.html).) One of these successful experiments was conducted by Professor emeritus of Osaka University, Japan – Yoshiaki Arata. Dr. Arata performed a demonstration of cold fusion at Osaka. A colleague of his wrote, afterward: “Arata’s demonstration was successfully done it demonstrated live data looked just similar to the data they reported in [the] papers. This showed the method highly reproducible.” Read the original article for more details at (http://www.sott.net/articles/show/157573-Cold-fusion-demonstration-a-success-). In addition, Andrea Rossi’s Fusion Energy Catalyzer was tested in a number of different scenarios this year, resulting in a stronger belief that cold fusion may be ready for public use by the end of 2011. On January 14, Focardi and Rossi held a press conference, discussing their 10-kW generator. Another experiment, which took place roughly a month later at the University of Bologna, reported the model generated 15 kW for 18 hours. There are currently plans to hook up roughly 200 of these smaller units, in order to construct two 1 megawatt-producing power plants before the end of the year. If these plants perform up to their potential, then we can hope for the construction of industrial-sized power plants within another year or two. But how does it work? Cold fusion is not really magical, even though it could very well have a miraculous effect on our future. It is a relatively simple chemical reaction that produces excess heat, meaning that if the reaction occurs in water, it will increase the temperature of the water. Powdered nickel fuels the reaction. You put in nickel (one of the most plentiful metals on the planet), and you get heated water. After that point, almost every mechanic in the world would be able to take it from there. Steam engines heat water with coal, then using the expansive properties of the steam to power turbines. A cold fusion device would use the same basic mechanical devices, but it would heat the water through the consumption of nickel rather than combustion. But why has news of cold fusion not yet reached mass media in the United States? Why is there no story in the New York Times that showcases all of this excitement and buzz? The media has been burnt by the dream of cold fusion before. In 1989, Fleishman and Pons first conducted a series of experiments on cold fusion and produced some truly exciting results. In their excitement, they let their findings slip a little too early, before they had been able to thoroughly study the discovery, or realize consistently positive results. They released their miraculous findings, with claims of having discovered the dream machine of the millennium, and they caused a lot of excitement in the scientific community, at least at first. But they had fallen prey to their own unbridled enthusiasm. Confronted with the potential of what they had discovered – a future resplendent with clean, free energy – they jumped the gun a little prematurely. Their method was reproduced across the globe, but many experiments fell flat. In fact, their method was shown to be effective only 30% of the time. And in the world of empirical fact, 30% is an error, not a discovery. It was supposed that the 30% of experiments that did corroborate Fleishman and Pons’ findings were more likely the result of bribes or ‘friendships,’ not cold fusion. Consequently, it was presumed that Fleishman and Pons were frauds, just a couple of jingoists desperately attempting to gain fame and attention. Cold fusion was thought to have been revealed as a hoax, and the scientists became notorious. All but excommunicated, Fleishman and Pons went underground, where they continued to hone their method and make the process easily replicable and consistent. They checked and double-checked their findings, and they spread their idea to other scientists willing to conduct more thorough investigations, such as Andrea Rossi, whose device has, so far, produced the consistency that Fleishman and Pons’ lacked. This discovery could not come at a better time for the world, when oil resources are quickly becoming scarce, and greenhouse gas emissions are continuing to spike, despite the damage they are causing. So, given the reason for optimism in this period in which energy is particularly expensive, why is the mass media refraining from mentioning cold fusion. Why is it not on the front pages of every newspaper? There are a number of possible explanations. First, the scientific community’s pause could very well be a consequence of the unbridled enthusiasm given by the initial experiments conducted in 1989. After such a humiliation, it is easy to see why scientists would remain skeptical, at least on the surface. Meanwhile, Rossi’s Energy Catalyzer is being slated for reproduction in large-scale, cold fusion reactors later this year. If you compare the pace of Rossi’s tests to the scientific norm, then it is clear that scientists are, indeed, excited. As for the press, there are more insidious explanations to be considered. For one, it is a distinct possibility that a number of enormous businesses, such as oil and coal companies are leaning on mass media sources to keep quiet. Cold fusion power plants would drop the price of energy, thereby putting energy companies out of commission. It is in their best interest to slow down the process of integrating cold fusion. But whatever the reason for mass media silence, you can expect to start hearing about cold fusion by the end of the year. By then, it will be impossible to keep quiet a discovery of this magnitude. Sources: (http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/6.11/coldfusion.html) (http://pesn.com/2011/02 /22/9501770_Rossi_cold_fusion_reactor_achieves_15_kW_for_18_hours/) (http://freeenergytruth.blogspot.com/)

