Every year, the President of the United States issues a proclamation in honor of Child Health Day (the first Monday of October), which in turn launches Children’s Health Month. President Calvin Coolidge was the first president to dedicate a special day to children’s health, in 1928, recognizing that “the conservation and promotion of child health places upon us a grave responsibility.” The U.S. is not living up to that vital responsibility and, in fact, is failing children miserably. American children’s ability to develop and thrive is being sabotaged by an avalanche of chronic ailments, with pediatric rates of some chronic conditions among the highest in the world.
An abysmal children’s health report card
Nationally representative studies show that the chronic disease burden shouldered by children in the U.S. is not only heavy but has increased steadily over the past three decades. One of these studies, published in 2010 in JAMA, used national longitudinal survey data to examine the prevalence of four types of chronic conditions (obesity, asthma, behavior/learning problems and “other” physical conditions) in American children and youth from 1988 to 2006. The researchers found that prevalence of these conditions doubled—from 12.8% to 26.6%—over the 18-year-period.
The results of a second national study were even worse. Over two-fifths (43%) of children participating in the 2007 National Survey of Children’s Health had at least one of 20 chronic health conditions (see list of conditions in Table 1), and when the researchers added overweight/obesity and moderate or high risk for developmental/behavioral problems to their analysis, over half of all children (54%) suffered from at least one chronic condition.
Table 1. Chronic health conditions assessed by National Surveys of Children’s Health
|Developmental/neurological*||Developmental delay; learning disability; conduct or behavioral problems; speech problems; attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder; autism spectrum disorder; Tourette syndrome; epilepsy or seizure disorder; migraines|
|Other brain-related conditions||Brain injury or concussion|
|Mental health||Anxiety; depression|
|Atopic||Food/digestive allergies; environmental allergies; asthma|
|Other||Chronic ear infections; hearing problems; vision problems; joint or bone problems|
*The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) defines developmental disabilities as physical, learning, language or behavioral impairments.
The picture and trends for specific chronic conditions are equally bleak:
- Developmental disabilities: Overall, more than one in six children (15%) between ages 3 and 17 have at least one developmental disability. The CDC notes that these disabilities “usually last throughout a person’s lifetime.”
- Autism spectrum disorder (ASD): In 2012, the CDC’s Autism and Developmental Disabilities Monitoring Network identified ASD in one in 68 children (1.5%); by 2014, the National Health Interview Survey (as reported by a different branch of the CDC) estimated autism prevalence at one in 45 children (2.2%). Parent-reported lifetime prevalence of ASD rose by almost 400% (from 0.5% to 2.0%) from 2003 to 2012.
- Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD): As of 2012, about one in nine 4-17-year-old children (11%) had ever received an ADHD diagnosis, up from 7.8% in 2003.
- Tourette syndrome (TS): An estimated one in 162 children (0.6%) have TS (tics); of these, the vast majority (86%) have at least one additional neurobehavioral condition.
- Epilepsy/seizure disorders: Roughly 0.7% of children have a seizure disorder. The risk of epilepsy is “strongly associated with increased number of allergic diseases.”
- Food allergies: Allergies to food, including severe anaphylactic reactions, increased by 50% in children aged 0-17 (1997–2011).
- Asthma: In a nationally representative study of kindergarten-age children born in 2001, almost one in six children (17.7%) had asthma, and 6.8% had been either hospitalized or taken to an emergency room for asthma. Another study estimated that the lifetime prevalence of asthma increased by 18% in less than a decade (2003–2012).
- Diabetes: Type 1 diabetes in youth (< age 19) increased by 21% from 2001 to 2009, for a 2009 prevalence of 1.93 per 1,000. Over the same time frame, there was a 31% increase in type 2 diabetes in children aged 10-19.
- Obesity: Almost one in six children and adolescents (17%) are obese.
Vaccination and chronic illness
American children also are the most highly vaccinated in the world. Since 1990, when the U.S. began substantially expanding its vaccine schedule, the number of vaccines required for school entry has increased by approximately 260%. There also has been a growing push to recommend certain vaccines (especially influenza and the Tdap vaccine for tetanus-diphtheria-acellular pertussis) to mothers-to-be, even though the package inserts for these vaccines openly state that “safety and effectiveness have not been established in pregnant women.” Currently, children receive repeated shots for 16 distinct illnesses (antigens). Counting vaccines administered during pregnancy, this adds up to as many as 73 total doses of the 16 antigens by the time children are 18 years old (Table 2).
