Hospital patients now being microchipped with "electronic tattoos"

(NaturalNews) Being microchipped is now being spun as a method of protecting the health of hospital patients. To help mask the practice of this bodily invasion with a trendy, high-tech appearance, microchipping sensors are being referred to as “electronic tattoos” that can attach to human skin and stretch and move without breaking. Supposedly the comparisons of this hair-thin electronic patch-like chip to an electronic tattoo are being made because of how it adheres to the skin like a temporary tattoo using only water. The small chip is less than 50 micrometers thick, which is thinner in diameter than a human hair. It is being marketed as a “safe” and easy way to temporarily monitor the heart and brain in patients while replacing bulky medical equipment currently being used in hospitals. This device uses micro-electronics technology called an epidermal electronic system (EES) and is said to be a development that will “transform” medical sensing technology, computer gaming and even spy operations, according to a study published last week. The hair-thin chip was developed by an international team of researchers from the United States, China and Singapore and is described in the Journal of Science. The proven link between animal microchipping and cancer Pet microchips have become increasingly common over the past few years. These chips are marked with a small barcode that can be scanned just like the tags on grocery items. This seems to suggest that microchips are meant to turn the wearer into an object that can be tracked and catalogued. Once inserted in an animal, the chip stays there for the entirety of its lifetime and can be used to identify the pet if it should be found on the street or turned into a shelter. The subdermal chips are often recommended by vets and animal care experts as a way to ensure lost pets find their way home again. But research suggests that despite their proclaimed usefulness, pet microchips may cause cancer. Multiple studies have clearly linked pet microchips with increased incidence of cancer and tumors in mice and rats. In the past, public disclosure of these suggested links between microchipping and cancer in animals stirred widespread concern over the safety of implantable microchips in living beings. The animal microchip study findings that created such an uproar were so persuasive that Dr. Robert Benezra, head of the Cancer Biology Genetics Program at the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center in New York, was quoted in an article about microchipping as saying, “There’s no way in the world, having read this information, that I would have one of those chips implanted in my skin, or in one of my family members.” A 2001 study found that 1% of rats with implanted microchips developed cancerous tumors near the chip location. At least a dozen animal studies have been done between 1990 and 2007 and most concluded that microchips significantly increased the risk of cancer at the microchip site. Soon we’ll all have “cool electronic tattoos!” All the electronic parts of the new EES chip are built out of wavy, snake-like components which allow them to be stretched and squeezed. They also contain tiny solar cells which can generate power or get energy from electromagnetic radiation. The sensor is mounted on to a water-soluble sheet of plastic and attached to the body by brushing the surface with water – hence the comparison to a temporary tattoo. This new device being implanted in hospital patients certainly looks and acts like a microchip – yet it is persistently being referred to as an “electronic tattoo” in order to make the concept appear harmless, friendly – even trendy! Invasive microchips – is the cost worth the convenience? Scientists claim the supposed advantage of the EES chips is their ability to cut back on the bevy of wires, gel-coated sticky pads and monitors that are currently relied on to keep track of the vital signs of hospital patients. Apparently these traditional forms of bulky equipment and monitors are overly “distressing” to patients. It appears scientists believe these new microchips are convenient enough that they outweigh the potential risks. In test trials, the microchip was purposefully attached to the throat of a human and used to detect differences in words such as up, down, left, right, go and stop. Researchers used these functions to control a simple computer game. Is the convenience of not having to manually operate equipment great enough to justify the implantation of an electronic sensor beneath the skin of humans? Would you trust a microchip to monitor your bodily functions without causing health hazards in the process? The future of America: microchipped zombies Researchers believe the technology could be used to replace traditional wires and cables, but this sounds remarkably like an excuse used to cover up the real truth: that this new microchipping method is a way to ensure all of us are eventually microchipped and able to be tracked and monitored. Soon, everyone will be required to wear chips or “tattoos” that prove they got their vaccinations, to link to health records, credit history and social security records. If the government can require Americans to carry microchipped documents including your work, financial and health records, it seems it is only a matter of time before these chips will be implanted for the sake of “convenience” or “security.” According to them, all of this is being done “for our own good.” Read more and watch videos about the government’s agenda to microchip all humans by 2017 here: http://yedies.blogspot.com/2010/11/microchipping-humans-by-2017.html Sources used and further reading: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-14489208 http://www.breitbart.com/article.php? id=CNG.6e1e2ad90e2d94b12b6258b7e9c5b33d.611&show_article=1 http://www.suite101.com/content/do-pet-microchips-cause-cancer-a127237

Architects and engineers challenge official story of World Trade Center Building 7 collapse

