Ætherna

Bulletin Board

BookRetreats
Home >> News

News

In 2014, Harvard University stated that prescription drugs are the 4th leading cause of death. North American culture practically worships the pharmaceutical industry and often fails to recognize many of the issues within it. Many Americans are completely unaware that new prescription drugs have a 1 in 5 chance of causing serious reactions, even after being approved.

In fact, approximately 1.9 million people are hospitalized annually due to properly prescribed medication (not including any overdoses, self-prescriptions, or mis-prescribing). 128,000 people die every year in the U.S. from drugs prescribed to them, so why is this still happening? The reality is, drug companies make a lot of money from selling prescriptions, and they even pay doctors to do it for them.

If you’ve ever questioned this industry and your doctor’s motives, here is some good news: You can now find out how much your doctor is paid annually to prescribe any drug. In addition, you can also search any company name and find out how much they pay doctors in total every year.

The Database That’s Exposing Big Pharma’s Money Trail 

The governmental website Open Payments Data a

The two former options allow you to see how much doctors and hospitals are paid annually by pharmaceutical companies to prescribe drugs. If you search a specific company, on the other hand, you can see a detailed summary of their spendings. There’s specific information outlining which doctors are paid the highest amounts, how many doctors they pay nationwide, the nature of these payments, and then specific details of every single payment they made to doctors that year.

For example, when you type Big Pharma giant Gilead Science Inc. into the tool bar, you can see that the company spent $36,830,535.40 in Total General Payments and $45,394,349.76 in Total Research Payments in the year 2015 alone. 48.4% of payments were classified as “Compensation for services other than consulting, including serving as faculty or as a speaker at a venue other than a continuing education program.” The top paid physician made more than $600,000 in 2015 from simply prescribing drugs manufactured by Gilead Science Inc.

It doesn’t take much common sense to understand what this could mean, particularly since it’s hardly a secret that pharmaceutical companies essentially buy out the medical industry. Numerous pharmaceutical companies have paid doctors and researchers to understate the dangers of both drugs and their negative side effects, and to falsify research as well.

Arnold Relman, Harvard Professor and former editor of the New England Journal of Medicine, put it perfectly when he said, “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.”

Don’t Be So Quick to Blame Your Doctor…

If you’ve visited Open Payments Data‘s platform and searched your doctor within their database, take a moment to reflect on what you’re really looking at. Just because your doctors receive payments from pharmaceutical companies doesn’t necessarily mean they’re terrible people; it could just mean that they’re doing their jobs.

It’s unlikely your personal doctor designed the current structure of the medical industry. Your doctor may not even understand the complexity of the pharmaceutical industry because MDs aren’t properly educated on these drugs. Many doctors genuinely believe they’re helping people through the use of medication; they don’t see the bigger picture here because it’s not included in their education. Plus, it’s often illegal for MDs to prescribe natural cures instead of pharmaceutical drugs and conventional treatments, particularly when it comes to the cancer industry (check out this CE article that exposes the truth about cancer).

In addition, when you actually think about it, it makes perfect sense that some doctors are being paid by pharmaceutical companies. Of course Big Pharma would require doctors’ help in creating drugs and validating their use; it’s completely legal and should be expected of them. However, there’s clearly a grey area here that cannot be ignored.

Pharmaceutical companies, rather than qualified and unbiased doctors, define a lot of the information that MDs are taught, and Big Pharma often influences medical professors and funds university programs. For example, 1,600 Harvard professors stated that they or a family member have ties to drug companies that could bias their teachings or research. The pharmaceutical industry donated more than $11.5 million to Harvard in 2008 for “research and continuing education classes.” Many Harvard students have expressed concern over this and it even made mainstream news when a student was belittled by his professor for asking about the side effects of a drug his professor was unlawfully promoting in class.

This has also been a prevalent issue within psychiatry. As Dr. Irwin Savodnik of UCLA explains, “The very vocabulary of psychiatry is now defined at all levels by the pharmaceutical industry.” This is partially because the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM)the text most psychiatrists in the U.S. refer to to diagnose and treat their patients, is heavily biased toward using pharmaceutical drugs instead of therapy. Read more about this in our CE article here.

If you haven’t yet been exposed to this side of the U.S. medical industry, I can understand that there may be some confusion. Why would pharmaceutical companies and some doctors conspire to over-prescribe or mis-prescribe people when their sole purpose should be to help their patients? The simple answer is profit.

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 doctors into the medicines they prescribe.

The patients don’t realize that, although their doctors may know a lot about diseases and human physiology and psychology, they know very, very little about drugs that’ve been carefully concocted and dressed up by the drug industry… If you don t think the system is out of control, please email me and explain why drugs are the third leading cause of death… If such a hugely lethal epidemic had been caused by a new bacterium or a virus, or even one-hundredth of it, we would have done everything we could to get it under control. – Dr. Peter Gotzsche, co-founder of the Cochrane Collaboration (source)

Why Big Pharma Wants You To Take Pills

This may be obvious to many of you, but, just to be clear: The entire medical industry is focused around profit. It’s similar to any other industry in that every service it provides you with, or item it convinces you to purchase, makes someone else a lot of many. In the case of a pharmaceutical company, they can only make money if you’re sick.

So, it wouldn’t really be in the best interest of Big Pharma to sell drugs without any negative side effects. If they produced drugs that actually 100% cured people, how would they continue to profit off our illnesses?

This is precisely why Big Pharma does not get involved with all-natural medicines; there is no profit to be made in plants. Anyone can grow a plant with the right climate and it’s much cheaper to manufacture than synthetic drugs. It’s also easier to make pills in larger quantities than plants. and then when you consider the economies of scale, Big Pharma is able to generate an even greater profit.

Big Pharma has infiltrated pharmaceutical drugs into other industries too. If you eat animal products, then you’re inadvertently ingesting the hormones, antibiotics, and other pharmaceutical drugs given to those animals. Antibiotics, birth control pills, painkillers, and other pharmaceutical drugs can be found in tap water as well.

Let’s take a moment to look at the bigger picture: Most industries are currently driven by money, not passion. It seems strange, but this is precisely the issue within the medical industry. I’m sure many doctors choose their occupation because they’re passionate about helping people. However, until Big Pharma stops playing such a crucial role in creating their job descriptions, it will be difficult for MDs to actually help people without simultaneously hurting them.

It’s clear that we need a systemic change in values. Until we start to work “for the people” rather than “for the profit,” we cannot expect these outcomes to change. It’s hardly surprising that Big Pharma wants you to be sick because they’re not just in the business to cure people — they also need to make a profit.

The website endthefed.org introduces us to the Federal Reserve as follows:

The Federal Reserve, “the Fed”, is the central bank of the United States of America that was created in 1913 by Congress. It is a banking cartel that has a government-granted monopoly on the creation of money and credit. The Fed literally loans “money” (Federal Reserve Notes) into existence. Federal Reserve Notes are paper promises backed by nothing of intrinsic value and they are only functioning as money because the government forces them on the public through legal tender laws.  Federal Reserve Notes are referred to as dollars but are not.  The definition of a dollar is a weight of silver (371 grains). To put it simply, the Fed is a group of banks running a national counterfeiting operation with the protection of the government.

This characterization, it would seem, has been growing into the public awareness more and more since G. Edward Griffin’s ‘The Creature From Jekyll Island’ became widely known.

Since then, former congressman Ron Paul has talked about the need to abolish the Federal Reserve in public speeches and in his book ‘End the Fed.’ He characterizes the Federal Reserve as both corrupt and unconstitutional. So why hasn’t it happened?

What To Replace It With?

An article in Forbes entitled “Assuming We ‘End The Fed,’ What’s The Next Step?” makes the case that there is no point ending the Fed—which author Nathan Lewis actually says he wants—if we have nothing viable to replace it with.

If you want to End the Fed, you need to create a vision of what would replace it. It needs to be a sound vision, not one with obvious problems, because nobody is going to risk it all to overturn the existing order for something that is clearly a pile of horse poop.

Lewis takes a look back in history, saying that before the Federal Reserve, there were also problems. He says that a U.S. Treasury monopoly of currency had the same kinds of problems as the Federal Reserve, and argues for a limited number of currency issuers as opposed to a monopoly.

Simple Question

In my research of this article and others, much was spoken about inflation and other such variables for which people argue both in favour of and against the Federal Reserve. But I wonder if such mainstream articles serve as part of the controlled opposition, swaying people away from those questions that are most important?

To me, a logical question to ask is: “Why does the U.S. government need to pay interest to the Federal Reserve to have new currency put into circulation?” But in all my scraping and searching around the internet, I have not found a single, solitary answer from a proponent of the Federal Reserve System, not even a lame or bad answer.

The question is simply avoided. And for good reason, if the only possible conclusion I can come to is true: All of this interest goes into the hands of the hidden, private controllers of the Central Banking System. Can you even imagine the amount of money we are talking about? How is it possible that this continues to exist? Where is our outrage?

Observations Of A 12-Year Old Girl

In Canada, a young 12-year old girl named Victoria Grant observed that the Bank of Canada operates in much the same way as the Federal Reserve in that the government–meaning the public taxpayer–has to pay interest on all money put into circulation.

Allow me to explain how our private banks and government work today: first the Canadian government borrows money from the Private Banks. They then lend the debt based money to Canada, with compounded interest. The government then continues to increase taxation of Canadians, year after year, in order to pay back the interest on the exponentially growing national debt. What results is inflation, less real money for Canadians to spend into our economy, and the real money being used to pad the pockets of the banks.

The passage comes from the following must-watch video, where Victoria elucidates clearly and succinctly the problem we faced in Canada in 2012, reflective of ALL Central-Bank controlled nations:

If you were in the room during her speech, or even if you had seen this video in its early days on Youtube, you might have thought that the days of private Central banking were numbered, based on the pristine clarity of Victoria’s scathing indictment.

However, six years later, the fact is that the Bank of Canada is still private. And the Federal Reserve still reigns. We are literally giving our money away to a rich and powerful elite. And this seems acceptable to us. Why is this the case?

