Connect with us

Alternative News

“Peer Reviewed:” Science Losing Credibility As Large Amounts Of Research Shown To Be False

Published

on

Science today, in all fields, is plagued by corruption. Yet, more often than not, attempts to create awareness about scientific fraud — an issue that few journalists have been willing to address — are met with the response, “Well, is it peer-reviewed?”

advertisement - learn more

Although good science should always be reviewed, using this label as a form of credibility can be dangerous, causing people to dismiss new information and research instantaneously if it doesn’t have  it, particularly when that information counters long-held beliefs ingrained into human consciousness via mass marketing, education, and more.

Unfortunately, it’s becoming increasingly apparent that we are being lied to about the products and medicines we use on a daily basis.

If you’re one who commonly points to the “peer-reviewed” label, then you should know that there are many researchers and insiders who have been creating awareness about the problem with this label for years.

Who Says So? And From What Fields?

  • Climate Science

Many people have spoken up against the corporatization and politicization of science. For example, Professor Lennart Bengtsson, a Swedish climatologist and former director of the Max Planck Institute for Meteorology in Hamburg, has voiced his concern that some scientists are, according to an interview given to the Daily Mail, “mixing up their scientific role with that of climate activist.” He claims that there are multiple indicators for how “science is gradually being influenced by political views.” (source)

Professor Joanna D. Haigh, a British physicist, professor of atmospheric physics at Imperial College London, co-director of the Grantham Institute for Climate Change, and former president of the Royal Meteorological Society, has also spoken up about the politicization of climate science. (source)

advertisement - learn more

The Australian prime minister’s chief business advisor has done the same, and so have other politicians, like Senator James Inhofe, chairman of the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works. You can read more about that story here.

Unfortunately, the mainstream vilifies such people, and to great effect.

Below is an excellent snippet of a lecture given by Richard Lindzen, one of the world’s top experts in the field and lead author of “Physical Climate Processes and Feedbacks,” Chapter 7 of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s Third Assessment Report on climate change. He knows that all climate science we receive is IPCC United Nations science. One of the scientists mentioned on the senator’s list, in this video, he talks about the politics of climate science and the manipulation of data — something that plagues all fields of science today.

  • Medical Science/Health Science/Food

In the case of medicine, a lot of information has emerged showing just how much corruption really goes on. The Editors-in-Chiefs of several major medical journals have been quite blunt, with perhaps one of the best examples coming from Dr. Richard Horton, the current Editor-in-Chief of The Lancet, who says, “The case against science is straightforward: much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue.” (source)

Dr. Marcia Angell, a physician and longtime Editor-in-Chief of the New England Medical Journal (NEMJ), also considered one of the most prestigious peer-reviewed medical journals in the world, alongside The Lancet, has said that “it is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of The New England Journal of Medicine.”  (source)

John Ioannidis, an epidemiologist at the Stanford University School of Medicine, published an article titled “Why Most Published Research Findings Are False,” which subsequently became the most widely accessed article in the history of the Public Library of Science (PLoS). (source)

Here is another great quote:

“The medical profession is being bought by the pharmaceutical industry, not only in terms of the practice of medicine, but also in terms of teaching and research. The academic institutions of this country are allowing themselves to be the paid agents of the pharmaceutical industry. I think it’s disgraceful.”

Arnold Seymour Relman (1923-2014), Harvard professor of medicine and former Editor-in-Chief of The New England Medical Journal  (source)

As you can see, this has been a problem for quite some time.

A Couple of Examples:

  • GMOs

One of the best examples of political influence over scientific publication comes from an episode involving Genetically Modified Maize. Monsanto published a study a few years ago which purported to demonstrate the effects of GMO maize on rats over a 90 day period. They reported no ill effects on the rodents from this diet. Given the fact that there are no long term studies examining the health risks associated with GMOs, independent researchers then decided to conduct the same study, with one difference: Their study lasted over a year rather than a mere three months. Researchers found instances of severe liver and kidney damage, as well as hormonal disturbances, alongside the development of large tumours and mortality among the treatment groups. The study was published in November of 2012, in the Journal of Food and Chemical Toxicology, and then instantly retracted. After hundreds of scientists condemned the retraction, the U.S. did not publish it. The study was then re-published in multiple peer-reviewed scientific journals (in Europe last year [2014]), like Environmental Sciences Europe. This is why it shouldn’t be a surprise that so many countries in Europe have  banned the growing of genetically modified crops. Many also have bans and/or severe restrictions on importing GM products, citing health and environmental concerns.