Table 2. Number of Vaccine Doses Administered to U.S. Children through Age 18
|Type of Vaccine||Disease Antigens
(Number of Doses)
|Hepatitis B (HepB)||3|
|Rotavirus (RV)||2 or 3
|Diphtheria-tetanus-acellular pertussis (DTaP)||15
(5 shots x 3 antigens)
|Haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib)||3 or 4
|Pneumococcal conjugate (PCV13)||4|
|Inactivated poliovirus (IPV)||4|
(2 shots x 3 antigens)
|Hepatitis A (HepA)||2|
|Tetanus-diphtheria-acellular pertussis (Tdap)||3
(1 shot x 3 antigens)
|Human papillomavirus (HPV)||2|
(1 shot x 3 antigens)
Without pregnancy vaccines
With pregnancy vaccines
67-69 doses of antigens
71-73 doses of antigens
There can be no dodging the observation that chronic illnesses and neurodevelopmental disorders in children have increased in tandem with the burgeoning vaccine schedule. Unfortunately, citing bogus ethical concerns, the CDC has steadfastly refused to carry out a study comparing total health outcomes in vaccinated and unvaccinated children, even though a study of this type would help elucidate the apparent association. Filling this research breach, evidence from other studies has been slowly accumulating, highlighting telling differences between the two groups of children.
Health status: A pilot study published in 2017 by Anthony Mawson and colleagues in the Journal of Translational Science compared the health of vaccinated and unvaccinated 6- to 12-year-old homeschool children (N=666) in four states (Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi and Oregon). In the U.S. in general, a higher proportion of homeschool versus public school children are unvaccinated; in this sample, 39% were unvaccinated. Otherwise, homeschool families are generally representative of U.S. families as a whole. For most of the analyses in this comprehensive study, the researchers defined “vaccinated” as either partially or fully vaccinated.
The study furnished a number of revealing results:
- Chronic illness: Compared with unvaccinated children, vaccinated children had a more than twofold greater odds of having been diagnosed with any chronic illness and a nearly fourfold greater odds of a diagnosed neurodevelopmental disorder (learning disabilities and/or ADHD and/or ASD). One in 13 vaccinated children (7.5%) had a neurodevelopmental disorder. Vaccinated children also had a greater odds of having a diagnosed atopic condition—allergic rhinitis, other allergies or eczema.
- Partial versus full vaccination: Partially vaccinated children had intermediate results (between fully vaccinated and unvaccinated children) for most of the atopic and neurodevelopmental health outcomes.
- Acute illness: Vaccinated children were significantly more likely to have had pneumonia and otitis media (middle ear infection). Unvaccinated children were more likely to have had chickenpox or pertussis. There were no meaningful differences for the other illnesses targeted by pediatric vaccines.
- Preterm birth: Evidence (expanded on in a separate publication by the same authors) showed a synergistic increase in the odds of neurodevelopmental disorders in children who were preterm and vaccinated, suggesting that vaccination may “precipitate adverse neurodevelopmental outcomes in preterm infants.”
As far back as 1992, a New Zealand study produced almost identical findings, comparing the prevalence of 11 chronic health conditions in 226 vaccinated (46%) and 269 unvaccinated children (54%). With the exception of diabetes (zero cases in either group), the incidence of the remaining ten conditions (including asthma, tonsillitis, hyperactivity and “slow development of motor skills”) was two to ten times higher in vaccinated versus unvaccinated children.
Use of health care services: In the Mawson et al. homeschool study, the vaccinated children were significantly more likely to use medications, to have visited a doctor when sick (past year) or to have had a hospital stay (ever). Echoing this pattern, a large 2013 study of pediatric clients at managed care organizations (MCOs) similarly found that “age-appropriately vaccinated children” used more health services than “undervaccinated” children. The MCO study, which included several hundred thousand children (N=323,247) born between 2004 and 2008, assessed undervaccination at two years of age based on “the difference between when the vaccine dose was administered and when the vaccine dose should have been administered.” The researchers also reviewed medical records to ascertain which children were undervaccinated for “nonmedical reasons” (that is, by parental choice). By these measures, half (49%) of the children were undervaccinated for any reason in the first 24 months, and an estimated 13% were undervaccinated due to parental choice. Undervaccinated children in the parental choice subgroup had significantly fewer outpatient and emergency department visits—both overall and for acute illness—compared with children vaccinated according to the standard schedule.