The Takeaway

Perhaps not enough ears have heard it. Or enough have heard it, but not enough have processed it, or have really come to grips with how our society works, and the extent to which we are giving our consent for it to continue. That doesn’t mean any of us should just give up. As conscious media and awakened citizens, we must forge on together to lay bare the hidden workings of the dark portals of power in our world. In our own minds first, we must collectively withdraw our consent to this system. Our efforts will not be in vain. There is a tipping point, and if we continue to persist in revealing and expressing truth, the end of the Fed will one day occur as naturally as a morning sunrise.

Related CE Article: Following The Money, Who’s Really In Control?

Enel Green Power North America reported that the two projects will generate about a combined 2,600 GWh annually. Those are the 320-MW Rattlesnake Creek wind farm, Enel’s first facility in Nebraska, and the 300-MW Diamond Vista farm in Kansas.

 It is not out of the question that artifacts of these visits still exist, or even that some kind of base is maintained (possibly automatically) within the solar system to provide continuity for successive expeditions. Because of weathering and the possibility of detection and interference by the inhabitants of the Earth, it would be preferable not to erect such a base on the Earth’s surface. The Moon seems one reasonable alternative. Forthcoming high resolution photographic reconnaissance of the Moon from space vehicles – particularly of the back side – might bear these possibilities in mind. – Carl Sagan (source)

Controversy has surrounded the Moon for a very long time, we have leaks, research and information from some very credible sources who have, over a span of decades, been relaying to the public that our Moon is not what we think it is, and that there’s also some type of extraterrestrial presence on the Moon.

One example would be the testimony of Colonel Ross Dedrickson, who was responsible for maintaining the inventory of the nuclear weapon stockpile for the United States, he had a long stint with the US Atomic Energy Commission, you can view his obituary here.

Shortly before his passing, he told the world that the US tried to detonate atomic weapons on the Moon for scientific purposes, measurements and whatnot and that this project was halted by extraterrestrials, who would not allow us to detonate any nuclear weapons in space.  These were some interesting comments because he is one of the hundreds of high ranking military people who have alluded to such things, and we also have a declassified report by the Air Force Nuclear Weapons Center from June 1959 that shows how seriously they were considering the plan, called Project A119.

We know for a fact that they wanted to investigate the capability of weapons in space, and if they did, we also know that we would never be told, similar to the testing that goes on here on planet Earth.

Then, we have remote viewers from the STARGATE program who have ‘seen’ strange structures and humanoid creatures on the Moon, like Ingo Swann (from his book, titled Penetration), for example. He wasn’t the only one from the program who did, I have personally had conversations with Dr. Paul Smith, a retired army veteran who spent a decade in that program, he also relayed to me that something strange is happening on the Moon. Many from within that program have been very outspoken about an extraterrestrial presence.

You can read more about the remote viewing program here. We’ve published numerous articles about it.

Multiple whistleblowers have also spoken of strange structures on the Moon, and it’s become so obvious that some academicians are trying to do what they can to bring attention to it. For example, a recently published a paper in the Journal of Space Exploration about certain features on the far side of the Moon that appear in the crater Paracelsus C. Titled “Image Analysis of Unusual Structures on the Far Side of the Moon in the Crater Paracelsus C,” it argues that these features might be artificial in origin, meaning someone other than a human being built them and put them there.

It’s not just the Moon, a physicist from the University of Tennessee Space Institute, Dr. Horace Crater, recently published a paper in The Journal of Space Exploration that, along with the NASA Viking images, hints “strongly at artificial surface interventions.”

The list is long, and the idea that somebody else is on the moon is nothing new, even the Deputy Manager for the Clementine Mission to the moon in 1995 said it was really a photo reconnaissance mission to check out structures on the far side of the Moon that wasn’t put there by humans…

But this article is not about what’s on the moon, it’s about what exactly the Moon is.

It’s also noteworthy to mention that the United States has been criticized by Russia for concealing artifacts they collected from the Moon.

I thought it was important to provide that brief overview before we get into it, to go more in depth you can check out the articles below:

Dr. Steven Greer: “We Did Go To The Moon, But The Footage Was Fake.”

Another Interesting Leak: A Second NASA Scientist Tells Us That ‘Somebody Else’ Is On The Moon

A Wel Known CIA Pilot Claims That The Moon Has 250 Million Citizens

Did Neil Armstrong & His Crew Encounter Extraterrestrials On The Moon 

What is the Moon?

Perhaps strangest of all the anomalies are the many indications that the moon may be hollow. Studies of moon rocks indicate that the moon’s interoior differs from the Earth’s mantle in ways suggesting a very small core or none at all. A 1962 study found the interior of the moon to be less dense that the exterior. – Jim Mars, from his, Our Occulted History

Is the moon hollow? Many intellectual minds seem to think so, but despite what’s really being talked about, these theories are still considered unconventional by the mainstream, who like to push their own theories and teach them as fact.

Perhaps the reason why the US has not disclosed their artefacts from the moon, including all of the rocks, is because from what we do have, studies of moon rocks have shown that the Moon’s interior is far different from the Earth’s mantle which suggests a very small core, or, no core at all.

In 1962 Gordon MacDonald, a NASA scientist, published a study that stated, “Indeed, it would seem that the Moon is more like a hollow than a homogeneous sphere.”

According to Sean C. Solomon, “The Lunar Orbiter experiments vastly improved our knowledge of the Moon’s gravitational field…indicating the frightening possibility that the Moon might be hollow.”(Our Occulted History)

Solomon is  is the director of the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia University. He is also principal investigator on the NASA MESSENGER mission to Mercury.

Here is a paper by Solomon on the topic published in 2014 discussing how, after decades of data, they still have no idea about the moons inner core and what it’s comprised of. There are multiple theories out there that’ve developed from this supposed uncertainty, including a fluid core.

Mars elaborates in his book:

“The most startling evidence that the moon could be hollow came on November 20, 1969, when the Apollo 12 crew, after returning to their command ship, sent the lunar module (LM) ascent stage crashing back onto the moon, creating an artificial moon quake. The LM struck the surface about forty miles from the Apollo 12 landing site, where super sensitive seismic equipment recorded something both unexpected and astounding – the moon reverberated like a bell for more than an hour. Frank Press of MIT stated, “…none of us have seen anything like this on Earth. In all our experience, it is quite an extraordinary event. That this rather small impact…produced a signal which lasted 30 minutes is quite beyond the range of our experience.”

How Did The Moon Get To Where It Is?

Conventional wisdom tells us that yes, the Moon may have originated elsewhere and at some point came to orbit our planet. It tells us that it was formed from debris after a space object smashed into Earth, while another theory states that Earth captured the Moon via its gravitational pull when it was wandering through the solar system…

Despite that our current theories are accepted as fact, there is absolutely no evidence for the conventional hypothesis. According to Russian scientist Isaac Asimov,  an American writer and professor of biochemistry at Boston University,

It’s too big to have been captured by the Earth. The chances of such a capture having been effected and the Moon then having taken up nearly circular orbit around our Earth are too small to make such an eventuality credible

Asimov also emphasized that,

We cannot help but come to the conclusion that the Moon, by rights, ought not to be there. The fact that it is, is one of those strokes of luck almost too good to accept

Other members of the Soviet Academy of Sciences (Vasin and Scherbakov, 1970), run by the Russian Government, published an article titled, “Is the Moon the Creation of Alien Intelligence?” This article offered another explanation for how the Moon may have been created. This seems to be a better hypothesis because there is actually a considerable amount of evidence that points towards something suspicious happening on the Moon.

It’s easier to explain the non-existence for the Moon, than it’s existence – NASA scientist Robin Brett

The best explanation for the Moon is observational error – the Moon doesn’t exist – Irwin Shapiro, Harvard Astrophysicist

Think about it…The Moon is in a nearly perfect circle, when it comes to its origin, all the while being synchronized with its period of revolution, so one side always faces the Earth.

As Mars points out,

This circular orbit is especially odd, considering that the moon’s center of mass lies more than a mile closer to the Earth than its geometric center. This fact alone should produce an unstable, wobbly orbit, much as a ball with its mass off-center will not roll in a straight line.

Were The Sumerians On To Something?

Many within this field are really into ancient Greek, and ancient Sumerian lore. Take Apollo 12 astronaut, Al Worden, for example, who made some very interesting comments about the Sumerians as well as extraterrestrial life in a live interview you can watch here.

In the late 1960’s, a senior scientist from the Planetary Science Institute, William Kenneth Harmann, stated he believes that the Moon results from a collision between Earth and another body at least the size of mars. This became known at the Big Whack theory, and it correlated to the story told in ancient Sumerian tablets…

According to several interpretations of Sumerian tablets, most notably from Zacharia Sitchin, more than 4 billion years ago, a large watery world called Tiamat was in orbit between Mars and Jupiter. Nibiru, a planet that supposedly enters into our solar system once every 3,600 years, caused Tiamat to crack under gravitational stress. Tiamat was cracked in half when one of Nibiru’s moon’s knocked into it, which also knocked a large portion of mars.

This is very interesting because recently scientists have confirmed that Mars used to be a very watery world, an Earth-like planet. There is even large amounts of evidence for ancient life on Mars before what appears to be a dramatic climate shift. Scientists hypothesize that the climate shift was a result of a large collision…The larger chunk of Tiamat became planet Earth.

So, it’s interesting to make that connection.

Back to the Moon!

It’s important to remember that something had to put the moon at or near its present circular pattern around the Earth. Just as an Apollo space-craft circling  the Earth every 90 minutes while 100 miles high has to have a velocity of roughly 18,000 mies per hour to stay in orbit, so something had to give the moon the precisely required velocity for its weight and altitude…The point – and it is one seldom noted in considering the origin of the moon – is that it is extremely unlikely that any object would just stumble into the right combination of factors required to stay in orbit. ‘Something’ had to put the moon at its altitude, on its course and at its speed. The question is: what was that ‘something?” – Mars

It’s hard to believe that the precise and stationary orbit of the moon is simply a coincidence …

Is it also a coincidence that the moon is at just the right distance from Earth to completely cover the sun during an eclipse? While the diameter of the moon is a mere 2,160, miles against the sun’s gigantic 864,000 miles, it is nevertheless in just the proper position to block out all but the sun’s flaming corona when it moves between the sun and Earth. -Mars

According to Asimov,

There is no astronomical reason why the Moon and the sun should fit so well. It is the sheerest of coincidences, and only the Earth among all the planets is blessed in this fashion.”

