Stand Up for Berkey!

How the EPA Is Attempting to Kill the Berkey Water Filter

By Derrick Broze

The U.S. EPA is attempting to label the popular Berkey Water Filters a pesticide in order to regulate the product under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act.

Over the last year, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has been pursuing a case against the owner of the Berkey Water Systems which produces the popular Berkey filters. The EPA is attempting to classify the Berkey filters as pesticides because they incorporate silver in their design, a feature which the EPA claims qualifies the filters as a pesticide under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). The move has already lead to one authorized dealer of the Berkey Water Systems being forced to shut down.

On August 9, New Millennium Concepts, Ltd. (NMCL) and the James B. Shepherd Trust, the owners of the Berkey Water Systems, filed a lawsuit against EPA, suing for violations of the Administrative Procedures Act and due process for their attempts to regulate the water filters. The NMCL said the EPA is labeling the filters a pesticide because of the use of silver to prevent biological growth inside the filters, a feature shared by many water filtration systems. NMCL says the silver does not leach into the water itself and thus the filters should not be regulated as a pesticide. Silver is currently a registered pesticide with the EPA.

NMCL notes that the EPA has not utilized this new re-interpretation to stop the sale of any other outdoor water filter. They go on to state that the “real issue” is that the EPA does not like that Berkey filters have been advertised as capable of removing the COVID-19 virus from your water.

In November, the case was dismissed after the judge claimed that the company doesn’t have standing in their claims. This means that Berkey Water Systems will likely face regulation as a pesticide unless appeals are successful.

“We are now in appeal because, amazingly, the district court ruled that New Millennium had not been harmed by the EPA issuing Stop-Sale orders to its dealers, its manufacturing facility and other vendors, and therefore had no standing in that court,” they wrote in a blog response.

In October, U.S. Congressman Matt Gaetz (FL-01) sent a letter to EPA Administrator Michael Regan regarding the agency’s new ruling classifying the Berkey Water Systems as pesticides. Gaetz’s letter highlights the EPA’s unprecedented attempt to put Berkey out of business. Gaetz requested the EPA provide specific documents to his office showing the process the EPA used to determine its actions.

“At a time when Americans are increasingly unhealthy and their water filled with contaminants, such as endocrine disrupters, heavy metals, and ‘forever’ chemicals, such as PFAS, the EPA should be pursuing policies within its regulatory authority that incentivize increased use of water-filtration systems, not less,” the letter states.

“The EPA must end its attack on Berkey Water Systems immediately and focus on the job it was created to do – keep Americans safe – a job Berkey Water Systems has arguably done more effectively.”

Berkey Dealer Forced to Shut Down

In mid-December, BerkeyFilters.com, an official distributor of the Berkey water filter, announced that they would be going out of business as a result of the lawsuit against the EPA. BerkeyFilters.com is owned by James Enterprise Inc. (JEI). The company said they were the first Berkey dealer to receive a Stop-Sale Order from the EPA.

In a now deleted blog post on BerkeyFilters.com, the company explained their side of the story. They say the whole fiasco began in November 2022 with an “unannounced, unscheduled inspection of JEI facilities.” The blog notes that an EPA inspector also told JEI that the EPA is “cracking down” on virus claims because of COVID-19, and that “the EPA had stepped up its enforcement efforts, particularly in regard to anti-microbial devices.”

In January 2023, JEI says they removed all references and statements relating to the filters removing waterborne pathogens, or pests. The company spent “hundreds of hours” deleting content on websites, social media accounts, and packaging. However, the Stop-Sale Order has not been lifted and, according to JEI, their business has been negatively impacted. They say have been forced to fire employees, cease certain services, and pause third-party parternships.

In the end, JEI was forced to close their doors as an official dealer of the Berkey Water Systems.

The official Berkey Water Systems posted a blog making it clear that although BerkeyFilters.com is no longer an official dealer of the Berkey Filter, the company is still producing the filters and not closing down.

They acknowledge that BerkeyFilters.com was the first dealer to receive the Stop-Sale Order and that both parties attempted to work with the EPA. Berkey Filters said they worked with the EPA for eight months but could not reach a resolution.

“It became apparent that the EPA would accept nothing less than the bankruptcy of New Millennium, its dealers, and more importantly preventing you the public from being self sufficient in terms of cleaning difficult to remove contaminants from your drinking water,” Berkey Water wrote.

“Unfortunately, over the course of the past year the folks at BerkeyFilters.com have fallen victim to this overreach by the EPA. We wish them the best.”

NMCL says they are committed to “fighting the EPA’s overreach” and its attempts to “control and prevent the public from purifying their drinking water.”

While Americans are exposed to water filled with fluoridePFASendocrine disrupting chemicals, and other toxins, the federal government is doing their best to destroy, or at the least weaken, a company which has been providing clean water to millions of people in America. If the EPA had done their job and kept the water supply clean, Americans would not need to seek out filters like the Berkey Water System.

Source: The Last American Vagabond

Visit TheLastAmericanVagabond.com. Subscribe to TLAV’s independent news broadcast on iTunes. Follow on Facebook and Minds. Support with Bitcoin.

Derrick Broze, a staff writer for The Last American Vagabond, is a journalist, author, public speaker, and activist. He is the co-host of Free Thinker Radio on 90.1 Houston, as well as the founder of The Conscious Resistance Network & The Houston Free Thinkers.

https://www.thelastamericanvagabond.com/category/derrick-broze/

from:    https://www.activistpost.com/2023/12/how-the-epa-is-attempting-to-kill-the-berkey-water-filter.html

Where O-Where is Covid 19

The non-existent virus; an explosive interview with Christine Massey

With a background in biostatistics, Christine Massey has been using Freedom of Information (FOIA) requests as a research tool, as a diamond drill, to unearth the truth about SARS-CoV-2. As in: Does the virus exist?

Her approach has yielded shocking results.

In a half-sane world, Christine’s work would win many awards, and rate far-reaching coverage. In the present world, more and more people, on their own, are waking up to her findings and completely revising their perception of the “pandemic.”

Here is my recent interview with the brilliant relentless Christine Massey:

Q: You and your colleagues have made many FOIA requests to public health agencies around the world. You’ve been asking for records that show the SARS-CoV-2 virus exists. How did you develop this approach?

A: In 2014, a lady in Edmonton submitted a freedom of information request to Health Canada asking for studies relating to the addition of hydrofluorosilisic acid (industrial waste fluoride acid) to public drinking water (water fluoridation). HealthCanada’s response indicated that they had no studies whatsoever to back up their claims that the practice is safe or effective.

A few years later, some high quality government-funded studies showed that common fluoride exposure levels during pregnancy are associated with lower IQs and increased ADHD symptoms in offspring. Nevertheless, dentists and the public health community continued to promote and defend the so-called “great public health achievement” of forcing this controversial preventative dental treatment onto entire communities, and were dismissive of those studies. So I used freedom of information requests to show that various institutions promoting and defending water fluoridation in Ontario, Alberta and Washington State could not provide or cite even one primary study indicating safety with respect to those outcomes.

So once I learned from people like David Crowe, Dr. Andrew Kaufman, Dr. Stefan Lanka and Dr. Thomas Cowan that the alleged [COVID] virus had never been isolated (purified) from a patient sample and then characterized, sequenced and studied with controlled experiments, and thus had never been shown to exist, I realized that freedom of information (FOI) requests could be used to verify their claims.

Most people are not going to take the time to check all of the so-called “virus isolation” studies for themselves, so FOIs were a way to 1) ensure that nothing had been overlooked, and 2) cut to the chase and back-up what these gentlemen [Kaufman, Cowan, Crowe, Lanka] were saying, if they were indeed correct.

So in May 2020 I began submitting FOI requests for any record held by the respective institution that describes the isolation/purification of the alleged “COVID-19 virus” from an unadulterated sample taken from a diseased patient, by anyone, anywhere on the planet.

Q: How many public health and government agencies have you queried with FOIA requests?

A: I have personally queried and received responses from 22 Canadian institutions. These are public health institutions, universities that claim to have “isolated the virus”, and 3 police services – due to their enforcement of “COVID-19” restrictions. I have also personally received responses from several institutions outside of Canada including the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and Anthony Fauci’s National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID). I await responses from a number of additional institutions.

Many people around the world have obtained responses to the same/similar, or related, [FOIA] requests, from institutions in their own countries. One person who has done a lot of work on this in New Zealand and other countries is my colleague Michael S. Also a fellow named Marc Horn obtained many in the UK. A handful of other people obtained several responses, and lots of people have obtained 1 or 2.

I have been compiling all of the responses that are sent to me on my FOI page, and as I type this (October 4, 2021) we have FOI responses from 104 institutions in well over 20 countries all relating to the purification/existence of the alleged virus. Additionally, there are court documents from South Africa and Portugal. In total, 110 instructions are represented at this moment on my website. There are FOI responses from more institutions that I haven’t had a chance to upload yet.