Toxic pathways to chronic illness
Increasingly, experts are studying how epigenetic factors contribute to the development of serious chronic diseases and disorders in children. Epigenetics looks at “de novo” genetic changes that “spontaneously arise within the child and are not present in the parents’ genes.” These changes control which genes switch on and off (gene expression). Many studies have described how environmental toxins prompt epigenetic changes that lead to developmental abnormalities and diseases. As the National Institutes of Healthconcedes, these environmental toxins include chemicals and medications.
According to the CDC, vaccines contain an astounding variety of ingredients, including preservatives and antibiotics to prevent contamination, adjuvants to stimulate a stronger immune response, stabilizers to enable transportation and storage, cell culture materials to grow antigens and inactivating ingredients to kill viruses or inactivate toxins. It is disingenuous to deny that these vaccine ingredients—both “chemicals” and “medications”—carry a sizeable toxic load straight into children’s bodies. Vaccine-friendly celebrity doctor Robert Sears acknowledges that parents are right to worry about the developmental impact of the “chemicals and metals and artificial things” harbored in vaccines. To name just four ingredients:
- The neurotoxic ethylmercury-based preservative thimerosal is present in seasonal influenza and Tdap vaccines and can lead to accumulation of inorganic mercury in the brain in vaccine-relevant concentrations.
- Aluminum adjuvants contribute to chronic neuropathology via multiple mechanisms, including through direct and indirect reductions in mitochondrial performance and integrity.
- Formaldehyde, used as an inactivating agent, is both neurotoxic and a known carcinogen.
- As an excitotoxin, monosodium glutamate (MSG) overstimulates nerve cells; neonatal exposure to MSG can produce “a significant pathophysiological impact on adulthood,” including increased permeability of the blood-brain barrier.
The ingredients of the Pediarix (DTaP-HepB-IPV) vaccine further illustrate the toxic soup injected into infants. They include formaldehyde; three different types of aluminum adjuvants; bovine, calf and monkey products; the inflammatory emulsifier polysorbate 80; and two different antibiotics. The complete list is as follows: “Fenton medium containing a bovine extract, modified Latham medium derived from bovine casein, formaldehyde, modified Stainer-Scholte liquid medium, VERO cells, a continuous line of monkey kidney cells, calf serum and lactalbumin hydrolysate, aluminum hydroxide, aluminum phosphate, aluminum salts, sodium chloride, polysorbate 80 (Tween 80), neomycin sulfate, polymyxin B, yeast protein.”
Neurodevelopmental experts have described a number of biologically plausible mechanisms whereby the heavy metals in vaccines may trigger neurodegenerative processes by prompting chronic microglial activation and excessive immune stimulation; interacting with autoantibodies (which are associated with higher blood mercury levels); impairing detoxification pathways; and causing mitochondrial dysfunction. Both thimerosal and aluminum harm astrocytes, which play an important role in higher neural processing.
Questions that need to be answered
The parallel timing of the increased vaccination schedule in the U.S. and the chronic disease epidemic in children cannot be dismissed as a coincidence. Moreover, there are many additional vaccine-related questions that urgently demand answers. For example, what are the synergistic effects of multiple toxins such as thimerosal and aluminum, and what happens when these toxins build up over time? What is the association between the timing and spacing of vaccination and subsequent health outcomes? Is there a down side to tinkering with the innate immune system so early in life? On this latter point, Dr. Suzanne Humphries comments that aluminum adjuvants “create a red-alert situation forcing the infant’s innate immune system to respond in the opposite manner to the way it should function in the first year of life.”
Finally, it is important to remember that vaccines have been associated not only with morbidity but also with mortality. Infants in the U.S. receive more vaccines in their first year of life than anywhere else in the world, yet the U.S. infant mortality rate is much higher than in other high-income countries. A group of researchers examined reports to the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) following Haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib) vaccination (1990–2013) and found reports of 896 deaths (median age=6 months); 749 records cited a cause of death, and 51% of these (n=384) listed the death as sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS). Although the vague SIDS moniker often has made it difficult to definitively pinpoint a causal role for vaccines, in July 2017, the U.S. Court of Federal Claims handed down a decision ruling that the parent-petitioners put forth “preponderant evidence” that vaccines “actually caused or substantially contributed” to their son’s SIDS death. Corroborating a vaccine-mortality association, a study in the African country of Guinea-Bissau found that infant mortality in children who received the diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis and polio vaccines was roughly double (10%-11%) the infant mortality observed in the no-vaccination group (4%-5%).