With all of the evidence that has surfaced showing an extraterrestrial presence on the Moon, to me, the spaceship theory proposed by Michael Vasin and Alexander Scherbakov (mentioned above) makes the most sense.

According to Mars,

The spaceship-moon theory may come closer than any other in reconciling the contradictions inherent in the origin and amazing orbit of the moon. However, such a consideration is supposed to be outside the discussion of educated and rational people. The circular logic of conventional science regarding the origins of the moon runs something like this: We know that extraterrestrials don’t exist, but we do know that the moon exists and has been mentioned throughout human history. We humans did not create it nor place it in orbit around Earth,  it must have been done by extraterrestrials. But because we know they don’t exists, we will simply call it an anomaly and will not publicly say any more about.

Sources used:

Our Occulted History, Do The Global Elite Conceal Ancient Aliens? – Jim Mars

Renewable energy projects were marked by distinctive trends and characteristics in 2018: frothy M&A market driven by a crush of liquidity and a shortage of project supply; a highly competitive environment among investors and lenders for an inadequate supply of projects...
Renewable energy projects were marked by distinctive trends and characteristics in 2018: frothy M&A market driven by a crush of liquidity and a shortage of project supply; a highly competitive environment among investors and lenders for an inadequate supply of projects...
Renewable energy projects were marked by distinctive trends and characteristics in 2018: frothy M&A market driven by a crush of liquidity and a shortage of project supply; a highly competitive environment among investors and lenders for an inadequate supply of projects...
Renewable energy projects were marked by distinctive trends and characteristics in 2018: frothy M&A market driven by a crush of liquidity and a shortage of project supply; a highly competitive environment among investors and lenders for an inadequate supply of projects...

Alex Pietrowski, Staff Writer
Waking Times

A physician’s word is often taken very seriously and with little skepticism. An opinion from one or two doctors, when made in a professional office or hospital, can persuade a worried patient to take drugs with complex side-effects, or even undergo traumatic treatments such as radiation and chemotherapy. Yet, when the same doctors, with years of experience and thousands of satisfied customers, give an opinion that questions a therapy established by mainstream medicine, the mainstream media calls them irresponsible, or quacks, or even criminals.

Many doctors are highly admirable people, but they are still human beings. They all make mistakes, they all learn from them, but the really good ones are willing to admit to them.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

Which brings us to Dr. Dwight Lundell. He’s an experienced heart surgeon and retired Chief of Staff and Chief of Surgery at Banner Heart Hospital in Mesa, Arizona. Not so long ago, Dr. Lundell made the following statement of confession:

“We physicians with all our training, knowledge and authority often acquire a rather large ego that tends to make it difficult to admit we are wrong. So, here it is. I freely admit to being wrong. As a heart surgeon with 25 years experience, having performed over 5,000 open-heart surgeries, today is my day to right the wrong with medical and scientific fact.

 

I trained for many years with other prominent physicians labeled “opinion makers.” Bombarded with scientific literature, continually attending education seminars, we opinion makers insisted heart disease resulted from the simple fact of elevated blood cholesterol. The only accepted therapy was prescribing medications to lower cholesterol and a diet that severely restricted fat intake. The latter of course we insisted would lower cholesterol and heart disease. Deviations from these recommendations were considered heresy and could quite possibly result in malpractice. It Is Not Working!

These recommendations are no longer scientifically or morally defensible.”

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

Not surprisingly, Lundell’s statement regarding the medical establishment’s approach to treating heart disease caused a ripple in the medical industry. It challenged the validity of statins – commonly known as cholesterol-lowering medications – such as Lipitor, Crestor, Zocor, and others.

The reason Lundell’s statement created such a buzz is because statins are big business. In the United States alone, about 25% of the population takes statin medications. They cost from as little as $53 per month to more than $600. Pfizer’s Lipitor went on sale in 1997 and its lifetime sales have surpassed $125 billion. AstraZeneca’s Crestor was the top-selling statin in 2013, generating $5.2 billion in revenue that year alone. The statin industry is estimated at around $30 billion in sales per year. Nevertheless, in the United States, more die each year of heart disease than ever before.

Lundell went on to say:

“The discovery a few years ago that inflammation in the artery wall is the real cause of heart disease is slowly leading to a paradigm shift in how heart disease and other chronic ailments will be treated. The long-established dietary recommendations have created epidemics of obesity and diabetes, the consequences of which dwarf any historical plague in terms of mortality, human suffering and dire economic consequences.

 

I have peered inside thousands upon thousands of arteries. A diseased artery looks as if someone took a brush and scrubbed repeatedly against its wall. Several times a day, every day, the foods we eat create small injuries compounding into more injuries, causing the body to respond continuously and appropriately with inflammation. While we savor the tantalizing taste of a sweet roll, our bodies respond alarmingly as if a foreign invader arrived declaring war. Foods loaded with sugars and simple carbohydrates, or processed with omega-6 oils for long shelf life have been the mainstay of the American diet for six decades. These foods have been slowly poisoning everyone.”

(function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:10162674340441958,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-8962-3608"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="//cdn2.lockerdomecdn.com/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs");

Simply, it is the foods that are baked or soaked in soybean oil and ones that are processed for long shelf-life that are creating an extreme imbalance of omega-6 and omega-3 fats in people’s bodies. Lundell estimates the ratio of imbalance “ranges from 15:1 to as high as 30:1 in favor of omega-6.” A healthy ratio is closer to 3:1.

But what makes Lundell’s statements controversial is that cholesterol does not cause heart disease…which makes statin drugs superfluous. And he suggests a treatment to heart disease that doesn’t make Big Pharma any money:

“Simply stated, without inflammation being present in the body, there is no way that cholesterol would accumulate in the wall of the blood vessel and cause heart disease and strokes. Without inflammation, cholesterol would move freely throughout the body as nature intended. It is inflammation that causes cholesterol to become trapped.

 

Since we now know that cholesterol is not the cause of heart disease, the concern about saturated fat is even more absurd today. The cholesterol theory led to the no-fat, low-fat recommendations that in turn created the very foods now causing an epidemic of inflammation. Mainstream medicine made a terrible mistake when it advised people to avoid saturated fat in favor of foods high in omega-6 fats. We now have an epidemic of arterial inflammation leading to heart disease and other silent killers. What you can do is choose whole foods your grandmother served and not those your mom turned to as grocery store aisles filled with manufactured foods. By eliminating inflammatory foods and adding essential nutrients from fresh unprocessed food, you will reverse years of damage in your arteries and throughout your body from consuming the typical American diet.”

It probably comes as no surprise that Lundell has been portrayed as a quack by the mainstream medical establishment. The main argument to back up his “quackery” was that his medical license was revoked in 2008…although the man was already retired and had no plans to return to the surgery room. He was not called a quack when he was performing surgeries, but once he took his 25 years of practice and discerned what he believes is the cause of heart disease, it was then that he was attacked by his peers. Which brings up the question if Lundell came onto the American Medical Association’s radar as he was working on and promoting his book, The Cure for Heart Disease, which was published in 2007.

Millions of dollars are made from heart disease treatment and statin medications. This established industry does not want anyone to interfere. Lundell said it himself, “Deviations from these recommendations were considered heresy and could quite possibly result in malpractice.” And it sure is easier to discredit a retired heart surgeon and chief of surgery with 25 years of experience if you revoke his license.

Dr. Dwight Lundell’s full statement, here.

Read more articles by Alex Pietrowski

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

About the Author

Alex Pietrowski is an artist and writer concerned with preserving good health and the basic freedom to enjoy a healthy lifestyle. He is a staff writer for WakingTimes.com. Alex is an avid student of Yoga and life.

This article (Esteemed Heart Surgeon Blows the Lid Off the Big Pharma Statin Drug Scamoriginally created and published by Waking Times and is published here under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Alex Pietrowski and WakingTimes.com

Disclaimer: This article is not intended to provide medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. Views expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of WakingTimes or its staff.

Like Waking Times on FacebookFollow Waking Times on Twitter.
Valerie Tarico, Contributor
Waking Times

The wonder-filled birth story of the baby Jesus was centuries in the making.

Picture a creche with baby Jesus in a manger and shepherds and angels and three kings and a star over the stable roof. We think of this traditional scene as representing the Christmas story, but it actually mixes elements from two different nativity stories in the Bible, one in Matthew and one in Luke, with a few embellishments that got added in later centuries. What was the historical kernel? Most likely we will never know, because it appears that the Bible’s nativity stories are themselves highly-embellished late add-ons to the Gospels.

Here are six hints that the story so familiar to us might have been unfamiliar to early Jesus worshipers.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

1. Paul’s Silence 

The earliest texts in the New Testament are letters written during the first half of the first century by Paul and other people who used his name. These letters, or Epistles as they are called, give no hint that Paul or the forgers who used his name had heard about any signs and wonders surrounding the birth of Jesus, nor that his mother was a virgin impregnated by God in spirit form. Paul simply says that he was a Jew, born to a woman.

2. Mark’s Silence 

The Gospel of Mark—thought to be the earliest of the four gospels and, so, closest to actual events—doesn’t contain a nativity or “infancy” story, even though it otherwise looks to be the primary source document for Matthew and Luke. In Mark, the divinity of Jesus gets established by wonders at the beginning of his ministry, and some Christian sects have believed that he was adopted by God at this point.

