DNA & Quantum Wave

Posted on by

New Science: DNA Begins As a Quantum Wave

One strand of DNA from one single cell contains enough information to clone an entire organism. Obviously, understanding DNA allows us to understand much about life and the universe around us. A deeper understanding of the new science tell us that DNA beings not as a molecule, but as a wave form. Even more interestingly, this wave form exists as a pattern within time and space and is coded throughout the entire universe.

dna

We are surrounded by pulsating waves of invisible genetic information, whose waves create microscopic gravitational forces that pull in atoms and molecules from their surrounding environment to construct DNA.

One scientist who caught these microgravitational forces in their action is Dr. Sergey Leikin. In 2008, Leikin put different types of DNA in regular salt water and marked each type with a different fluorescent color and the DNA molecules were then scattered throughout the water. In the experiment’s major surprise, matching DNA molecules were found pairing together. After a short time, entire clusters of the same colored DNA molecules had formed. Leikin believes some sort of electromagnetic charge allowed the same colored molecules to cluster. However, other experiments show that this is not the case. That it is most likely to be gravity. Let us explain.

In 2011, Nobel Prize winner Dr. Luc Montagnier demonstrated that DNA can be spontaneously formed out of merely hydrogen and oxygen. He started out with a hermetically sealed tube of pure sterilized water and then placed another sealed tube next to it, which had small amounts of DNA floating in water. Montagnier then electrified both tubes with a weak, 7 hertz electromagnetic field and waited. 18 hours later, little pieces of DNA had grown in the original tube, which consisted of only pure sterilized water.

This new science tells us that the universe is constantly conspiring to make biological life, whenever and wherever it can. In any given area of the universe, these hidden microgravitational waves will begin gathering atoms and molecules together to create DNA, and thus, life.

Another phenomenal discovery was made when Dr. Fritz-Albert Popp caught DNA in the act of pulling in photons (tiny packets of energy that make up visible light). The new science reveals that photons are essential to the basic health and function of DNA and are apparently used to send and receive information throughout the body. He found that each DNA molecule stores up to 1,000 photons within itself, similar to that of a tiny fiber-optic cable. The photons shoot back and forth at the speed of light inside the molecule and are stored until they need to be used.

1441978_orig

In 1984, Russian scientist Dr. Peter Gariaev discovered that when a DNA molecule was placed inside a small quartz container, it naturally absorbed every photon in the room. A stunning analogy of this would be that of a single person standing in a large sports stadium and having every photon in the stadium somehow bending directly to that person, leaving that person’s body literally glowing with light, while the rest of the stadium goes completely dark.

In conventional science, the only force that can bend light is gravity and it is done only around a black hole. Thus, it appears DNA is generating a microgravitational effect that attracts and captures light. Looking back to the first experiment mentioned in this article by Dr. Leikin, we see that it is indeed likely not an electrical charge that forced or allowed the same DNA molecules to attract to one other, but is likely due to gravity, as electrical charges have never been able to bend light as it moves through space.

The most incredible part of Dr. Gariaev’s experiment came when he thought it was over. He had pulled out the DNA from the quartz container and looked back into the container only to find that photons were still spiraling in the exact same place where the DNA had been. Apparently, some sort of gravitational influence was holding photons right where the DNA had been. This later became called the “DNA phantom effect. Thus, DNA is creating an energetic force that absorbs photons and pulls them right into the molecule, but the DNA itself isn’t even needed. It is some invisible force, or some wave, that attracts and holds the light (photons) there all by itself. 

Dr. Gariaev found that he could “blast” the phantom with supercold liquid nitrogen gas and the photons would all escape from the force field. Within 5 to 8 minutes though, new photons would be captured and the entire phantom would reappear. He could keep doing this as much as he wanted, but new photons would keep appearing. In fact, it was only after doing this for 30 days straight that the photons finally did not reappear.

Certainly, this last experiment was done over 30 years ago, and yet, the significance of it has yet to be truly felt. The first two experiments are still relatively young and have also yet to be fully appreciated. Clearly though, our view of the universe and life itself is changing as these concepts are understood by more people each day.

Much of the information in this article came from The Synchronicity Key: The Hidden Intelligence Guiding The Universe and You, by New York Times Best Selling author David Wilcock

from:    http://themindunleashed.com/2017/01/new-science-dna-begins-quantum-wave.html

The Intelligent Loner

Posted on by

Study Shows Why Highly Intelligent People Prefer Fewer Friends

4873241022_5f9eed2c06_o

Did you know that extremely intelligent people would rather be alone?

While psychologists have a pretty good idea of what typically makes humans happy, they have found that extremely smart people long for something a bit different.

In a paper published in the British Journal of Psychology, researchers Norman Li and Satoshi Kanazawa report that highly intelligent people actually experience less life satisfaction when they socialize with people more frequently. These intelligent people are happier when left alone.

Researchers came to this conclusion by surveying responses of 15,197 people between the ages of 18 and 28. Their data was a part of the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health, a survey that measures life satisfaction, intelligence, and health. Analysis of this data shows that being around dense crowds of people typically leads to unhappiness, while socializing with friends typically leads to happiness, unless the person is highly intelligent.

The authors of this study explain these findings with the “savanna theory of happiness”. This theory is the idea that life satisfaction is not only determined by what is happening in the present but also influenced by how our ancestors may have reacted to certain events. Evolutionary psychology argues that the human brain has been designed for and adapted to the conditions of an ancestral environment. Because of this, researchers believe that our brains have trouble comprehending and dealing with situations that are unique to the present.

Two factors that differ the most between ancient and modern life are population density and how frequently humans socialize with friends. Today, we spend a lot more time around lots of people and a lot less time around actual friends. Researchers believe that highly intelligent people are less effected by the savanna theory.

This means that in general, highly intelligent individuals are more likely to have ‘unnatural’ preferences and values that our ancestors may not have had. It is natural for the human species to seek and desire friendship, yet as a result, more intelligent individuals are likely to not feel the need to seek out such companionship.