At this juncture, millions of children’s futures are at stake. It is critically important to honestly assess whether vaccines have had a net negative impact rather than the “enormous” beneficial impact that the public health establishment likes to present as fact.
The World Mercury Project is recognizing October 2017, Children’s Health Month, by launching a set of videos highlighting the chronic health issues plaguing our children. In our Campaign to Restore Child Health, WMP are also asking for everyone’s help to demand vaccine safety science. Our government health leaders who should be protecting children’s health are urging parents to vaccinate all children without doing the necessary safety studies. Watch the videos and read about the campaign.
Why We Need To Stop Bashing R. Kelly If We Want To Stop Teen Sexual Abuse & Pedophilia
- The Facts:
Singer superstar Robert Kelly has been charged with multiple accounts of child porn, rape, abuse, and running a sex cult where he kept several young women as sex slaves inside his home.
- Reflect On:
If we only react to crimes with judgement, anger, and hatred, do we ever give ourselves a chance to understand why this happens? If we don't take the time to do that, how can we ever stop it? Today, it's turned into an epidemic.
R. Kelly is a hot topic right now, as he’s been accused of raping minors, keeping minors locked up in his home for sexual purposes, and having inappropriate relationships with minors. We are talking about teenagers who ultimately are still just children. The testimony of many women and those close to him have illuminated what Kelly has done, although he still denies these claims. As a result of a recent docu-series on Lifetime called ‘Surviving R Kelly,’ he is being made fun of, judged, and hated on publicly by many within the industry as well as outside of it. On the surface, this is understandable given the crimes and atrocities he’s committed.
The star is known as a predator of teenage girls. When he was 27, he married 15-year-old singer Aaliyah at a secret ceremony in Chicago. Vibe magazine later discovered that they were able to change Aaliyah’s age on the wedding certificate listing herself as 18, even though she was only 15 at the time. The marriage was annulled in February 1995.
A girl by the name of Tiffany Hawkins sued R Kelly for the personal injuries and emotional distress she suffered during a three-year relationship with the star. In court documents, she said she began having sex with Kelly in 1991 when she was 15 and he was 24.
He has been charged with 21 counts of making child pornography involving intercourse, oral sex, urination, and other sexual acts. Chicago police accused him of videotaping each of these acts and enticing minors to participate in them.
Back in July 2017, a crowd gathered in Chicago as Timothy Savage told the world that he believed his 21-year-old daughter was being “held against her will” as part of an alleged sex cult led by R&B singer R Kelly.
As it turns out, she wasn’t the only one. Apparently, there were several women held captive as sex slaves in a home he owned.
The story made global news, and put the spotlight on the 51-year-old superstar’s private life – in particular, the rumours about his alleged sexual relationships with underage girls.
Savage claimed his daughter, Jocelyn, was part of an abusive sex cult, in which young girls were groomed and physically/sexually abused by Kelly.
R Kelly’s wife, ex-wife, and daughter have also been quite outspoken about his abusive behaviour, even more so now that so many people are gathering together and sharing their stories. When R. Kelly was making millions for record companies, it seemed to be swept under the rug. Along with these accusations also came many awards, fame, and notoriety.
It’s important to note that what we hear and what leaks out into the mainstream probably represents only a fraction of Kelly’s illegal activities. Many celebrities and members of the elite are often protected from the law, and many abused women and children may not feel comfortable coming forward.
How Should We React?
Amidst all of the judgement, anger, resentment and hatred towards R. Kelly, and any sexual predator, criminal, etc. for that matter, we often fail to address one of the most important questions: We forget to ask why and how.
There is no denying people have been hurt here, and it’s important to discuss what’s happened, but we must also discuss solutions. All we seem to do is judge, hate, and punish without asking why and how these things happen. It reminds me of how we operate prison systems in the western world. We claim to rehabilitate individuals, but really we just force them into incredibly poor conditions that often make their state of mind worse by the time of their release, and then we send them back out into society expecting that the past won’t repeat itself.