Why is Mark thought to be where the authors of Matthew and Luke got material? For starters, some passages in Mark, Matthew, and Luke would likely get flagged by plagiarism software. But in the original Greek, Mark is the most primitive and least polished of the three. It also is missing powerful passages like the Sermon on the Mount and has endings that vary from copy to copy. These are some of the reasons that scholars believe it predates the other two. Unlike Paul, the author of Mark was writing a life history of Jesus, one that was full of miracles. It would have been odd for him to simply leave out the auspicious miracles surrounding the birth of Jesus—unless those stories didn’t yet exist.

3. A Tale of Two Tales

Beyond a few basics, the nativity stories in Matthew and Luke have remarkably little overlap. In both, Jesus is born in Bethlehem of a virgin Mary who is betrothed to a man named Joseph. That’s where the similarity ends.

In Matthew’s story, an unnamed angel appears to Joseph, astrologers arrive bearing symbolic gifts, a special star appears in the east, Herod seeks to kill Jesus, warnings come during dreams, and the holy family flees to safety in Egypt just before boy infants are slaughtered across Judea.

In Luke’s story, the angel Gabriel appears to the future parents of John the Baptist. They miraculously conceive, but his father is made mute as a punishment for doubting. Gabriel then appears to Mary. During a visit between the two prospective mothers, who are cousins, John the Baptist in the womb recognizes Jesus in the womb and leaps. Later when John is named, his father miraculously regains the power of speech. A census forces Mary and Joseph to go to Bethlehem, where there is no room in the inn. Jesus is born and laid in a manger/cradle, and angels sing to shepherds who visit the baby. After his naming, his parents take him to the Jerusalem temple where he is recognized and blessed by a holy man and a resident prophetess, and then the family returns to their home in Nazareth instead of going to Egypt.

Some Christians try to harmonize these stories but a simpler explanation is that they represent two different branches in the tree of oral tradition. The study of European fairy tales shows that different versions of the stories tend to split off, with characters and magical elements diverging over time much like an evolutionary tree. The Matthew and Luke nativity stories likely underwent a similar process, meaning that oral traditions circulated and evolved for some time before the two authors inscribed their respective versions. Scholars debate how much the authors further revised the stories they received.

It’s interesting to note that each author inserted a dubious historical event (an impossible census in one and an unlikely mass infanticide in the other) to make his plotline work. Dubious histories become credible only after potential eyewitnesses die off—so their presence is one more indicator that one or more generations lapsed before the stories took their present form.

4. Pagan Parallels

Luke’s story appears to be slanted toward a Roman audience, and in fact the idea of gods impregnating human women was a common trope that many Jews and Christians have recognized as pagan. Progressive theologian Marcus Borg argued that the point of the story was to pivot fealty from Caesar Augustus to Jesus. According to Roman imperial theology, Augustus had been conceived when the god Apollo impregnated his human mother, Atia. Titles inscribed on coins and temples during his reign included “Son of God,” “Lord,” and “Savior.” They also included the phrase “peace on earth,” which Luke has his angels sing to shepherds.

5. Say What?!

By the second chapter of Luke, the parents of Jesus behave as if they have forgotten the astounding signs and wonders that accompanied his birth. When the boy is twelve, Mary and Joseph take him to Jerusalem for a festival, where they lose him in the crowd and find him three days later among the teachers in the temple. When they scold him, he says Why were you searching for me? Did you not know that I must be in my Father’s house?” But they did not understand what he said to them’ (Luke 2:49-50).

Wait. They didn’t know what he was talking about?! This otherwise bizarre narrative glitch, which directly follows the nativity story, suggests that the former was tacked on at a later time.

6. Divinity Rising

If we line up the four gospels in the estimated order they were written—Mark (60CE), Matthew (70-90CE), Luke (80-95CE), then John (90-100CE), an interesting pattern emerges. Jesus becomes divine earlier and earlier. In Mark, as mentioned, he is shown to be divine when he is baptized (and perhaps is uniquely adopted or entered by God at that point). In Matthew and Luke, he is fathered by the Holy Spirit and is sinless from birth. In John, he is the Logos, present at the creation of the world—though also born of a woman. This sequence suggests that theologies explaining the divinity of Jesus emerged gradually and evolved as Christianity crystalized and spread.

After the Gospels of Matthew and Luke were bundled into the Catholic Bible, the two infancy stories merged. The three astrologers became Kings riding camels. Mary got her own “immaculate conception” and became, to some, a sinless perpetual virgin. The place of Jesus birth became a stable filled with adoring animals. And the holy birthday moved to winter solstice, weaving in delicious and delightful pagan traditions including feasting, tree decorating and festivals of light. The birth of a long-awaited messiah fused with the rebirth of the sun—and their joint birthday party became, in the dead of winter, a celebration of bounty and beauty and love and hope that captivated hearts even beyond the bounds of Christianity.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

About the Author

Valerie Tarico is a psychologist and writer in Seattle, Washington. She is the author ofTrusting Doubt: A Former Evangelical Looks at Old Beliefs in a New Light and Deas and Other Imaginings, and the founder of www.WisdomCommons.org.  Her articles about religion, reproductive health, and the role of women in society have been featured at sites including The Huffington Post, Salon, The Independent, Free Inquiry, The Humanist, AlterNet, Raw Story, Grist, Jezebel, and the Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies.  Subscribe at ValerieTarico.com.

This article (6 Hints that Baby Jesus Stories were Late Additions to Early Christian Lore) was originally created and published by ValerieTarico.com and is re-posted here with permission.

Like Waking Times on FacebookFollow Waking Times on Twitter.

William Parker, Ph.D., Green Med Info
Waking Times

Millions use Tylenol on a daily basis without concern, but it has a wide range of toxic side effects you should be aware of, especially if you are pregnant or use it with your children.

A number of non-peer-reviewed articles have been written and published on the web claiming that there is literally nothing to fear from acetaminophen during pregnancy. There are two types of articles that fall into this category. First, reputable watchdog organizations have weighed in on the issue, declaring acetaminophen use during pregnancy and during childhood to be proven safe. In particular, the National Health Service of the UK and the Center for Accountability in Science have both strongly criticized the Spanish study from 2016 showing a link between acetaminophen use during pregnancy and ADHD/autism.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

The second type of article is generally written by a science writer working for an organization that runs a website. Often quoting one to three experts who claim that is perfectly safe and that pregnant women and families should not be concerned, many of these articles are published by reputable sources that are generally trustworthy. Typically, an expert is being asked to comment on one particular publication showing a link between acetaminophen use (usually during pregnancy) and some sort of neuropsychiatric problem (autism, lowered IQ, hyperactivity, and/or social/behavioral problems, depending on the study). There are several important things to consider when evaluating these articles:

1.  There are a number of University Professors who have studied the use of acetaminophen on the developing brain and who are keenly aware of the potential dangers. A partial list of these individuals is provided below.

2.  Being an expert in acetaminophen neurotoxicity during development means that considerable time has been invested in studying the issue. Any true expert in this issue will be aware of basic facts regarding acetaminophen neurotoxicity. These facts include the following:

(a) Studies in animal models (both in mice and in rats) demonstrate that acetaminophen use during a sensitive period of brain development causes long-term alterations in the brain and is manifested as problems with social function.

(b)  Margaret McCarthy, Chair of Pharmacology at the University of Maryland, has worked out the probable mechanism by which acetaminophen-induced brain damage occurs. Her research team has found that the male brain is considerably more sensitive to acetaminophen than the female brain, possibly accounting for the gender bias in autism.

(c) There are (as of January 2017) a total of 8 published studies evaluating the long terms effects on children of acetaminophen use during pregnancy or during childhood. Two of these (one in 2014, one in 2016) were published in JAMA Pediatrics, one of the most highly respected pediatric journals. All studies point toward acetaminophen use being associated with long-term problems with neurological function. Each study design has included some attempt to control for indication. In all studies, acetaminophen use rather than indication has been identified as the key factor associated with cognitive problems. A formal meta-analysis is not currently possible because of the varied outcome measures and study designs, but all 8 studies point in the same direction: Acetaminophen is neurotoxic to the developing brain. The studies are not “cherry picked”, selecting only those which find an effect. All studies point toward a neurotoxic effect of acetaminophen in the developing brain.

(d)   Acetaminophen substantially alters brain chemistry and temporarily impairs awareness of social issues in adult humans.

(e)  Testing of acetaminophen safety in children did not include any evaluation of brain function, and no long-term studies were ever conducted. The primary manufacturer of acetaminophen in the US acknowledges that the drug has never been shown to be safe for brain development when used during pregnancy or in childhood. All safety tests were performed with the assumption that any side effects would be acute in nature (e.g., bleeding or acute organ damage). This assumption was based on observations made with acetaminophen in adults and with aspirin in children. It was not based on any experience with acetaminophen use in children.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

3.     Having prescribed tens of thousands of doses of acetaminophen does not make anyone an expert on the neurotoxicity of acetaminophen, any more than eating thousands of pounds of chips makes somebody an expert in the effects of an inflammatory diet. Credentials and certifications that allow physicians to prescribe acetaminophen do not make them experts, and elevated positions in the medical community do not qualify anybody as an expert on the effects of acetaminophen. If somebody does not know those basic facts listed above, then they are not an expert on the neurotoxicity of acetaminophen. Usually, the experts will have published one or more peer-reviewed manuscripts on the topic. Those are the people to ask when an expert is needed.

4.     It is tempting to point accusing fingers at physicians who say that acetaminophen is safe when they literally have no grasp whatsoever of the relevant scientific literature. However, this would be a mistake. I have tracked down a few of these individuals who were quoted in a very public format, and one individual, in particular, didn’t even remember having made a comment on the topic. The most likely explanation is that a reporter asked them if acetaminophen was safe, and their response based on their training (not on the knowledge of the literature) was that it is safe. After all, if they didn’t think it was safe, they would not be administering it dozens of times per day. So, if a reporter asks a physician if something is safe, and they provide their knowledge based on what they have been taught and how they practice, then it is hard to blame them. The reporter didn’t ask them to spend days or even weeks reviewing the literature in detail, but rather assumed that any physician administering something dozens of times per day would know the literature. (This is a false assumption. No physician has the time to study all current literature on every drug they administer.) So, in a nutshell, a tragic propagation of incorrect information is occurring despite the best of intentions of all parties involved.