This fact was also made clear by WikiLeaks documents:

Resistance to the advent of genetically modified foods has been pronounced across Europe. The continent features some of the strictest regulations governing the use and cultivation of GMO products, and public skepticism about biotech goods is quite high – a fact not lost on American diplomats. In a lengthy report dating from late 2007 , a cable issued by the State Department outlined its “Biotechnology Outreach Strategy, ‘which, among other things, recognized the European Union’s ‘negative views on biology’ and committed as a national priority to limiting them (O7STATE160639).

Initial attention paid to the State Department’s part in pushing industrial manufactures on its allies obscured the even bigger role it played in assuring a place for genetically modified agricultural products (GMOs) in a region that largely wanted nothing to do with them. The American campaign promoting biotech products was a worldwide effort. In all, some 1,000 documents from the Cablegate cache address this effort, a significant number of which originate in Europe. U.S. diplomats on the continent gave considerable attention to insuring the interests of American biotech firms in Europe – Whether through “education” programs, government lobbying, or outright coercion – as well as stripping down European Union regulations designed to act as a bugger against them. Available cables published by WikiLeaks suggest that the United States invests considerable time, effort, and expense in its operations on behalf of the American biotech firms.

Read more about it from The WikiLeaks Files: The World According To U.S. Empire.

In 1996, Steven M. Druker, being a public interest attorney and the Executive Director of the Alliance For Bio-Integrity, initiated a lawsuit in 1998 that forced the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to divulge its files on genetically engineered foods.

He’s recently published a book on the lawsuit that provides details of his experience. He has also released the documents on his website, showing the significant hazards of genetically engineering foods and the flaws in the FDA’s policy.

It’s called Altered Genes, Twisted Truth: How the Venture to Genetically Engineer Our Food Has Subverted Science, Corrupted Government, and Systematically Deceived the Public.

  • Pharmaceutical Drugs

There are a number of examples to choose from here, but antidepressants make the top of the list. Irving Kirsch, a lecturer in medicine at Harvard Medical School, published a study pointing out how “analyses of the published data and the unpublished data that were hidden by drug companies reveals that most (if not all) of the benefits are due to the placebo effect.” (source)

Another study published in the British Medical Journal by researchers at the Nordic Cochrane Center in Copenhagen showed that pharmaceutical companies were not disclosing all information regarding the results of their drug trials. Researchers looked at documents from 70 different double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRI) and serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRI) and found that the full extent of serious harm in clinical study reports went unreported.

Tamang Sharma, a PhD student at Cochrane and lead author of the study, said: “We found that a lot of the appendices were often only available upon request to the authorities, and the authorities had never requested them. I’m actually kind of scared about how bad the actual situation would be if we had the complete data.” (source)

Another co-author of the study, Dr. Peter Gotzsche, who co-founded the Cochrane Collaboration (the world’s foremost body in assessing medical evidence), found in a separate analysis that 100,000 people in the United States die each year from the side effects of correctly used prescription drugs, noting that “it’s remarkable that nobody raises an eyebrow when we kill so many of our own citizens with drugs.” He has published many papers arguing that our use of antidepressants is causing more harm than good, and taking into consideration the recent leaks regarding these drugs, it seems he is correct.

Below is a brief video of him elaborating on this problem:

  • Vaccines

Vaccines are getting more attention now than ever before. In fact, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Chairman of the World Mercury Project (WMP), recently announced a $100,000 challenge aimed at putting an end to the inclusion of mercury, a neurotoxin that is 100 times more poisonous than lead, in vaccines administered in the U.S and globally.

It’s offered to anybody, including journalists and scientists, who can provide a study showing that it is safe to inject mercury into babies. This will be difficult, as hundreds of studies (that were also present at the press conference in print form) show it is absolutely unsafe, and can significantly increase the risk of developing neurodegenerative disorders.

You can read more about this here.

Multiple cases of vaccine fraud have been uncovered, but this is something you might not know given the fact that the mainstream media completely ignores these facts, and vaccines are heavily marketed.

For example, Lucija Tomljenovic, who has a PhD in biochemistry and is a senior postdoctoral fellow in UBC’s Faculty of Medicine, as well as a medical investigator, uncovered documents that reveal vaccine manufacturers, pharmaceutical companies, and health authorities have known about multiple dangers associated with vaccines but chose to withhold them from the public. (source)

But perhaps one of the biggest revelations in medical history, also unfortunately ignored by mainstream media, came only a couple of years ago and is still making noise, as it should.