The survey also revealed that smarter people were less likely to feel that they benefited from friendships, but they actually socialized more than less intelligent people.

Intelligence is believed to have evolved as a psychological mechanism to issues. For our ancestors, this meant that frequent contact with friends and allies was a necessity that allowed them to survive. Yet, a highly intelligent person would not need such companionship because they would be more likely to solve problems on their own without needing another person’s help. This diminishes the importance of friendships.

Since highly intelligent people do not always prefer what their ancestors would have wanted, they are more comfortable in urban settings. Historically, people tended to live comfortably in groups of around 150. This is the typical size of a Neolithic village. Densely packed urban centers are thought to bring about the feeling of isolation and depression because they do not foster close relationships. Yet a busy place normally has less of a negative effect on people who are very intelligent.

This is not to say that you are unintelligent if you enjoy spending time with friends. It just means that that one really smart person you know may not actually be a sad loner, they are probably like that because that is what makes them happy and comfortable

from:    http://www.realfarmacy.com/loner-intelligent-person/

THe Future Volcanoes of New Hampshire

Posted on by

New England Might Not Be Volcano-Free Forever

Mt. Washington in the White Mountains of New HampshireJose Azel/Getty Images
Last week I ran across a fairly provocatively-titled article on Gizmodo that claimed that New Hampshire might have a volcanic future. At first glance, you might think that is click-bait nonsense, but that is far from it. At some point in the geologic future—maybe millions to hundreds of millions of years from now—volcanoes will erupt across eastern North America. It is likely inevitable. However, until recently, we haven’t had any geologic evidence of what might (and I emphasize might) be the first sparks that could someday lead to a newly volcanic New England.

Now, New Hampshire and all of the northeastern United States has been a very volcanically quiet place for a long time—and by that, I mean we likely haven’t had a whiff of volcanism in over 100 million years (contrary to some apocryphal reports of volcanoes in the 1800s). That’s because all of New England is on what is called a “passive margin” of the North American continent. There is really nothing geologically exciting in terms of volcanoes or earthquakes along the whole east coast.

Compare that to the “active margin” on the west coast, where you have the Cascade volcanoes, faults, earthquakes—the whole lot. That’s because on the west coast, North America is directly interacting with other tectonic plates, namely the Pacific, Gorda, and Juan de Fuca plates. These plates are either grinding against North America to make the San Andreas fault zone or plunging underneath the continent to create the Cascadia subduction zone.

Over on the east coast, you need to travel all the way to the middle of the Atlantic Ocean before you find another tectonic plate. That boundary between North America and Europe is a spreading ridge, where a new plate is created, moving the two continents further apart. The boundary is thousands of miles from the eastern seaboard of the continent, so it really plays no role in geologic activity along the passive eastern margin.

However, this will not always be the case. Although the Atlantic Ocean is geologically young and still actively spreading, it will start to close again at some point. Our current continental configuration on Earth is one where the continental plates are all fairly spread apart, but that is only one part of a tectonic cycle—the Wilson Cycle—in which massive supercontinents break into dispersed continents and assemble again. So, although North and South America are moving away from Europe and Africa today, at some point they will start to converge again.

Subduction Isn’t That Subdued

Why might that happen? Well, mostly likely it would be the initiation of a new subduction zone on one or both sides of the Atlantic Ocean. Remember, in a subduction zone, the dense oceanic plate (the floor of the Atlantic) will sink down underneath the more buoyant continent. Then we’ll start seeing the earthquakes and volcanoes associated with subduction.

Of course, one of the biggest questions in tectonics today is what causes subduction to start. We’ve never seen it happen—the process likely takes millions of years. Exactly why a perfectly happy stable continental margin (like we have on the east coast of North America) suddenly starts to see the oceanic plate founder and subduction begin is the realm of arm-waving and speculation.

A theory on one end of the spectrum is that the oceanic plate—which is already more dense than the continental plate—will become so cold and dense that it starts to sink back into the mantle, detaching itself from the continent along weak points. The other end might be that the edge of the continent becomes hotter and thinner and eventually breaks off from the oceanic slab. There have even been some studies that propose mechanisms to support a purely tectonic stress origin to subduction and suggest that we’re seeing very early signs of new subduction along the European margin (though those conclusions are highly controversial).

But let’s head back to New Hampshire. A new study in Geophysical Research Letters by Menke and others examined something that geologists have noticed under New England for a few decades. A zone in the mantle—400 kilometers across and lies 200 kilometers beneath our feet—is anomalously warm. It might be as much as 700°C hotter than much of the mantle surrounding it. Early speculation was that this area, known as the North Appalachian Anomaly, was the remnant of a mantle plume (like the hotspot under Hawaii) that North America passed over 130-100 million years ago.

Menke and others used seismic waves generated by large earthquakes to examine and model the geometry of the North Appalachian Anomaly. They found that it really doesn’t line up well with the path of the hotspot; the anomaly is much more confined and circular in shape than originally thought. This evidence suggested to to them that the anomaly is not a remnant but its own, new(ish) feature of hot mantle.

Oddly, springs in New England have elevated helium-3, an isotope of helium associated with places with active magmatism. Menke and others propose that the coincidence of the North Appalachian Anomaly and this elevated helium-3 support a hypothesis that the anomaly is really a place where the mantle under New England is convecting upwards and melting, creating this region of warmer material. Remember, the mantle is not solid or molten, but rather a plastic zone that can move and melt. Possibly, the movement of North America has created eddies in the mantle, like a boat passing through the sea. So under New England (and some others parts of eastern North America), the mantle is rising and making things hotter under the continent.

Now, the big speculative jump here is from this evidence to the idea that maybe new volcanism will start in New England. Menke and others’ main conclusion is that the North Appalachian Anomaly is not the old remnant of a hotspot. In fact, they suggest that things under that part of North America may never get hot enough to create much new molten rock. “An intriguing alternate possibility,” they write, “is that the NAA is an incipient feature that will lead to a new magmatic event in a few million years.” A volcanic New Hampshire is well down the list of possibilities. But it’s not outside the realm of possibility.