5.     Unless an organization such as the National Health Service has the time to review a topic thoroughly, they should remain silent on an issue. It took a team of us two years to put together our summary of the evidence, both direct and circumstantial, regarding the potential neurotoxicity of acetaminophen during development. It took the NHS only days to publish their recent criticism of the 2016 Spanish study. Offering questionable criticisms of a single paper without reviewing the literature to see how that publication fits into the big picture is a disservice to the public being served.

6. Reading the published quotes from many “experts” who exonerate acetaminophen, it is apparent that the logic falls into one of two categories.

(a) Everybody is doing it, so it must be OK.

(b) This single study is not perfect, so no change in practice should be made.

Neither of these criticisms is logically sound, of course. These two criticisms are often combined and were, in fact, part of the critical comments directed toward the first paper showing that acetaminophen probably has substantial neurotoxicity during development (published in 2008 by Steve Shultz). Further, the evaluation of study weaknesses is usually skewed and not entirely valid. Since the idea that acetaminophen is safe is being embraced, then any merit in the paper is often undermined to make the case. This is certainly true of the published (peer reviewed) criticisms of the 2008 Shultz paper.

7.     Many on-line sources support the view that acetaminophen can be very dangerous to the developing brain. Probably the most reliable source, the FDA, is remaining silent on the topic until something more definitive is done. The FDA knows that this is extremely urgent, but unfortunately, our FDA is not linked well (in a practical manner) with our NIH, and thus they can’t dictate research priorities.

8.     Here is a list (not comprehensive) of experts regarding the neurotoxicity of acetaminophen during brain development.

a) First, I’ll thank the wonderful team of individuals who helped put together our comprehensive review on this topic. Shu Lin, a professor with me in Duke’s Surgery Department, is a very dear and long-time friend of mine who has supported me through countless projects over the past 22 years. Staci Bilbo, director for research on Autism at Harvard, is a friend and collaborator who has helped me understand what causes inflammation and the role of inflammation in brain dysfunction. Chi Dang Hornik, a pediatric pharmacist at Duke, contributed greatly to our understanding of the frequency of acetaminophen administration and the available formulations of the drug. Many thanks to Martha Herbert. As a Harvard professor and clinician, she has a great appreciation for the clinical data obtained from patients with autism. Cindy Nevison, a professor at the University of Colorado at Boulder, rounds out our team, providing critical information about the epidemiology of autism. (Thanks also to our interns (Rasika Rao and Lauren Gentry) and research analyst (Zoie Holzknecht) who were a tremendous help in compiling information and preparing that information for publication.)

b) Margaret McCarthy, chair of Pharmacology at the University of Maryland, it the most knowledgeable person I know regarding the biochemistry of the human brain and how that is affected by acetaminophen and other drugs in that class.

c) Chittaranjan Andrade, Chair of Psychopharmacology at the National Institute of Mental Health and Neurosciences, Bangalore, India, has written a peer reviewed paper on the topic of acetaminophen induced brain damage. He nicely summarized a number of studies looking at the connection between acetaminophen and neurological damage. His final conclusion is that the drug is probably more associated with ADHD than autism, but the conclusion was limited to exposure during pregnancy and his work was conducted before some critical studies were published in 2016.

d) Henrik Viberg is a professor in the Department of Organismal Biology at Uppsala University in Sweden. He has studied how exposure of mice to acetaminophen during development can cause long term brain damage.

e) In 2015, a group of scientists working with Laurence de Fays at the Federal Agency for Medicines and Health Products in Brussels acknowledged the clinical studies and the studies in animal models which indicated that acetaminophen could be dangerous to the developing fetus, but concluded that paracetamol is “still to be considered safe in pregnancy”. At the same time, they state that “additional carefully designed studies are necessary to confirm or disprove the association (between acetaminophen and brain damage to children)”, and that “care should be taken to avoid raising poorly founded concerns among pregnant females”. We very strongly agree with the conclusion that more studies are needed, but very strongly disagree with the conclusion that women should be kept in the dark about the matter. It is important to point out that several more studies have come out since Laurence de Fays’ report. One of those is a 2016 manuscript in JAMA Pediatrics(see the next expert), a highly reputable peer reviewed journal, which addresses the concerns raised by de Fays, so it is possible that de Fays’ group may now have a different opinion.

f) A team of scientists and doctors working with Evie Stergiakouli at the University of Bristol analyzed data from a prospective birth cohort, and concluded that “children exposed to acetaminophen prenatally are at increased risk of multiple behavioral difficulties”. They found considerable evidence indicating that the association was not due to the confounding factors that concerned de Fays’ group (previous expert).

(function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:10162674340441958,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-8962-3608"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="//cdn2.lockerdomecdn.com/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs");

g) Jordi Julvez at the Centre for Research in Environmental Epidemiology in Barcelona, Spain worked with a team of a dozen clinicians and scientists to publish their 2016 study linking acetaminophen with autism and ADHD.

h) Amany A. Abdin, a professor in the Department of Pharmacology, Tanta University, Egypt, wrote a review of the acetaminophen/autism connection and published it in the journal Biochemistry and Pharmacology: Open Access. Her conclusion in 2013 was that the drug is not safe and that the acetaminophen/autism connection should receive attention.

i) The original paper that identified a connection between neuropsychiatric disorders and acetaminophen was published by Steve Shultz while at the University of California at San Diego. Coauthors on the paper included Hillary Klonoff-Cohen, currently an Endowed Professor and Director of the MPH program at the University of Illinois.

j) Four scientists, including research scientist Ragnhild Eek Brandlistuen and professors Hedvig Nordeng and Eivind Ystrom in the Department of Pharmacy at the University of Oslo, coauthored a study showing a connection between adverse neurodevelopment and acetaminophen use during pregnancy.

k) Jorn Olsen, Professor and Chair of the Department of Epidemiology at UCLA, published one of the more recent papers (2016) showing a connection between autism and acetaminophen use during pregnancy.

l) Five professors (John M. D. Thompson, Karen E. Waldie, Clare R. Wall, Rinky Murphy, and Edwin A. Mitchell) from four different departments at The University of Auckland published their findings in PLOSone in 2014 which “strengthen the contention that acetaminophen exposure in pregnancy increases the risk of ADHD-like behaviours. Our study also supports earlier claims that findings are specific to acetaminophen.”

For evidence-based research on the dangers of acetaminophen, visit the GreenMedInfo.com Research Dashboard.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

About the Author

William Parker is an Associate Professor at Duke University, where he has worked in the Department of Surgery since 1993.  William is currently investigating a number of issues associated with inflammation and Western society, including vitamin D deficiency, heart disease and alteration of the symbionts of the human body (“biota alteration”). He has been interested in “natural” immune function for some time, which has led him down a path that includes the first studies of immune function in wild rats and the discovery of the function of the human appendix.

**© [12/22/18] GreenMedInfo LLC. This work is reproduced and distributed with the permission of GreenMedInfo LLC. Want to learn more from GreenMedInfo? Sign up for the newsletter here http://www.greenmedinfo.com/greenmed/newsletter.**

Disclaimer: This article is not intended to provide medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. Views expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of WakingTimes or its staff.

Like Waking Times on Facebook. Follow Waking Times on Twitter.

Natasha Longo, Prevent Disease
Waking Times

Palm oil of any kind, whether it be from the fruit or kernel is not beneficial to the Earth or human health. The marketing gurus behind the largest palm oil manufacturers in the world will never give you the whole story. In fact, they are attempting to deceive international governments at every turn with false information and misrepresented data. Palm fruit oil or palm kernel oils are not healthy at all and most of the health risks are associated with the processing of which very few have been informed.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

The use of palm oil has skyrocketed in recent years, and at 50 million metric tons in 2010, it is the most heavily utilized vegetable oil. While consumers in India, China, and Indonesia directly buy raw palm oil for cooking and frying, in developed markets many are unaware that palm oil is used in approximately half of all packaged foods, personal care, and cleaning products.

Palm oil’s dramatic growth has occurred for good reason. The oil palm is currently the most efficient vegetable oil crop in the world. While one hectare of land can produce just 0.38 tons per year of soybean oil, 0.48 tons of sunflower oil, and 0.67 tons of rapeseed oil, that same hectare can produce more than 3.7 tons of palm oil.

High yields and low land requirements, then, make palm oil the least expensive vegetable oil in the market. Palm oil is also versatile, as it is readily usable for baking, frying, soaps, cosmetics, and biofuel. In contrast, most other vegetable oils require hydrogenation for some food uses.
(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});
Note that palm fruit oil and palm kernel oil are completely different oils with vastly different nutritional profiles. Palm fruit oil is often claimed to be highly nutritious and contains about equal amounts of saturated and unsaturated oils. Palm kernel oil is made from the kernel, or seed of the palm fruit and contains much higher amounts of saturated fat. Both are problematic for our health primarily due to processing. However, sustainability is also a major problem. Here are the 3 reasons you should stay away from any type of palm oil.

#1) Sustainability

Due to the massive worldwide backlash regarding the destruction of tropical ecosystems, every major palm oil company is now using the word “sustainable” to try and greenwash their ravaging of rain forests.

Unilever: “Through our Sustainable Agriculture Programme, we have been working towards the sustainable cultivation of oil palms for more than ten years.”

Kellogg: “…all of the palm oil we use today is 100 percent sustainablysourced through a combination of GreenPalm certificates, mass balance and segregated, sustainably grown supply.”

Nestle: “…committed to traceable sustainable palm oil….by end 2012, we will achieve a total of 80% RSPO certified sustainable palm oil.”

And the list goes on through several other manufacturers who use the world “sustainable” as if it’s going out of style.

