Connect with us

Awareness

Daughter of “Autism Speaks” Founder Shares Shocking Information About Vaccines

Published

on

Who is Katie Wright? She’s the mother of two children, 9 year old Mattias and 11 year old Christian. Christian has autism, and was the inspiration behind the creation of Autism Speaksa foundation which creates awareness about autism and provides resources for parents and others who wish to learn more about it.  The foundation has grown to be considered the world’s leading autism science and advocacy organization.

advertisement - learn more

There is a “huge disparity that makes up the autism spectrum. My son lives on the other side, the severely affected side of the spectrum. I am so proud of my 11-year-old son Christian – no one works harder (my opinion as his Mom!). However, Christian is not a savant, not a professor, not an artist, but just a typical kid struggling with severe autism. He was toilet-trained at age nine and needs 24-hour-a-day supervision because he has no awareness of danger. More to the point, Christian cannot be interviewed on talk shows because he cannot speak,” says Wright.

Before I go any further, this is a huge point to remember when it comes to autism. It’s an extremely wide spectrum, and a lot of children at one end of the spectrum are like Christian, and there are others who are ‘high functioning,’ and don’t have the same issues as the ones on the other end of the spectrum. Personally, I believe a lot of these kids do have what we’ve come to call autism, but on the other hand I think there are many who have been misdiagnosed, that don’t have the same biological characteristics as others and could actually represent a form of evolution, but that’s another topic.

The amount of children being diagnosed with autism continues to rise exponentially, and it’s that goes far beyond genetics.

Children with autism at certain ends of the spectrum are very different from those on another end of the spectrum, and this is showcased in multiple ways.

“This wide spectrum of autism really can become a tricky issue. I want the public to see the many gifts of people with autism and how much they contribute to our world. However, it is families like mine who frequently ask for the public’s help and support. It’s important that the public understand that we need more educational supports and more research money (especially environmental research money!) because high functioning individuals are, sadly, not the norm but the best-case scenario for our kids.”
– Katie Wright (from the interview, linked below)

advertisement - learn more

Autism Speaks & Vaccines

Katie has given a number of interviews over the past decade regarding the foundation, Autism Speaks, and its stance on vaccines and autism. In an interview she gave a few years ago, she explains why her parents steered away from the causation aspect of autism. What’s the reason? It’s because they trust doctors and physicians and other academics without question. Putting our trust into others has caused many problems, especially because those we put our trust in, are putting their trust in corporations.

“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)

This is why today we see so much conflicting information. I’ve put more examples in the article linked below, which highlights eye-opening information about the science behind how most published research is likely false, a fact that not enough people are aware of nor pay attention to.


Peer Reviewed Science Is Losing Credibility As Large Amounts of Research Shown To Be False


Dr. Peter Gotzche, co-founder of the Cochrane Collaboration (the world’s most foremost body in assessing medical evidence), puts it quite nicely:

“The main reason we take so many drugs is that drug companies don’t sell drugs, they sell lies about drugs. This is what makes drugs so different from anything else in life…Virtually everything we know about drugs is what the companies have chosen to tell us and our doctors…the reason patients trust their medicine is that they extrapolate the trust they have in their own doctors into the medicines they prescribe.”

You can read more about him, his work, and access the source (video) of his comment above, here.

He goes on to mention that, although doctors may know a lot about diseases and human physiology, they know virtually nothing about our medicines, which includes vaccines.

Katie explained that her parents had quite a simple philosophy, that doctors and PhD’s would lead them in the right direction. The funny thing about this is the fact it’s said that the majority of doctors believe vaccines are safe, but if we look at the science and the number of doctors and scientists trying to create awareness about this issue, their voice is never really heard and seems to be instantaneously shut down, something we’ll touch more on later.