BPA plastics chemical found to feminize males

(NaturalNews) Don’t worry, be happy. Just ignore the fact that countless researchers have warned time and time again that the chemical bisphenol A (BPA for short) is a major hormone disruptor and is a huge threat to human health. After all, we must all be safe because the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) would have banned the stuff long before now if there was really any problem, right? If you agree with the above, you might also think the deadly radiation still spewing from nuclear reactor meltdowns in Japan is nothing to worry about, either. But the truth is always better than sticking your head in the sand, and this is exactly what the FDA seems to be doing when it comes to BPA. Here’s the latest breaking news on what has become an environmental nightmare for both humans and possibly wildlife while the FDA does nothing but express “some concern” that BPA might not be perfectly safe. University of Missouri researchers have evidence that BPA causes male deer mice to lose their masculinity and behave more like females. In fact, female mice sense something isn’t quite “right” about BPA exposed males and don’t want to mate with them. The scientists conclude that exposure to BPA during human development could also be wreaking havoc on hormones and distorting and disrupting behavioral and cognitive traits that are unique to each sex and important in reproduction. “The BPA-exposed deer mice in our study look normal; there is nothing obviously wrong with them. Yet, they are clearly different,” said Cheryl Rosenfeld, associate professor in biomedical sciences in the College of Veterinary Medicine and investigator in the Bond Life Sciences Center, in a statement to the media. “Females do not want to mate with BPA-exposed male deer mice, and BPA-exposed males perform worse on spatial navigation tasks that assess their ability to find female partners in the wild.” “This study sets the stage for BPA researchers to examine how BPA might differentially impact the behavioral and cognitive patterns of boys versus girls,” Rosenfeld added. “Investigators looking for obvious BPA-induced differences, such as chromosome deletions or DNA mutations, could be missing subtle behavioral differences that eventually lead to long-term adverse outcomes, including demasculinization of male behaviors with a decreased reproductive fitness.” For the new study, the researchers fed female deer mice a BPA-supplemented diet for two weeks prior to breeding and throughout lactation. The mothers were given a dosage equivalent to what the U.S. Food and Drug Administration considers a non-toxic dose for pregnant women to ingest. When the deer mice offspring were weaned at 25 days of age, they were fed on a non-supplemented BPA diet. Then, after the rodents matured into adults, their behavior was tested to study each mouse’s ability to navigate a maze to safety. Male deer mice normally have an enhanced spatial navigational ability. It’s important because it allows them to find female mates that are dispersed throughout the environment. Female deer mice do not need to search for mates so their navigational abilities have not been enhanced by evolution. But when the University of Missouri researchers tested the navigational skills of male mice that had been exposed to BPA early in their development, something was terribly wrong. Each male mouse had two five minute opportunities per day, for seven days, to try to find their way in to a home cage through one of several holes placed around the edge of an open maze. What’s more, the maze was marked with a set of visible navigational cues to help the animals. Yet many of them could not find the exit. On the other hand, all the male mice who had not been exposed to BPA found the correct exit quickly – some on the first day. Adding to the strong evidence that the BPA dramatically changed the ability of the male mice to navigate normally, the scientists found that the non-BPA exposed mice quickly learned the most direct approach to finding the correct hole, while the exposed males appeared to sort of randomly and inefficiently wander around looking. The female deer mice also were turned off by potential mates who had been exposed to BPA. In a mate choice experiment, the scientists measured the females’ level of interest in a stranger male by observing specific behaviors, such as nose-to-nose sniffing and the amount of time the female spent checking out her potential partner. According to Dr. Rosenfeld, both non-exposed and BPA-exposed females strongly preferred control males over BPA-exposed males. “These findings presumably have broad implications to other species, including humans, where there are also innate differences between males and females in cognitive and behavioral patterns,” Rosenfeld said in the media statement. “In the wide scheme of things, these behavioral deficits could, in the long term, undermine the ability of a species such as the deer mouse to reproduce in the wild. Whether there are comparable health threats to humans remains unclear, but there clearly must be a concern.” This research, which is set for publication in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences , is the latest in a mounting and damning array of studies showing the dangers of BPA. For example, as NaturalNews has covered extensively, BPA has been found to cause precancerous conditions, kidney and developmental problems in animals. And research published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) showed that humans could be walking time bombs of health problems related to the ingestion of BPA, which is found in virtually all packaged foods. The JAMA study reported for the first time that the chemical might well be linked to the epidemic of heart disease and diabetes in this country (http://www.naturalnews.com/024207_BPA_health_plastics.html). Editor’s note: NaturalNews is opposed to the use of animals in medical experiments that expose them to harm. We present these findings in protest of the way in which they were acquired. For more information: http://www.naturalnews.com/BPA.html http://www.missouri.edu/