Q: How would you characterize the replies you’ve gotten from these agencies?

A: Every institution without exception has failed to provide or cite even 1 record describing purification of the alleged virus from even 1 patient sample.

Twenty-one of the 22 Canadian institutions admitted flat out that they have no such records (as required by the Canadian legislation). Many institutions outside Canada have admitted the same, including the CDC (November 2, 2020), Australia’s Department of Health, New Zealand’s Ministry of Health, the UK Department of Health and Social Care…

And in some cases, silly excuses were provided. For example, the Norwegian Directorate of Health’s response was that they do not own, store or control documents with information about patients. Public Health Wales told Dr. Janet Menage that they have not produced any such records, and that while they would normally be willing to point her towards records that are in the public domain it would be too difficult in this case.

Brazil’s FDA-like injection-approver, the Health Regulatory Agency (Anvisa), told Marcella Picone that they have no record of virus purification and are not required to by law, thus it is (in their minds) not their obligation to make sure that the virus actually exists.

Q: What is the exact text of your FOIA requests?

The text has varied somewhat over time. For example, in the beginning I used the word “isolation”. But since that term gets abused so badly by virologists, I now stick to “purification”.

In all requests I specified exactly what I meant by isolation/purification (separation of the alleged virus from everything else), and that the purified particles should come directly from a sample taken from a diseased human where the patient sample was not first adulterated with any other source of genetic material (i.e. the monkey kidney cells aka Vero cells and the fetal bovine serum that are typically used in the bogus “virus isolation” studies).

I always clarified that I was not requesting records where researchers failed to purify the alleged virus and instead cultured something and/or performed a PCR test and/or sequenced something. I also clarified that I was requesting records authored by anyone, anywhere – not simply records that were created by the institution in question. And I requested citations for any record of purification that is held by the institution but already available to the public elsewhere.

The latest iteration [of the FOIA request] is posted on a page of my website where I encourage others to submit requests to institutions in their own country: Template for “SARS-COV-2 isolation” FOI requests.

Q: These agencies are all saying they have no records proving SARS-CoV-2 exists, but at the same time some of these agencies sponsor and fund studies that claim the virus does exist. How do you account for this contradiction?

I will address this by way of an example.

The Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC) is the only Canadian institution that failed to provide a straightforward “no records” response thus far. Instead, they provided me with what they pretended were responsive records.

The records consisted of some emails, and a study by Bullard et al. that was supported by PHAC and their National Microbiology Laboratory, and by Manitoba Health and Manitoba’s Cadham Provincial Laboratory.

Neither the study nor the emails describe purification of the alleged virus from a patient sample or from anything else. The word “isolate” (or “isolation” / “purify” / “purification”) does not even appear, except in the study manuscript in the context of isolating people, not a virus.

…in the Materials And Methods section we find that these researchers performed PCR “tests” for a portion of the E gene sequence (not a virus), and they incubated patient samples (not a virus) on Vero cells (monkey kidney cells) supplemented with fetal bovine serum, penicillin/streptomycin, and amphotericin B, and they monitored for harm to the monkey cells.

No virus was looked for in, or purified from, the patient samples. No control groups of any kind were implemented in the monkey cell procedures. No virus was required or shown to be involved anywhere in the study, but “it” was blamed for any harm to the monkey cells and “it” was referred to repeatedly throughout the study (I counted 26 instances).

Nevertheless, this was the sole paper provided by the Public Health Agency of Canada.

And although the researchers did not claim to have “isolated” the alleged virus in this paper, they performed the same sort of monkey business / cell culture procedure that is passed off as “virus isolation” by virologists in country after country. (Because virology is not a science.)

…Note the admission in the [study] Abstract: “RT-PCR detects RNA, not infectious virus”.

…So I wrote back to the Public Health Agency of Canada and advised the that none of the records they provided me actually describe separation of the alleged virus from everything else in a patient sample, and that I require an accurate response indicating that they have no responsive records.

In their revised response, the Agency insisted that the gold standard assay used to determine the presence of intact virus in patient samples is visible cytopathic [cell-killing] effects on cells in a cell culture, and that “PCR further confirms that intact virus is present”.

…As you have pointed out to your readers again and again: No one has isolated/purified “the virus”. They simply assume that patient samples contain “it” (based on meaningless PCR tests). They adulterate patient samples with genetic material and toxic drugs, starve the cells, then irrationally blame “the virus” for harm to the cells. They point to something that has never been purified, characterized, sequenced or studied scientifically, in a cell culture and insist “that’s the virus”. They fabricate the “genomes” from zillions of sequences detected in a soup. It’s all wild speculation and assumptions, zero science.

So the people responsible for the blatantly fraudulent claims made by these institutions are either wildly incompetent or intentionally lying.

—end of interview—

To bolster Christine’s final comments, these agencies will respond to FOIA requests with: “we have no records of virus purification”—and then sponsor studies that claim the virus HAS BEEN purified and discovered, because…

The standards for purifying the virus in the studies are no standards at all. They’re entirely irrational.

However, because Christine is very precise and accurate in her FOIA requests, when it comes to what purification means, the agencies are compelled to reply…

“Well, in THAT case, we have no records of virus purification…”

Meaning: There are no records showing the virus has been isolated; there are no records showing the virus exists.

from:    https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2021/10/07/the-non-existent-virus-explosive-interview-with-christine-massey/

TO End Water Fluoridation…

Media Blackout: The Federal Court Case To End Water Fluoridation!

By Spiro Skouras

As we are inundated with headlines about violent riots and looting being passed off as mostly peaceful protests, or how the dreaded virus continues to spread in communities around the world, there is another story taking place which directly affects hundreds of millions of people globally that is being blacked out by the mainstream corporate media.

Unlike the aforementioned crises which are being cited as the justification for the World Economic Forum’s Great Reset, this public health crisis actually has a rather simple solution: to end water fluoridation by no longer adding the toxic substance to the nation’s water supply.

You would think this would be a straightforward process, considering the mountains of studies which conclude fluoride is a harmful neurotoxin attributed to lower IQs and ADHD. Unfortunately, government regulatory agencies have been not only defending this practice for generations, they champion the forced medication as a great achievement in medical history.

Right now, in perhaps one of the most important trials of our time, the Fluoride Action Network is taking the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) head on in an unprecedented court case that could lead to the end of water fluoridation in the US and possibly worldwide as other nations would likely follow suit.

In this interview, Spiro is joined by Dr. Paul Connett of the Fluoride Action Network to discuss the current court case against the EPA and water fluoridation as the first week of the trial has come to an end and the second, possibly final week is about to begin.

Fluoride Action Network
http://fluoridealert.org

Link & Times To Watch The Trial Live
http://fluoridealert.org/issues/tsca-fluoride-trial/

Spiro’s Interview with Dr. Paul Connett & his Son, Attorney Michael Connett
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VQAjWu0hBnw&feature=emb_logo

Follow Spiro on BitChute bitchute.com/channel/spiro/ Follow on Twitter https://twitter.com/o_rips

from:    https://www.activistpost.com/2020/06/media-blackout-the-federal-court-case-to-end-water-fluoridation.html

Water Fluoridation & Your Health

Why Water Fluoridation Is A Forced Experiment That Needs To Stop

The United States stands almost entirely alone among developed nations in adding industrial silicofluorides to its drinking water—imposing the community-wide measure without informed consent. Globally, roughly 5% of the population consumes chemically fluoridated water, but more people in the U.S. drink fluoride-adulterated water than in all other countries combined. Within the U.S., just under a third (30%) of local water supplies are not fluoridated; these municipalities have either held the practice at bay since fluoridation’s inception or have won hard-fought battles to halt water fluoridation.
Dozens of studies and reviews—including in top-tier journals such as The Lancet—have shown that fluoride is neurotoxic and lowers children’s IQ.

The fluoride chemicals added to drinking water are unprocessed toxic wasteproducts—captured pollutants from Florida’s phosphate fertilizer industry or unregulated chemical imports from China. The chemicals undergo no purification before being dumped into drinking water and often harbor significant levels of arsenic and other heavy metal contamination; one researcher describes this unavoidable contamination as a “regulatory blind spotthat jeopardizes any safe use of fluoride additives.”

Dozens of studies and reviews—including in top-tier journals such as The Lancet—have shown that fluoride is neurotoxic and lowers children’s IQ. Fluoride is also associated with a variety of other health risks in both children and adults. However, U.S. officialdom persists in making hollow claims that water fluoridation is safe and beneficial, choosing to ignore even its own research! A multimillion-dollar longitudinal study published in Environmental Health Perspectives in September, 2017, for example, was largely funded by the National Institutes of Health and National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences—and the seminal study revealed a strong relationship between fluoride exposure in pregnant women and lowered cognitive function in offspring. Considered in the context of other research, the study’s implications are, according to the nonprofit Fluoride Action Network, “enormous”—“a cannon shot across the bow of the 80 year old practice of artificial fluoridation.”