She states that the general consensus is that autism is genetic, which is another issue in itself because today, there are literally hundreds of studies showing that autism is not just genetic, but can be caused by various environmental toxins, like prescription drugs during critical stages of fetal development, or agricultural pesticides, and much more. All of these have now been implicated in the development of autism, and yes, so have vaccines.


You can read more about that in these articles:

Another Groundbreaking Study Emerges Linking Agricultural Pesticides To Autism

Monsanto, Pesticides, Vaccines, & Autism: If We Continue On This Route, “All Children Will Be Autistic By 2025.”

Scientists Link Autism To These Toxic Chemicals During Fetal Development


In the interview, Katie is asked at around the 9:20 mark by the interviewer:

“Here’s the part that I’m really struggling with, why couldn’t they (the parents of Katie, founders of Autism Speaks) get 20 % to go down the environmental rabbit hole, why couldn’t they get some portion of the dollars to say, ‘you know what, we’re hearing too many damn stories, our own grandson, we don’t have to make it the life mission of autism speaks but let’s to the real stuff, the vax un-vax stuff etc…Why couldn’t even that have happened?”

Katie answers:

“I wish I knew, I’ve tried, I really really tried. I think that they were told a lot of promises, maybe lies would be the more accurate word, by some people in the science department that they were going to commit fairly to environmental science. They agreed to do some vaccine research, a million dollars was specifically raised for it…”

She went on to explain that the money wasn’t spent on vaccines at all, and instead “ridiculous” environmental research. Furthermore, she explains how he (the researcher) was from big Pharma, and he didn’t really have an interest in the children.  “He became very powerful very fast. I would get phone calls from researchers and parents who tried to speak with him and he would basically just turn his back and walk away, or say something inappropriate like….ahhh, well..mmhhmmm but anecdotes aren’t science etc.”

“I could go on and on, every single one of his endeavours was a tremendous failure. He was disastrous with autism speaks.” 

She also states at approximately the 15: 31 mark:

“We honestly haven’t talked about vaccines in many years because it led to too much arguing, and it led to just a lot of problems in our family. We couldn’t really talk about it.”

This is a great reflection of the overall general consciousness of this issue. The fact that ‘the brainwashers’ (big Pharma) can influence a human mind to react a certain way when bringing up the link between vaccines and autism really goes to show how much sway they have over our perceptions, not just with vaccines, but with various aspects that surround the human experience.

A Trip To The CDC

After this, she mentions how her father took a trip to the CDC, and he was extremely unimpressed with their vaccine safety research. This isn’t a surprise, even the ingredients used in vaccines, like aluminum, have actually gone through zero safety testing. There is not one study showing it’s safe to inject aluminum into babies, let alone mercury, aborted human fetal cells and more. These ingredients have just been presumed safe! How ridiculous is that? Especially when you consider the fact that scientists recently discovered some of the highest brain aluminum content every measured in the brain’s of autistic people. Researchers were also able to identify the mechanism from which aluminum via vaccines is taken from the injection site, and travels to distant organs, eventually ending up in the brain. It doesn’t exit the body like the aluminum we take in from food, for example.


Related CE Articles presenting the science of aluminum in vaccines:

Researchers Discover Where The Aluminum Goes After It’s Injected Into A Babies Body From A Vaccine

Scientists Discover Huge Amounts of Aluminum In The Brains of Deceased Autistic People


Katie’s father actually raised some concerns about this with the CDC (lack of safety testing for vaccines), and she mentions in the interview how he was able to do so because he wasn’t on the board of autism speaks anymore, and he felt comfortable to bring something like this up.

Does this mean that when controversial claims are made, they’re completely ignored by the influential members of the foundation?

She explains that when her father went to the CDC, he encountered people who didn’t really care about the foundation, or autism at all.

If one were to go through the science, they would find hundreds of examples of what really goes on behind the scenes. More recently, a study published in Clinical Rheumatology exposes how vaccine manufacturers used phoney placebos in clinical trials to conceal a wide range of devastating risks associated with HPV vaccines. Instead of using genuine inert placebos and comparing health impacts over a number of years, as is required for most new drug approvals, Merck and GlaxoSmithKline spiked their placebos with a neurotoxic aluminum adjuvant and cut observation periods to a matter of months. You can access that study and read more about it here.