(NaturalNews) Most of us remember the horror of the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks, and the mental images of the collapse of the twin World Trade Center towers is forever etched into our minds. But while the reason for their demise is well-known, well documented and well accepted, there remain serious doubts about exactly why another WTC structure, Building 7, imploded in the afternoon on that fateful day. Scores of television and radio news outlets who had reporters on the scene, as well eyewitnesses and – perhaps most importantly – a number of architectural engineers all believe that WTC Building 7 buckled and fell not because of raging fires on the first floor that tore through office furniture and weakened the structure, as a government agency concluded , but because it had been rigged well in advance with explosives. As incredible as it sounds, the evidence – again, much of it from first-hand eyewitnesses and structural engineering experts – strongly supports that conclusion . According to a video report by AE911Truth, some 1,500 engineers and architects now say WTC 7 “could not have been brought down by office fires.” Watch the video at: http://naturalnews.tv/v.asp?v=100AB0D5050B41D63CBC2FC1451CEAED One of those expert critics is Richard Gage, a member of the American Institute of Architects and founder of American Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth , who says fire has caused equal or worse damage to other, taller structures, without ever producing the same effect. “Fires have never before caused the collapse of any skyscraper, even though there are numerous examples of much hotter, larger and longer lasting fires in these buildings,” he said. “And in the case of Building 7, the fire that NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology) said started the collapse had actually burned out over an hour before. “It could not have caused the collapse as [the government] said,” he added, noting that the very “modern” Building 7 was not struck by an aircraft and collapsed “mostly into its own footprint… in just under seven seconds.” Michael Donly, a structural engineer, says since the building “came down on its own footprint,” meaning that “all of the (support) columns needed to be severed at the same time in order for that structure to fall the way that we saw.” Adds Kathy McGrade, a metallurgical engineer, “The symmetry is the smoking gun.” Other experts interviewed for the video report said that when WTC 7 collapsed in the fluid manner in which it fell, it was obvious that it the top two-thirds of the building were not meeting any structural resistance from the ground level, meaning that all parts of the structure had to have collapsed in unison. Other experts said their visual analysis of the collapse was “a classic implosion,” as in, the building had been rigged to collapse in on itself. “In an office fire, you cannot generate enough heat to melt steel,” McGrade insisted. “And yet, we have evidence of molten iron” that was found in the debris of WTC 7. “R.J. Lee Company, USGS (United States Geological Survey) and [work from other experts] all three separately found these microspheres” of molten iron and steel – indicative of a thermitic reaction that likely destroyed the steel beams, she said. In addition to the physical evidence, NYC firefighters testified that they saw molten steel in the debris of WTC 7. The bottom line is this: If the building was destroyed purposely – and the evidence is very strong that it was – the question now is, why ? And if so, what was the point in covering it up? America lost nearly 3,000 sons, daughters, mothers and fathers on that fateful day. How does a cover-up do them justice? Watch the video at: http://naturalnews.tv/v.asp?v=100AB0D5050B41D63CBC2FC1451CEAED Sources: http://www.nist.gov/manuscript-publication-search.cfm?pub_id=909254 http://www.prisonplanet.com/architects-engineers-solving-the-mystery-of-wtc-7.html

Baby products contain toxic flame retardant chemicals

(NaturalNews) Potentially toxic flame retardants, many of them containing compounds known as penta brominated diphenyl ethers, are a common component of many household products containing polyurethane foam. Originally intended to increase product safety by decreasing fire risk, these compounds have come under increasing scrutiny since the early 1990s due to growing evidence of their damaging health effects. But even though these chemicals have been banned in 172 countries and 12 U.S. states, they continue to make their way into a wide variety of products found in U.S. households, including toys and upholstered furniture. In an especially disconcerting study conducted by researchers at Duke University earlier this year, potentially toxic flame retardants were found in 80 percent of samples of polyurethane foam collected from baby products commonly and legally sold in the U.S.. Samples were taken from car seats, high chairs, strollers, nursing pillows and bassinet mattresses. The results of the study were published in 2011 by the American Chemical Society journal Environmental Science and Technology, and suggest that additional research is warranted “to specifically measure infants exposure to these flame retardants from intimate contact with these products, and to determine if there are any associated health concerns.” Penta brominated diphenyl ethers, also known PBDEs, are known to bio-accumulate in fatty tissue, breast milk and blood after being inhaled or ingested with food. The highest and most dangerous concentrations of ingestible and inhalable PBDEs occur in plants that repair and recycle products containing these chemicals, and also in domestic environments, since they persistently show up in household products containing polyurethane foam. Recent studies show that in the U.S., blood concentrations of PBDEs are much higher in children than in adults. These chemicals are known to have damaging effects on nervous system development and can also disrupt the function of estrogen and thyroid hormones. When children are exposed to these chemicals early in life, either through inhalation or ingestion with breast milk, their damaging effects have been known to persist into adulthood and may include reduced performance on intelligence tests and behavioral changes like hyperactivity. The Duke University study suggests that even though the manufacture and distribution of PBDEs is subject to increasing restrictions in the U.S. and Europe, these dangerous flame retardants are still finding their way into our homes and the body tissues of developing infants. It may be wise to check labels carefully and investigate PBDE levels before exposing infants to polyurethane foam products.