According to declassified government documents summarized by Project Censored, Manhattan Project scientists discovered early on that fluoride was a leading health hazard to bomb program workers and surrounding communities.

A little history

During World War II, fluoride (a compound formed from the chemical element fluorine) came into large-scale production and use as part of the Manhattan Project. According to declassified government documents summarized by Project Censored, Manhattan Project scientists discovered early on that fluoride was a “leading health hazard to bomb program workers and surrounding communities.” In order to stave off lawsuits, government scientists “embarked on a campaign to calm the social panic about fluoride…by promoting its usefulness in preventing tooth decay.”

To prop up its “exaggerated claims of reduction in tooth decay,” government researchers began carrying out a series of poorly designed and fatally flawed community trials of water fluoridation in a handful of U.S. cities in the mid-1940s. In a critique decades later, a University of California-Davis statistician characterized these early agenda-driven fluoridation trials as “especially rich in fallacies, improper design, invalid use of statistical methods, omissions of contrary data, and just plain muddleheadedness and hebetude.” As one example, a 15-year trial launched in Grand Rapids, Michigan in 1945 used a nearby city as a non-fluoridated control, but after the control city began fluoridating its own water supply five years into the study, the design switched from a comparison with the non-fluoridated community to a before-and-after assessment of Grand Rapids. Fluoridation’s proponents admitted that this change substantially “compromised” the quality of the study.

In 1950, well before any of the community trials could reach any conclusions about the systemic health effects of long-term fluoride ingestion, the U.S. Public Health Service (USPHS) endorsed water fluoridation as official public health policy, strongly encouraging communities across the country to adopt the unproven measure for dental caries prevention. Describing this astonishingly non-evidence-based step as “the Great Fluoridation Gamble,” the authors of the 2010 book, The Case Against Fluorideargue that:

“Not only was safety not demonstrated in anything approaching a comprehensive and scientific study, but also a large number of studies implicating fluoride’s impact on both the bones and the thyroid gland were ignored or downplayed” (p. 86).

In 2015, Newsweek magazine not only agreed that the scientific rationale for putting fluoride in drinking water was not as “clear-cut” as once thought but also shared the “shocking” finding of a more recent Cochrane Collaboration review, namely, that there is no evidence to support the use of fluoride in drinking water.

Bad science and powerful politics

The authors of The Case Against Fluoride persuasively argue that “bad science” and “powerful politics” are primary factors explaining why government agencies continue to defend the indefensible practice of water fluoridation, despite abundant evidence that it is unsafe both developmentally and after “a lifetime of exposure to uncontrolled doses.” Comparable to Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.’s bookThimerosal: Let the Science Speak, which summarizes studies that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and “credulous journalists swear don’t exist,” The Case Against Fluoride is an extensively referenced tour de force, pulling together hundreds of studies showing evidence of fluoride-related harm.

… death rates in the ten most fluoridated U.S. states are 5% to 26% higher than in the ten least fluoridated states, with triple the rate of Alzheimer’s disease.

The research assembled by the book’s authors includes studies on fluoride biochemistry; cancer; fluoride’s effects on the brain, endocrine system and bones; and dental fluorosis. With regard to the latter, public health agencies like to define dental fluorosis as a purely cosmetic issue involving “changes in the appearance of tooth enamel,” but the International Academy of Oral Medicine & Toxicology (IAOMT)—a global network of dentists, health professionals and scientists dedicated to science-based biological dentistry—describes the damaged enamel and mottled and brittle teeth that characterize dental fluorosis as “the first visible sign of fluoride toxicity.”

The important 2017 study that showed decrements in IQ following fluoride exposure during pregnancy is far from the only research sounding the alarm about fluoride’s adverse developmental effects. In his 2017 volumePregnancy and Fluoride Do Not Mix, John D. MacArthur pulls together hundreds of studies linking fluoride to premature birth and impaired neurological development (93 studies), preelampsia (77 studies) and autism (110 studies). The book points out that rates of premature birth are “unusually high” in the United States. At the other end of the lifespan, MacArthur observes that death rates in the ten most fluoridated U.S. states are 5% to 26% higher than in the ten least fluoridated states, with triple the rate of Alzheimer’s disease. A 2006 report by the National Research Council warned that exposure to fluoride might increase the risk of developing Alzheimer’s.

The word is out

Pregnancy and Fluoride Do Not Mix shows that the Institute of Medicine, National Research Council, Harvard’s National Scientific Council on the Developing Child, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and National Toxicology Program all are well aware of the substantial evidence of fluoride’s developmental neurotoxicity, yet no action has been taken to warn pregnant women. Instead, scientists with integrity, legal professionals and the public increasingly are taking matters into their own hands. A Citizens Petitionsubmitted in 2016 to the EPA under the Toxic Substances Control Act requested that the EPA “exercise its authority to prohibit the purposeful addition of fluoridation chemicals to U.S. water supplies.” This request—the focus of a lawsuit to be argued in court later in 2019—poses a landmark challenge to the dangerous practice of water fluoridation and has the potential to end one of the most significant chemical assaults on our children’s developing bodies and brains.

Sign up for free news and updates from Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and the Children’s Health Defense. CHD is planning many strategies, including legal, in an effort to defend the health of our children and obtain justice for those already injured. Your support is essential to CHD’s successful mission.

from:    https://www.collective-evolution.com/2019/01/10/why-water-fluoridation-is-a-forced-experiment-that-needs-to-stop/

What’s In Your Water?

As always, DO YOUR RESEARCH and think about getting a good water filter. (I like the BIG BERKEY):

What’s in your water: 6 Reasons why you should never drink from the tap

Image: What’s in your water: 6 Reasons why you should never drink from the tap

(Natural News) While the tap seems like an easy and hassle-free way to drink water, it’s anything but. Tap water is filled to the brim with dangerous contaminants that have no business being anywhere near your body. Every time you turn on the tap and fill your glass, you risk drinking any of the thousands of chemical toxins that have been found in our nation’s tap water.

In California, sewer water is now being recycled into tap water. “New regulations approved Tuesday by the California State Water Resources Control Board allow treated recycled water to be added to reservoirs, the source of California municipal drinking water,” reports the San Francisco Gate. “The regulations specify the percentage of recycled water that can be added and how long it must reside there before being treated again at a surface water treatment facility and provided as drinking water.”

Listed below are some of the most common and prolific toxins found in municipal water:

  1. Fluoride — Because it’s believed to prevent tooth decay, water fluoridation has been practiced for the last 50 years. Unfortunately, not only is fluoride totally unnecessary, it also does more damage than you think. According to FluorideAlert.org, fluoride can harm tooth enamel, negatively impact thyroid and pineal gland function, and weaken bones. The dose is not controlled, and it is known to accumulate in the body, interfering with digestion, hormones, and neurotransmitters. This array of health issues is why countries such as Belgium, Sweden, and Hungary have either banned or rejected water fluoridation.
  2. Chlorine  Turns out chlorine isn’t just for the pool; water treatment facilities make use of this chemical as well. The problem with chlorine is that it’s so effective a disinfectant that drinking it destroys beneficial gut bacteria. In turn, this makes you more susceptible to digestive issues and ailments such as asthma and food allergies. Moreover, chlorine is believed to be highly carcinogenic in even small amounts.
  3. Arsenic — This naturally-occurring element can seep into groundwater and water wells, which is usually how you become exposed to it. On top of it being extremely carcinogenic, arsenic has been known to raise the chances of developing cardiovascular disease, diabetes, and cognitive development disorders in young children.
  4. Heavy metals — Pipes contain heavy metals that make their way into our water whenever water passes through them. Lead is the most well-known of these heavy metals, and has been connected to neurological and developmental difficulties in young children. Other heavy metals like aluminum can damage your nerves, kidneys, and brain. And don’t make the mistake of thinking that having new plumbing fixtures makes you safe. As per NRDC.org, even new brass faucets and fixtures can still have a relevant amount of lead in them.
  5. Hexavalent chromium  This probable human carcinogen can result in reproductive harm, severely damage the liver and kidneys, and bring about eye and respiratory irritation. Hexavalent chromium is so dangerous that even drinking it over a short period of time has been shown to cause health issues.
  6. Pharmaceutical drugs — From being flushed down the toilet to being passed through bodily waste, there are several ways that pharmaceutical drugs can end up in our drinking water supply. And the kinds of medication that have been found in drinking water is nothing short of shocking: painkillers, antidepressants, blood thinners, antibiotics, and hormones are just some of them. This means that your local water supply could be harboring a deadly cocktail of pharmaceuticals with disastrous health effects.

from:    https://www.naturalnews.com/2018-08-03-whats-in-your-water-6-reasons-why-you-should-never-drink-from-the-tap.html

On the Pineal Gland and Fluoride

Why A Fluoride-Free Pineal Gland is More Important than Ever

https://i0.wp.com/themindunleashed.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/why-aaaa.jpg?w=584

There has been some controversy over the activity of adding synthetic fluoride to municipal water supplies and elsewhere, but not enough. The seriousness of this issue is more than what most realize. Fluoridation ranks with GMO’s and tainted, forced vaccinations among the great crimes against humanity.