However, all this talk of warmer bits of mantle and eddies along the eastern margin of North America got me wondering: Maybe these eddies are what can lead to new subduction? Heat can thermally eat away at the edge of a continent until you cause that break between the continent and ocean. An even more distant possibility is that this is a common process that eventually, millions of years or more down the road, creates a New England volcanic arc, starting the Atlantic Ocean toward its demise. This is some of the most exciting stuff in geosciences today: We can use these bits of pure research to better understand how the planet will evolve in the near and far future—and whether some day we might be talking about the great volcanoes of Concord and Nashua.

from:     https://www.wired.com/2016/12/new-england-might-not-volcano-free-forever/

Holistic Medicine & Cancer

Posted on by

Curing Cancer With Holistic Medicine?

Can cancer be cured? Can it be cured with holistic medicine? The answer to both of these questions is yes. Many people have done so and many continue to do so. Unfortunately, in the United States and elsewhere, we are taught from a very young age that pharmaceutical medicine is all there. We are taught that the pharmaceutical industry is still “searching for a cure.” We are taught that vitamins, minerals, amino acids, fatty acids and phytonutrients play little or no role in cellular health (which contradicts basic biochemistry).

The pharmaceutical industry has compromised the health of our world. It relies on false assertions under claims of “hard science,” when in fact, all of the big “scientific studies” being conducted is backed and paid for by the pharmaceutical industry itself. Of course they aren’t going to promote natural cures. It would bankrupt them within months and would end their false charade.

As Dr. Sunil Pai M.D. states in an interview, “Follow the money. What is the biggest industry right now? It’s the cancer care industry. So the average cancer care for a person from Stage I to Stage IV will range anywhere from $350,000- $1,400,000 by the end of stage IV.” Revealing the truth about cancer and the pharmaceutical industry would immediately put an end to numerous jobs in the Food and Drug Administration, the American Cancer Society, the Rockefeller Institute, the American Medical Association and many others. Sadly, the truth has been covered up in the name of greed and profit.

Additionally, taking information on how to live a healthy life from the pharmaceutical-backed western medical doctors is quite ironic. As Dr. Leonard Coldwell states in an interview:

“The medical doctors, statistically, has the shortest lifespan of 56 years of age on average, the highest abuse of alcohol and drugs, the highest suicide rate (only the psychiatrists are higher), and so you go to somebody that has the lowest life span, highest suicide rate, highest drug abuse rate, to ask them how to have a healthy, happy, long life? I think we should rethink our way of thinking.” 

Healing

Dr. Coldwell is someone who has cured over 35,000 patients of different cancers. His cure rate also sits at 92.3%, which means that for every 100 people who have come to him for help to cure their cancer, he has successfully cured 92 of them. Quite impressive. Dr. Coldwell’s tips for right diet when treating or trying to prevent cancer can be seen here.

holistic-medicine

Another doctor who is helping those with cancer is Dr. Daniel Nuzum. Dr. Nuzum is the foremost proponent of a healing substance and health supplement know as fulvic acid. Dr. Nuzum has treated over 8,000 patients with fulvic acid, and all of them had a varying level of success, while no negative side effects were ever reported.

Fulvic acids are created by soil-based microorganisms and is the end-product of decomposed organic matter. Fulvic acid has numerous benefits for the body, including being the most potent anti-oxidant known, an extremely rich source of electrolytes, catalyzes enzyme reactions, helps to chelate heavy metals, restores electrochemical balance and increases the synthesis rate of RNA and DNA.

Since it supplies so many electrons, electrochemical balance returns and allows the body to function optimally. According to Dr. Jerry Tennant, having enough electrical activity within the body is necessary for not only wellness, but life itself:
“Chronic disease is always defined by having low body voltage. One cannot cure chronic disease without inserting enough electrons to achieve -50mV (millivolts). One must have the raw materials necessary to make new cells and to eliminate the toxins or infections present that will damage the new cells. You can take all the medications you like and do as much surgery as you like, but you will not heal unless you have -50mV, raw materials (nutrients) and lack of toxins.” 
In addition to supplying sufficient electrical activity, according to Supreme Fulvic, fulvic acid is also able to increase nutrient assimilation into the cells, transport any nutrient possible (due to its extremely low molecular weight) and detoxify cellular waste. It can also chemically convert toxins into usable nutrients for cells. In essence, that means it converts metabolic waste into food and energy for the cell.
According to Optimally Organic, their fulvic acid is best because it comes from lush vegetation, as compared to dried rock bed (like most companies).
Lastly, there exists numerous studies showing how the cannabis plant can and does cure cancer. For the sake of convenience, here is an article that has compiled and cited 20 studies that show this information. In fact, the U.S. Government has known this information since at least 1974, when a study done at the Medical College of Virginia proved cannabis effectively treated a range of cancers and was published the next year in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute. Unfortunately, this study was swept under the rug and remained silent for nearly three decades, until the study became publicly accessible.
There are numerous other doctors around the world who are curing cancer with holistic medicine, which incorporates using foods, lots of sunshine and fresh air, medicinal herbs and spices and a variety of different treatment methods to reduce physical and emotional stress. As Dr. Leonard Coldwell states on his website, 86% of diseases occur because of excessive stress, while only 14% occurs because of physical elements.
Some of these other doctors include Dr. Stanislaw Burzynski, Dr. Edward Group and Dr. Samir Chachoua.
There also exists plenty of other good information out there on how to help cure and prevent cancer, including an 11 part documentary series called The Quest For the Cures Continues, which interviews 28 medical doctors, 11 scientists and 9 cancer survivors, who “break the code of silence” on the truth about cancer. Part 1 can be seen here.
The solutions already exist. As Dr. Coldwell has said, “If nature creates a problem, nature always offers a solution.”
from:    http://themindunleashed.com/2017/01/curing-cancer-holistic-medicine.html

Oh, Acupuncture!