The Roundtable for Sustainable Palm Oil was created to address huge issues of deforestation, land grabs and global warming in 2004. But the problem is, it was created by the largest palm oil producers and was supposed to set a global standard and certificate for palm oil that was grown sustainably. That’s like getting criminals involved in police procedure to set standards on catching criminals.

The most hospitable climates are situated within 20 degrees of the equator, the same region where tropical rain forests flourish and carbon-rich peatlands abound. Indonesia and Malaysia alone comprise more than 10 percent of the world’s remaining tropical rain forests, yet some predict that if current trends continue, Indonesia’s surviving rain forests will almost entirely disappear by 2022. Deforestation is especially noticeable on Borneo, an island more than twice the size of Germany.

In addition to deforestation, oil palm expansion has resulted in land use disputes with indigenous populations, frequently pitting plantation owners holding government concessions against native inhabitants with traditional land tenure. And if palm oil consumption continues to grow, as much as 15 million additional hectares of land, equivalent to five times the size of Belgium, will be needed by 2050–and that’s assuming that the use of palm oil as biodiesel feedstock doesn’t take off as a result of favorable regulations in the European Union and elsewhere.

At least half of the world’s wild orangutans have disappeared in the last 20 years; biologically viable populations of orangutans have been radically reduced in size and number; and 80 percent of the orangutan habitat has either been depopulated or totally destroyed. The trend shows no sign of abating: government maps of future planned land use show more of the same, on an increasing scale.

In Malaysia, peat swamp forests are being obliterated, and the disappearing forests endangering the habitat of the “pygmy elephant — the smallest elephant on Earth — the clouded leopard, the long-nosed tapir and many rare birds.”

As word spreads about the devastation that palm oil cultivation can cause, people are beginning to take notice and companies are beginning to make changes. Sustainable palm oil is in its infancy, and according toWorldwatch Institute, palm oil sustainability criteria remain controversial.

Check out saynotopalmoil.com to get a full perspective on what’s happening throughout the world because of palm oil.
But let’s set aside the issue of sustainability and let’s talk about health.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

#2) Detrimental Health Effects

The palm fruit oil and palm kernel oil are high in saturated fatty acids, about 50% and 80% respectively and esterified with glycerol. The Oil palm gives its name to the saturated fatty acid palmitic acid of which it contains 44% by composition. According to the World Health Organization, evidence is “convincing” that consumption of palmitic acid increases risk of developing cardiovascular diseases, placing it in the same evidence category as trans fatty acids.

According to a report in The Journal of Clinical Investigation, rats fed a diet of 20% palmitic acid and 80% carbohydrate for extended periods showed alterations in central nervous system (CNS) control of insulin secretion, and suppression of the body’s natural appetite-suppressing signals from leptin and insulin (the key hormones involved in weight regulation). The results found that many of the deleterious effects of high-fat diets, specifically those enriched with palmitic acid, are CNS mediated resulting in reduced insulin activity. CNS resistance to leptin and insulin compromises the ability of both hormones to regulate food intake and body weight in the presence of diets high in saturated fat/palmitic acid, subsequently resulting in obesity.

Two meta-analysis have examined the effect of palmitic acid on serum cholesterol. In a 1997 study based on 134 clinical studies, British researchers concluded that, compared to carbohydrates, palmitic acid raises blood cholesterol levels (Clarke et al. 1997). In 2003, Dutch scientists conducted a meta-analysis of 35 clinical studies (Mensink et l. 2003) and examined what many experts consider the best indicator of heart-disease risk: the ratio of total cholesterol to HDL cholesterol Institute of Medicine, National Academies 2002). Palmitic acid increased the ratio of total cholesterol to HDL cholesterol more than other saturated fatty acids, including lauric acid and myristic acid, which are abundant in palm kernel oil. Palm oil increases the ratio of total cholesterol to HDL cholesterol more than the average U.S. or British dietary fat (Jensen et al. 1999; Keys et al. 1957). That finding indicates that, in terms of blood cholesterol, palm oil is somewhat more harmful than the average U.S. dietary fat and much more harmful than other oils such as olive and even soy and canola which are themselves toxic.

In a study published in a 1999 issue of “Plant Foods for Human Nutrition,” three Nigerian biochemistry researchers extol some of the nutrients found in fresh palm oil, but point out that the oil in an oxidized state can threaten physiological and biochemical functions of the body. They acknowledge that manufacturers of processed foods oxidize palm oil in their products for a variety of culinary purposes, meaning that much of the palm oil consumers eat is in an oxidized state. The dangers of oxidized palm oil include organotoxicity of the heart, kidney, liver and lungs, as well as reproductive toxicity, the researchers claim. Additionally, they note, oxidized palm oil can cause an increase in free fatty acids, phospholipids and cerebrosides.

The problem with palm fruit oil is not so much its saturated fat content because we know coconut oil has plenty of that and it’s one of the healthiest oils on Earth. However, coconut oil does not suppress the body’s natural appetite-suppressing signals from leptin and insulin. It is the triglyceride structure in palm oil which creates potentially negative health effects in contrast to coconut oil whose structure actually promotes health. Coconut oil also contains much higher amounts of myristic, lauric, and capric acid which are relatively absent in palm oil. Although coconut oil also contains palmitic acid, the ratio is much lower (about 9 times lower) and coconut oil’s saturated fat profile is much more balanced than palm oil. The health promoting effects of coconut oil exceed palm oil’s by a very large margin.

#3) Processing

Even the best palm oils go through extending heating and processing making them inferior to healthful oils such as virgin coconut or ice-pressed olive oils.

Virgin coconut oil is derived from the milk obtained from fresh coconut meat, and not necessarily from copra, by processes like fermentation, centrifugal separation and enzyme action, although some coconut oils can also be extracted using these methods from the kernel or meat. Care is taken to use no or as less heat as possible in the extraction of this oil. Produced this way, this oil tastes and smells the best and is laden with antioxidants and medium chain fatty Acids. It also has remarkable anti-microbial properties. Organic coconut oils are extracted from coconuts obtained from coconut palms raised only on organic manure and no synthetic fertilizers, insecticides etc., and without the involvement of any chemical in its extraction or processing.

Palm oil on the other hand whether refined, pure, organic or virgin, goes through extensive processing. Most small-scale palm oil processors do not have the capacity to generate steam for sterilization. Therefore, the threshed fruits are cooked in water. Whole bunches which include spikelets absorb a lot of water in the cooking process. Large scale operations use high-pressure steam heats the fruit at higher temperatures without losing as much water. Therefore, most small-scale operations thresh bunches before the fruits are cooked, while high-pressure sterilization systems thresh bunches after heating to loosen the fruits.

Sterilization or cooking means the use of high-temperature wet-heat treatment of loose fruit. Cooking normally uses hot water; sterilization uses pressurized steam. The heat treatment destroys enzymes and arrests hydrolysis and autoxidation, essentially changing the nutritional value of the fruit’s constituents from their natural state.

Heat solidifies the proteins in which the oil-bearing cells are microscopically dispersed. Only through high heat mechanisms is it possible to partially disrupt the oil-containing cells in the mesocarp and permit oil to be readily released.

The moisture introduced by the steam acts chemically to break down gums and resins. The gums and resins cause the oil to foam during frying. Starches present in the fruit are hydrolyzed and removed.

Once the oils has been pressed it must go through clarification and drying. The main point of clarification is to separate the oil from its entrained impurities.

(function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:10162674340441958,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-8962-3608"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="//cdn2.lockerdomecdn.com/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs");

The fluid coming out of the press is a mixture of palm oil, water, cell debris, fibrous material and ‘non-oily solids’. Hot water is therefore added to the press output mixture to thin it. The diluted mixture is passed through a screen to remove coarse fibre. The screened mixture is boiled from one or two hours and then allowed to settle by gravity in the large tank so that the palm oil, being lighter than water, will separate and rise to the top. To prevent increasing FFA through autocatalytic hydrolysis of the oil, the moisture content of the oil must be reduced to 0.15 to 0.25 percent.

Re-heating the decanted oil in a cooking pot and carefully skimming off the dried oil from any engrained dirt removes any residual moisture.

In large-scale mills the purified and dried oil is transferred to a tank for storage prior to dispatch from the mill. Since the rate of oxidation of the oil increases with the temperature of storage the oil is normally maintained around 50C, using hot water or low-pressure steam-heating coils, to prevent solidification and fractionation. Iron contamination from the storage tank may occur if the tank is not lined with a suitable protective coating.

Small-scale mills simply pack the dried oil in used petroleum oil drums or plastic drums and store the drums at ambient temperature.

The boiling/sterilizing and oil purification processing of palm fruit essentially renders the end product nutritionally deficient in many of the powerful nutrients native to the palm fruit itself.

Palm Fruit Oil vs. Coconut Oil 

Palm oil is extracted from the pulp of the fruit. It should not be confused with coconut oil, which is derived from the kernel or meat of the coconut palm (Cocos Nucifera).

When coconuts are used, it is considerably easy to replace them. Coconut trees can grow in almost any kind of soil even in sandy soils in seashores. More so, they live and bear fruit for up to more than sixty years. It is considered a “three-generation tree” which can support a farmer, his children and his grandchildren. Coconut oil is regarded as renewable resource which can be grown again in contrast to fossil and mineral raw materials such as crude oil, coals, ores, etc. whose occurrence is limited and finite.

Cold-pressed, expeller-pressed or centrifuged are methods of extracting oil from dry or fresh coconut and can be used for both refined and unrefined varieties. All methods can create relatively healthy oils, unlike the palm oil varieties. Coconut oil is a highly stable fat and will not go rancid. If you want a more mild and delicate coconut oil, the centrifuged oils especially virgin varieties are the best since they are less likely to be exposed to heat during extraction. Palm fruit oil cannot go through centrifuged extraction without considerable heating and processing first.

Coconut oil does not go through the extensive sterilization and re-heating processes common in palm fruit oil manufacturing. For oil to be efficiently extracted from its plant-based source (seeds, nuts, etc.), it has to be heated to a certain extent to allow the oil to flow freely, but high temperatures should not be employed. Likewise, the oil can be extracted by pressing only from seeds or nuts or any other plant source with oil content above 30%. But when fruit is boiled or sterilized before the pressing process takes place, it affects the integrity of the nutrients themselves, especially when the oil is being extracted from the fruit and meat and not the seed itself.