Claim: TSA employees now developing cancer clusters from standing near body scanner machines

(NaturalNews) In a new twist to the TSA saga to which we can only say, “We told ya so,” the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) has obtained documents through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) that reveal TSA employees are reporting “cancer clusters” among their own employees who work near radiation body scanners. At the same time, DHS refuses to issue dosimeters to TSA employees because, obviously, those dosimeters would indicate alarming levels of radiation exposure. So it’s better to just keep everyone ignorant and keep irradiating all the TSA employees and hope nobody notices, apparently. That TSA employees are giving themselves cancer by irradiating innocent travelers is perhaps the most striking bit of tragic justice we’ve yet seen in this entire fiasco. TSA agents commit felony crimes every single day against innocent travelers, molesting them, illegally detaining them and humiliating them as part of the “security screening” procedures. They’re also irradiating them with the naked body scanners that we all know Janet Napolitano openly lied about (http://www.naturalnews.com/032839_body_scanners_TSA.html). As a side effect of that irradiation effort, TSA employees are also irradiating themselves . Cancer, not surprisingly, will not be far behind. By the way, the best and most timely reporting on this subject is currently coming from Paul Joseph Watson at PrisonPlanet.com, who, together with Alex Jones leading the protests, has been hammering both the TSA and the Texas legislature over these criminal pat-downs (http://www.prisonplanet.com/cancer-surges-in-body-scanner-operators-tsa-launches-cover-up.html). In an age where nearly all mainstream journalism is little more than comedic shilling for Big Government, it’s refreshing to know that people like Watson are still pursuing the role of honest journalism that questions government’s lies (as in the Nixon era). Napolitano lied about safety of body scanners Why are the body scanners causing cancer clusters among TSA employees? As we reported yesterday, Janet Napolitano lied about the safety of the devices, claiming that NIST had “affirmed the safety” of them. NIST fired back an email that specifically explained NIST doesn’t test the safety of products at all! Ever! Therefore, all the claims that these devices were tested and confirmed as safe was complete B.S. from Napolitano. Just an outright lie. Not a shred of truth to be found. You see, when government has abandoned the truth as a matter of policy, it can only resort to lies to further its agenda. The truth no longer has any place in the U.S. government, where criminals and thugs simply make up whatever lies they want and then pass them off as “truth” to the press (which dutifully reports all government lies as truths). This is precisely the case with the TSA and these naked body scanners. It’s also the situation with the economy, the unemployment rate and the national debt, if you follow economic news. The American empire has become what the Roman Empire was right before its fall: A tragic cabal of professional thieves and liars who run the government and steal from the People. TSA employees fry their own genitals with radiation Now, even though the NIST did not test the safety of these machines, it did warn airport screeners to avoid standing next to them because the machines clearly emitted doses of radiation that could mutate DNA and cause cancer. The bulk of TSA employees, who we’ve already established are among the most intellectually-challenged individuals which are still somehow employable, don’t seem to care that they’re getting fried with radiation every day on the job. In fact, many TSA employees don’t even understand the laws of physics , as has been demonstrated over and over when they tell travelers truly idiotic things like, “There’s no radiation from these machines.” (True story. This is what one of our contributing writers was told by a TSA agent in Denver.) Gee, how do they think the machines work? Do they think they’re magic? Who needs radiation when you can just use magic to see through people! The one notable upshot from all this is the realization that TSA agents might experience so much DNA damage from standing next to those machines that they will be rendered completely infertile and therefore have no ability to reproduce. This, the scientists say, is called “natural selection.” Those best adapted to surviving will pass on their genes to the next generation, while those who fail to protect the integrity of their own DNA get removed from the human gene pool. I can’t think of a more appropriate example of natural selection in action. Darwin eats TSA agents as a mid-morning snack, it seems. So maybe those radiation machines do have a purpose after all… All kidding aside, there’s a kind of poetic justice in the idea that these agents who terrorize innocents will one day find themselves on the receiving end of a chemotherapy drip. It’s not that we wish suffering upon anyone, but this is a suffering they have brought upon themselves . At what point, I wonder, will the cancer-stricken TSA employees finally figure out the government is lying to THEM, too? That’s a realization shared by many veterans who sign up for military service with all sorts of patriotic enthusiasm and then one day realize the government has stolen their health benefits and abandoned their needs. Such is the result of naive faith in a government that couldn’t care less about the people it claims to serve. Well, heck, I’m not even sure the government continues that “serving the people” cover story anymore. Now, the government openly claims to be the supreme power over the servant people. Learn more at EPIC You can read up on the FOIA documents, the cover-ups, the lies and more at the EPIC website: http://epic.org/privacy/airtravel/backscatter/epic_v_dhs_radiation.html There, you’ll find details about the lawsuit, supporting legal documents and more. Thank goodness we have EPIC, huh? I encourage you to consider making a donation to this outstanding non-profit group. They consistently produce important victories in the fight to defend your privacy and freedoms. Also, of course, stay tuned in to www.PrisonPlanet.com where Alex Jones is leading the popular revolt against the TSA. Reaching over 24 million listeners a month, his radio show is probably one of the top three in the nation, and he doesn’t hold back. From time to time, I occasionally serve as a fill-in host for Alex when he’s traveling, so I’m very familiar with his operation there and how hard his entire team works to bring you freedom-oriented news six days a week. (It’s an exhausting job.) Not everybody enjoys Alex’s boisterous approach to delivering information, but I think it’s entirely appropriate given how far our government has descended down the path of tyranny and corruption. This is not a time to stay silent. Unless, for some reason, you just enjoy having your reproductive organs irradiated by a body scanning machine that’s probably giving the TSA’s own employees cancer right this minute.