World to be force-fed test tube meat after livestock failure

(NaturalNews) In vitro meat is one of the latest attempts from scientists and bio-engineers to create a substitute for traditional meat production. The technology for creating meats through meat cultures in vitro is far from perfected, but enthusiasm for the effort is plentiful. Support for cultured meat technology comes from a wide spectrum of interests as well. Many vegans are stepping forward in endorsement of the pseudo meats citing the cruelty of traditional animal meat production, the use of hormones, antibiotics and ultimately the slaughter of millions of animals yearly. Animal rights advocates have also stepped forward in support of this technology. In fact, PETA has gone so far as to offer a reward of a million dollars to any entity that can develop an in vitro meat product that can be cost effectively mass produced. The scientists and backers of this technology suggest that a burgeoning population makes developing in vitro meats a necessity for a litany of reasons. For instance, traditional animal husbandry requires vast tracts of land, and stores of water. Livestock also contributes to global warming. Pundits suggest that in vitro meat will be safer and healthier. Their reasoning includes the argument that cholesterol and fat can be regulated during production. In addition, because the product will be produced under strict quality control, food borne bacteria will be significantly reduced. How is in vitro meat produced? A simple explanation of in vitro meat includes: 1. Harvesting of cells from a healthy donor animal 2. Separation of cells from tissue – Primarily muscle cells and stem cells 3. Cultivating cells in a nutritious solution 4. Bulking newly formed tissue up 5. Mincing for meat product That sounds easy enough. What’s the problem? Apparently there are a few. For example, though there has been success in making in vitro meat strips suitable for mincing, the appearance and taste of the meat is less than appealing up to this point. The technology is far from economical at this stage for a variety of reasons. For instance, much of the current production of in vitro meat relies on using non animal based nutrients to grow the cells in. Animal products can’t be used in the process because the cells can’t digest animal derived nutrients themselves. Instead solutions must contain nutrients from other sources such as plant and microorganisms. This result in a slower process, so mass production is not available at this point. Though in vitro meat production doesn’t require the use of genetically modified organisms, the idea of using enhanced meat is being discussed as a means to speeding up the production process. In addition, the use of growth hormone has also been considered by some researchers. Engineered meat may help meet the high demand world wide as traditional ranching and farming flounders under the demand, but there are unanswered questions with the use of these products. For instance, how will in vitro meat stack up nutritionally to natural beef? Will in vitro meats be affordable especially to people in third world countries or to poor people in developed nations? Will GMOs and growth hormones be necessary for the production of this food, and who will have control over this new technology? Meat consumption may not necessarily be essential to survival, but animal products remain one of the most efficient ways of acquiring certain nutrients such as B12, and iron. This is especially important for areas with limited agricultural opportunities and for cultures that rely heavily on animal products for sustenance. In vitro meats are also a concern for people who are concerned about turning over control of the world s food supply to a handful of agribusinesses. For specialized food production such as in vitro products may be cost prohibitive, and traditional family owned agribusinesses will likely go bankrupt. The world has an enormous appetite for animal products and that combined with a population explosion means that we will have to look for solutions that are affordable, safe and nutritious. If we are unable to do so, control of the world’s food supplies will slip away from individuals, families, regions, and even independent nations and fall into the hands of large agribusinesses and corporations. Even more disturbing will be having no control whatsoever in what goes in to the foods we eat. Furthermore relinquishing control over what foods we eat and how it is produced sets a dangerous president as well. For instance, will we be penalized if we choose to raise our own foods, or buy natural or organic foods produced by small companies? Will the in vitro meat industry be required to label their foods for any genetic modifications they deem necessary? Science has made huge contributions to food production and feeding the population. However, science shouldn’t rule the world; rather it should enhance and support the population and their will. Here is a quote from the web page of The Centre for Society and Genomics, a think tank heavily invested in in vitro meat based in the Netherlands, for your consideration: “Genomics can lead to better quality foodstuffs. What’s more, genomics research can contribute towards a personalized diet, leading to a healthier lifestyle. But are these promises not too rash, considering the complex relationship between food and health? And what if the knowledge and opportunities are available, but consumers refuse to follow the lifestyle that is good for them, should they then be held personally responsible for the consequences?” (8) Sources and further reading 1. http://www.futurefood.org Accessed online 6/29/11 2. http://www.invitromeat.org Accessed online 6/30/11 3. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2008347/Test-tube-burger-coming-soon- Lab-grown-meat-needed-feed-world.html Accessed online 6/29/11 4. http://www.new-harvest.org/faq.htm Accessed online 6/30/11 5. http://www.new-harvest.org/research.htm 6. http://www.society-genomics.nl/en/projects/nutrition.html 7. http://www.new-harvest.org/img/files/datar_and_betti.pdf 8. http://www.society-genomics.nl/en/projects/nutrition.html Accessed 6/29/11

Exposed documents reveal Napolitano, TSA lied about safety of cancer-causing naked body scanners