This changes the nutrient make-up, enzymes and oil properties after processing. Overall, there are more risks and disadvantages from both a health and sustainability perspective to qualify or quantify palm fruit oil as a health promoting oil, especially when comparing it to coconut oil.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

About the Author

Natasha Longo has a master’s degree in nutrition and is a certified fitness and nutritional counselor. She has consulted on public health policy and procurement in Canada, Australia, Spain, Ireland, England and Germany.

Like Waking Times on Facebook. Follow Waking Times on Twitter.

On December 26th, 2018, we awoke to a message on our YouTube channel stating “We’ve determined that your channel is no longer eligible for monetization.”

I can’t say we were all that surprised, but regardless it was still a bit of a shock only because we had been working hard over the last two months to grow our account and keep consistent with content. We had added over 12,000 new subscribers in just a short time before this happened.

Our long-term plan was to continue to build our YouTube account to help spread our message far and wide, and use some of the revenue to sustain our work alongside our other funding avenues. It appears that leg of funding is now gone, and we’ll have to once again pivot which we are no stranger to after Facebook’s yearly changes have cut our revenue by over $600,000 per year, and our staff as well.

A screenshot of the message we received from YouTube on Dec 26, 2018.

Why Did This Happen?

We don’t entirely know but we can speculate on a few things.

Let’s start with copyright issues.

CE’s content is original, shot in our studio and we don’t use any music other than what we have a license to use from Artlist or Audioblocks.. not only that, our account is in perfect standing and always has been, so we know it’s not an issue of copyright. In fact, the image below not only shows our account is still partner verified, but you can see we have never had any strikes on guidelines or copyright status.

Regardless of all of this, which has been very unclear, YouTube has simply stated on our account “Your channel does not comply with the YouTube Partner Program terms.” and therefore “Account status: Currently ineligible for monetization”

Very similar to when Facebook shut down our Facebook page for 21 days due to false allegations of copyright violation on OUR OWN original content, YouTube also doesn’t take this process very seriously and doesn’t allow businesses to get in touch to find out what’s actually happening. Instead, you suffer financial loss and are left to figure out what the heck happened. Last time Facebook shut our page down we lost $35,000 in revenue and it was on the 2nd day of our IndieGoGo campaign launch, effectively hindering us from gaining traction on the campaign.

The Content

Our content is very politically neutral and we back up our facts with sources whenever possible. Compared to most channels, we simply don’t do anything that would warrant such a harsh decision.

To be clear, YouTube has no issue with distasteful content where people are half naked or naked, swearing consistently, glorifying drug and alcohol use, getting high on camera and putting on makeup, violence, or anything of that nature. We know that because those accounts have millions of subscribers and are well monetized.

But dissenting voices seem to be a thing for YouTube, just as it is for Facebook and Twitter.

So it appears as though YouTube is attempting to politely say “we simply don’t want you on our platform, and we’re going to make it really hard for you to live here.”

We know this because not only did they demonetize our account, but regardless of our 82,000 subscribers, our videos usually struggle to get more than 1000 views. Further to that, as part of their demonetization, YouTube has stopped us from being able to use their End Cards feature, which allows us to show viewers more of our content or click to support our work. With this move, the motivation seems to be nothing more than ‘we’re not going to let you do anything that can help you.’ Below is a screenshot of the End Card cut.

What We Can Do

Big tech companies have made it very clear, they are going to respond to and allow deep state control to set their agendas and narratives. Companies who dissent from mainstream narratives designed to veil the public from truth are going to be demonetized and shut down as much as possible.

This leaves 2 ways for independent media like CE to continue thriving.

CETV

We knew this was coming one day, which is why we spent the last year working on CETV. The thing that is absolutely crazy about YouTube demonetizing us on the 26th was the fact that we launched CETV on the same day. Pure coincidence? Did they somehow know? I don’t know! But it’s the second time we geared up for a huge launch only to have a social media channel be affected same day.

Right now, CETV is available for early bird pricing and you can get $20 off a yearly membership. CETV is going to be the home of interviews and shows that explore consciousness and our world from a neutral and conscious perspective. It’s our next step in conscious media. You can join CETV right now and take advantage of the early bird pricing here.

CMM Campaign

We also had been gearing up to keep independent media alive with our conscious media movement campaign. We watched as many of our friends lost their entire business when they were demonetized and shut down, so we started a campaign to fund conscious media to make sure the world has access.

Since launching our campaign in October 2018, together we have achieved the following:

Dec 21, 2018 – We hired a content editor!!!
Dec 15th, 2018 – We removed one ad unit on our website.
Dec 1st, 2018 – Supporters helped increase our website traffic by 40%. BIGGER IMPACT!

We currently have a little over 3000 supporters for our CMM campaign, we need 20,000 for our journalism to thrive month in and month out. Very large independent media outlets like the Guardian have turned to this model and they are thriving, now it’s our turn!

You can become a supporter of CE through our CMM campaign here.

The Takeaway

YouTube has not at all been clear about what is going on with our account, but we don’t have to let it stop us or even get upset. It is what it is and independent media has had to pivot many times throughout this all out war to keep mainstream media alive.

As people, we have the power. We decide what lives based on what we choose to support. Done with the mainstream? Don’t support it anymore, instead, help keep independent media thriving by not only engaging with it and sharing it but also by financially supporting it if you believe in it.

Independent conscious media is the future, it’s only a matter of time.

The Public Utility Commission of Nevada has approved NV’s long-term IRP to double its renewable energy capacity by 2023. The utility will bring 1,001 MW of solar capacity online via six new power purchase agreements (PPAs).

The Public Utility Commission of Nevada has approved NV’s long-term IRP to double its renewable energy capacity by 2023. The utility will bring 1,001 MW of solar capacity online via six new power purchase agreements (PPAs).

We have officially released our new streaming service CETV! It promises to feature honest, transparent conscious media content not seen anywhere else. We have been forging a new form of media, called ‘conscious media’ for 10 years now, and felt this was the next step in our journey as we feel society desperately needs this type of voice.

People are tired of polarity, political slants, heavy bias’ and drama everywhere they look, CETV is free from all of that as we not only cut straight to the facts, but we explore the deeper meaning behind them so viewers can get in touch with deep aspects of themselves, thought and explore consciousness.

CETV brings together exclusive interviews and episodic shows to fulfill the weekly lineup. Content creators share their extensive knowledge, insight, powerful ideas, and stories that cannot be found anywhere on television or from other media platforms.

“We recognize there is a sizeable gap in news and media out there. People are either watching left leaning media, right leaning media or media controlled by just a few corporations. Are we getting the truth? What does this news even mean for us as humans?” according to Joe Martino, Founder of Collective Evolution. “We have 10 years experience in creating conscious media and now is a time, more than ever, where we need to begin realizing conventional media, and even most alternative media, is not helping us to grow and move forward, but instead leaving us spinning our tires in argument and divide. It’s time for something different, something from the heart – and we are bringing it.”

Collective Evolution is known worldwide for its hard-hitting yet neutral tone in its media. CE does not choose any political side or voice, but instead simply asks deep questions about what is taking place and what it means for us all.

“We believe it’s important to ask WHY things are happening in our world and look deeper than simple facts. If we truly want to change our world, we first have to find out the deep truths as to how and why they are happening. How often do you see news and media that pushes you to explore who you are, why we’re here and how we can bring more peace into our lives individually and collectively, while staying grounded in our everyday world? That’s what CE does.” Joe Martino added.

Aside from the 100+ hours of interviews already available, slated thus far is a new show featuring global speaker and modern philosopher Franco DeNicola called Elevate. The dives deep into exploring humans, our world and who we are from an incredibly deep perspective. CETV will also feature international meditation guide Dulce Ruby in a show coming soon called Waking Realm.

CE is currently in talks with other unique content creators

How to Watch

You can access an entire year of CETV for $99 at regular price, or take advantage of the early bird sale for $79 for the year. CETV is available directly to you, commercial free and ad free.

Monthly subscriptions are $10.

CETV currently streams via web browsers on your phone or laptop. The CETV app on iOS, Android and TV streaming devices like Apple TV and Roku will be available within Q1 of 2019.

*Current CE Media members will automatically have access to the platform and migration of those accounts is already underway.

About CETV

CETV is your source for conscious, thought-provoking and enlightening content voiced through a neutral standpoint designed to encourage us to question & deeply understand our human experience. This helps us truly create a world where we can thrive as opposed to simply sustaining. This voice cannot be found from traditional media outlets, which is why CETV, like Collective Evolution, is evolving the way media is told.

CETV is delivering riveting, heart-based, intentional media, covering relevant topics happening in our world today. Something like this has never been done before.

Each program will be backed by a passionate host and production team. CETV is developing the high quality programming – advocating truth, freedom and a conscious world – delivered directly to viewers – when and where they want it.

To get your subscription at early bird pricing visit cetv.one/

Article written by Sinfully Wholesome at Greenmedinfo.com. Posted here with permission. Want to learn more from GreenMedInfo? You can sign up for their newsletter here

Like the Magi, carrying myrrh, frankincense, and gold, researchers from the University of Leicester have, for the first time, demonstrated the potential of treating ovarian cancer using the Christmas gift frankincense.

The origins of frankincense can be traced to the Arabian Peninsula. According to Herodotus (5th century BC):

“Arabia is the only country which produces frankincense, myrrh, cassia, and cinnamon.. the trees bearing the frankincense are guarded by winged serpents of small size and various colors. (See this GreenMedInfo Summary).”

Frankincense, along with gold and myrrh, is one of the most famous Christmas presents in history, and is a fragrant plant resin extracted from the Boswellia sacra tree found across Africa and Arabia. Using the compound AKBA (acetyl-11-keto-beta-boswellic acid) derived from the resin, the research has successfully shown its potential effectiveness in targeting ovarian cancer.