If we continue to judge, make fun, and ‘bash,’ we simply reinforce the cycle and allow it to continue without ever getting to the root cause of it, thus prolonging the issue instead of stopping it. In essence, just as we must provide a loving space for victims to process their experiences, we must also create that space for perpetrators.
As much as people may not want to hear it, ask yourself the question: Are we really changing anything by holding so much hate and judgment toward perpetrators? What happens when those hated individuals enter into bad rehabilitation systems and are out of prison a mere 5 or 10 years later? We’re perpetuating a cycle of disconnection.
Flipping The Script
People like R. Kelly are ‘sick,’ in the same way murderers, other rapists, and criminals are ‘sick.’ The only response from society has been judgement, and the result of that judgement is jail time which largely benefits politicians and corporations. It’s a modern day example of slavery, and actually has nothing to do with rehabilitation and fostering understanding and compassion.
When it comes to sexually abusing children, those who participate in this type of activity have often been subjected to severe childhood trauma themselves. It could be sexual or something else. As a result, they grow up and repeat what they have been through or look for other unhealthy ways to cope as they struggle to fit into society. This is something that has not been addressed nor understood by all of those who are participating in what’s become known as ‘elite level sexual abuse.’
In the case of R. Kelly himself, most people probably don’t realize he is a victim of child sex abuse. He has detailed in his autobiography how he was raped when he was eight years old, which continued for years. His brother also recently gave an emotional interview detailing how both of them were repeatedly raped at very young ages by their older sister, starting from when they were about 6 years old. They were forced to perform sexual acts on her as well as have intercourse. (source)
Think about what this does to a child at that age. This is trauma, and his behaviour may be a result of this trauma. Further, the Lifetime documentary series Surviving R Kelly clearly shows Kelly tries incredibly hard to protect himself from getting hurt. This is likely part of why he is so controlling. As hard as it is to watch and hear, it seems like he attempts to control every aspect of his life so that he avoids getting hurt. Does it mean it’s right to do? Of course not, it simply shows the frame of mind he’s operating from, and understanding that helps us figure out how we can help R Kelly. If we don’t put aside our hatred and judgement in order to feel compassion for these individuals, we will never find a solution. If we refuse, we not only fail to help the perpetrator, but we end up further perpetuating the issue and creating more victims.
Another great example would be the Vatican. Take Cardinal George Pell, for example, who recently became the highest ranking Vatican official to ever be convicted of child sexual abuse. This is something, most likely, he grew up experiencing himself. To him, it could be ‘normal’ behaviour, even if that’s at the subconscious level. Many of these Cardinals have been in the church since they were children. Not long ago, decades worth of sexual abuse was reported in a choir that was led by the retired pope Benedict’s brother. In that specific case, there were approximately 600 members of a Catholic boys’ Dompatzen choir in Regenburg, Germany who where physically and sexual abused from 1946 to 1992. Georg Ratzinger, the former Pope’s Benedict’s brother, was the choir’s head from 1964 to 1994.
Without treatment, many of these children may grow up and abuse young children. And if they don’t leave the church, they could end up further perpetuating the cycle of sexual abuse within it.
Asking The Important Questions
What does hatred do? What does judgement do? What progress will we ever make by making fun of these people, labelling them as psychopaths, and locking them up? On the other hand, what will love do? What does understanding do? What progress would be made without judgement and punishment, but rather with understanding, openness, transparency, and communication? We may need to detain these people to stop them from hurting others, but we must think of better ways of approaching this than our current methodology.
Don’t believe me? Hear it from a victim of elite child sex trafficking. We just put out a 4-part interview series with Anneke Lucas on January 17th, where she describes in detail her involvement as a child in an elite Belgian pedophile ring, her remarkable escape, and her healing journey over the last couple decades.
In the interview, she explains how vital it is during the healing process to not feel like a ‘victim,’ and that you actually empower your abuser by taking the victim stance or by labelling them as ‘crazy satanic pedophiles.’ She learned to look at them from a different perspective. Eventually, she felt sorry for her perpetrators and realized that the abusers are in need of something society is not ready to provide them with: the opportunity to heal.
Sexual abuse has been an issue deeply ingrained in society for centuries, and it’s in part because society fails to respond with compassion. We do the exact opposite of that. We make fun of, vilify, point fingers, punish, and kill criminals. We do not rehabilitate and we do not give a chance for ‘lost souls’ to connect to the light that exists within them, that light that exists within all of us. There is no talk of past trauma and healing, and this is one of the biggest problems when it comes to alleviating various crimes including sexual abuse and pedophilia.