Dr. William Thompson, a longtime senior CDC scientist, published some of the most commonly cited pro-vaccine studies, which showed that there was absolutely no link between the MMR vaccine and autism (Thompson, et al. 2007, Price, et al. 2010Destefano, et al. 2004). However, Dr. Thompson recently admitted that it was the lowest point” in his career when he “went along with that paper.” He went on to say that he and the other authors “didn’t report significant findings” and that he is completely ashamed” of what he did. He was complicit and went along with this,” and regrets that he has been a part of the problem.” (source)(source)(source)

A  study with revised information and no data omitted was published by Dr. Brian Hooker (a contact of Dr. Thompson) in the peer reviewed journal Translational Neurodegeneration, and it found a 340% increased risk of autism in African American boys receiving the Measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine. The study has since been retracted, around the same time this controversy arose.

You can read the full study here, although, unsurprisingly, it has since been retracted.

Thompson’s attorneys, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Bryan Smith of Morgan & Morgan, also released a statement from Dr. Thompson, which mentioned Hooker: I have had many discussions with Dr. Brian Hooker over the last 10 months regarding studies  the CDC has carried out regarding vaccines and neurodevelopmental outcomes including autism spectrum disorders. I share his belief that CDC decision-making and analyses should be transparent.” (source)

he had to invoke whistleblower protection and turned extensive agency files over to Congress. He said that, for the past decade, his superiors have pressured him and his fellow scientists to lie and manipulate data to conceal a causal link between vaccines and brain injuries, including autism.

Final Thoughts

As you can see, scientific fraud is a big problem across the board, and this article has only provided a few examples. The problem is not just with GMOs and vaccines — it affects cosmetics, food, cleaning supplies, and so much more. How have so many products, which cause so much harm, been approved by the agencies that are tasked to protect us?

There are so many books on this topic, but they don’t get the attention they deserve, since the major mainstream media shareholders are identical to those of the entire health industry. Why would they bash their own products on their own national television networks?

The power of corporate America has taken over almost every aspect of our lives. If you’re wondering what we can do about it, well, I believe the first step is awareness. There is still a plethora of information that the general public is completely unaware of, but if we backtrack to a decade ago, information that used to be considered a conspiracy is now simply fact. A great example is the corporate takeover of science, as discussed in this article, but another one could be the Snowden Leaks on mass surveillance, or 9/11. Studies are now being published by physicists and engineers regarding that event.

Awareness makes it harder for the elite to manipulate us. Once we become aware of something, we can stop it. For example, look at Genetically Modified Foods and the pesticides that go with them. As soon as the masses became aware of their dangers, they began to change their shopping habits. Now, most countries around the world have completely banned these foods.

It’s difficult to accept that there are unseen powers, motivated by their own greed and lust for power, that are doing us harm disguised as good. It is only when we become aware of how we are being harmed and change our shopping habits — hurting their bottom line — that they change their tactics.  On the other hand, it’s encouraging to know that once we do come together for a common goal, anything can be accomplished, and we actually do have the potential and power to change our world.

 

We Need Your Support...

The demand for Collective Evolution's content is bigger than ever, except ad agencies and social media keep cutting our revenues. This is making it hard for us to continue.

In order to stay truly independent, we need your help. We are not going to put up paywalls on this website, as we want to get our info out far and wide. For as little as $3 a month, you can help keep CE alive!

SUPPORT CE HERE!

cards

Advertisement
advertisement - learn more

Alternative News

Congressional Hearing Could Be The Beginning Of The End For Hillary Clinton

Published

on

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    A public hearing examining Clinton Foundation malfeasance before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee will be convened today, and will include supposedly 'explosive' testimony from three whistleblowers.

  • Reflect On:

    Is it possible that this hearing represents a watershed moment in the takedown of the Deep State?

For those who remain skeptical about the notion that the Trump Administration is working to take down a ‘Deep State’ that has long held power over the American government, the military, and its law enforcement and intelligence agencies, today’s (December 13, 2018) public hearing on investigations into the Clinton Foundation before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee may very well be a watershed moment.

Mind you, there is a second tier of skeptic to consider: those who accept the notion that a ‘Deep State’ or shadow government does exert tremendous power in our world and may very well have plans to create a totalitarian one-world government, but reject the notion that there is any real resistance to this power, especially not from Donald Trump.