Biotech quick fix for superweeds could lead to ‘super superweeds’

(NaturalNews) Albert Einstein once defined insanity as doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. And that is exactly how the biotechnology industry and government agencies are trying to handle the escalating “superweed” epidemic. According to a recent report out of Washington University (WU) in St. Louis, Mo., the chemical industry’s answer to genetically-modified (GM) induced superweeds is to now tamper with the genetics of the superweeds themselves, which may appear to provide a quick fix, but will eventually spur an even worse breed of “super superweeds.” Superweeds, of course, are the byproduct of genetically-engineered (GE) crops that have been programmed to resist certain pesticides and herbicides. Use of these chemicals has increased as a result, and the weeds they were designed to kill have over time developed a resistance to them as well, having mutated into what we now know as superweeds (http://www.naturalnews.com/weeds.html). But instead of recognizing the problem as having stemmed from GE technology in the first place, purveyors of GMOs are now looking at ways to genetically modify superweeds. This insane notion will most likely not even work, but even worse is the fact that it is sure to exacerbate the problem even further to the point that there will eventually be no way to control ever-mutating stocks of “Frankenweeds.” WU researchers have basically identified the mechanism behind the ability of horseweed, a type of superweed, to resist Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide, also known as glyphosate. And by playing around with varying temperatures and times of application, the scientists determined that in certain weather and under certain conditions, they were able to successfully mitigate the superweed. But this method of reactionary problem solving does not address the root cause of the issue, and in fact only makes it worse. GMOs and the pesticides they require to grow are spawning unnatural superweeds that are slowly destroying the whole of agriculture. And ironically, coming up with a quick fix such as tampering with the genetics of the superweeds themselves is a recipe for epic disaster in the long run. Sources for this story include: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/06/110616142901.htm