Understanding the Different Fluorides

There are two types of fluoride. Calcium Fluoride, which appears naturally in underground water supplies, is relatively benign. However, too much consumed daily can lead to bone or dental problems. Calcium is used to counter fluoride poisoning when it occurs. This redeeming factor indicates that the calcium in naturally formed calcium fluoride neutralizes much of fluoride’s toxic effects.

On the other hand, the type of fluorides added to water supplies and other beverages and foods are waste products of the nuclear, aluminum, and now mostly the phosphate (fertilizer) industries. The EPA has classified these as toxins: fluorosilicate acid, sodium silicofluoride, and sodium fluoride.

For this article, the term Sodium Fluoride will include all three types. Sodium fluoride is used for rat poison and as a pesticide. According to a scientific study done several years ago, Comparative Toxicity of Fluorine Compounds, industrial waste sodium fluorides are 85 times more toxic than naturally occurring calcium fluoride.

Health Hazards of Sodium Fluoride

Generally, most fluoride entering the body is not easily eliminated. It tends to accumulate in the body’s bones and teeth. Recently, it has been discovered to accumulate even more in the pineal gland, located in the middle of the brain.

This consequence of dental fluorosis, which seriously harms teeth, from daily fluoridation has been documented. Yet, the American Dental Association (AMA) continues beating a dead horse, promoting fluoride. There is a refusal to admit that instead of preventing tooth decay, fluoride causes even more dental harm.

The flood of sodium fluoride in water and food also creates other more serious health problems that are not widely publicized, even suppressed. Nevertheless, in addition to fluorosis, independent labs and reputable researchers have linked the following health issues with daily long term intake of sodium fluoride:

*Cancer
*Genetic DNA Damage
*Thyroid Disruption – affecting the complete endocrine system and leading to obesity
*Neurological – diminished IQ and inability to focus, lethargy and weariness.
*Alzheimer’s Disease
*Melatonin Disruption, lowers immunity to cancer, accelerates aging, sleep disorders.
*Pineal Gland, calcification, which clogs this gland located in the middle of the brain.

How Did We Get Stuck With Stuff?

According to investigative journalist Christopher Bryson, author ofThe Fluoride Deception, getting large quantities of sodium fluoride into the water and food system was a ploy of public relations sponsored by the industries who were saddled with getting rid of the toxic materials.

Fluoride was necessary for the processing or enriching of uranium. The pro-fluoride propaganda was started during the Manhattan Project to create the first atom bombs in the 1940′s. The spin was to convince workers and locals where the largest nuclear plant was located in Tennessee that fluoride was not only safe, it was good for kids’ dental health.

In the early 1950′s, the notorious spin master and father of advertising, Edward Bernays, continued the campaign for adding fluorides to water supplies as an experiment in engineering human consent! Then the AMA picked up on the dental issue and endorsed sodium fluoride’s addition to water supplies. The few dissenting health studies and reports were usually squashed. Those dissenting voices were dismissed as quacks regardless of their credentials.

Approximately 2/3 of the USA water supply is laced with sodium fluoride. Sodium fluoride is a common pesticide. So that residue is in some foods. Some sodas, packaged orange juices, and even bottled drinking water for babies contain fluoride additives. Buyer beware. Read your labels carefully.

Avoiding Fluoridation

Keep in mind that boiling only increases the concentration of fluoride to water more. But removing fluoride from tap water is not so difficult. Reverse osmosis works well for removing fluorides. If you own your home and can spring for the bucks, you can have one installed under the sink in your kitchen. That makes things very convenient for your fluoride removal from tap water.

If this is not your situation, grab a couple of large jugs and fill them up from reverse osmosis machines in health food stores, supermarkets, and other locations. There are several such machines around, usually labeled as using reverse osmosis, and they usually take coins. So it is the most accessible and cheapest way to go if you can’t install one where you live.

The Physiological Importance of the Pineal Gland

During the late 1990′s in England, a scientist by the name of Jennifer Luke undertook the first study the effects of sodium fluoride on the pineal gland. She determined that the pineal gland, located in the middle of the brain, was a target for fluoride. The pineal gland simply absorbed more fluoride than any other physical matter in the body, even bones.

Because of the pineal gland’s importance to the endocrine system, her conclusions were a breakthrough. Her study provided the missing link to a lot of physiological damage from sodium fluoride that had been hypothesized but not positively connected. A veritable root source for the chain reaction of blocked endocrine activity had been isolated.

Good news though. Frequent exposure to outdoor sunshine, 20 minutes or so at a time, will help stimulate a fluoride calcified pineal gland. Just make sure you take off your hat. This is more important than most realize, because the pineal gland affects so much other enzyme and endocrine activity, including melatonin production.

The 2012 Connection

First a bit about 2012, a date many have heard about. According to Carlos Barrios, anthropologist, historian, and investigator who was initiated as a Mayan ceremonial priest and spiritual guide, “Anthropologists visit the temple sites and read the inscriptions . . . but they do not read the signs correctly. . . . Other people write about prophecy in the name of the Maya. They say that the world will end in December 2012. The Mayan elders are angry with this. The world will not end. It will be transformed.”

Carlos Barrios goes on to say that the transformation will be both spiritual and physical. The transition started in 1987. He says that we are in a spiritual transition from the rule of materialism, greed, and enmity to a new period of cooperation and peace – but not without difficulty. The current oligarchy is happy with what they have and don’t want to give it up, and they are powerful. The Mayans claim that 2012 marks the end of the period of the fourth sun and the beginning of the fifth sun.

Carlos points out that adversarial revolution against the ruling class will not work. It is up to those who want this shift to connect with others of like mind and begin actively creating networks of real cooperation. The old will crumble. The new period will dawn with its growing pains, the severity of which depends on our ability to accept what is happening and go with the flow. This, he says, requires evolving to unconditional love, with an open and simple heart, forgiveness, and cooperation with less ego competition.

Connecting the Pineal Gland to This 2012 Matter

Well, what does all this have to do with the pineal gland? A lot. It is considered a portal to the inner or higher self by yogi masters, including Paramahansa Yogananda, author of Autobiography of a Yogi. Psychics consider it to be the link for inter dimensional experiences. It is associated with what many call the third eye or sixth chakra, which is a doorway to higher consciousness and bliss.

And it is vital for supporting intuition, an ability that will be needed during hard times. So it is necessary to evolve spiritually in order to help create better understanding, acceptance of our fellow humans, and easier group cooperation. Meditation is a part of this evolving. That and a little sunshine, good rest and food, can cause a calcified pineal gland to loosen up and allow that portal to open.

An unusual psychiatrist, professor of medicine at University of New Mexico, and practicing Buddhist, Dr. Rick Strassman, MD, has written a book based on actual human studies of people under the psychedelic drug, DMT, titled DMT, The Spirit Molecule. He has discovered, among other things, that the pineal gland is a source of DMT production during birth and at death, and during near death or mystical experiences. This chemical approach corroborates the idea of the pineal gland as a portal, where the spirit passes through to other dimensions, either entering this physical realm or leaving it.

South American and Central American shamans use Ayahuasca, an herbal potion that stimulates DMT for psychological healing and spiritual initiation ceremonies. They have expanded their ceremonies with Ayahuasca by traveling throughout the world or opening their local facilities to non natives. They are doing this urgently in anticipation of 2012. Their desire is to jump start and expand individuals’ consciousness so the transition of consciousness will be facilitated and incorporate as many as possible.

This information is meant to link the physical realm’s pineal gland to higher states of awareness and other realms. The point is not to advocate or discourage psychedelic drug use, but to encourage health, meditation and spiritual growth by maintaining a fluoride free pineal gland. 2012 is approaching. Time to get in shape!

from:    http://themindunleashed.org/2014/12/fluoride-free-pineal-gland-important-ever.html

Health Myths

The Top 15 Lies You’re Being Told About Health and Mainstream Medicine

 

Valued sources of information are hijacked by much bigger interests than you can imagine

The Top 15 Lies You're Being Told About Health and Mainstream Medicine


Do you ever question what doctors, nutritionists, institutions and even science tells you about your health, food, environment and lifestyle? You should, because we live in an era of deception and duplicity where the most trusted and valued sources of information are hijacked by much bigger interests than you can imagine. The internet is one of the last frontiers for truth, informing and educating billions on why our systems of health, agriculture, medicine and many other areas we depend on are failing us. The reason they’re failing us is because corrupt governments, corporations and the media are constantly feeding us lies on a daily basis, which through repetition, the public eventually accepts as truth.