Both sets of skeptics will point to the fact that there has been no concrete action, no major arrests of supposed key Deep State players. A case in point: is Hillary Clinton not still walking about freely, touring with her husband, flying out to India for a lavish wedding celebration, creating a buzz of excitement around the prospect that some lucky donor could get the opportunity to spend an evening of drinking and theatre with her?

OK, these events might be pathetic money grabs,  but certainly if some of the allegations against her were true, both groups would argue, would she not be behind bars by now? Suffice it to say, most people who have done any manner of research into the many claims against Hillary Clinton have concluded that while she is most likely a criminal, they just can’t see her getting arrested. But if–and it’s a big ‘if’–she ever does get arrested and convicted of a serious crime, that likely would satisfy the most ardent skeptic and give rise to widespread belief that the Trump Administration is working on, and succeeding in, taking down the Deep State. Let’s examine the possibility that things are headed in that direction.

advertisement - learn more

Two-Tiered Justice System

For those who have been following the stories of impropriety, illegality, and even sexual perversion surrounding Hillary Clinton (at times in connection with husband Bill), from Whitewater to Filegate to Benghazi to Pizzagate to Uranium One to the private email server, and more recently with Clinton Foundation malfeasance in the spotlight surrounded by many suspicious deaths, there is a sense that Hillary Clinton must be too high up, has too much protection, or is too well-connected to ever have to face criminal charges. Certainly if one listens to former FBI investigator James Comey’s testimony into his kid-gloves handling of Clinton’s private email server investigation, one gets the impression that he is one of many government officials that is in Clinton’s back pocket.

Whistleblower William D. Campbell echoes the sentiments that people like Hillary Clinton are receiving preferential treatment in a ‘two-tiered justice system’, as noted in this Sara Carter article:

A former whistleblower, who has spoken with agents from the Little Rock FBI field office last year and worked for years as an undercover informant collecting information on Russia’s nuclear energy industry for the bureau, noted his enormous frustration with the DOJ and FBI. He describes as a two-tiered justice system that failed to actively investigate the information he provided years ago on the Clinton Foundation and Russia’s dangerous meddling with the U.S. nuclear industry and energy industry during the Obama administration.

“(Mueller) received the documents, copies of which I still have, over a period of years and ignored a national security threat to the United States because of his political preference,” said Campbell, who said he is frustrated that the investigation into the Clinton Foundation and the other information he provided was apparently ignored years ago.

However, it must be noted that this was how things were then. Things have changed significantly within the system, though if you relied on Mainstream Media you would probably not have put together how much this ‘two-tiered justice system’ has started to be challenged based on firings and forced resignations within the Department of Justice, the FBI, and elsewhere. This post from Q-Anon probably gives us the best compilation of these actions:

Q!2jsTvXXmXs

Justice_1.jpg

[Updated]
James Baker – FIRED [reported today – resigned [false]] / removed Jan/FIRED 4.21
Lisa Page – FIRED [reported today – resigned [false]]
Testimony received.
Tracking_y.
[Added]
Mike Kortan, FBI Assistant Director for Public Affairs – FIRED [cooperating under ‘resigned‘ title]
Josh Campbell, Special Assistant to James Comey – FIRED
[DOJ]
David Laufman, Chief of the Justice Department’s Counterintelligence and Export Control Section [NAT SECHRC email invest] – FIRED/FORCE
John Carlin, Assistant Attorney General – Head of DOJ’s National Security Division – FIRED/FORCE
Sally Yates, Deputy Attorney General & Acting Attorney General – FIRED
Mary McCord, Acting Assistant Attorney General – Acting Head of DOJ’s National Security Division – FIRED/FORCE
Bruce Ohr, Associate Deputy Attorney General – Demoted 2x – cooperating witness [power removed]
Rachel Brand, Associate Attorney General – No. 3 official behind Deputy AG Rosenstein – FIRED/FORCE
Cross against House/Senate resignations/final term announcements + CEO departures.
CONSPIRACY?
FAKE NEWS?
THE SWAMP IS BEING DRAINED.
TRUST THE PLAN.
JUSTICE.
Q

——

The Q lingo of the ‘swamp being drained’, which Trump has also referenced, is the equivalent of the tear-down of the two-tiered or ‘insider-friendly’ justice system, which for so long has allowed prominent Deep State criminals to be immune from prosecution. Just the kind of rhetoric we have been hearing, including Clinton Foundation CFO Andrew Kessel’s semi-metaphorical admission, ‘I know where all the bodies are buried in this place,’ leads us to believe that things are now different.