(NaturalNews) Remember when Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Janet Napolitano claimed back in 2010 that the US Transportation Security Administration’s (TSA) naked body scanners had been proven safe by research conducted by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) (http://epic.org/privacy/backscatter/USAToday.pdf)? A Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request recently brought to light internal emails that were sent by NIST to DHS that basically decry Napolitano’s false assertion that NIST had verified the safety of the naked body scanners. Amid the string of emails discussing the matter, an undisclosed sender explains that NIST was “a little concerned” over Napolitano’s public reassurances that TSA’s naked body scanners are safe. After all, NIST does not test products, and it never tested the naked body scanners in the first place. Napolitano apparently took the individual machine dose measurements that NIST had gathered and twisted them to say what she wanted them to say, which was that the machines are safe. You can view a partially-censored copy of that email exchange here: http://epic.org/privacy/backscatter/USAToday.pdf Worse, NIST had actually warned DHS and TSA that the machines were not necessarily safe, and that airport screening agents should avoid standing next to them because of the harmful radiation they emit. It is unclear whether or not this warning was ever taken seriously by TSA officials. Napolitano also falsely claimed that research conducted by the Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory confirms the safety of naked body scanners, even though the research actually suggests the opposite. Dr. Michael Love from the school publicly stated that the machines are going to give people skin cancer, and the specific findings of the report indicate that “radiation zones” around the machines emit enough radiation to exceed the “General Public Dose Limit.” One thing is for sure, though. Many current and former TSA agents who have developed cancers are now speaking out against the machines, as they believe repeated and continual exposure to them is responsible for their conditions. Many TSA agents have repeatedly requested that they be given dosimeters to wear that will warn them of dangerous radiation exposure — but TSA higher-ups have never followed through in addressing their concerns, despite empty promises that they would. Sources for this story include: http://www.prisonplanet.com/new-documents-prove-tsa-mischaracterized-safety-aspects-of-full-body-scanners.html http://epic.org/2011/06/epic-v-dhs-lawsuit—-foiad-do.html

Chief scientists continue to ignore science by promoting GMOs

(NaturalNews) U.K. authorities recently released a report entitled Global Food and Farming Futures which recommends that “new technologies” in agriculture not be excluded merely on ethical or moral grounds. But Britain’s Chief Scientist took this language and perverted it into an endorsement for genetically-modified organisms (GMOs), despite the fact that a more credible report issued by the International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Scientific and Technology for Development (IAASTD) expresses quite the opposite concerning biotechnology in agriculture. Upon first release of the report, the U.K. mainstream media went wild, falsely reporting that it proved the need for GMOs to feed the world, and that planting “Frankencrops” is the only way for agriculture to survive in the long term. And Beddington made a series of ignorant and unscientific statements himself, suggesting that GMOs will solve the problems of water shortages and salination, and that they are the “key to human survival.” For being “Chief Scientist”, Beddington seems to have a minimal grasp on reality, let alone actual science. Twenty-five years of GMO research has yet to produce a single drought-resistant crop. It has also failed to produce a salt-tolerant crop, or any other crop that outperforms conventional crops, for that matter. It has, however, increased pesticide use and multinational corporate control over agriculture, though. Yet none of these facts stopped the “chief” or the media choir from blabbing their nonsensical opinions about the alleged benefits of GMOs. The only thing the report actually illustrates is the fact that the current industrial food system and its biotechnological leanings are taking us in the wrong direction. This was also the conclusion of the highly-credible IAASTD report as well, which points toward small-scale, diversified agriculture as the real answer to the world’s food problems. According to GroundTruth , many of the “400 authors and contributors” to the Global Food and Farming Futures report did not even actually contribute to it. “I didn’t participate in any meetings, discussions, findings, or report writing,” explained one scientist listed as a contributor. Instead, he was asked to write a review for another publication. He added that GMOs were never mentioned anywhere in any of the material he dealt with, though, and that they were never the issue at hand. It turns out that a government advisory group actually funded the study with the purpose of convincing officials to keep an open mind to things like GMOs, and to contradict the IAASTD report. So the report is nothing more than an unscientific, fraudulent propaganda piece that Britain’s Chief Scientist and his country’s media repertoire are using to advance a pro-GMO agenda, and nothing more. Sources for this story include: http://www.panna.org/blog/gmo-apologists-ignore-science-again

New NASA research points to possible HAARP connection in Japan earthquake, tsunami