These people have nobody to talk to, their always running and hiding and never addressing the root cause of their problems. As a result, many people experience pain and trauma, and the cycle continues.
European Union Approval of Glyphosate Found To Be Based On Plagiarized Science From Monsanto
- The Facts:
Glyphosate, an active ingredient within Monsanto's Roundup herbicide, was recently re-licensed and approved by the European Parliament. However, MEPs found the science given to them was plagiarized, full of industry science written by Monsanto.
- Reflect On:
With so much science showing it's harmful to humans and the environment, and the fact that several dozen countries have made it illegal, why is it still approved in the UK, Canada, and US? Among a few other places.
It’s hard to know where to begin when it comes to glyphosate, an active ingredient used in Monsanto’s infamous ‘Roundup herbicide,’ a product that’s illegal in many countries (not including Canada and the United States). For a number of years, these countries have been citing the devastating health and environmental effects of Roundup herbicide, namely regarding glyphosate. Sri Lanka, for example, completely banned the product because of it’s link to deadly kidney disease, whereas many other countries have cited its carcinogenic effects. The science is quite clear, and it’s been coming out for decades. Fernando Manas, Ph.D. at the National University of Rio Cuarto in Argentina, outlines how “There is evidence of high levels of genetic damage in people of Marcos Juarez (Argentina), which may result from unintentional exposure to pesticides.” (source)
Nobody can really argue against why glyphosate shouldn’t be approved anywhere in the world, especially when you take a look at the science. Glyphosate recently made headlines, as the case regarding school groundskeeper Dewayne Johnson was the first lawsuit claiming that glyphosate causes cancer to go to trial. There are thousands upon thousands of similar pending cases. Any jury that reviews all of the scientific evidence will not be able to rule otherwise, and Johnson’s case was a great example that showed glyphosate caused his cancer.
How are these products approved? It comes as a result of corrupt regulatory agencies here in Canada as well as within the US, specifically the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The list of examples is very long when it comes to corruption and government connections to corporations like Monsanto. This is the only way these products get approved, it’s not science, it’s simply lobbying efforts and shady politics.
“It is commonly believed that Roundup is among the safest pesticides… Despite its reputation, Roundup was by far the most toxic among the herbicides and insecticides tested. This inconsistency between scientific fact and industrial claim may be attributed to huge economic interests, which have been found to falsify health risk assessments and delay health policy decisions.” – R. Mesnage et al., Biomed Research International, Volume 2014 (2014), article ID 179691
EU regulators recently decided to relicense glyphosate, and it came based on an assessment that was plagiarized from industry reports. It’s quite backwards that for years, health regulators have been relying on the scientific reports from the company that manufactures these products, instead of seeking out independent scientific studies.
A group of MEPs decides to commission an investigation into claims that Germany’s Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (bFr) copy-and-pasted tracts from Monsanto studies.
As the Guardian points out:
The study’s findings have been released hours before a parliamentary vote on tightening independent scrutiny of the pesticides approvals process. The authors said they found “clear evidence of BfR’s deliberate pretence of an independent assessment, whereas in reality the authority was only echoing the industry applicant’s assessment. Molly ScottCato, a Green MEP, said the scale of alleged plagiarism by the BfR authors shown by the new paper was “extremely alarming.”
Molly Scott Cato, a member of European Parliament, went on to tell the Guardian:
“This helps explain why the World Health Organization assessment on glyphosate as a probable human carcinogen was so at odds with EU assessors, who awarded this toxic pesticide a clean bill of health, brushing off warnings of its dangers.”
The study found plagiarism in half of the chapters assessing published studies on the health risk, which means that half of the science came directly from Monsanto themselves, because the plagiarism was of industry science. And what does the industry do? Jane Goodall, although referencing GMOs, hammers home the point:
As part of the process, they portrayed the various concerns as merely the ignorant opinions of misinformed individuals – and derided them as not only unscientific, but anti-science. They then set to work to convince the public and government officials, through the dissemination of false information, that there was an overwhelming expert consensus, based on solid evidence, that GMOs were safe. (source)
This quote came from a book written by Lawyer Steven Druker, who sued the FDA and uncovered documents showing how the agency manipulated the science and corrupted scientists in order to get GMOs approved. You can read more about that in detail here.