The Hearing

What may finally soothe the anger of William D. Campbell and other whistleblowers is that their time seems to have finally come to be heard, and perhaps even have their findings acted upon, as today’s hearing seems to be striking a different tone to the ears of those who have in-depth knowledge of the crimes that have been alleged. This is certainly how rep. Mark Meadows, a member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, sees it:

Rep. Mark Meadows, chairman of the Freedom Caucus and member of the committee, said this time it will be different. He noted that the investigation is apparently ongoing with the FBI and DOJ and believes the information being delivered for Thursday’s hearing to be ‘explosive’ in nature and may help connect the dots.

Meadow’s told Fox New’s Martha MaCallum Tuesday, “the American people, they want to bring some closure, not just a few sound bites, here or there, so we’re going to be having a hearing this week, not only covering over some of those 6,000 pages that you’re talking about, but hearing directly from three whistleblowers that have actually spent the majority of the last two years investigating this.”

Meadows, who’s also on President Donald Trump’s short-list to replace Chief of Staff Gen. John Kelly, noted that some “allegations (whistleblowers) make are quite explosive.”

“We just look at the contributions. Now everybody’s focused on the contributions for the Clinton Foundation and what has happened just in the last year,” he said. “But if you look at it, it had a very strong rise, the minute she was selected as secretary of state. It dipped down when she was no longer there.”

“And then rose again, when she decided to run for president. So there are all kinds of allegations of pay-to-play and that kind of thing,” Meadows added.

If, in fact, this hearing reveals anything serious like the long-suspected ‘pay-to-play’ strategy of the Clinton Foundation–which allegedly sought large donations in return for favors from the Clinton-run State Department–then Hillary Clinton will be in big trouble. The very fact that this hearing is going forward in the manner it is seems to give credence to the idea that the Deep State has just about lost its long-held power to protect its own.

The Takeaway

As Martin Luther King said, ‘The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends towards justice.’ It seems like those of us who have been researching and learning about the fraud and corruption in politics have been waiting so long for the truth to emerge and justice to be served as to have difficulty believing that it may ever arrive. Fortunately, we don’t have long to wait to see if this coming hearing is a true watershed moment and a harbinger for things to come.

That said, it is important to keep in mind that this is only a small part of a larger awakening that is happening on the planet right now, and if we hope to contribute to this awakening, we will realize that maintaining equanimity throughout the unfolding of these events is what is essential.

We Need Your Support...

The demand for Collective Evolution's content is bigger than ever, except ad agencies and social media keep cutting our revenues. This is making it hard for us to continue.

In order to stay truly independent, we need your help. We are not going to put up paywalls on this website, as we want to get our info out far and wide. For as little as $3 a month, you can help keep CE alive!

SUPPORT CE HERE!

cards

Continue Reading

Alternative News

Finally, A Clear Explanation Of The “Baby It’s Cold Outside” Controversy

Published

on

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    Recently, the 1944 song 'Baby It's Cold Outside' came under fire from modern feminists claiming it was a song promoting rape culture. Some radio stations banned the song. A check into the lyrics and song's meaning proved that simply wasn't true.

  • Reflect On:

    Why are we so quick to jump to aggressive conclusions without simple research? Why are we so emotionally driven about everything these days? Why are we so quick to protect ourselves from 'offensive' things? Don't we decide to get offended?

When I first heard of the “Baby It’s Cold Outside” controversy it seemed to resemble the type of results from the common social engineering practices taking place right now whereby people are led to think incompletely about events and culture in order to create a divide amongst people. This creates enemies where they don’t truly exist and makes for a very easy to manipulate and control populace. Ultimately, this leads for people to call for greater governance.

And this is exactly what is happening when you observe the millions up in arms about issues they don’t fully understand, calling for the government or corporate bodies to step in and do something about it.

Common examples are microaggressions, trying to say everything is hate speech, and blaming gender, racism, or privilege at any possible time, even when those things have nothing to do with situations.

I feel this is often, not always, a reflection of the barriers we want to put up around ourselves so we don’t have to deal with much of the pain we have within ourselves. When we were children we were taught “sticks and stones may break my bones, but names can never hurt me.” The reason we are told that is simply because while we all do want to live in a world where everyone is nice to one another, people may sometimes say mean things. The piece we miss today is, how we react to what people say isn’t a reflection of what they said, it’s a reflection of how we feel within ourselves.