(NaturalNews) Recent data released by Dimitar Ouzounov and colleagues from the NASA Goddard Space Flight Center in Maryland highlights some strange atmospheric anomalies over Japan just days before the massive earthquake and tsunami struck on March 11. Seemingly inexplicable and rapid heating of the ionosphere directly above the epicenter reached a maximum only three days prior to the quake, according to satellite observations, suggesting that directed energy emitted from transmitters used in the High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program (HAARP) may have been responsible for inducing the quake. Published in the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) publication Technology Review , the findings are presented alongside a different theory called Lithosphere-Atmosphere-Ionosphere Coupling, which hypothesizes that the heating in the ionosphere may have been caused by the impending earthquake as the fault line released radioactive radon. This theory, of course, is not actually proven, but is instead presented as a possible explanation for the presence of the high-density electrons and emitted infrared radiation that was observed. Another explanation for this strange heating — and one that, upon analysis, seems much more likely — is that it was an indication that concentrated energy was used to induce the earthquake , and not the other way around. Numerous credible reports and scientific observations reveal that HAARP technology is fully capable of being used as a scalar weapon, meaning it can emit strong electromagnetic pulse bombs that can alter weather or trigger seismic fault lines. Evidence that HAARP is not only capable of inducing earthquakes, but that it appears to have been used on Japan A casual glance at the graphics presented as part of Ouzounov’s research data shows near-perfect heat rings present above the epicenter of the quake. If radon emissions from the fault line were truly responsible for creating these heat zones, they would more than likely have had irregular, scattered appearances, rather than concentric circles. This anomaly by itself debunks the theory that the impending earthquake caused the heat patterns. Also, readings from the HAARP Induction Magnetometer, which visualizes the frequency spectrum of signals detected in the earth’s geomagnetic field, show that a steady, ultra-low frequency (ULF) of roughly 2.5 Hz was being broadcast days before the earthquake. The 2.5 Hz ULF happens to be the exact same frequency as the natural resonance produced by an earthquake — and since there were no constant earthquakes occurring on the days before the quake as the HAARP Induction Magnetometer appeared to indicate, the logical conclusion is that the signal was being broadcast to induce the quake (http://presscore.ca/2011/?p=1624). Some would argue that HAARP is not capable of producing such frequencies, especially at the power levels that would be required to induce a massive earthquake like the 9.0+ that occurred in Japan. But testimony by various governments says otherwise. On April 28, 1997, then US Secretary of Defense William S. Cohen gave an important keynote address at the Conference on Terrorism, Weapons of Mass Destruction, and US Strategy at the University of Georgia in Athens. When asked a question about terrorism, Cohen had this to say as part of his response about the type of technology that existed, even back then: “Others are engaging even in an eco-type terrorism whereby they can alter the climate, set off earthquakes, volcanoes remotely through the use of electromagnetic waves” (http://www.defense.gov/transcripts/transcript.aspx?transcriptid=674). This admission counters the claims made by some that no such technology exists, and that it is impossible to create seismic activity using directed energy. Clearly the technology has been around for a while, and the notion of it being used as a weapon is anything but a baseless conspiracy theory. Then, there is the EU report on the environment, security and foreign policy, that was released on January 14, 1999 (http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-//EP//TEXT+REPORT+A4-1999-0005+0+DOC+XML+V0//EN). This report outlines various types of weapon threats, including a section entitled, “HAARP – a weapons system which disrupts the climate.” The paper explains that HAARP is “run jointly by the US Air Force and Navy,” and that one of its purposes is “to heat up portions of ionosphere with powerful radio beams.” It also states the following important details: “HAARP can be used for many purposes. Enormous quantities of energy can be controlled by manipulating the electrical characteristics of the atmosphere. If used as a military weapon this can have a devastating impact on an enemy. HAARP can deliver millions of times more energy to a given area than any other conventional transmitter. The energy can also be aimed at a moving target which should constitute a potential anti-missile system.” Later references to HAARP describe it as “a matter of global concern,” emphasizing that most people have no idea it even exists. This was written, of course, more than a decade ago — and yet not much has changed since that time, despite several pushes to make HAARP more transparent. But if HAARP is truly responsible for helping to induce some of the seemingly natural disasters that occur in the world, it is no surprise that the program continues to be kept largely under wraps. You can view the HAARP Fluxgate Magnetometer for yourself at the following link: http://maestro.haarp.alaska.edu/cgi-bin/scmag/disp-scmag.cgi Sources for this story include: http://www.technologyreview.com/blog/arxiv/26773/

Do cell phones cause cancer?

(NaturalNews) This week the World Health Organizations officially classified cellphones as possibly carcinogenic to humans. This statement was made from a team of 31 scientists from 14 countries who made this decision after reviewing the data from previous peer-reviewed studies. The team looked for links between cancer and the type of radiation found in cellphones. Their conclusion was to classify cellphones in category 2B which means cellphones are possibly carcinogenic to humans. Other compounds in the 2B category include lead, nickel, DDT, chloroform and gasoline exhaust. Dr. Christopher Wild, director of the International Agency for Research on Cancer, said this new WHO report is important “first and foremost just because of the large number of users worldwide that have access now to this technology.” Globally, it’s estimated there are 5 billion cell phones being used, that’s three fourths of the population on earth. However, because cellphone usage habits have changed since the early studies, it’s difficult to know whether the conclusions from previous studies are still relevant today. Also, the current studies haven’t looked at usage longer than 10 years. So, there is a lot more research to be conducted to get a clear sense of whether cell phones actually cause cancer. In the meantime, if you are concerned about any potential health risks of cellphones the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) have suggested some steps to take including: – Use of cell phones mainly for shorter conversations, or for times when a landline phone is not available. – Switch to a cell phone with a hands-free device that will place more distance between the phone and your head. Sources: http://monographs.iarc.fr/ http://transition.fcc.gov/cgb/cellular.html http://www.fda.gov/Radiation-EmittingProducts/RadiationEmittingProductsandProcedures/HomeBusinessandEntertainment/CellPhones/ucm116293.htm