As far as the CDC goes, the director, Dr. Brenda Fitzgerald had to recently resign because of her supposed connections to big tobacco. In 2016, a group of scientists at the CDC named, SPIDER (Scientists Preserving Integrity, Diligence and Ethics), put out a list of complaints in the form of a letter to the CDC’s Chief of Staff, where they say, “It appears that our mission is being influenced and shaped by outside parties and rogue interests… and Congressional intent for our agency is being circumvented by some of our leaders. What concerns us most, is that it is becoming the norm and not the rare exception.”

This was covered by several activists, from Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to another article from the Huffington Post, but unfortunately it received little to no mainstream media attention.

Shortly before this, and perhaps even more shocking is the whistleblower testimony from a senior CDC scientist, who has authored multiple commonly cited studies that show no link whatsoever between the MMR vaccine and autism. In fact, one of his studies, published in 2004, is the most commonly cited study used to debunk the link between the MMR vaccine and autism.

His name is Dr. William Thompson, and he bravely told the world that it was “the lowest point” in his career that he “went along with that paper.” He said that the authors “didn’t report significant findings” and that he is “completely ashamed” of what he did, that he was “complicit and went along with this, and that he regrets that he has “been part of the problem.” (source)(source)(source)

Here is an official statement from Dr. Thompson describing the situation in his own words. This is perhaps the best source of information regrading this matter.

Here is the study now in question, published with the new information.

As you can see, there are clearly multiple concerns to talk about here. The only issue is, there is one side that doesn’t want to talk about it and it appears that this side wants to constantly ridicule and ostracize anybody who even brings this up. Perhaps that’s to avoid a conversation or evidence? This is unethical and the day we stop asking questions is the day we cease to be real scientists. There are so many publications raising concerns about vaccines that it’s overwhelming.

It’s really no surprise to see vaccination rates around the world dropping dramatically.

The Top 6 Reasons Why Parents Are Choosing Not To Vaccinate Their Kids

Katie went on to explain that her father felt the people at the CDC ,”don’t wanna know, they don’t want to know anything, and he knew they could for pennies. He thought they wanted to fix it, and they don’t, they just want to keep going and they know a percentage of children will be predominately damaged and they just don’t care.”

“They were spending a hundred times more money on flu vaccine marketing campaigns than they were for safety testing.”


A Matter of Right and Wrong: The CDC’s Troubling Lack of Research Ethics


Katie explained,

If you criticize anything about the vaccine schedule, you’re killing children, “children are dying is that what you want?!” You know, that’s what it’s like at the CDC . Anytime Bob (founder of autism speaks and her father) they would be like, “children will die!”

Another interesting point she mentions, is that “so many” of the employees, and many members of the board space out their vaccinations for their own children. What’s even more shocking is the fact that, “some don’t vaccinate at all. I don’t get it.”

Click on the picture below to listen to the entire interview.

Important Questions We Need To Ask Ourselves

One of the most important questions to ask is, in light of all of the evidence and information that’s emerged connecting autism to environmental factors, such as vaccines, mercury toxicity in the environment, prescription drugs and more, why is it still frowned upon to bring these studies up? Why are so many doctors and scientists and figures like, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., spending their time trying to bring awareness to this issue?

PS, if you’re looking for the science, articles have been linked throughout this article, above and below, that go into more detail, so be sure to check them out.

Why are so many parents choosing not to vaccinate their children anymore? Have vaccines really eradicated disease? (An entirely separate discussion as well). Are they really as “life-saving” and “successful” as they’ve been marketed to be?”

There are so many questions and discussions that need to happen, and it’s been long over due for an open and public debate to happen where all of the relevant information is presented.