Posted on by

Research Confirms this Holistic Treatment is Safer and More Effective than Morphine

Anna Hunt, Staff
Waking Times

A new study has discovered that acupuncture can be more effective in treating pain than intravenous morphine. In addition, the researchers discovered that acupuncture can work faster in relieving pain and have fewer adverse effects. The study was conducted over a one-year period at the Fattaouma Bourguiba University Hospital in Tunisia. The results were published in the American Journal of Emergency Medicine.

The Side Effects of Morphine Use

Morphine is an opioid pain medication which can have severe adverse effects. These include drowsiness, dizziness, constipation, stomach pain, nausea, vomiting, headache, tired feeling, anxiety and mild itching. Other risks associated with morphine use include misuse, abuse and addiction.

In addition, scientific research has shown that prescription opioids may actually worsen chronic pain. It appears that a holistic alternative to treating pain is much-needed in order to mitigate the dangers of conventional pharmaceutical pain treatment.

Now, a groundbreaking study shows that acupuncture is one of these effective holistic alternatives. Considering the study results, it may perhaps be even more effective than morphine.

Study: Acupuncture versus Morphine

A study performed in the Emergency Department of Fattouma Bourguiba University Hospital, which sees about 100,000 emergency patients per year, evaluated the pain treatment approach for 300 ED patients.

The research evaluated 300 emergency patients. 150 were administered up to 15 mg of morphine per day. The other 150 were given acupuncture treatment for address their pain. The researchers summarized the results as follows:

Success rate was significantly different between the 2 groups (92% in the acupuncture group vs 78% in the morphine group P < .001). Resolution time was 16 ± 8 minutes in the acupuncture group vs 28 ± 14 minutes in the morphine group (P < .005).

From the 5-minute time point, the acupuncture group reported significantly larger pain decrease compared with the morphine group.

Overall, 89 patients (29.6%) experienced minor adverse effects: 85 (56.6%) in morphine group and 4 (2.6%) in acupuncture group (P < .001). No major adverse effects were recorded during the study protocol.

In patients with acute pain presenting to the ED, acupuncture was associated with more effective and faster analgesia with better tolerance.

To paraphrase, the acupuncture group in the study experienced significant pain reduction, and the effect occurred faster and with fewer side effects when compared to the morphine group.

Western Medicine Recognizes Acupuncture as an Effective Medical Treatment

Acupuncture originated in China many centuries ago and soon spread to Japan, Korea and other parts of Asia as an accepted medical treatment. Throughout the Asian continent, it is widely used in health care systems, officially recognized by governments, and well received by the general public.

In 1996, acupuncture became an accepted form of medical treatment endorsed by the World Health Organization (WHO). The WHO based their endorsement on data from numerous controlled clinical trials conducted over the two previous decades. The WHO report that resulted from the analysis of these clinical trials states:

Diseases, symptoms or conditions for which acupuncture has been proved – through controlled trials – to be an effective treatment:

  • Adverse reactions to radiotherapy and/or chemotherapy

  • Allergic rhinitis (including hay fever)

  • Biliary colic

  • Depression (including depressive neurosis and depression following

  • stroke)

  • Dysentery, acute bacillary

  • Dysmenorrhoea, primary

  • Epigastralgia, acute (in peptic ulcer, acute and chronic gastritis, and gastrospasm)

  • Facial pain (including craniomandibular disorders)

  • Headache

  • Hypertension, essential

  • Hypotension, primary

  • Induction of labour

  • Knee pain

  • Leukopenia

  • Low back pain

  • Malposition of fetus, correction of

  • Morning sickness

  • Nausea and vomiting

  • Neck pain

  • Pain in dentistry (including dental pain and temporomandibular

  • dysfunction)

  • Periarthritis of shoulder

  • Postoperative pain

  • Renal colic

  • Rheumatoid arthritis

  • Sciatica

  • Sprain

  • Stroke

  • Tennis elbow

Notice the multiple mentions of conditions that involve pain, such as low back pain, neck pain and headaches. In their report, the WHO also stated that acupuncture has shown to have a therapeutic effect on abdominal pain, cancer pain, facial spasms, and labour pain (although the organization did not have sufficient clinical data to include these in the effective treatment list above.)

Undoubtedly, acupuncture can play a powerful role in pain management. It is an effective drug-free alternative to reducing pain with very few side effects that has been proven over the ages. Finally, science is catching up to reinforce this claim.

from:     http://www.wakingtimes.com/2017/01/12/research-confims-holistic-treatment-more-effective-morphine/

Ramen Anyone?

Posted on by

Japan hopes to get elderly drivers off the road by bribing them with ramen noodles

Friday, December 02, 2016 by:

Image: Japan hopes to get elderly drivers off the road by bribing them with ramen noodles

(NaturalNews) In one of the sillier stories of a historically silly year, Japanese authorities are now bribing elderly drivers to give up their driver’s licenses — in exchange for coupons that will lower the cost of ramen noodles. No, this is not an article from The Onion. This is happening in real life.

Why would Japan ask such a thing of their elderly? It has a lot to do with the fact that they seem to be putting a lot of innocent lives at risk by remaining on the road. Yaron Steinbuch of The New York Post reports, “The offer comes amid a spate of deadly accidents caused by vehicles driven by the elderly — a growing problem in a country where 4.8 million people aged 75 or older have a license. Those who relinquish their license will receive a certificate that will cut prices from 590 to 500 yen – about $5.20 to $4.43.”

If the authorities are actually concerned about the well-being of these elderly individuals, you have to question just how healthy a diet of ramen noodles could possibly be. They’re historically filled with sodium, which is not exactly what people who are coming up on the last years of their lives should be consuming on a regular basis, if at all.