Scientists push to implement edible RFID tracking chips in food

(NaturalNews) It will monitor your calorie intake, show from where your food was sourced, and even let you know when the food in your fridge is about to go bad — these are some of the enticing claims made by the developers of a new system that embeds edible radio frequency identification (RFID) chips directly into food. Its creators insist the technology will revolutionize the way humans eat for the better, but critical-thinking onlookers will recognize the ploy as just another way to track and control human behavior. Developed by Hannes Harms from the Royal College of Art in London, the “NutriSmart” system is based on the idea that RFID wafers injected directly into food can help better track the food supply chain, further automate the supermarket shopping experience, and simplify the eating experience by programming data into food so that humans essentially do not have to think about what they are doing. The technology makes both eating and dealing with food in general mindless, as a person simply needs to plop an RFID-embedded food item onto a special RFID-laced plate, which then tells the person all about the item and how much of it to eat. RFID ovens and microwaves also eliminate having to think about how long to cook an RFID food item — simply put it in the RFID microwave, oven, or toaster, and the machine will know exactly how long to cook the item. As interesting and novel as this might sound, such technology is actually quite frightening when taken to its logical ends. NaturalNews previously warned that mad scientists have already developed edible RFID tags for use in pharmaceutical drugs (http://www.naturalnews.com/028663_health_care_technology.html). These tags, of course, can and will likely be used to monitor patients’ compliance with doctors orders, and alert authorities if a patient refuses to take certain pills as prescribed. And if such technology also ends up in food, it is safe to assume that evil powers will seek to control the food supply with it, as well as monitor the types of food people eat. In other words, if authorities one day decide that vitamin and mineral supplements are off limits, which is what is currently happening in Europe (http://www.naturalnews.com/032389_herbal_remedies_Europe.html), it is plausible that RFID technology can assess illegal intake of such nutrients, and immediately send this data to the appropriate enforcement agencies. This 1984-esque scenario appears to be more than just science fiction — it is unfolding before our eyes just a little bit more every single day. And the NutriSmart system is just another piece of evidence that those in power wish to micromanage every single aspect of our lives, from the drugs we take to the foods we eat. Sources for this story include: http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-05-nutrismart-rfids-food.html