We must guard against science becoming dogma, because that’s what much of it has become today.


Related CE Articles with more information specific to the science I’m speaking of:

The Top 6 Reasons Why Parents Should Never Be Forced To Vaccinate Their Children

Researchers Discover Where The Aluminum Goes After It’s Injected Into A Babies Body From A Vaccine

Scientists Discover Huge Amounts of Aluminum In The Brains of Deceased Autistic People

A $100,000 Message From Robert F Kennedy Jr & Robert De Niro To American Journalists & Scientists

Colten Barrett Dies From His Gardasil HPV Vaccine Injuries – One of Multiple Deaths Reported


Unfortunately, there are no large-scale studies comparing health outcomes in vaccinated children vs. those who haven’t received vaccines. Total compensation paid to families through the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act/National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program is at approximately $4 Billion. The alarming part is that only 1% of vaccine injuries are even reported, and only 1/3 of the petitions are compensated – This means that 99% of vaccine injuries go unreported and the families of the vast majority of people injured by vaccines are paying for it in several different ways. (source)(source)(source)(source)

Vaccine manufacturers cannot be held liable for injuries or deaths that occur from use of their vaccines. The point is, the pharmaceutical industry has no incentive to care about our health when it comes to making our ‘medications’ safe, they don’t have to, there is no punishment for them for not doing so. They can legally be careless with their product and this is evident by the extreme lack of safety testing for multiple “medications,” especially in the realm of vaccines. Throw in all of the fraud, and other shady things that go on in big business and it’s evident we have a problem! Perhaps this is why there hasn’t been one appropriate safety study to justify the use of mercury and aluminum, aborted human fetal cells and more inside of vaccines.

What’s the takeaway here? Always question, do not let the egoic idea of a “educated” person’s instructions guide you, think for yourself and don’t put your complete trust in health professionals because they too are misled by corporations. A lot of ‘education’ is mere brainwashing, and it’s critical to the well being of us, our health, and our planet, that we start taking into consideration factors that, too often, are completely ignored and ridiculed by the mainstream. The evidence speaks for itself.

It’s ok to question long held beliefs that we’ve thought to be true. I’ll leave you with this great quote that really gives one something to think about,

“We knew that the Earth was flat, we knew that we were the center of the universe, and we knew that a man-made heavier than air piece of machinery could not take flight. Through all stages of human history, intellectual authorities have pronounced their supremacy by ridiculing or suppressing elements of reality that simply didn’t fit within the framework of accepted knowledge. Are we really any different today? Have we really changed our acceptance towards things that won’t fit the frame? Maybe there are concepts of our reality we have yet to understand, and if we open our eyes maybe we will see that something significant has been overlooked.” – Terje Toftenes

Free Franco DeNicola Screening: The Shift In Consciousness

We interviewed Franco DeNicola about what is happening with the shift in consciousness. It turned out to be one of the deepest and most important information we pulled out within an interview.

We explored why things are moving a little more slowly with the shift at times, what is stopping certain solutions from coming forward and the important role we all play.

Watch the interview here.
Advertisement
advertisement - learn more

Awareness

Boy or Girl – Baby Gender Selection Issues

Published

on

Some parents have the possibility to opt for gender selection; however, being able to decide whether to have a baby boy or girl is a controversial issue.

Many couples expecting a baby do not think it’s a big issue whether they have a boy or a girl; however there are several medical, social, and personal reasons that could influence parents to recur to some form of gender selection.

Like many other controversial practices, the legality of gender selection, also known as sex selection, varies from country to country.

The Legality of Baby Gender Selection

The United States has perhaps some of the most relaxed laws regarding baby gender selection in the world. Most European countries and Australia, on the other hand, have bans on sex selection and only allow it for medical reasons. For example, if a parent is a carrier of a mutation or gene with more chances of manifesting itself in a certain gender, baby gender selection is valid. However, if parents simply wish to balance the ratio of boys and girls in their family, they are not allowed to recur to sex selection.