LIE #1. GENETICALLY MODIFIED ORGANISMS (GMOs) CAN FEED THE WORLD
A lot of food that we eat today contains genetically modified ingredients and usually without our knowledge. Supporters of this technology maintain that it ensures and sustains food security around the world as the population increases. As well as scientific debates on the merits of genetically engineered food, there are equally, if not more important, debates on the socioeconomic ramifications of the way such science is marketed and used.

The dangers of GMO foods can no longer be denied. Researchers havelinked organ damage with consumption of Monsanto’s GM maize.

Biotechnology companies erroneously claim that their manipulations are similar to natural genetic changes or traditional breeding techniques. However, the cross-species transfers being made, such as between fish and tomatoes, or between other unrelated species, would not happen in nature and may create new toxins, diseases, and weaknesses. When genetic engineers insert a new gene into any organism there are “position effects” which can lead to unpredictable changes in the pattern of gene expression and genetic function. The protein product of the inserted gene may carry out unexpected reactions and produce potentially toxic products. There is also serious concern about the dangers of using genetically engineered viruses as delivery vehicles (vectors) in the generation of transgenic plants and animals. This could destabilise the genome, and also possibly create new viruses, and thus dangerous new diseases.

Unlike chemical or nuclear contamination, genetic pollution is self-perpetuating. It can never be reversed or cleaned up; genetic mistakes will be passed on to all future generations of a species.

LIE #2. ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELDS AND WIRELESS RADIATION ARE NOT HARMFUL TO HUMANS

The danger of magnetic, electric, wireless, radio (microwave), ground current, and high frequency radiation is that it is mostly invisible until great damage is done – like the increased risk of some brain tumors in long term cell phone users.

Sensitivity to electromagnetic radiation is a very big health problem of our youngest generations. The media and medical community dismiss it, but it is imperative health practitioners, governments, schools and our entire society learn more about the risks because the human health stakes are significant.

Studies suggest that women briefly exposed to very high-intensity EMFs have an increased risk of miscarriage, especially EMFs emitted by power lines and electrical appliances.

A growing percentage of people are now heeding the advice of holistic health experts and disposing of their microwaves due to the dangers of microwaved food.

The effect of EMFs on biological tissue remains controversial. Virtually all scientists agree that more research is necessary to determine safe or dangerous levels. It’s like one big human experiment which we won’t know the results of for several decades. Now, with the increasing proliferation of wireless handheld and portable devices, it is literally impossible to escape EMFs in any major city.

What they do know is that iron, which is necessary for healthy blood and is stored in the brain, is highly affected by EMFs. The permeability of the cell membranes of nerves, blood vessels, skin and other organs is also affected, as well as the intricate DNA of the chromosomes. Every bodily biochemical process involves precisely choreographed movement of EMF sensitive atoms, molecules, and ions.

Not only do EMFs impact your own health and that of your children and pets, but also the Earth as a whole, as our overuse of electricity contributes greatly to pollution from coal-fired electricity plants. Those who are wise will heed the warnings of the electrically sensitive and reduce the EMF radiation in their homes through good design and reduction of dependence on electric appliances.

LIE #3. MEDICAL SCREENING AND TREATMENTS PREVENT DEATH

Even though the medical community advocates for regular screenings for those with illnesses, they may bring little benefit and may actually pose harm to your health. This applies to almost every type of medical screening for cancer and several other diseases. Medical screening carries an immense risk in itself, not only due to the damage inflicted by screening techniques on the human body, but by the very nature of medical follow-up protocols. These protocols usually encourage patients to enter deeper into more invasive techniques, which further cripple health and lead to a very high percentage of fatalities.

Doctors are often criticized for prescribing unneeded tests and procedures that harm more than they help and add to medical costs that could otherwise be avoided. 12 medical tests and procedures now being questioned worldwide as unnecessary and potentially cause — sometimes harmful results to patients.

Radiation-induced cancers have tripled in the last two decades and diagnostic imaging has been already been admitted as a cause by the U.S. government.


There is a secular trend between breast cancer mortality and screening programs specifically medial diagnostic techniques such asmammography. In a Swedish study of 60,000 women, 70 percent of the mammographically detected tumors weren’t tumors at all. These “false positives” aren’t just financial and emotional strains, they may also lead to many unnecessary and invasive biopsies. In fact, 70 to 80 percent of all positive mammograms do not, upon biopsy, show any presence of cancer.

A prostate (PSA) blood test looks for prostate-specific antigen, a protein produced by the prostate gland. High levels are supposedly associated with prostate cancer. The problem is that the association isn’t always correct, and when it is, the prostate cancer isn’t necessarily deadly. Only about 3 percent of all men die from prostate cancer. The PSA test usually leads to overdiagnosis — biopsies and treatment in which the side effects are impotence and incontinence. Repeated biopsies may spread cancer cells into the track formed by the needle, or by spilling cancerous cells directly into the bloodstream or lympathic system.

News coverage of many diseases focus too much on treatments and not enough on prevention, a trend that could prove risky in the long run for most people who don’t understand how to take care of their health.

LIE #4. FLUORIDE PREVENTS TOOTH DECAY

A growing number of communities are choosing to stop adding fluoride to their water systems, even though the federal government and federal health officials maintain their full support for a measure they say provides a 25 percent reduction in tooth decay nationwide.

There are now serious facts and health risks regarding fluoridation which can no longer be ignored and the practice itself is being questioned by most of the world.

Austrian researchers proved in the 1970s that as little as 1 ppm fluoride concentration can disrupt DNA repair enzymes by 50%. When DNA can’t repair damaged cells, we get old fast.

Fluoride prematurely ages the body, mainly by distortion of enzyme shape. All systems of the body are dependent upon enzymes. When fluoride changes the enzymes, this can damage every system and function of the body.

Dr. Paul Connett, PhD stated “When historians come to write about this period, they will single out fluoridation as the single biggest mistake in public policy that we’ve ever had.”

David Kennedy, DDS President International Academy of Oral Medicine and Toxicology said that “water fluoridation is the single largest case of scientific fraud, promoted by the government, supported by taxpayer dollars, aided and abetted by the ADA and the AMA, in the history of the planet.”

LIE #5. FOCUS ON LOWERING BAD CHOLESTEROL TO PREVENT HEART DISEASE

Perhaps one of the biggest health myths propagated in western culture and certainly in the United States, is the misuse of an invented term “bad cholesterol” by the media and medical community. Moreover, a scientifically-naive public has been conned into a fraudulent correlation between elevated cholesterol and cardiovascular disease (CVD). Cholesterol has not been shown to actually cause CVD. To the contrary, cholesterol is vital to our survival, and trying to artificially lower it can have detrimental effects, particularly as we age.

We have become a culture so obsessed with eating foods low in cholesterol and fat that many health experts are now questioning the consequences. Could we really maintain a dietary lifestyle that was so foreign to many of our ancestral populations without any ill effects on our health? Many researchers are now concluding that the answer to that question is “NO.” Current data is now suggesting that lower cholesterol levels predate the development of cancer. Scientific papers prove that people with high so-called “Bad” LDL cholesterol live the longest.
The ‘noddy-science’ offered by marketing men to a generally scientifically-naive public has led many people to believe that we should replace certain food choices with specially developed products that can help ‘reduce cholesterol’. Naturally this comes at a price and requires those who can afford it to pay maybe four or five times what a ‘typical ordinary’ product might cost. But is this apparent ‘blanket need’ to strive towards lowering our cholesterol justified? And, indeed, is it healthy?

The cholesterol itself, whether being transported by LDL or HDL, is exactly the same. Cholesterol is simply a necessary ingredient that is required to be regularly delivered around the body for the efficient healthy development, maintenance and functioning of our cells. The difference is in the ‘transporters’ (the lipoproteins HDL and LDL) and both types are essential for the human body’s delivery logistics to work effectively.

Problems can occur, however, when the LDL particles are both small and their carrying capacity outweighs the transportation potential of available HDL. This can lead to more cholesterol being ‘delivered’ around the body with lower resources for returning excess capacity to the liver.

We need to reform education on what really causes heart disease and why cholesterol, whether high or low, is not an evil process in the body, but a natural part of our biology. When we stop listening to medical doctors, suddenly we start listening to what our bodies crave… to be the healthiest version of ourselves.