Still, at this time, the government is not forcing elderly citizens to hand in their driver’s licenses, leaving this a completely optional decision. Though it is extremely strange and something that is easy to poke fun at, it is a far cry from fascism and that’s a very good thing. During an era when government overreach has become the norm, it’s nice to see the powers that be trying to get creative in order to achieve their goals. It may not be a good idea and it may not even work, but at least they aren’t trying to oppress people based on their age.

So where do you stand on this issue? Should elderly people be allowed to drive after if they pass all the requirements necessary?

from:    http://www.naturalnews.com/2016-12-02-japan-hopes-to-get-elderly-drivers-off-the-road-by-bribing-them-with-ramen-noodles.html

Vaccination – Some Considerations

Posted on by

First Study on Vaccinated vs. Unvaccinated Children Pulled from Web

vaccinated-childChristina Sarich, Staff Writer
Waking Times  

The results of the first ever study comparing the health of vaccinated children vs. unvaccinated children is out, and they are already causing controversy. For many – hundreds of thousands of families that have already been injured by vaccines – the results won’t be surprising, but to many others, the findings might be a little shocking. This is possibly why the scientific journal which originally published the results withdrew the study from publication.

The abstract of the study was published online in Frontiers in Public Health after being accepted November 2. The study compared children’s health via surveys of mothers who home-schooled their children aged 6-12 years. Nearly 40 percent of the children had never been vaccinated, so the control group was adequate to do a good comparison against children who had been vaccinated.

After heavy criticism from the public and scientific community due to the results of the study, though, it was retracted. Why? Those that were vaccinated were three times more likely to be diagnosed with neurodevelopmental disorders such as autism.

The abstract specifically stated,

“A total of 415 mothers provided data on 666 children, of which 261 (39%) were unvaccinated. Vaccinated children were significantly less likely than the unvaccinated to have been diagnosed with chickenpox and pertussis, but significantly more likely to have been diagnosed with pneumonia, otitis media, allergies and NDDs (defined as Autism Spectrum Disorder, Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder, and/or a learning disability).”

The study further concluded,

“In this study based on mothers’ reports, the vaccinated had a higher rate of allergies and NDD than the unvaccinated. Vaccination, but not preterm birth, remained significantly associated with NDD after controlling for other factors. However, preterm birth combined with vaccination was associated with an apparent synergistic increase in the odds of NDD. Further research involving larger, independent samples is needed to verify and understand these unexpected findings in order to optimize the impact of vaccines on children’s health.”

The initial backlash was significant. Public comments included, “this study is of poor design, though not impossible results. Study relies of self-report of moms, inducing bias,” and, “Another garbage vaccine study in Frontiers journal. Scientists, stop reviewing/publishing there.”

Science Blogs also quickly posted an article titled, “Antivaccinationists promote a bogus internet “survey.” Hilarity ensues as it’s retracted.”

When the paper was pulled, the publishers were also accused of not following a proper retraction process. Though the journal isn’t the first to pull a vaccine paper amid public criticism — in February, Vaccine temporarily removed — then soon retracted — a paper linking the vaccine for Human papillomavirus to behavioral problems in mice; a modified version of the paper was later republished, the retraction is suspect considering how quickly the paper was pulled. When the publishers were asked why this happened, they simply responded that the paper was submitted for review, but had not been approved.

Researchers like Catherine J. Frompovich likely wouldn’t think the study is so ‘hilarious’ as Science Blogs attests. She writes of a doctor in the UK who believes vaccines are indeed tied to autism. Dr. Graham Downing, who is a Neuro-musculoskeletal and Functional Medicine consultant in the UK has found that the vaccination of pregnant women increases inflammation in their bodies and also increases the risk of releasing inflammatory markers in their fetuses/infants. Such releases include phenotypes [the set of observable characteristics of an individual resulting from the interaction of its genotype with the environment.]

Downing also contends that the increased inflammation in cells caused by vaccines, also elevate in the fetal brain where cytokines release glutamates. The prefrontal lobes and the limbic system, which involves human emotions, are affected in fetuses from pregnancy vaccines administered to moms-to-be. So, not only are children outside the womb affected, but the neurological/immunological decline starts while they are still in the womb.

Downing also attests that vaccines are tied to the artificial intelligence rollout goals of the elite. As Frompovich writes,

“Dr. Downing says there are five-year and fifteen year goals for AI. The fifteen-year goal is to have AI run everything, including humans! You have to listen to his comments about that aspect—one word: “frightening!” To ‘authentic’ his remarks, Doctor cited a report issued by the White House, “A Federal Vision for Future Computing: A Nanotechnology-inspired Grand Challenge.”

Here’s what that 15-page report is about:

Create a new type of computer that can proactively interpret and learn from data, solve unfamiliar problems using what it has learned, and operate with the energy efficiency of the human brain. [3]

[Basically, it’s an artificial brain to replace the human brain. Also, they want to create a new soul for humans, too!]”

So, why are vaccine promoters so quick to dismiss, or make a drivel of a study based on mothers’ health reports of their children? Bias or no bias – it’s hard to dismiss a 300 percent increase in autism and neurological damage rates – but those reasons are left to your imagination.

from:     http://www.wakingtimes.com/2016/12/01/first-ever-study-vaccinated-vs-unvaccinated-children-removed-web/

The Role of Media – Something You Can Do

Posted on by

What Went Wrong With Trump and the Media

The business model is pulling in the wrong direction for democracy.

Nov. 19, 2016 3:26 PM

LM Otero/AP Photo

We need to push harder, go deeper, spread the story wider. Help us do it with a tax-deductible donation to Mother Jones

There aren’t a lot of people who have not yet been blamed for the election of Donald Trump.

FBI Director James Comey. Vladimir Putin, Jon Stewart, Sean Hannity, Twitter, Facebook, CNN, Hillary Clinton, the DNC, and oh, Donald Trump. There’s a good case to be made for almost every culprit you can imagine, and a tweetstorm or thinkpiece to lay it out.