This has generated a form of medical tourism in which couples from countries where gender selection is illegal, like the UK, travel to the US in order to be able to choose whether to have a baby boy or girl.

On the other hand, sex selection is illegal in the two most populated countries on Earth, China and India. In these countries, baby gender selection has been performed clandestinely for many years and for reasons other than family balancing or avoiding genetic diseases. In these societies, having a baby boy is preferred mainly for cultural and economic reasons. Parents believe that boys have better chances of earning income and eventually support them when they reach an old age.

advertisement - learn more

Methods of Baby Gender Selection

There are two major types of gender selection methods: the first one is called sperm sorting, and involves separating X-chromosome sperm from Y-chromosome sperm by flow cytometry, a purification technique in which chromosomes are suspended in a stream of sperm and identified by an electronic detector before being separated. Intra-uterine insemination or in-vitro fertilization can then be performed with the enriched sperm. The success rates for this method vary from 80% to 93%.

The other method, called pre-implantation genetic diagnosis, consists in generating several embryos through in-vitro fertilization, which are then genetically tested to determine a baby’s gender. The chosen embryos can then be implanted. This method has a success rate of almost 100%; however, it can be quite expensive, costing up to $15,000.

Issues Regarding Baby Gender Selection

While there are few objections against baby gender selection when it is performed for medical reasons, it has become a highly controversial issue when it is used for balancing the number of boys or girls in families. Some people raise the obvious ethical question of whether people who opt for gender selection are “playing God” by manipulating whether to have a baby boy or girl. Others believe that new parents will raise a baby more appropriately if he or she belongs to their preferred gender.

Gender Imbalance Caused by Baby Gender Selection

Gender selection has caused demographic concern in China and India since it has contributed to generate a gender imbalance in the populations of those countries. In some regions of China, for example, the sex ratio for newborns is 118:100, boys to girls. This phenomenon has in turn been associated with social problems such as an increase in violence and prostitution.

It seems like a logical solution for governments around the globe to legalize baby gender selection but to analyze the personal reasons why each couple intends to select a baby boy or girl. Gender selection for medical reasons should even be encouraged, since it could prevent serious genetic diseases such as cystic fibrosis, Huntington’s disease, and Haemophilia A. Balancing the gender ratio of a family should be accepted if by doing this, a healthy family environment is created. On the other hand, China and India have shown that baby gender selection as a result of a bias towards a particular gender can not only create a gender imbalance in the population, but contribute to social problems as well.

Free Franco DeNicola Screening: The Shift In Consciousness

We interviewed Franco DeNicola about what is happening with the shift in consciousness. It turned out to be one of the deepest and most important information we pulled out within an interview.

We explored why things are moving a little more slowly with the shift at times, what is stopping certain solutions from coming forward and the important role we all play.

Watch the interview here.
Continue Reading

Awareness

Organic Certification: What the USDA Organic Label Means

Published

on

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    Organic and natural labels mean different things, and various types of labels tells you what percentage of ingredients are actually organic. We'll explore what to look for.

  • Reflect On:

    Do you sometimes buy products thinking they are organic or fully natural based on their wording? Have you later found out that those products aren't natural or organic at all? Read labels more closely at grocery stores to be aware.

Don’t get conned by fraudulent claims of “natural” or “organic.” Learn what to look for, and why it’s important, to ensure you’re getting the quality you are paying for.

The industrial age of the 20th century brought about changing agricultural practices that have generated increasing alarm about the effects of these practices on the environment and health. The use of chemical fertilizers and pesticides, antibiotics, hormones, irradiated and genetically altered food and fiber products has created a groundswell of rightful concern. It has led to the growing demand for non-toxic, organic products that many are willing to pay a higher price for to ensure the healthful purity of food and clothing provided for their families.