“I was just minding my own business looking for people to crucify in my witch hunts instead of dealing with my own pain…” JP Sears, Baby It’s Cold Outside Controversy Explained

Remember, when it comes to getting offended, we all decide what offends us and how to get offended by what someone says. TRUE empowerment means you have the control within yourself. We don’t have to allow things to offend us simply because someone says something, and this also doesn’t mean everyone is going to be mean to us all the time, this is an unsubstantiated fear.

advertisement - learn more

How The Controversy Began

The controversy began a few weeks ago when people claimed the lyrics of the song Baby It’s Cold Outside were promoting rape culture. A groundswell emerged on social media, causing the song to be banned on several radio stations in the US and Canada. Singer Melinda DeRocker even opted out of recording it on her recent holiday album.

But did anyone stop to find out what the writer of the song meant when they wrote it in 1944? Yes, actually, some did, thankfully.  But many didn’t and jumped on the hate bandwagon because nowadays many of us seem to have become headline and meme readers and take all we see as fact without ever questioning what we’re being told. We seem to shy away from delving deeper into content and research, as a general statement, and this is a big problem.

The truth is, the song’s composer Frank Loesser wrote the song so he and his wife Lynn Garland could perform it at holiday parties.

The song’s original score designates the duet partners as “wolf” and “mouse,” and genders are unspecified. This is why many decades of covers have had women and men switching roles as we saw with Lady Gaga and Joseph Gordon Levitt’s version where Gaga plays the wolf’s role. Heck, even Miss Piggy of the Muppets played the wolf as she pursued ballet dancer Rudolf Nureyev.

The Real Meaning, All About Perspective

When you truly begin to observe the lyrics more clearly, you can actually deduce what it’s about. In fact, some have argued it’s a song about female empowerment.

In 2006, Slay Belle wrote for the feminist blog Persephone:

“At the time period the song was written, ‘good girls,’ especially young, unmarried girls, did not spend the night at a man’s house unsupervised,”

“Later in the song, she asks him for a comb (to fix her hair) and mentions that there’s going to be talk tomorrow – this is a song about sex, wanting it, having it, maybe having a long night of it by the fire, but it’s not a song about rape. It’s a song about the desires even good girls have.”

“The song ends with the woman doing what she wants to do, not what she’s expected to do, and there’s something very encouraging about that message.”

And in 2015, writer Helen Rosner decided to remove the part about the ‘aggressor’ in the song, or the wolf, and determined that the song was about a “sexually aware woman worried about slut-shaming.”

“The first two verses are both: (1) I have to go. (2)I’m having a great time, but (3) I’m scared of my family’s opinions,” Rosner wrote on Twitter. “She clearly wants to stay, is scared of the social ramifications of that choice, and in the end says ‘fuck society’s repressiveness’ & stays.”

“If you think Baby It’s Cold Outside is creepy, you are robbing the woman in that song of her agency,”
“You are the problem. I’m not kidding.” – Helen Rosner

The Takeaway

In this article, we covered 2 different perspectives of what this song is about. In 2018 it’s about rape, 2015 it’s about a sexually aware woman who is trying to avoid slut shaming, which was the same sentiment in 2006 as the song “was about sex, wanting it, having it, and maybe having a long night of it by the fire, a song about the desires even good girls have.”

The differences come down to important nuances that often don’t exist in many overly emotional activists these days: critical thinking. The 2006 and 2015 examples are intelligently thought out, researched, unemotional and balanced. The example from here in 2018 resembles movements that are about narratives, rhetoric, and creating enemies and divide. It’s angry, emotional and does not have a basis in truth when you take the time to analyze and look at original meanings.

I feel it’s very important we remember not to push so hard about taking sides and trying to identify with certain movements. The more we do this, the more we filter everything through that narrative. Thus we become unconscious.

I wanted to end with a laugh. I will say, I like JP Sears for his comedy. Sure sometimes I am not sure if it comes across to most people as making fun of spirituality and personal work, or if it just calls out the ridiculousness of some of it when we do it inauthentically, but he still has some great jokes. Perhaps though, a shift in his style is needed or even emerging, so his message, whatever it may be, can be a lot clearer to viewers.

That said, I feel in this video’s tone, it hits pretty well on what things are like today with many activists.

We Need Your Support...

The demand for Collective Evolution's content is bigger than ever, except ad agencies and social media keep cutting our revenues. This is making it hard for us to continue.

In order to stay truly independent, we need your help. We are not going to put up paywalls on this website, as we want to get our info out far and wide. For as little as $3 a month, you can help keep CE alive!

SUPPORT CE HERE!

cards

Continue Reading

Alternative News

If Cannabis Can Kill “Incurable” Brain Cancer, Why Is It Criminalized?