LIE #6. SUNLIGHT IS HARMFUL AND SUNSCREEN IS YOUR BEST DEFENSE

Sunscreen is full of some of the most toxic chemicals known. Yet both the cancer and sunscreen industries insist on their use to ironically prevent cancer from “bad” sunlight. People still fall for this nonsense, slather on the sunscreen in hopes to protect against a non-existent foe. If the sun was really that harmful, we’d all be dead long ago. Meanwhile, a growing body of evidence shows that blocking the sun’s rays from reaching our skin dramatically influences our optimal vitamin D levels, leading to higher mortality, critical illness, mental health disorders and ironically, cancer itself. Here’s why you need to make your own sunscreen.

There are well over 800 references in the medical literature showing vitamin D’s effectiveness–both for the prevention and treatment of cancer.

Blocking the sun’s rays from reaching our skin dramatically influences our optimal vitamin D levels, leading to higher mortality, critical illness and mental health disorders. Ironically, sunscreen itself causes cancer.

Exposure to sunlight and ultraviolet light has been repeatedly shown to NOT be the cause of skin cancer. Scientists from The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center reported UVA exposure is unlikely to have contributed to the rise in the incidence of melanoma over the past 30 years.

The idea that sunscreen prevents cancer is also a myth promoted by pharmaceutical companies, conventional medicine and the mainstream media for one purpose…profit. The sunscreen industry makes money by selling lotion products that actually contain cancer-causing chemicals. It then donates a portion of that money to the cancer industry through non-profit groups like Cancer Societies which, in turn, run heart-breaking public service ads urging people to use sunscreen to “prevent cancer.”

LIE #7. VACCINES PREVENT DISEASE AND INCREASE IMMUNITY

The term “immunization”, often substituted for vaccination, is false and should be legally challenged. Medical research has well established that the direct injection of foreign proteins and other toxic material (particularly known immune-sensitising poisons such as mercury) makes the recipient more, not less, easily affected by what he/she encounters in the future. This means they do the opposite of immunize, commonly even preventing immunity from developing after natural exposure. There are 5 phases of awakening to the dangers of vaccination and many lie in different phases.

The actual frequency of health problems has been estimated by authorities to be possibly up to 100 times, or more, greater than that reported by government agencies. That difference is due to the lack of enforcement or incentive for doctors to report adverse effects. With the anti-vaccination movements now exposing the truth on the internet, the medical community is now on high alert, defending their claims and being told by vaccine manufacturers that they must never let their patients (or parents) think that the risks could outweigh the benefits, when in reality, it is precisely the opposite that is true.

Convincing evidence is finally coming forward from peer reviewed studies which show that the rapid increase in the number of vaccines given to children is creating synergistic toxicity and a state of immune overload in the majority of vaccine recipients manifesting in related health issues including epidemics of obesity, diabetes, and autism.

The benefit risk ratio is an important decision in anyone deciding whether to vaccinate or not. Contrary to popular belief and marketing, childhood diseases in a developed country are not as dangerous as we are led to believe. Catching a particular disease does not mean you will die from it. Vaccines were actually introduced at a time when diseases had already declined to a low risk level. This fact is proven, scientifically.

The main advances in combating disease over the last 200 years have been better food and clean drinking water…not vaccines. Improved sanitation, less overcrowded and better living conditions also contribute. This is also borne out in published peer reviewed research which prove that vaccine did not save us. The is irrefutable evidence which shows that the historical application of vaccines had no health benefit or impact on prevention of infectious disease.

All vaccines contain sterility agents, neurotoxins, immunotoxins, and carcinogenic compounds. Some examples include formaldehyde, a carcinogen found in almost every vaccine, neurotoxins such asmonosodium glutamatepotassium chloridethimerosal, sterility agents such as Triton X-100octoxynol-10, polysorbate 80, and immuntoxins such as neomycinmonobasic potassium phosphate,sodium deoxycholate to name a few of many.

It is no coincidence that the more educated you are, the less chance you will vaccinate which contradicts the misconceptions of many health professionals who profess that parents don’t vaccinate because they are under-educated, poor or misinformed. Those who become fully informed of the dangers of vaccines never see them in the same light again, as their motives then become clear.

LIE #8. CONVENTIONAL MEDICINE AND THE HEALTHCARE SYSTEM HELPS SICK PEOPLE

Perhaps the biggest health myth today is the public’s misconception that mainstream medicine and the healthcare system helps sick people. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Why do people follow medical authorities who prescribe toxic vaccinations, medications and treatments which only serve as a detriment to human health?

The freedom of people to choose natural healing, alternative medicine and methods of disease prevention could soon be threatened by corporate lobbyists who will do anything to protect their wealth at the expense of your health.

90 percent of all diseases (cancer, diabetes, depression, heart disease, etc.) are easily preventable through diet, nutrition, sunlight and exercise. None of these solutions are ever promoted by conventional medicine because they make no money.

No pharmaceuticals actually cure or resolve the underlying causes of disease. Even “successful” drugs only manage symptoms, usually at the cost of interfering with other physiological functions that will cause side effects down the road. There is no such thing as a drug without a side effect.

There is no financial incentive for anyone in today’s system of medicine (drug companies, hospitals, doctors, etc.) to actually make patients well. Profits are found in continued sickness, not wellness or prevention.

The main error of the biomedical approach is the confusion between disease processes and disease origins. Instead of asking why an illness occurs, and trying to remove the conditions that lead to it, medical researchers try to understand the biological mechanisms through which the disease operates, so that they can interfere with them. These mechanisms, rather than the true origins, are seen as the causes of disease in current medical thinking and this confusion lies at the very centre of the conceptual problems of contemporary medicine.

Almost all the “prevention” programs you see today (such as free mammograms or other screening programs) are nothing more than patient recruitment schemes designed to increase revenue and sickness. They use free screenings to scare people into agreeing to unnecessary treatments that only lead to further disease.

Nobody has any interest in your health except you. No corporation, no doctor, and no government has any desire to actually make you well. This has served the short-term financial interests of higher powers in the west very well. The only healthy, aware, critically thinking individuals are all 100% free of pharmaceuticals and processed foods.

LIE #9. THERE ARE ACCEPTABLE LEVELS OF CHEMICALS

The levels are “acceptable” by industry and regulatory standards, but our exposure to other “acceptable levels” of toxic chemicals that then interact with each other and dance with our cells within our bodies is never taken into consideration.

We have over 200 synthetic chemicals in our bodies right now. Our exposure to toxins is that pervasive. Most of us do not detect their presence every moment of every day, but we have to wonder–how are they affecting us? What does this mean for future generations? This is all ignored by all industries.

Chemicals account for an annual $3.7 trillion in sales across the globe–the United States makes up almost 19 percent. Many jobs rely on this industry, yet 85 percent of the chemicals in commerce today have not been tested. How are the products containing those chemicals impacting our health? What’s the impact on those who work or live near the chemical plants?

Is it really that hard for most people to believe that we are being assaulted on a daily basis by chemical terrorism? Genetically modified foods, artificial flavours, colors, preservatives, emulsifiers, and sweeteners all made with toxic chemicals, all of which are proven toxic to human health.

Artificial sweeteners, preservatives, nitrates, artificial colors, MSG…if it’s processed, chances are it contains one or more of these ingredients. Sodium benzoate and potassium benzoate are preservatives that are sometimes added to sodas to prevent mold growth, but benzene is a known carcinogen. Butylated Hydroxynaisole (BHA) is another preservative that’s potentially cancer-causing. Reading labels is an easy solution–if you don’t recognize an ingredient, don’t buy the food product.

There are no acceptable levels of any chemicals that belong in our foods and it’s time we get the chemical industry out of our foods.

LIE #10. DISEASE CAN’T BE REVERSED WITHOUT DRUGS

Many combinations of natural products are as effective as man-made drugs, but without the side effects when acting against specific diseases. For empirical evidence, look no further than the indigenous tribes and cultures which still use many formulations pre-dating the historical record and with great success. A comprehensive study and first of its kind published in PLoS One assessed 124 natural product combinations and found that in the right combinations, they can match drug level potency.

Plants are better than drugs on many levels. Specific herbs, fruits and vegetables have been found on many instances to work better than medication for specific diseases. For example, Soursop Fruit has been found to kill cancer up to 10,000 times more effectively than strong chemotherapy. Consuming apples daily has been found in some studies to be more effective than statin medications at reducing heart disease.Cranberry juicegarlic and turmeric are just three of dozens of other foods which beat drugs in treating and preventing disease.

There are herbs that boost and heal the lungs, others which increaseenergy and vitality, many that stabilize the thyroid and even lower blood pressure.

** The 7 Most Prescribed Drugs In The World And Their Natural Counterparts **

Despite the medical model which relies on pharmaceutical intervention for every known illness, there are well over one hundred common diseases that can be reversed naturally. That’s the difference between treatment for profit and healing for wellness. Arthritis (both rheumatoid and osteo) diabetes (both Type I and Type II), hypertension and cancer are all reversible with proper herbal strategies, nutrition and exercise.