The same thing goes for glyphosate.
The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) based its recommendation that glyphosate was safe for public use on the BfR’s assessment.
According to the EFSA, “The report does not provide any new scientific information that calls into question the assessment and conclusions of glyphosate. EFSA stands firmly behind the integrity of its risk assessment process and its conclusions on glyphosate.”
Jo Lewis, the Soil Associations policy director told the Guardian:
“It is unacceptable that pesticide-industry studies receive greater recognition than scientific peer-reviewed open literature in regulatory decision-making. Whilst this paper focuses on the US EPA, similar criticisms have been made of EU decisions and we fear that outside the EU, pressure to approve pesticides will increase.”
Again, it’s weird how this is even a debate. This has been known for a very long time, and we’ve seen similar happenings with DDT in the past.
“Children today are sicker than they were a generation ago. From childhood cancers to autism, birth defects and asthma, a wide range of childhood diseases and disorders are on the rise. Our assessment of the latest science leaves little room for doubt; pesticides are one key driver of this sobering trend.” – October 2012 report by Pesticide Action Network North America (PANNA) (source)(source)
Keep in mind that the use of glyphosate has skyrocketed, a 1500% increase from 1995 to 2005 was seen, and 100 million pounds of this stuff is used every year on more than a billion acres in the United States alone.
It’s found in our food, our beverages, our favourite snacks, etc.
It’s even been found in the breast milk of mothers, and in urine samples of people across Europe. (source)
The main toxic effects of glyphosate as identified by MIT’s Dr. Stephanie Seneff include:
- Kills beneficial gut bacteria and allows pathogens to overgrow
- Interferes with function of cytochrome p450 (CYP enzymes)
- Chelates important minerals (iron, cobalt, manganese, etc)
- Interferes with synthesis of aromatic amino acids and methionine – leads to shortages in critical neurotransmitters and folate
- Disrupts sulfate synthesis and sulfate transport
Need I write more?
At the end of the day, despite the power these corporations hold over government regulatory agencies, it’s human beings that are actually spraying this stuff. This is why change needs to occur at an individual level. One day, no human will agree to spray or use Roundup herbicide, because our lives literally depend on it. We’re simply being used as tools by these corporations, and they profit off our ignorance. Our own consciousness is being used against us. The lies and the scientific fraud that occur in order to get these products on the market actually convince people that they are safe. It’s still hard for some people to accept let alone entertain the idea that our regulatory agencies would ever knowingly do something to harm us.
This is why awareness is so important, and why we must do our own research.
Authentic UFO Footage Caught On Camera By A University Professor & His Research Students
- The Facts:
Østfold University College has an observatory that is set up year round 24/7 for the purpose of filming the strange light phenomenon that is known in this part of Norway. And one night, scientists and students captured footage of an actual craft.
- Reflect On:
Think about how this topic has changed over the years, going from 'taboo' to completely verified within the mainstream. What are the implications of realizing that we have been visited for possibly longer than we've been aware of?
UFOs have gone from being a ‘taboo’ topic of discussion to a scientifically proven phenomenon. They’re real, and practically everybody knows it. This is evident from all of the declassified documents, witness testimonies, and electrooptical data that’s available as well as all of the mainstream ‘UFO’ disclosure that’s occurred over the past few years. We’re talking about testimonies from astronauts, generals, colonels, pilots and long-time Department of Defence and space agency scientists, like Norman Bergrun, Bob Dean, Colonel Ross Dedrickson, Edgar Mitchel, etc. The list is a very long one, and the number of testimonies reaches to well over one thousand if we look at them on a global scale.
The question is no longer if UFOs exist, but rather, who or what is behind the wheel? Just as there was evidence for UFOs decades ago when the phenomenon was referred to as a mere ‘conspiracy theory,’ the same holds true for the hypothesis that some of these objects may indeed be crafts piloted by extraterrestrial or extradimensional beings. There are plenty of reasons to assume that many of these craft are extraterrestrial, from contactee/abduction accounts as well as witness testimonies like the one included above.