Published

on

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    Cannabis contains a compound that may kill brain cancers that chemotherapy and radiation can't touch. This is outlined by the research below.

  • Reflect On:

    Why has it been such a struggle for patients interested in medical marijuana to actually find it? Why, with all its medicinal potential, is this the case?

This article was written by Sayer Ji, Founder of Greenmedinfo.com. His work is reproduced and distributed here with permission. 

In recent years, we’ve focused heavily on educating our readers about the still relatively unknown role that cancer stem cells play in cancer, both in terms of conventional cancer treatment failure and the exceptionally promising role that natural interventions play in targeting these highly malignant cells.

It is encouraging to witness a growing awareness that cancer has been completely misunderstood, and that in order to make progress against the global epidemic we will have to go back to the wisdom of the ancients by using foods and spices instead of toxic chemicals and radiation to fight a disease that should be classified more as a survival mechanism unmasked than an inexorably lethal, genetically-driven condition. Even the National Cancer Institute now admits that it had been wrong for decades about “early stage” breast (DCIS) and prostate (HGPIN) “cancers,” and that they should be reclassified as indolent or benign lesions of epithelial origin, i.e. not “cancer” at all! Essentially, therefore, millions were overdiagnosed and overtreated for cancers they never had. Even now, despite this admission, the vast majority of conventional doctors have yet to account for, acknowledge, or integrate this radically different definition of cancer and its implications for treatment into their “standard of care.”

Only last week, we featured a new review on natural therapies that target cancer stem cells, many of which included common foods and spices. You can view it here. But one substance conspicuously absent from the list was cannabis, which is the herb we now turn to to give it a fair representation in the context of this topic.

A recent article published in the Journal Neuroimmune Pharmacology titled, “The Antitumor Activity of Plant-Derived Non-Psychoactive Cannabinoids,” reviewed the therapeutic potential of a non-psychoactive class of phytochemicals found in cannabis known as cannabinoids. Unlike THC, cannabinoids do not activate the cannabinoid 1 and cannabinoid 2 receptors in the central nervous system in any significant way, making their activity less controversial as they do not produce changes in perception and sensation associated with “recreational” and/or “psychedelic” drugs. There are actually over 60 cannabinoids in cannabis, but the second most abundant one, cannabidiol (CBD), has been found to inhibit and/or kill a wide range of cancers in the animal model, including gliobastoma (a difficult-to-treat type of brain cancer), breast, lung, prostate, and colon cancer. There have been a wide range of mechanisms identified behind these observed anti-tumor activities, including anti-angiogenic (preventing new blood vessel formation), anti-metastatic, anti-cell viability, but the one we wish to focus on in this report is its ability to to inhibit the stem-like potential of cancer cells.

Stem cells are unique within the body as they are capable of continual self-renewal, theoretically making them immortal relative to regular body cells (somatic cells), which die after a fixed number or replication cycles. In their normal state of function they are essential for healing and bodily regeneration, as they are capable of differentiating into the wide range of cells that make up the body and need to be regularly replaced when damaged.

advertisement - learn more

This so-called pluripotent property of stem cells is also observed in tumor formation and maintenance, as cancer stem cells are capable of producing the entire range of different cells that make up a tumor colony. Unlike regular tumor cells, cancer stem cells are uniquely tumorigenic because they are capable of breaking off from an existing lesion or tumor and forming a new tumor colony of cells. In this sense, they are “mother cells” at the heart of cancer malignancy, whose ability to colonize other tissues by producing all the “daughter cells” necessary to form a new tumor make their existence highly concerning from the perspective of cancer prevention and treatment. Radiation and chemotherapy, while capable of reducing the size of a tumor, actually enrich the post-treatment residual lesion or tumor with higher levels of cancer stem cells, and in some cases transform non-cancer stem cells into cancer stem cells, ultimately making the post-treatment state of the treated tissue far worse than its pre-treatment condition. This is why identifying and using natural, safe, effective and affordable ways to target cancer stem cells versus the non-tumorigenic tumor cells in a lesion or tumor is the only rational way to treat cancer, and should be the primary focus of present day cancer treatment approaches.

The new review discussed the way that cannabidiol targets and/or inhibits the cancer stem cell subpopulation in cancers such as the highly treatment-resistant form of brain cancer known as glioblastoma, which is widely considered by conventional medicine as “incurable.” A 2013 study,1mentioned in the review, found that patient-derived glioblastoma cells when exposed to cannabidiol saw a significant down-regulation of the genetic tumor marker Id-1, which has been closely correlated with brain cancer cell invasiveness. They also found that cannabidiol was capable of inhibiting neurosphere formation (a sign of cancer stem cell tumor formation), as well as was capable of inhibiting glioblastoma tumor invasiveness in an animal model.