LIE #11. THE BEST WAY TO TREAT CANCER IS WITH CHEMOTHERAPY AND RADIATION

Doctors and pharmaceutical companies make money from it. That’s the only reason chemotherapy is still used. Not because it’s effective, decreases morbidity, mortality or diminishes any specific cancer rates. In fact, it does the opposite. Chemotherapy boosts cancer growth and long-term mortality rates. Most chemotherapy patients either die or are plagued with illness within 10-15 years after treatment. It destroys their immune system, increases neuro-cognitive decline, disrupts endocrine functioning and causes organ and metabolic toxicities. Patients basically live in a permanent state of disease until their death. The cancer industry marginalizes safe and effective cures while promoting their patented, expensive, and toxic remedies whose risks far exceed any benefit. This is what they do best, and they do it because it makes money, plain and simple.

The reason a 5-year relative survival rate is the standard used to assess mortality rates is due to most cancer patients going downhill after this period. It’s exceptionally bad for business and the cancer industry knows it. They could never show the public the true 97% statistical failure rate in treating long-term metastatic cancers. If they did publish the long-term statistics for all cancers administered cytotoxic chemotherapy, that is 10+ years and produced the objective data on rigorous evaluations including the cost-effectiveness, impact on the immune system, quality of life, morbidity and mortality, it would be very clear to the world that chemotherapy makes little to no contribution to cancer survival at all. No such study has ever been conducted by independent investigators in the history of chemotherapy. The only studies available come from industry funded institutions and scientists and none of them have ever inclusively quantified the above variables.

LIE #12. SCIENCE IS REPUTABLE AND HONEST

The pursuit of truth in modern scientific query is marred by greed, profit and only a concept of truth built on the assumption of an unexamined good. While pharmaceutical drug approvals, genetically modified foods and various other controversial technologies may appear to be based on “science”, corporate interests and profits often interfere with the true meaning of what science represents to both academics and the public.

The primary methodology of science is to prise apart reality into its component parts in order to better understand how the whole functions. Cartesian logic began with the separation of mind and matter and the scientific method depends upon the separation of the observer from the observed. The absolute separation between mind and matter has now been shown to be entirely fictitious the importance of objectivity within the scientific method remains undiminished.

There is little real science to be found in the common practice of mainstream medicine. Rather, what passes for “science” today is a collection of myths, half-truths, dishonest data, fraudulent reporting and inappropriate correlations passed off as causation. Correlational studies can NOT prove causation, yet the end result of most scientific studies in mainstream medicine make a causal claim without any proof and then pass those suggestions to the public to sell the medical model to the public.

Advertisers and product manufacturers have certainly used this inherent cognitive bias towards trusting “scientific facts” in order to market products which they claim have a scientific basis in their effectiveness. The same is of course true within ideologies and politics. While many choose to focus on the large scandals such as the drug research fraud, countless fraudulent scientific claims are made every day in advertising, often with no repercussions.

LIE #13. THERE ARE SAFE DOSES OF CHEMICALS IN MEDICATIONS

Ask any scientist in the field of health and safety and they will tell you that toxicity is all about the dose. Not really. While you can die from anything taken in excess, even water, you can also run into serious fatal complications from any poison at any dose if you take it long enough. There is no safe dose of a poison because the body recognizes even the smallest dose and immediately creates inflammatory cascades and immune responses to combat these foreign entities. Toxic chemicals are now invading every facet of our lives from our schools to our workplaces. They are gradually deteriorating every single system in our bodies and causing so many diseases, that it’s now difficult to isolate exactly which chemicals are causing each disease.

The chemical testing we currently do to establish if a chemical is safe may not be sufficient. In particular, we may not be targeting nor understanding the effects of extremely low levels of chemical contaminants during critical phases when the organism is “listening” for chemical messengers. This occurs, for example, during fetal development and during changes that occur in puberty. The first question we need to be asking is: does this chemical mimic any of the messenger chemicals that organisms depend upon for survival?

What most of these chemical management companies, their regulatory agencies and scientists do not apprecite, is what a delicately balanced organism we are especially at the molecular level. At this level, chemicals act more like a handshake than like that third pint of beer.

LIE #14. PEOPLE ARE HEALTHIER TODAY THAN IN PREVIOUS GENERATIONS
Life expectancy at birth rose by a few years for both men and women in the last two decades of the 20th century. This has come at an enormous cost in the quality of life of our elders, for they are suffering with more pain and greater disability than ever before in last 15 years of life. People globally are living longer but chronic debilitating conditions are becoming more prevalent.

A recent Global Burden of Disease Study 2010 involved 486 authors in 50 countries who aimed to offer a comprehensive update on diseases and injuries since the last such report in 1990. It found the leading risk factor accounting for the disease burden in most developed nations is diet.

Perhaps most worrisome is the medicalization of childhood which is leading us to illness if adulthood. If children cough after exercising, they have asthma; if they have trouble reading, they are dyslexic; if they are unhappy, they are depressed; and if they alternate between unhappiness and liveliness, they have bipolar disorder. While these diagnoses may benefit the few with severe symptoms, one has to wonder about the effect on the many whose symptoms are mild, intermittent or transient.

Each successive generation is sicker and more diseased than its predecessor. Autism, learning disabilities, ADHD, asthma, diabetes and many other diseases continue to skyrocket. No government agency has ever done, or will ever do anything about it except continue to compile statistics.
LIE #15. THERAPEUTIC PLANTS ARE DANGEROUS DRUGS

The reason cannabis is so effective medicinally is directly related to its ability to interact with receptors in the body which inhibit inflammation and prevent disease. Cannabis does this so well, that few drugs can compete with its level of potency which come essentially with no side effects. Consquently cannabis is labeled a threat to mainstream medicine.

The question is no longer which disease cannabis can cure, but which disease can’t it cure? A study published in Nature Reviews-Cancerprovides an historic and detailed explanation about how THC and natural cannabinoids counteract cancer, but preserve normal cells.

It’s no surprise that the United States has decreed that marijuana has no accepted medical use use and should remain classified as a highly dangerous drug like heroin. Accepting and promoting the powerful health benefits of marijuana would instantly cut huge profits geared towards cancer treatment and the U.S. would have to admit it imprisons the population for no cause. Nearly half of all drug arrests in the United States are for marijuana.

According to MarijuanaNews.com editor Richard Cowan, the answer is because it is a threat to cannabis prohibition “…there really is massive proof that the suppression of medical cannabis represents the greatest failure of the institutions of a free society, medicine, journalism, science, and our fundamental values,” Cowan notes.

Many researchers have noted that there was “inadequate” data for decades to determine whether smoked marijuana was safe or effective in treating symptoms of pain and preventing disese. The primary reason for the s lack of data had to do with the National Institute on Drug Abuse, or NIDA, which was the only source of cannabis for research and they were blocking the most meaningful studies due to close ties with pharmaceutical companies.

This view was supported by Dr. David Bearman, the executive vice president for the Academy of Cannabinoid Medicine/Society of Cannabis Clinicians. “Part of the problem in the United States is that the NIDA has blocked almost all meaningful studies on cannabis,” Bearman said. Bearman argues that while synthetic cannabis pills do offer pain relief, marijuana is cheaper, has fewer side effects and can be more effective.

Now decades of propaganda is being reversed as scientists and the public are being exposed to the true potential of cannabis and its ability to both heal and prevent disease.

Marco Torres is a research specialist, writer and consumer advocate for healthy lifestyles. He holds degrees in Public Health and Environmental Science and is a professional speaker on topics such as disease prevention, environmental toxins and health policy. 

from:    http://www.newrealities.com/index.php/articles-on-health/item/3379-the-top-15-lies-you-re-being-told-about-health-and-mainstream-medicine

Dangers of Fluoride

Nine Shocking Dangers of Fluoride Exposure

fluoride-small

5th February 2014

By Dr. Edward F. Group

Guest Writer for Wake Up World

Exposure to fluoride is a contentious topic, mostly because exposure is everywhere. Not only is fluoride a common ingredient in toothpaste, many municipalities have a fluoridated water supply. Why? Well, the reason we’re given is that it encourages oral health… even though it’s not known to prevent harmful oral bacteria. [1] What is known is that fluoride is toxic. In fact, the number one reason for poison control calls concerning fluoride are for children who’ve eaten toothpaste. [2] [3] Long-term ingestion is harmful to the brain, digestive system, heart, bones… even the tooth enamel it’s supposed to help. [4] [5] [6] These next 9 shocking facts will make you take a second look at your exposure to fluoride.