TSA backscatter radiation safety tests were rigged

(NaturalNews) It can now be revealed by NaturalNews that the TSA faked its safety data on its X-ray airport scanners in order to deceive the public about the safety of such devices. As evidenced by recent events in Washington, we now live in an age where the federal government simply fakes whatever documents, news or evidence it wants people to believe, then releases that information as if it were fact. This is the modus operandi of the Department of Homeland Security, which must fabricate false terror alerts to keep itself in business — and now the TSA division has taken the fabrication of false evidence to a whole new level with its naked body scanners (see below). Even physics professors question the TSA’s obvious cover-up The evidence of the TSA’s fakery is now obvious thanks to the revelations of a letter signed by five professors from the University of California, San Francisco and Arizona State University. You can view the full text of the letter at: http://www.propublica.org/documents/item/april-2011-letter-to-john-holdren The letter reveals: • To this day, there has been no credible scientific testing of the TSA’s naked body scanners. The claimed “safety” of the technology by the TSA is based on rigged tests. • The testing that did take place was done on a custom combination of spare parts rigged by the manufacturer of the machines (Rapidscan) and didn’t even use the actual machines installed in airports. In other words, the testing was rigged . • The names of the researchers who conducted the radiation tests at Rapidscan have been kept secret! This means the researchers are not available for scientific questioning of any kind, and there has been no opportunity to even ask whether they are qualified to conduct such tests. (Are they even scientists?) TSA operates in complete secrecy None of the Rapidscan tests have been available to be subjected to peer review . They are quite literally secret tests using secret techniques engineered by secret researchers. We the People apparently have no right to see the data, nor the methodology, nor even the names of the researchers who supposedly carried out these safety tests. • The final testing report produced from this fabricated testing scenario has been so heavily redacted that “there is no way to repeat any of these measurements,” say the professors. In other words, the testing violates the very first tenant of scientific experimentation which is that all experiments must be repeatable in order to be verified as accurate. As the professors state in their letter: The document is heavily redacted with red stamps over the words and figures. In every case the electric current used which correlates one to one with X-ray dose has been specifically redacted. Thus there is no way to repeat any of these measurements. While the report purports to present the results of objective testing, in fact the JHU APL personnel, who are unnamed anywhere in the document either as experimenters or as authors, were not provided with a machine by Rapiscan. Instead they were invited to the manufacturing site to observe a mock-up of components (spare parts) that were said to be similar to those that are parts of the Rapiscan system. The tests were performed by the manufacturer using the manufacturer’s questionable test procedures. You got that? Where is the outrage from the “scientific” community on all this? This quack science TSA testing is so atrociously and inexcusably bad that if this fabricated evidence were presented at any sort of scientific meeting, they would be laughed off the stage and publicly vilified in the media. And yet, somehow, when the TSA engaged in this sort of quack science, virtually the entire scientific community says nothing. Only a small group of especially courageous scientists has stood up to this obvious quackery, and even these professors are of course being blasted in the press and called un-American for merely questioning the obviously flimsy evidence being laughably fronted by the TSA. I mean, seriously: Can you imagine the total outcry if an herbal product company claimed that its products cured cancer, and it did all the testing itself, and all the names of the researchers were kept secret, and the methodology was a secret, and the whole document was 50% redacted to protect “proprietary information?” They would actually be arrested by the federal government for running a criminal scam! So why can the TSA get away with the exact same scandalous junk science distortions and virtually no one in the mainstream media asks a single question? The complete fabrication of safety in the name of false science It’s amazing what America has come to these days, folks. The federal government isn’t merely counterfeiting money every day (or stealing from your retirement accounts to keep itself afloat, which just started happening yesterday), but the feds are also fabricating scientific evidence to keep pushing their utterly fabricated “war on terror.” The feds in Washington aren’t really fighting a war on terror… they ARE the terror! When the feds reach down your pants and feel your junk; when they force you to be fried with high-powered X-rays at the airport; and when they threaten anyone who stands up to their Nazi-like marching orders, they have become the very terrorist organization they claim to be fighting. • The dose rates of X-rays being emitted by the Rapidscan machines are actually quite high — comparable to that of CT scans , say the professors. Yes, the dose duration is significantly lower than a CT scan, but the dose intensity is much higher than what you might think. And as anyone who knows a bit about physics and biology will tell you, the real danger from radiation is a high-intensity, short-duration exposure. That’s exactly what the TSA’s backscatter machines produce. • The radiation detection device used by Rapidscan to measure the output of the machines — an ion chamber — is incapable of accurately measuring the high-intensity burst of radiation produced by the TSA’s naked body scanners, say the professors. • At the same time, the radiation field measurement device used by the TSA — a Fluke 451 instrument — is incapable of measuring the high dose rates emitted by backscatter machines. The measurement devices, in effect, “max out” and cannot measure the full intensity of the exposure. Thus, the TSA’s claims of “low radiation” are actually fraudulent. By the way, the device mentioned by the TSA really is an F 451. Does that ring a bell in terms of fiction novels? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fahrenheit_451) • The amount of electrical current applied to the X-ray tubes has been redacted by the TSA (working with John Hopkins). This makes it impossible for third-party scientists to accurately calculate the actual radiation exposure, and it hints at yet more evidence of a total TSA cover-up. As explained by the professors: …the X-ray dose is proportional to the current through the X-ray tube. Not having access to the current used in the JHU test, or in the field application of the scanner means that the measurements at JHU are irrelevant to the dose at the airport. There is also no data on the pixel size and overscanning ratio, which also bear directly on the dose delivered to subjects. The statement in the HHS letter that the fluence is not a relevant quantity ignores fundamental physics. There shall be no independent testing whatsoever The TSA adamantly refuses to allow independent testing of the radiation levels being emitted by the machines. The agency is using the cover story that “terrorists might be able to circumvent the technology” if anyone is allowed to actually test the machine. Hilarious! This is the very definition of quack science . You have to trust our in-house fabricated experiments, and we won’t tell you how we even arrived at our test results, and we won’t release the names of the scientists who even ran the tests, but we can’t tell you more because of the terrorists. Notably, this is after Osama Bin Laden has already been killed, and he was the whole reason the TSA started up in the first place. The terror mastermind is dead, in other words, and still the TSA can’t trust university physics professors to conduct credible science on its naked body scanners. Actual radiation emitted by the machines is far higher than what the TSA claims John Sedat, a professor emeritus in biochemistry and biophysics at UCSF and the primary author of the letter says, “..the best guess of the dose is much, much higher than certainly what the public thinks.” This indicates the public has been deeply misled by the actual amount of radiation emitted by the machines. • Peter Rez, the physics professor from Arizona State, says