With such profit opportunities, it’s little wonder that the lucrative organic product market has suffered abuse with so-called “organic” labels being fraudulently placed on products that have not earned the right. As a result of pressure from farming and consumer groups, legislation for the standardization of organic certification was introduced in the 1980s. It has been updated to include more vigorous enforcement and control methods since, with the current standards established in 2002 by the USDA.

The Standards of USDA Organic Certification

Specific standards must be met in order to legally claim a product as USDA certified organic. Organic producers must utilize methods that conserve water, maximize soil health, and reduce air pollution. The specific standards to earn USDA organic certification include:

Free of synthetic chemicals such as insecticides, herbicides, fertilizers, hormones, antibiotics, and additives

Free from irradiation and genetically modified organisms

advertisement - learn more

Agricultural products grown on land that has been free of prohibited substances for a period of three years

Animals used for meat, eggs, milk or other animal products must be exclusively fed foods that are organically grown, may not be given antibiotics or hormones, and must have access to outdoors.

Clean and sanitized harvesting and processing equipment throughout the process from harvest to finished, packaged product

Detailed chain-of-handling records from the field through final sales

Physical separation of certified organic products from non-organic products throughout the process of production

Regular on-site inspections from USDA-approved inspectors to ensure compliance

Understanding the Certified Organic Label

Once the rigorous process of certification has been completed, organic producers may place the USDA certified organic seal on their products. Currently, there are four levels of certified organic products, with a specific definition of the percentage of organic ingredients the final products contains. They are as follows:

• 100% organic: all production methods and ingredients are USDA certified organic.

• Organic: at least 95% of the production methods and ingredients are USDA certified organic with remaining ingredients included on the National List of allowed ingredients.

• Made With Organic Ingredients: at least 70% of the ingredients are USDA certified organic with remaining ingredients included on the National List of allowed ingredients.

• No organic wording or seal: less than 70% of the ingredients are USDA certified organic and no claims may be made on the front or back of the product.

Manufacturers or producers who knowingly label a product “organic” when it does not meet the USDA standards are subject to fines up to $11,000 per violation.

Why Organic Certification is Important

When you see the official USDA organic certification seal on food, clothing, and bedding products, you can be assured that these products have met the meticulous standards required and are free of chemicals, toxins, antibiotics, and hormones. When you see the USDA certified organic label, you will understand the value of the higher priced organic products as compared to non-organically produced products.

With the current stringent organic certification requirements enforced by regular inspections from USDA accredited agents, the USDA certified organic label has great meaning and importance to the consumer. Look for the label to know that you are getting the quality you are paying for.

Free Franco DeNicola Screening: The Shift In Consciousness

We interviewed Franco DeNicola about what is happening with the shift in consciousness. It turned out to be one of the deepest and most important information we pulled out within an interview.

We explored why things are moving a little more slowly with the shift at times, what is stopping certain solutions from coming forward and the important role we all play.

Watch the interview here.
Continue Reading

Awareness

WHO Finds Global Lack Of Inactivity Rising Especially In Wealthier Countries — What You Can Do

Published

on

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    Inactivity is on the rise and it's the cause of a wide range of health concerns. Our population is only becoming more inactive, not less, and it's time to change that.

  • Reflect On:

    There are many factors of our modern world that make us less active. Our jobs, driving rather than walking/biking, too much screen time. What can you do differently to bring more activity into your life? What story stops you from starting?

The World Health Organization (WHO) estimates that more than a quarter of the entire population on this planet are not getting enough physical exercise, this number has barely improved since 2001. There are many factors that contribute to this, but just how much damage are we doing by failing to be active?

The lack of physical exercise raises the risk of many health problems, such as heart disease, type-2 diabetes and various types of cancers.

Interestingly, according to their study published in The Lancet Global Health, higher income countries, such as the UK, were among the least active population. Women were also found to be more sedentary throughout the world, excluding two regions in Asia.