More specifically, they have been able to demonstrate the ability of AKBA to combat cancer cells in late-stage ovarian cancer.

Lead researcher Kamla Al-Salmani, PhD student from the University’s Department of Cancer Studies and Molecular Medicine explained:

“After a year of studying the AKBA compound with ovarian cancer cell lines in vitro, we have been able to show it is effective at killing the cancer cells.  Frankincense is taken by many people with no known side effects. This finding has enormous potential to be taken to a clinical trial in the future and developed into an additional treatment for ovarian cancer.”

Frankincense has been used as a folk medicine for centuries due to its anti-inflammatory properties, making it a viable treatment for asthma, skin conditions and gastroenteritis among others. Previous studies have also successfully linked AKBA as a potential treatment for many other cancers, including colon, breast and prostate cancer; however this is the first study to demonstrate its potential in combating ovarian cancer.

The researchers have shown that this frankincense compound is effective at killing ovarian cancer cells at realistic concentrations. What has been most surprising is that the cells we have tested which are resistant to chemotherapy have shown to be more sensitive to this compound, suggesting frankincense may indeed be able to help overcome drug resistance, and lead to an improved survival rate for patients with late-stage ovarian cancer.

Additional reading:

Ken McGowan is an environmentalist, social entrepreneur & the former leader of the Green Party of Nova Scotia.

Ken is a graduate of the U of T with a degree in molecular biology, and is the founder & product formulator of Sinfully Wholesome, a socially & environmentally responsible natural skin care company.

Ørsted US Offshore Wind said on December 20 that it received approval from Connecticut regulators for its 20-year power-purchase agreement (PPA) for the Revolution Wind offshore wind farm.

John Vibes, Guest
Waking Times

Nearly 15 years ago, St. Boniface church in San Francisco began opening their doors for homeless people in need of shelter. The effort was started by Father Louis Vitale of the church, and community activist Shelly Roder, in 2004 and is known as The Gubbio Project.

Hundreds of people each day pass through the church, using the pews to sleep on, and getting blankets from the staff.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

“No questions are asked when our guests walk into the churches; in an effort to remove all barriers to entry, there are no sign-in sheets or intake forms. No one is ever turned away; all are welcomed, respected and treated with dignity,” according to the Gubbio Project’s website.

The facility is still open for local churchgoers who want to visit throughout the day, but 2/3 of the church is reserved for the Gubbio project.

“This sends a powerful message to our unhoused neighbors – they are in essence part of the community, not to be kicked out when those with homes come in to worship. It also sends a message to those attending mass – the community includes the tired, the poor, those with mental health issues and those who are wet, cold and dirty,” a representative with Gubbio said.

One of the main complaints that people often have about homeless shelters is that they can feel like prisons, and be extremely dangerous as well, but the Gubbio project seems different. 95% of those surveyed said they always or usually feel safe at The Gubbio Project, and those who pass through are not treated like prisoners as they are in many shelters.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

(function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:10162674340441958,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-8962-3608"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="//cdn2.lockerdomecdn.com/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs");

Last year The Mind Unleashed reported that the city of Seattle was planning to set up razor-wire fencing to keep homeless populations from camping. Then, not long after we reported that San Francisco was using Robots scare homeless people away from encampments and report them to police. Also in San Francisco, we recently reported that the city spent $8,700 installing large boulders under overpasses to prevent homeless people from setting up camps. There were numerous homeless encampments in the area until they were recently forced out of the area, and now the City’s government is doing everything they can to keep the camps out of the area.

At least a dozen activists were arrested last month for feeding the homeless in Wells Park in El Cajon, California. Even a 14-year-old child was arrested. Authorities say that the law is aimed to prevent the spread of disease, but activists say that they are criminalizing the homeless.

“It means they are criminalizing homelessness. They’ve created 4 laws against the homeless. No camping, no sleeping in cars, no panhandling and no feeding the homeless,” Mark Lane told RT.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

Like Waking Times on Facebook. Follow Waking Times on Twitter.

Jon Rappoport, Guest
Waking Times

There is an obsession to say that everything is made out of something.

Who knows where it started? With the Egyptian pyramid builders? The Sumerians?

In the modern era, the fervor has reached a high point.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

Physicists, biologists, and chemists are relentless in their pursuit of consciousness as a function of the brain. It has to be the brain. All those synapses and neurons and chemicals…and underneath them, the atoms and the sub-atomic particles…somehow these tiny particles conspire to produce consciousness and awareness.

Yet these same scientists deny that a sub-atomic particle carries any trace of awareness. The particles flow. They obey laws. That’s all.

So the experts are painted into a corner. They then speculate: “Well, you see, the increased ability to process information, the complexity of structure—naturally, this implies consciousness.”

No it doesn’t.

A Ferrari is complex. So is the Empire State Building. So is the IBM’s best computer. And? Where is the consciousness?

You, sitting there right now, reading these words—you understand the words; you KNOW you’re reading them; you’re not just processing information. YOU ARE CONSCIOUS.

If a physicist wants to say that you, knowing you’re reading, are just a phenomenon of atoms in motion, let him try, let him explain. Let him do more than bloviate.

Imagine you were the chief of a CIA section called Consciousness Covert Ops. What would you try to do, given that your motive, as always, is control?

You would try to convince the population that consciousness isn’t free and wide-ranging and powerful and independent. You would try to narrow the popular belief about consciousness.

What better way than to focus on the brain as the seat of all awareness?

“The brain functions according to laws. We’re discovering more and more about those laws. We can determine when the brain is malfunctioning. We’re learning how to correct those malfunctions.”

Indeed.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

You’re spinning narrative about the brain as if it were a car that has to visit the shop. That’s what you want. You want to make people believe their brains need fixes, because, after all, you come out of the long tradition of CIA MKULTRA mind control.

When the brain comes into the shop, you can try to reprogram it. You can experiment. You can apply the latest technology. You can attempt to insert controls. You can place monitors in the brain, in order to observe it in real time.

At a more basic, yes, philosophic level, you want to eliminate any sort of movement claiming that consciousness is separate from the brain. You want to snuff that idea out. It’s counter-productive, to say the least. It could give rise to a renaissance of an old outmoded notion called: freedom.

What could be more free, more independent, more unique, more creative than individual consciousness that has a non-material basis?

You want to do everything you can to equate consciousness with the brain and, thus, the modern idea of the computer. Yes, the computer. Perfect.

“Consciousness is a computer operating at a very high level.”

“All computers can be improved.”

“All computers can malfunction. They can be repaired.”

And then, the ultimate coup:

“Consciousness? A very old idea that, in light of the progress of technology, has no merit. It’s really information processing. The brain handles that. The brain is a computer. We’re learning how to build a better brain…”

You’re shifting the focus of the old 1950s MKULTRA program, which mainly involved drugs and hypnosis, to a new arena. You’re coming at the territory inside the skull from a number of angles. You’re the next generation of Brave New World.

And right across town, the Pentagon and its research branch, DARPA, is deeply involved in a number of allied research projects. For example, the cortical modem, a little piece of equipment that costs about $10.

The gist? Insert proteins into neurons, and then beam photons into those proteins, thus creating image displays that bypass the normal channels of perception.

Virtual reality with no headset. The project is still in its early stages, but the direction is clear: give the “user” an image display beyond his ability to choose.

(function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:10162674340441958,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-8962-3608"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="//cdn2.lockerdomecdn.com/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs");

It’s touted as an overlay. The person, walking down the street, can still see the street, but he can also see what you give him, what you insert into his visual cortex. Of course, as the technology advances, you could take things further: block out physical reality and immerse the person in the virtual.

DARPA’s enthusiasm about this project, as usual, exceeds its current grasp, but its determination to succeed is quite genuine. And the money is there.

Think about this. Which way is a bright college student going to go? He can study ancient philosophy, in the least popular department on campus. He can read the Vedanta, and plow through its explications of consciousness. Or he can study biology and physics, and then try to land an entry job with the Pentagon, where he can fiddle with the human brain for fun and profit. This student has been thoroughly immersed in computers since he could crawl. He understands what they do and how they work. He’s been taught, over and over, that the human brain (consciousness) is a computer. So what path will he take?

Over and above everything I’m pointing out in this article, there is a human capacity called imagination. It’s the wild card in the deck. It’s the greatest wild card ever known. It is, in fact, the cutting edge of consciousness. It invents new realities. It releases gigantic amounts of buried energy. And it’s entirely an individual proposition.

I built my second collection, Exit From The Matrix, on that basis: the liberation and expansion of imagination. Not just in theory, but in practice. There are dozens of imagination techniques to work with.

Brain=computer=consciousness is the greatest covert op on the planet. It’s supported with major money and labs and journals and armies of psychiatrists and neurological professionals and physicists and the military.

And the op is completely false, because, again, the very scientists who push it are saying the brain is composed of sub-atomic particles THAT CONTAIN ZERO CONSCIOUSNESS.

Think about that.

They’re saying consciousness arises out of particles that have no consciousness.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

About the Author

Jon Rappoport is the author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALEDEXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29thDistrict of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at NoMoreFakeNews.com or OutsideTheRealityMachine.

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, Exit From The Matrixclick here.)

This article (If You Were Chief of CIA Consciousness Ops) was originally created and published by Jon Rappaport’s Blog and is re-posted here with permission.

Like Waking Times on FacebookFollow Waking Times on Twitter.

Pages

Connect with us

Subscribe to our rss and social networks accounts...

On the Subject of US

Ætherna Guild is a free will, clean energy & sustainable living community resource website. More

Navigation

Browse Ætherna's resourceful info!

Ætherna Guild



Energetic Balance Frequencies

Ætherna Guild's Mission

Awaken mankind's universal consciousness to find equitable solutions for a real, honest, best and prosperous Guild, based on unity and sharing, peace, respect and love, in harmony with nature and our environment to foster the achievement of collective goals leading to a higher intelligence and collective consciousness.

A Sovereign Space for One Hearth Guild ॐ

More