This is not going to be one of those pieces. As my colleague Kevin Drum writes, “For the most part, people are just blaming all the stuff they already believed in.” But in the flood of emails that have poured into MoJo since the election, many readers have asked us to dive into one issue in particular—the role of  media.

And it happens to be an issue we’re obsessed with. We believe that the business model for media in the United States is broken; that if we’re going to have the kind of journalism that democracy requires, we’re going to need different ways of paying for it; and that critical among those will be reader support in many different forms.

So we’re not going to pussyfoot around: By the end of this piece, we hope you’ll invest in our hard-hitting investigative reporting. And if you’re already in for that, you can do it right now. Meanwhile, let’s take a look at where things stand.

We’re preparing to be governed by a man with a record of contempt for truth and transparency, at a time when every potential countervailing force, from the Democratic Party to the courts, is on the ropes. We’re also headed for nearly unmitigated one-party control of the federal government and a growing number of states.

In the past, the Fourth Estate has been essential at moments like this, holding the powerful accountable until the pendulum swings back toward checks and balances. Whether that can happen this time, though, is not so clear. Because this time, the press itself is among the institutions under strain—and that strain may well be part of what made Trump’s ascent possible.

Here’s what played out during the campaign, and is playing out again in the transition: Individual journalists and individual outlets do amazing work under the most difficult circumstances, facing down virulent abuse in person and on social media. But the larger gravitational forces of the industry pull in the opposite direction. Those forces push us toward the lowest common denominator. They reward outrage and affirm anger—and they don’t incentivize digging deep, explaining complex problems, or exposing wrongdoing.

One person who understands this better than most is…Donald Trump. He knew from the get-go that as a celebrity known for saying outrageous stuff, he could call up any show, anytime, and count on being put on the air because he brought the eyeballs. As CBS chairman Les Moonves put it way back in February, his bomb-throwing “may not be good for America, but it’s damn good for CBS.”

Trump could have capitalized on this at any time, but he really hit a perfect-storm moment. Media revenues are under enormous pressure across the board. Newspapers and magazines are battling cheap and free digital competitors. Cable is threatened by cord-cutting. And digital publishers are watching new ad dollars rush over to Facebook and Google.

That made news organizations desperate for eyeballs and content, and Trump gave them both. Airing his interviews, covering his rallies, turning his tweets into posts and his comments into tweets was quick and inexpensive—far less expensive certainly than digging through his business record or analyzing how his campaign has emboldened white nationalists.

When it comes to news, you get what you pay for, and when the answer to that is “zero,”  that’s also the value of a lot of what you get in your Facebook feed.

Which brings us to the other part of the perfect storm: social media. Rage (and fear) motivate sharing. Rage-sharing reinforces the beliefs we and our friends already hold, which makes us want to signal those beliefs even more. Each “OMFG, Trump just_______” pushes the button again, and motivates.

And it’s not just media organizations that noticed Trump driving the clicks and shares. A network of bottom-feeders, bots, and outright provocateurs have discovered that you can cash in on ad networks by simply making up fake news stories that will spread wildly on social media. And what a coincidence that we didn’t learn until after the election that Facebook had a way to tamp down fake news, but held back because it was terrified of a conservative backlash. Google likewise waited until after the election to kick fake-news sites out of its ad network; Twitter didn’t crack down on far-right accounts until November 15. That really bodes well for the future decisions of companies that govern our digital life (and know more about each of us than the National Security Agency ever will).

The last part of the perfect storm was—is—the evisceration of newsrooms. There are, give or take, 40 percent fewer journalists in America than there were a decade ago, and there are about to be even fewer as companies cut back dramatically post-election. Univision is shedding more than 200 jobs, many of them at millennial-aimed Fusion; the Guardian is in the process of reducing its US newsroom by 30 percent, the Wall Street Journal is trimming positions and consolidating sections, and the New York Times has said it has a newsroom downsizing coming in January.

For those journalists who remain, the pressure will only increase—to bring eyeballs, but also avoid offense. Because while big media companies feed on controversy, they are terrified of being targets of controversy themselves. They built big audiences and revenue streams on a style of journalism that avoids any semblance of a point of view, so as not to drive any part of the audience away. Trump’s attacks on journalists as biased are designed to reinforce that fear. That’s one reason why for much of the campaign his lies weren’t called out, his falsehoods weren’t fact-checked—because that would have appeared like injecting a point of view.

Grim, right? Here’s another link where you can support our work during these challenging times with a monthly or one-time gift (along with a Harvard study showing that the act of giving may promote happiness).

In the end, political journalism is deeply conservative—not in the partisan sense, but in the sense of being invested in institutions, ways of doing things, and the foundational belief that the system works and  destructive forces will be neutralized in due time. That was what made it hard to imagine a Trump win, or to recognize Bernie Sanders’ movement as more than the usual protest candidacy.

And it’s what now is driving coverage inexorably toward normalization. Already, public radio hosts banter as they inform us that Steve Bannon, a man who ran an openly race-baiting website, has become the senior White House strategist; already People, just weeks after publishing a harrowing article about its own writer’s experience of being assaulted by Trump, has compiled “27 Photos of Ivanka Trump’s Family That Are Way Too Cute.”

Demagogues are dependent on a compliant media. It is the air they breathe, the fuel they run on. They rely on it to legitimize their lies and give their bombast a veneer of respectability. They deploy it to bestow favors and mete out punishment. And they will not abide disrespect from the press, because it’s contagious.

Peter Thiel, the Silicon Valley billionaire and Trump champion, showed one way of punishing journalists when he spent millions on the lawsuit that shut down Gawker. (Mother Jones was a target of similar litigation—though we won.) There will be many other opportunities, from rewriting transparency laws like the Freedom of Information Act to defunding the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. (So in addition to supporting Mother Jones with a monthly or one-time gift, consider pitching in for your local public media station.)