that the high-quality images described by the TSA could not be produced with the low levels of radiation being claimed by the TSA. The images, in other words, don’t match up with the TSA’s cover story. Rez estimates the actual radiation exposure is 45 times higher than what we’ve previously been told. • The TSA machines are capable of firing even higher levels of radiation into a “region of interest” (such as your anus or scrotum, in which the TSA seems to be taking great interest these days), thereby exposing that region to even higher levels of radiation than the rest of your body. Mechanical failure and software bugs The backscatter scanning devices uses a high-powered X-ray beam that is quickly moved back and forth across your body by reflecting the beam off a moving wheel. If that wheel fails for any reason and stops moving, the traveler could be pierced with a deadly X-ray beam that focuses extremely high levels of radiation on a small group of cells, mutating their DNA. This means the backscatter devices are mechanical systems , and all mechanical systems eventually fail (just like airplanes). The TSA has done absolutely nothing to address the reliability of these mechanical wheels nor to allow independent testing of the reliability of these wheels. • The TSA refuses to allow independent scientists to review its software code that controls the radiation beam. Thus, the software and its capabilities also remain a complete secret. What if there’s a software bug that causes 10,000 times the usual radiation exposure for some unlucky traveler? Suppose the pervert TSA agent zooms in on some 9-year-old child’s junk to capture a picture for his own private collection… does that result in yet more radiation? (Fact: One TSA agent has already been arrested for distributing child pornography.) (http://www.tsagoons.com/2011/04/23/tsa-agent-busted-for-kiddie-porn/) See more at www.TSAgoons.com (warning: graphic language and imagery on that site.) What science? We don’t need no stinkin’ science! As we’re all now learning, the TSA completely bypassed the normal procedure for independent testing of equipment to be used on the public. As explained by the professors: The independent testing of the safety of these specific scanners has not been rigorous nor has it been held to the standards usually associated with new devices before approval for utilization in the public sector. Usually the exact technology, as installed, is sent to a university, national laboratory or other outside facility that has the expertise to test, for an extended period of time to enable an in-depth study — usually by several independent groups. The U.S. government, however, no longer feels it needs to engage in any “scientific” testing whatsoever. Why bother? The government can simply fabricate whatever results it wants and then release those to the mainstream media which will dutifully reprint the government’s lies as if they were facts. The truth is no longer relevant to the government’s tyrannical agenda. As long as no one questions the lies, it hardly matters how unreasonable or bizarre those lies become. Government can always play the terrorism card and force people to shut up and stop asking questions, you see. “How dare you question our integrity. We’re the government! We’re protecting YOU from terrorism!” Sure they are. By feeling up my anus? Seriously? If it wasn’t actually true, it would be hilarious. What is the TSA hiding? NaturalNews asks the obvious question: Why won’t the TSA subject its backscatter scanning machines to independent testing? Why won’t it allow five different university physics departments to conduct five independent tests — using documented equipment and methodologies — and thereby assure the public, with credibility, that its machines are perfectly safe? I can tell you why: Because the TSA is lying . The agency has fabricated its test results. It has conspired to deceive and mislead the American public over the safety of these machines, and it has done so through an agenda of government secrecy and scientific fraud. The TSA, lacking any credibility whatsoever, has resorted to routine lying about its machines, its procedures and its intentions. When 6-month-old babies have their rear-ends searched by TSA agents wearing evil grins (http://scottystarnes.files.wordpress.com/2011/05/lb9nk.jpg), you know it’s all gone too far. The TSA refuses to allow independent testing of its machines because it knows what NaturalNews readers already know: That if the machines were honestly and accurately tested, they would show far higher levels of radiation exposure than what we’ve been told. It would show that the TSA’s body scanners significantly increase the risk of cancer to a population that is already over-irradiated with medical imaging tests such as CT scans and chest X-rays. The TSA, like virtually every other department of the federal government, is now actively engaged in the routine falsification of the scientific data concerning a device that is exposing millions of Americans to an increased risk of cancer . And as long as the federal government claims to have “supreme power” while refusing to answer to the People, we’re only going to get more of this tyranny in the months ahead. The TSA has become the terrorist organization This is not merely unacceptable; this is a CRIME against the American people. These TSA body scanners are, effectively, Weapons of Mass Destruction that are unleashing ionizing radiation upon an unsuspecting public. And they are doing it right in your face; telling you it’s all perfectly safe while, behind the scenes, they had to engineer a specially-rigged unit just to run their rigged tests using measurement devices that can’t even record the high levels of radiation actually being emitted. The public backlash against these devices is so strong and so loud that news crews have to interview dozens of people on camera just to find one person to actually say something positive about the TSA’s pat-down and ionizing scanners. That’s the report from Alex Jones , who has also been covering TSA tyranny in great detail. The popularity of his www.Infowars.com website is exploding in the wake of the government’s increasingly bold lies and disinfo campaigns that frankly are backfiring on them. A lot of people are easily fooled, but just as many aren’t. Probably 95% of all travelers are absolutely opposed to everything the TSA forces them to go through at the airport. That’s why Texas is about to pass a law that would criminalize TSA agents who reach down your pants and molest you or your children. But the TSA has put out a preemptive statement on its blog that claims none of this matters. “States cannot regulate the federal government,” the TSA claims. And it actually quotes the U.S. Constitution as the source of its power! (What about the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution? How convenient that they forgot all about that part, eh?) The passage of this law could lead to a fascinating showdown in Texas. What we need is a group of Texas Rangers to march into the airport in Dallas and arrest the TSA agents, handcuff them, and march them off to jail. Then let’s see the feds try to invade Texas to free their criminal TSA agents. That should be amusing. I’ve spent some time in Texas, talking with the locals, and I can guarantee you that a bunch of tyrant feds trying to invade Texas are going to be absolutely shocked at the intensity of the public resistance they will meet. The growing TSA resistance movement By the way, with the TSA’s molestation of children and outright lying about the safety of its machines, the federal government is vastly overestimating the stupidity of the general public. People are taking notes of the encroaching tyranny, and while they may pretend to voluntarily walk through the TSA’s security checkpoints right now, there will come a day when the American people simply refuse to be herded like cattle anymore. I predict a widespread backlash against the TSA, reflected through state legislative efforts and public protests that will demand an end to the TSA which has now come to mean “Touch Some Ass!” The hilarious ending to all this, by the way, is that the backscatter machines are also dosing all the TSA workers with regular bursts of ionizing radiation , meaning that the very people working for the tyrannical TSA are, themselves, victims of its deception. Somehow, that seems incredibly fitting. Sources for this story include: http://www.propublica.org/article/scientists-cast-doubt-on-tsa-tests-of-full-body-scanners http://www.propublica.org/documents/item/april-2011-letter-to-john-holdren http://s3.amazonaws.com/s3.documentcloud.org/documents/93183/april-2011-letter-to-john-holdren.pdf

« Previous Page — Next Page »