The extraterrestrial hypothesis holds a lot of credibility, not to mention that many encounters with these crafts show a display of physics-defying maneuverers. This hypothesis made its way into the mainstream recently when a Pentagon official disclosed its “Aerospace Ariel Threat Identification Program.” The head of that program, Louis Elizondo, went on national television just weeks after retiring from the Pentagon stating that he believes some of these objects are piloted by intelligent extraterrestrials. (source)
So if that’s what you believe, you’re not alone in your thoughts. Mainstream UFO disclosure requires another discussion, as it’s hard to really trust any information or perspective that comes from mainstream media these days.
There are no shortage of, what seem to be, authentic videos from very credible sources. Sure, we’ve had multiple videos and pictures of these objects released by dozens of governments worldwide, but we also have footage from a number of civilians, like you and me, who have encountered these objects and have been lucky enough to have a phone or a camera on hand.
For example, a UFO was filmed by multiple crews in Turkey on May 13, 2009, and the footage appears to show occupants inside of the craft. It made headlines over there, and is well known to UFOlogists as the Kumburgaz, Turkey UFO incident. There were also several witnesses from the local village. The video was analyzed by the Scientific and Technology Research Board of Turkey (which is sponsored by the government). They concluded and vouched for its authenticity. It was filmed by the late Dr. Roger Lier, which is fascinating because he was a doctor of Podiatric medicine, and arguably the best known individual with regards to extracting alleged alien implants. He has performed more than fifteen surgeries that removed sixteen separate distinct objects. These objects have been investigated by several prestigious laboratories, including Los Alamos National Laboratories, New Mexico Tech, and many others. You can watch him speak at the Citizens Hearing on Disclosure which took place a few years ago here.
The footage was taken by the Hessadalen Interactive Observatory at Ostfold University College. This particular observatory has captured and documented many strange anomalies that seem to plague the area. As far as I know, its the only official 24 hour UFO observatory in the world. Radar and cameras have tracked and filmed numerous inexplicable phenomenon in this area, with the fastest one recorded at 30,000 km per hour, which is faster than any known aircraft today.
The light phenomena here in Hessadelenm, Norway started in late ’81 with a lot of sightings. At the most it was 20 sightings a week. The local people here started to see the light down in the valley, sometimes close to their houses, and they were wondering, what could this be? (Quote from Strand, taken from The Day Before Disclosure)
Radar and camera have since picked up astonishing photos of unexplained light phenomenon. Landings have also been reported, and conclusive evidence showing earth samples have also been taken.
Below is a picture of students and scientists examining a two ton piece of turf that was cut out in the area using laser precision. It was lifted and placed a few meters away. There was no sign of machinery or people.
One week during September 2007, a major survey was carried out by the university scientists assisted by students with several observation units. On the fourth night of the survey, something special happened. Below is footage taken from the film The Day Before Disclosure, written and produced by Filmaker Terje Toftenes. The film (from where the above picture was taken) has footage of multiple instances documented by the observatory as well as more information on this particular area of Norway. It was taken by Stand and the students.
The first bit you see there is what showed up in September, although it’s dark but you can hear the excitement of Strand as well as the students as they scream with joy. The second piece of footage within the clip below, where it cuts to shortly after, is another incident that was filmed by the observatory .
Below is another picture from the observatory, one of many that continue to be completely unexplained to this day.
What kind of implications are to come from the realization that we are not alone, and that we’ve been visited by beings from elsewhere for a long time? It truly leaves no aspect of humanity untouched, and it’s interesting to reflect on how sheltered we’ve been from so many topics, not just limited to UFOlogy. Ultimately, this sheltering from the truth often ends up hindering our willingness to learn about these subjects.
We have been conditioned to live our life, accept things the way they are, and ignore any information that challenges our beliefs despite any evidence presented. There is something for us to discover here, perhaps about ourselves or about the nature of reality and where we came from. Not long from now, it will be us traversing through the stars, stumbling upon other civilizations who will look up in awe. But first, we have to collectively accept that it’s time to take off the training wheels and fly. No longer can we continue to live on this planet the way we have been. If we want to move forward and live in peace, harmony and abundance, drastic changes need to be made.
At the end of the day, I believe this planet is more important than we are.
Researcher Jailed After Uncovering Deadly Virus Delivered Through Human Vaccines
If you have been following stories in recent years of scientists and researchers who make discoveries that are threatening to...
Tylenol Damages The Brains of Children, Research Reveals
Original Article Link A number of non-peer-reviewed articles have been written and published on the web claiming that there is...