The study looked at self-reported data on activity levels from 358 population based surveys covering 168 countries and included 1.9 million people.

The populations of higher income countries, which include the UK and USA showed an increase in the proportion of inactive people and had actually risen from 32% in 2001 to 37% in 2016, in the lower income countries it remained at 16%.

Those who were classified as inactive did less than 150 minutes of moderate exercise and around 75 minutes of intense activity per week.

advertisement - learn more

It was found that women were less active than men overall, except for in South and Central Asia, the Middle East, North Africa and higher-income Western countries. The authors believe that this was caused by a few different factors including extra childcare duties and cultural perspectives that may have made it more difficult for them to exercise.

Why More Inactivity In Wealthier Countries?

According to the researchers, in the wealthier countries, many of the jobs have transitioned to more office or desk jobs, meaning a more sedentary type of lifestyle. On top of that much of the population of these countries drive automobiles or take public transit to and from work which in many cases accounts for a lot of their time.

In the lower income countries, many of the jobs require the people to be more active, are physically demanding and people often have to walk to and from their jobs.

The WHO has had a goal to reduce the global levels of inactivity by 10% by 2025, the authors of the study feel that at the rate we are currently going, this target will be missed.

Lead author of the study, Dr. Regina Guthold said, “Unlike other major global health risks, levels of insufficient physical activity are not falling worldwide, on average, and over a quarter of all adults are not reaching the recommended levels of physical activity for good health.”

Regions with increasing levels of insufficient physical activity are a major concern for public health and the prevention and control of non-communicable diseases.”

Co-author, Dr. Fiona Bull added, “Addressing these inequalities in physical activity levels between men and women will be critical to achieving global activity targets and will require interventions to promote and improve women’s access to opportunities that are safe, affordable and culturally acceptable.”

According to the WHO,

Exercise guidelines for 19- to 64-year-olds

How much?

  • at least 150 minutes of moderate aerobic activity or 75 minutes of vigorous aerobic activity every week
  • strength exercises on two or more days a week that work all the major muscles
  • break up long periods of sitting with light activity

What is moderate aerobic activity?

  • Walking fast, water aerobics, riding a bike on level ground or with a few hills, doubles tennis, pushing a lawn mower, hiking, skateboarding, rollerblading, volleyball, basketball

What counts as vigorous activity?

  • Jogging or running, swimming fast, riding a bike fast or on hills, singles tennis, football, rugby, skipping rope, hockey, aerobics, gymnastics, martial arts

What activities strengthen muscles?

  • lifting weights, working with resistance bands, doing exercises that use your own body weight, such as push-ups and sit-ups, heavy gardening, such as digging and shovelling, yoga

What activities are both aerobic and muscle-strengthening?

  • circuit training, aerobics, running, football, rugby, netball, hockey

Final Thoughts

I was surprised to see that the WHO didn’t touch on inactivity due to too much screen time — watching television, Netflix, Facebook scrolling, messaging, texting, browsing etc. Certainly, the increase in screen time plays a roll with the amount of inactivity, especially in the higher income countries. If you are someone who spends too much time staring at a screen, then it is important to consider the above information. Can you limit your screen time and replace it with something active? Or would you consider jumping rope, or rebounding while watching the television? Our health is our greatest wealth and having awareness about an issue is the first way to create change and take responsibility for our lives.

Could you walk or bike to work instead of drive? What about trying a new sport? Could you commit to adding a few hours each week of physical activity? These small decisions could have a profound impact on your health, longevity and overall well-being.

Much Love

Free Franco DeNicola Screening: The Shift In Consciousness

We interviewed Franco DeNicola about what is happening with the shift in consciousness. It turned out to be one of the deepest and most important information we pulled out within an interview.

We explored why things are moving a little more slowly with the shift at times, what is stopping certain solutions from coming forward and the important role we all play.

Watch the interview here.
Continue Reading
advertisement - learn more
advertisement - learn more

Video

EL