We need an alternative—and we need it now.

Back to where we started: The business model is broken when it comes to ensuring the kind of journalism democracy requires. In the uncertain, dangerous times ahead, we’ll need something better, and a lot of it.

We’ll need media that doesn’t have to bargain for access or worry about backlash.

We’ll need media that isn’t dependent on giving bigots a platform. (CNN expects to make $1 billion this year—in large part thanks to election coverage that had many high moments, but also employed paid Trump operative Corey Lewandowski.)

We’ll need media that doesn’t sell out its own for political ends. (Remember when Fox News’ Megyn Kelly had to “make up” with Trump after nearly a year of bullying and threats?)

We’ll need reporters who can chase after what is shaping up to be cronyism and corruption of epic proportions, and who can stand up to the intimidation that is bound to ensue.

We’ll need a business model that—to circle all the way back to Les Moonves—isn’t dependent on pumping up the eyeballs at any cost.

That’s what we are determined to build here at MoJo.

We don’t claim to have all the answers on where things go from here. But we know a free, fearless press is an essential part of it, and that means doubling down on the investigative reporting that readers like you have demanded, and supported, for 40 years.

Instead of focusing on the controversies that Trump and other politicians spoon-feed the press (over here, five candidates for secretary of state! No here, a fresh Twitter rant against the New York Times!), we’ll dig into the stories they want to keep secret. We’ll go after the unprecedented conflicts of interest and corruption wherever they arise. (These, as you well know, are not limited to either party.)

We’ll expose the danger to vulnerable communities like immigrants and religious minorities, while also exploring how people are organizing and fighting back. We’ll listen to people whose voices aren’t heard enough—including the working-class people who voted for Trump because he promised them better times. And we will ask you, our readers, what else is important to cover now—your input is key as we all find our way in this new landscape.

Whatever the story is, we won’t be held back by timidity or fear of controversy. The only thing that limits us are the resources we have to hire reporters, send them into the field, and give them the time and job security they need to go deep.

That’s where your tax-deductible monthly or one-time donation makes all the difference. (So does subscribing to our magazine, giving a gift subscription—we have some great holiday savings going on—or signing up for our newsletters.) A full 70 percent of Mother Jones’ revenue comes from reader support. It’s the core of the business model we think will be critical to saving watchdog journalism. And many of you agree: Since the election we’ve been seeing unprecedented support from readers who have flocked to our site to read, subscribe, donate, and share their thoughts about where we need to go from here.

And let’s take one more step. While it’s critically important to shore up independent reporting, you’re going to want to take action in other ways too. Here are some things we’re thinking about as we head toward the holidays.

Many of you will talk—and listen—to people you disagree with, to understand where they’re coming from and maybe find the tiniest sliver of common ground. Arlie Hochschild did that in our cover story about Trump voters, and she saw many of the trends others in the media missed. Some of you might want to try to open up your Facebook feeds to people you differ with; we put together a list of tools to get out of your “filter bubbles.” And one of our editors, James West, has started a project where he’s friending all the Trump supporters he interviewed this year. He’ll tell their stories as that evolves.

Finally, we’re remembering to be thankful—not least, to you. Mother Jones as you know it today is the result of a big, risky bet at a moment not unlike this one—2006, when we were looking at media that had failed to challenge a war-mongering government’s lies and a digital news landscape where hot takes had overtaken original reporting. We asked you, our readers, to help us counter that trend, to build a 24/7 digital operation and a newsroom to go after the big stories of the day. And you did.

Ten years later, at a moment of even more radical upheaval, many of you have told us that you want to be part of a movement that builds a bigger, stronger independent journalism scene. Thanks to you, we are ready.

MoJo will need to be stronger, more agile, and even more fearless in an environment that’s growing more dangerous to journalism and democracy. Let’s go.

from:    http://www.motherjones.com/media/2016/11/trump-media-fail

New FBI Hacking Powers

Posted on by
It Just Got Much Easier for the FBI to Hack Your Computer
Just in time for the Trump administration.

Dec. 2, 2016 12:37 PM

Cedric Hatto/ZUMA

Just in time for the Trump administration, the FBI has gotten what critics characterize as broad new hacking powers. As of Thursday, government agents can now use warrants obtained from a single judge to hack computers in multiple jurisdictions, rather than having to get warrants from judges in each distinct jurisdiction, as required under the old rule. The rule went into effect despite the last-ditch efforts by Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) and others to either kill or delay it in order to give Congress time to study its implications.

In a speech on the Senate floor Wednesday, Wyden said the change to Rule 41 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure was especially troubling given the imminent presidency of Donald Trump, who has “openly said he wants the power to hack his political opponents the same way Russia does.”

“By sitting here and doing nothing, the Senate has given consent to this expansion of government hacking and surveillance.”

The changes were approved by the US Supreme Court in a private vote at the end of April, after several years of discussion within the federal judiciary. They were never debated by Congress. The US Department of Justice says the news rules are necessary, particularly in cases where criminals use anonymizing software to conceal their location while committing crimes such as peddling child pornography. Another concern is the weaponizing of hundreds of thousands of internet-connected devices into “botnets” that are then used to flood websites with traffic to shut them down, or for criminal activities that, in the words of Assistant Attorney General Leslie Caldwell, “siphon wealth and invade privacy on a massive scale.”

Wyden isn’t convinced that the changes are urgent. Along with Sens. Chris Coons (D-Del.) and Steve Daines (R-Mont.), he tried on Wednesday to get the Senate to approve legislation that would have either blocked or delayed the implementation of the new powers.

Those efforts failed.

“By sitting here and doing nothing, the Senate has given consent to this expansion of government hacking and surveillance,” Wyden said in a statement. “Law-abiding Americans are going to ask, ‘What were you guys thinking?’ when the FBI starts hacking victims of a botnet hack. Or when a mass hack goes awry and breaks their device or an entire hospital system and puts lives at risk.”