The results of this preclinical study were so compelling that the researchers concluded cannibidiol might make an ideal adjunct treatment:

With its lack of systemic toxicity and psychoactivity, cannabidiol is an ideal candidate agent in this regard and may prove useful in combination with front-line agents for the treatment of patients with aggressive and high-grade glioblastoma tumors.

Integrative approaches often focus on using natural interventions as “adjuncts” to conventional, inherently toxic approaches like chemotherapy and radiation, we believe that another possibility exists, namely, that cannabidiol in combination with a wide range of other natural substances studied for targeting glioblastoma is more effective (and certainly far safer) than a combination approach. To view other anti-glioblastoma substances, view our database on the subject.

Another highly relevant study published in 2007 titled, “Cannabinoids induce glioma stem-like cell differentiation and inhibit gliomagenesis,”2 found that cannabinoids target the stem-like properties of glioma cells, encouraging their differentiation into functioning, non-tumorigenic cells, and inhibiting the dysregulated increased production of glioma cells.

A more recent 2015 study,3 found that glioblastoma cells treated with cannabidiol inhibited their self-renewal by down-regulating “critical stem cell maintenance and growth regulators.”

Another study, published last month, found that cannabidiol inhibits glioma stem-like proliferation by inducing autophagy, a natural form of programmed cell death.4

Consider, finally, that the cancer stem cell targeting and killing properties of cannabidiol are only one of a wide range of potential mechanisms through which cannabis as a whole plant, comprised of hundreds of different phytochemicals and phytonutrients, can treat cancer. We have indexed hundreds of studies on cannabis’ therapeutic properties, a good subset concerning its ability to prevent, kill, or regress a wide range of different cancer types. You can view them all on our cannabis research database.

Research on cannabis and brain cancer has only just begun, but considering the abject failure if not also sheer violence of conventional approaches, waiting for sufficient quantities of Pharma or government capital to flow in the direction of a non-patentable substance already saddled with archaic laws in some cases criminalizing its possession is a no win proposition. Anecdotes of healing with cannabis are not uncommon. One such report can be viewed on our colleague Dr. Jeffrey Dach’s website, titled, “Cannabis Oil Brain Tumor Remission,” demonstrating just how powerful cannabis and its cannabinoids may be for accomplishing what conventional approaches can not. Last year, we reported on a similar case of temporary remission in childhood leukemia using cannabis extract. Also, consider reports like this one, where a woman clearly being victimized by conventional medicine was able to replace 40 different medications through using raw cannabis juice.

The short of it is that the future of medicine, if it is to continue to advertise itself to be concerned with alleviating human suffering and being guided by “evidence,” must incorporate this safe, time-tested, affordable and effective healing agent into its standard of care. Failing to do so will not de-validate cannabis, rather, but the medical system itself. One might ask, if cannabis can treat “incurable” brain cancers, and is safer and more effective than chemotherapy and radiation, shouldn’t withholding it or information about its healing properties be considered criminal? Instead we still live in a time and age where simply possessing it or using it is in some jurisdictions classified as a criminal offense of dire if not irreparable consequence to our civil liberties. Perhaps we are at a critical turning point now and the aforementioned research will lead us all forward to a more enlightened medical ethos that respects the right of a patient to choose his or her treatment as long as it does no harm to others.

  • Get access to the upcoming documentary on the healing properties of medicinal cannabis starting on Dec. 12th, 2018. Save Your Spot.

 Want to learn more from GreenMedInfo? Sign up for the newsletter here: http://www.greenmedinfo.com/greenmed/newsletter.”

We Need Your Support...

The demand for Collective Evolution's content is bigger than ever, except ad agencies and social media keep cutting our revenues. This is making it hard for us to continue.

In order to stay truly independent, we need your help. We are not going to put up paywalls on this website, as we want to get our info out far and wide. For as little as $3 a month, you can help keep CE alive!

SUPPORT CE HERE!

cards

Continue Reading
advertisement - learn more
advertisement - learn more

Video

EL

We Need Your Support...

 

With censorship, things have become tough. If just 5% of people seeing this today supported CE, we'd be able to fund a TRUE investigative team INSTANTLY. Your support truly matters and goes a long way! 

Thanks, you're keeping conscious media alive.