1. Weakens Skeletal Health

Skeletal fluorosis is a condition resulting from fluoride consumption. The liver is unable to process fluoride, thus it passes into the bloodstream where it combines with calcium that’s been leeched from the skeletal system. You’re left with weak bones, otherwise known as skeletal fluorosis. The risk has been known about for decades yet it’s not been established how much exposure will trigger skeletal fluorosis… and the impact it has on quality of life is horrendous. [7] [8] [9] The best way to protect yourself is to avoid fluoride. Recently, Chinese authorities established a link between reductions in fluoride exposure and the incidence of fluorosis. [10]

2. Causes Arthritis

Fluoride has been shown to cause calcification of cartilage, the essential tissue for joint health. [11] Degenerative osteoarthritis has been linked to skeletal fluorosis. [12] And in a study of individuals suffering from fluorosis, osteoarthritis knee conditions occurred frequently. [13]

3. Toxic to the Thyroid

Iodine and fluoride belong to a family of compounds known as halogens. Although iodine is beneficial to the thyroid, fluoride is not. However, because of the similarities, the thyroid can absorb fluoride instead of iodine. This is bad. Fluoride is toxic to thyroid cells; it inhibits function and causes cell death. [14] For decades, fluoride was used to reduce thyroid function in individuals suffering from an overactive thyroid. [15] Now — and pay attention to this — the range used in water fluoridation matches the levels typically used to reduce thyroid function. [16]

4. Calcifies the Ultra-Important Pineal Gland

Although the full capabilities of the pineal gland have been the subject of debate for centuries, it’s known for certain that, at a minimum, the pineal gland regulates body rhythms and wake-sleep cycles; two extremely important functions. Fluoride is especially toxic to the pineal gland, where it accumulates and calcifies the gland. In fact, by the time the average person reaches old age, their pineal gland will have higher calcium density than their bones. [17]

5. Accelerates Female Puberty

It also deserves mention that the pineal gland plays an integral role in the onset of puberty. Research has shown that girls living in areas prone to more fluoride exposure experience puberty earlier than girls exposed to less. [18] Fluoride’s damaging effect on sexual function only begins here…

6. Harmful to Male and Female Fertility

A direct link exists between fertility rates and fluoridated drinking water. Higher levels of fluoride correspond to lower fertility rates, particularly with drinking water levels of 3 ppm. [19] Animal models show that fluoride reduces reproductive hormones in females. [20] Men have it just as bad; those suffering from fluorosis have lower testosterone and fertility than men with limited fluoride exposure. [21]

7. Bad for Kidney Health

Fluoride is toxic to the kidneys and a higher rate of chronic kidney disease has been reported in areas where the water contains high levels of fluoride. [22] [23] According to Chinese researchers, a fluoride level of 2 mg/L is all it takes to cause renal damage in children. [24] While water fluoridation levels are often much lower than this, the fluoride bombardment continues with toothpaste and other sources.

8. Harmful to the Cardiovascular System

Research suggests that exposure to fluoride causes cardiovascular inflammation and atherosclerosis. [25] [26] Other research has examined its effect on blood pressure but had mixed results. Regardless, despite that cardiovascular disease can have many causes, the evidence, and history show its incidence increases with exposure to fluoride.

9. Negative Cognitive Effects

The Fluoride Action Network reports that, as of May 2013, 43 studies have examined the effect of fluoride on human intelligence. The results should motivate anyone to minimize their fluoride exposure. One observation is that fluoride negatively impacts children’s neural development. [27] Another is that children living in highly fluoridated areas have up to five times greater chance of developing a low IQ compared to those who do not. [28]

Reducing Your Exposure to Fluoride

Using non-fluoride toothpaste can immediately reduce your fluoride exposure. Maintaining healthy iodine levels can help protect the thyroid from fluoride. Fluoridated water is the largest concern and most water filters are not adequate for removing fluoride; instead look to a reverse osmosis water purification systems.

Have you made efforts to reduce your exposure and minimize the dangers of fluoride? What tips do you have? Please leave a comment below and share with us.

-Dr. Edward F. Group III, DC, ND, DACBN, DCBCN, DABFM

from:    http://wakeup-world.com/2014/02/05/nine-shocking-dangers-of-fluoride-exposure/

Brush Your Teeth with Chocolate???

Chocolate Toothpaste Better than Fluoride, Researcher Says

For a healthy smile brush between meals, floss regularly and eat plenty of chocolate? According to Tulane University doctoral candidate Arman Sadeghpour an extract of cocoa powder that occurs naturally in chocolates, teas, and other products might be an effective natural alternative to fluoride in toothpaste. In fact, his research revealed that the cocoa extract was even more effective than fluoride in fighting cavities.

The extract, a white crystalline powder whose chemical makeup is similar to caffeine, helps harden teeth enamel, making users less susceptible to tooth decay. The cocoa extract could offer the first major innovation to commercial toothpaste since manufacturers began adding fluoride to toothpaste in 1914.

The extract has been proven effective in the animal model, but it will probably be another two to four years before the product is approved for human use and available for sale, Sadeghpour says. But he has already created a prototype of peppermint flavored toothpaste with the cavity-fighting cocoa extract added, and his doctoral thesis research compared the extract side by side to fluoride on the enamel surface of human teeth.

from:    http://tulane.edu/news/releases/archive/2007/051607.cfm

Sadeghpour’s research group included scientists from Tulane, the University of New Orleans, and Louisiana State University’s School of Dentistry. Sadeghpour will earn his PhD from Tulane University on May 19.

fromn:    http://tulane.edu/news/releases/archive/2007/051607.cfm

Anti-Fluoridation Legislation Proposed in 9 States

Nine states propose 16 anti-fluoridation bills in 2013 to protect public against poison

Thursday, December 19, 2013 by: Ethan A. Huff, staff writer

(NaturalNews) Things are heating up on the fluoride front as states and municipalities all across the country rethink their official water fluoridation policies. According to the Fluoride Action Network (FAN), some 16 pieces of legislation across nine states were introduced or passed just within the past year to protect the public against this pervasive poison.

In Utah, for instance, the Safe Drinking Water Disclosure Act was passed back in April, requiring that all shipments of fluoride chemicals coming into the state be accompanied by certificates of analysis detailing the presence of any outside contaminants. The law reportedly took effect on July 1, allowing local water utilities to end their fluoridation programs in the event that certificates are not provided.

Fluoride additives, as you may recall, are often laced with other poisons like arsenic, cadmium and even radioactive isotopes that persist from the waste liquids used by the phosphate fertilizer and aluminum manufacturing industries to capture pollutants. These pollutants, not the natural environment, are the source from which the artificial fluoride chemicals added to water supplies are derived.

Tennessee, a leader in anti-fluoridation legislation, introduced two similar bills earlier this year requiring fluoride manufacturers to disclose the full contents of their chemicals. House Bill 1215 and Senate Bill 1274 were also accompanied by HB 1186 and SB 1211, two bills that would allow local voters to decide whether or not to continue fluoridating their water supplies. Statewide, Tennessee also introduced HR 130, which would prohibit state employees or agencies from endorsing fluoride.

“In years past the dental lobby has been successful in getting pro-fluoridation bills introduced in state legislatures across the United States, including legislation that would mandate statewide fluoridation — a law 13 states presently have. But the tables are turning,” explains FAN. “In 2013… instead of the introduction of pro-fluoride bills, we saw the exact opposite, with the introduction of 16 anti-fluoridation bills in 9 states.”

Five states introduce legislation to eliminate fluoridation mandates

Concerning statewide fluoridation mandates, New Jersey successfully thwarted attempts by some legislators to require that its 9 million residents be forcibly medicated with fluoride poison. And at least five bills have been introduced, one each in South Dakota, Connecticut, Minnesota, Illinois and Arkansas, to end longstanding fluoridation mandates.

“With the exception of the Illinois bill, all of these proposals are still being considered and are expected to have public hearings in 2014,” adds FAN. “In preparation, FAN has been working with our point people and local groups within these states to organize grassroots campaigns in support of the legislation.”

Besides the aforementioned bills, a handful of other anti-fluoride bills were introduced this year in Kansas, Massachusetts and New York. HB 2372 in Kansas now requires that warnings about fluoride and its effect on IQ — a Harvard University study recently confirmed that fluoride exposure lowers IQ levels in children — be printed on water bills.

In Massachusetts, a similar bill would require an infant fluoride warning similar to the infant warnings currently issued in New Hampshire; Milwaukee, Wisconsin; and Austin, Texas. And in New York, A 141 has been introduced to require that all fluoridated communities lower their poisoning level from 1.2 parts per million (ppm) of fluoride to 0.7 ppm of fluoride, in accordance with new recommendations from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

“It doesn’t take an expert to see that the tide has shifted, that state legislators are discovering the truth about fluoridation, and that the momentum is clearly on our side going into the 2014 legislative sessions,” concludes FAN.

To support the work of FAN and to keep up to date on fluoride legislation in your own community, visit:
http://fluoridealert.org.