Caldwell argued the rules had already been debated and vetted. In a November 28 blog post, she wrote the federal judiciary deliberated on the changes for three years, using the same process used to modify other rules of criminal procedure. The current rule change deals specifically with venue issues—removing traditional jurisdictional constraints—and not what investigators can actually do as part of the search, she wrote. Further, investigators already had the power to search multiple computers at the same time, she noted, and it was already legal for investigators to hack victim computers to understand the scope of the criminal hack.

“It would be strange if the law forbade searching the scene of a crime,” she wrote.

Caldwell also wrote that the rule modification doesn’t change what is and isn’t permissible under the Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable searches and seizures. “The Constitution already forbids mass, indiscriminate rummaging through victims’ computers, and it will continue to do so,” she wrote. “By contrast, blocking the [rule change] would make it more difficult for law enforcement to combat mass hacking by actual criminals.”

But those reassurances likely will not satisfy privacy advocates. In June, tech writer Mike Masnick noted that the DOJ’s justification for the rule change “skirt[ed] the truth, at best.” The new rule, Masnick wrote, “effectively wipe[s] out the requirement to give a copy of the warrant to the person whose computers are being hacked,” which “pretty much guarantees that some of the people who are hacked following this won’t even know about it.” He suggested that the DOJ’s use of the threat of child exploitation as a way to legitimize the rule change in effect derailed the necessary review of serious modifications to the government’s powers that should be debated and approved by Congress. “The FBI has a rather long history of abusing its surveillance powers, and especially seeking to avoid strict oversight,” Masnick wrote. “Approving such a change just because the DOJ is insisting it’s ‘FOR THE CHILDREN, WON’T YOU PLEASE THINK OF THE CHILDREN!’ isn’t a particularly good reason.”

That’s probably why big tech companies like Google and a host of civil rights organizations have opposed the change for years.

“Google has a significant interest in protecting its users and securing its infrastructure,” wrote Richard Salgado, Google’s director of law enforcement and information security, in a February 2015 letter submitted to the Judicial Advisory Committee on Criminal Rules. “The proposed amendment substantively expands the government’s current authority under Rule 41 and raises a number of monumental and highly complex constitutional, legal, and geopolitical concerns.”

from:    http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/12/fbi-computer-hacking-supreme-court

What Value – Hope?

Posted on by

In Stripping Away Our Hope, Maybe Trump Has Done Us a Favor

The outcome of this election is a wake-up call to action. Now that we know our elected leaders will not save us, let’s get to work.
Trump-Action.gif
David Korten

Prince Ea, rapper and spoken-word artist and social justice advocate, has a soliloquy on YouTube with a surprising title: WHY IM HAPPY TRUMP WON. How could he think that, as he has passionately called for recognizing the dignity in all people? He’s happy, he says, because he sees this election result as a wake-up call. It forces us to recognize the sickness of our society and “that we cannot legislate our way out of human problems, nor can we truly change the world by changing the rulers.”

I remember hoping a Clinton-Gore administration would lead to a system transformation back in 1992. I had the same hope for the Obama administration in 2008.

But it’s now clear that leadership for the needed system change will not come from within the existing corporate-dominated political system. It must come from We the People, claiming and exercising our sovereign right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

Since we cannot expect action from the upcoming administration and Congress on any measure that puts environmental and social interests ahead of the interests of corporations and the very rich, there will be no point during the next two to four years in the old discussions of what might be politically feasible. We can instead focus on building popular support for what is necessary and desirable and transforming the political landscape to press the rule makers to follow.

Because of the depth and breadth of the change our circumstances require, we will need to organize on many fronts, including the following four:

1. Resist the forces of corporate rule. Given Trump’s record and that of his political allies, we should be prepared to expose his betrayal of his promise to his base to clear the swamp of Wall Street interests and lobbyists as he pushes to privatize public services, programs, and infrastructure; roll back environmental protections; cut taxes for the rich; normalize corruption; and further rig the electoral process. All the while, we must keep clearly in mind that resistance without a compelling positive alternative is a losing strategy.

2. Grow community. The relationships involved in strong, inclusive, caring communities are an essential foundation of what some call the ecological civilization we must now bring into being. Reconnecting with neighbors. Organizing activities that connect people across religious and racial lines. Rebuilding local economies. Resisting racism and sexism. Supporting local farmers. Participating in local initiatives to restore local ecosystems. Supporting sustainable-energy initiatives. Advancing cooperative ownership. Electing community-oriented city council members and county supervisors. Supporting groups finding housing for the homeless and jobs for the jobless. Campaigning for a living wage. I find hope in evidence that such efforts are blossoming all around the country in ways I’ve not seen in my lifetime. As science is confirming, such community-building engagement affirms our self-worth and aids recovery from the distrust and fear the presidential campaign has evoked.

3. Democratize political institutions. Voter suppression, the distortions of corporate media and dark money, gerrymandering, the candidate limitations of a two-party system controlled by a corporate establishment, and an electoral college system that ignores the will of the majority are powerful reminders that democracy in the United States remains an aspiration. A true democracy of the sovereign people is another essential foundation of the ecological civilization on which our future well-being depends. We will have it only as We the People organize to demand it.

4. Advance a new public narrative. We humans are only beginning to awaken to the fact that our status as living Earth’s dominant species carries with it responsibilities as well as rewards. The ways of living, the institutions, and the narratives of our past no longer serve. We humans live by shared stories. We need a shared narrative that gives us the courage and guiding vision to take the step to species maturity. Through public dialogue, social networking, and independent media, we can find a compelling shared narrative to guide our path to institutions and policies appropriate for our time.

If the outcome of this election forces us to face up to the depth of system failure that threatens our common future and motivates us to engage the work of an essential cultural and institutional transformation, it may prove to be, as Prince Ea put it, a blessing in disguise.

from:   http://www.yesmagazine.org/new-economy/in-stripping-away-our-hope-maybe-trump-has-done-us-a-favor-20161130