Natural cure discovered for debilitating heart syndrome POTS

(NaturalNews) Imagine simply standing up and feeling your heart speed up more than 30 beats a minute — sometimes it races well over 120 beats a minutes. You also have heart palpitations out the blue and low stroke volume (the amount of blood your heart pumps with each blood). Even the amount of blood in your body is too low. These are the symptoms of Postural Orthostatic Tachycardia Syndrome (POTS) — dubbed “The Grinch Syndrome” because the majority of patients have a heart that is literally, to use Dr. Seuss’ description of the Grinch’s heart, “two sizes too small.” POTS affects about 500,000 people in the U.S., primarily young women. And while it isn’t life-threatening, it can destroy the quality of a person’s life and cause substantial disability by bringing on symptoms such as dizziness, lightheadedness, fatigue, inability to stand for prolonged periods of time (chronic orthostatic intolerance) and fainting. But now there’s evidence POTS can be cured without drugs or surgery, according to research just published in Hypertension: Journal of the American Medical Association . It isn’t the easiest “prescription” for many POTS sufferers but knowing they can be cured may be enough to get them started on this natural path to total healing. The treatment? Regular exercise. “The exercise training program is a resounding success in the treatment of POTS,” Benjamin Levine, M.D., senior study author and director at the Institute for Exercise and Environmental Medicine at Texas Health Presbyterian Dallas, said in a statement to the media. As anyone with POTS knows, the condition can cause such dizziness and fatigue that exercise can seem downright impossible. But the researchers figured out a way to help POTS sufferers begin exercising safely. “The unique component is to start training in a recumbent (semi-reclining) position, which is important to those who can’t tolerant standing. This strategy avoids the upright position that produces symptoms. We don’t even let patients stand up to exercise for one or even two months,” explained Levine who is also professor of medicine and cardiology and distinguished professorship in exercise science at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas. “However, to maintain the benefits these patients will need to incorporate the training program into their everyday lives indefinitely.” There are a variety of recumbent or sitting exercises include cycling with a recumbent bike, rowing and swimming. Dr. Levine and his research team recommend exercise training for POTS patients that progressively increases in intensity, frequency and duration. The training regime, they said, should start with 30 to 45 minute sessions, two to four times per week. Eventually, patients work up to exercising five to six hours each week and they are encouraged to exercise upright when they are able to. For the recent study, the scientists worked with 18 women (average age 27) and one man who completed a double-blind drug trial. The POTS sufferers were randomized to receive either the beta blocker propranolol, commonly prescribed for their heart condition, or a placebo for four weeks. After that time period, the research subjects participated three months of exercise training. There was also a control group of 15 non-POTS healthy participants who participated in the study. The results of the study showed that all POTS patients who completed the exercise training showed improvement in physical function scores. What’s more 95 percent of them showed improvement in their ability to function socially. Every single POTS patient who completed the exercise regime showed an improvement in heart rate responses and over half – 53 percent – were actually “cured” of their POTS. That means their change in heart rate with standing no longer met the diagnostic criteria for the syndrome. More good news for POTS sufferers: aldosterone-to-renin ratio (the regulation of sodium balance, fluid volume and blood pressure) has long been known to be low in people with POTS and the standard drug therapy given these people does nothing to help. But not so with the all-natural exercise regime — the aldosterone-to-renin ration, which plays a critical role in how the body handles changes to blood circulation during prolonged standing, showed a dramatic increase in the POTS patients who worked out regularly. The researchers’ analyses also showed the group receiving beta blocker drugs showed no change in social function scores and very few patients taking the drugs improved their physical function scores at all. “Exercise training is superior to the beta blocker in restoring upright blood circulation, improving kidney function and dramatically improving quality of life,” Qi Fu, M.D., Ph.D., study first-author and assistant professor of internal medicine and cardiology at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, concluded in the statement to the media. For more information: www.heart.org/news

WHO panel warns that cell phone use may cause cancer

(NaturalNews) Scientists from the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), a group affiliated with the World Health Organization (WHO), say that mobile phones are a “possible” carcinogen that may be a cause of cancer. The findings, which support previous research on the subject, add to the growing body of evidence which suggests that the electromagnetic radiation emitted from mobile phones causes serious health problems. “A positive association has been observed between exposure to the agent and cancer for which a causal interpretation is considered … to be credible,” states the IARC. However, in the same train of thought, the agency claims that evidence is “limited” to suggest that mobile phone usage is linked to glioma or acoustic neuroma, two types of brain cancer. In 2009, IARC published a study in the Journal of Clinical Oncology that linked mobile phone usage to an 18 percent increase in brain tumor risk. And because it was observed that such tumors tended to form on the sides of brains where mobile phones were primarily used, the connection between the two is even more striking (http://www.naturalnews.com/027448_cell_phone_brain_health.html). Another report issued in 2010 by the International Electromagnetic Field Cooperative (IEFC) also found a link between mobile phone usage and increased rates of brain tumors. Included in this report is a Swedish study that found a 420 percent increase in brain cancer rates among children who began using mobile and cordless phones as teenagers, as opposed to those that did not (http://www.naturalnews.com/028078_cell_phones_brain_cancer.html). With all of this research now available and the latest announcement from IARC, one would think more people would be concerned about the risks involved with the excessive use of mobile phones and looking for less-risky alternatives or using hands-free devices at the very least. But because the period between when a cancer patient is exposed to this radiation and when he or she develops tumors typically spans several decades, some experts claim that the link between the two is inconclusive and are content to tell the public there is really little to worry about. Sources for this story include: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110531/ap_on_he_me/eu_med_cellphones_and_cancer

Next Page »