Interpretive science. Facts are always subject to interpretation, depending on who pays your salary.

I have this on-going discussion with my eldest brother about religion.  I personally feel that religion is an interpretive study, depending on your faith.  My brother believes that the bible is the inerrant word of his god.  And of course, that the gods of other beliefs don't exist.  That is an interpretive belief.  Blah blah blah, and religion is not science, and I shouldn't go outside in lightening storms to avoid the inevitable retribution from above for my beliefs.

In school we were taught that the sciences were immutable, that the facts we learned were indeed the totality of the universe, and that the world existed within a small and narrow set of parameters governed by laws of physics, mathematics and that those laws could not ever be altered.  As life goes on, we learn that those same laws governing the universe are in fact, sort of guesses; and that scientists are altering and changing the "approved" view of the world all the time.  And so it is, not just with the theoretical scientists, but also with the practical ones as well.  As physicists look at computer screens of what they believe to be collisions of sub sub sub atomic particles and postulate theories as to what they believe might possibly be happening; so do practical applied scientists.  Their laboratory has a lot more flexibility to it.  Or as they like to claim, interpretation.

When a scientist gets a grant from someone to look for something specific, research to find something, or prove a certain concept is valid or not; they generally have an idea what the result will be.  They just want to have a scientist, interpret specific data from research or testing to validate their reasons.  And it all goes down to interpretation.  A guy in France takes a hundred rats and divides them into four groups, feeds them Genetically Modified grain in various percentages, and when after two years 24 of the 25 rats in each of the three groups eating the GM food had cancers, the conclusion that can be made is that GM foods cause cancer.  But I'm not a scientist, and my paycheck doesn't come from a company that makes GM seeds, agrochemicals and whose livelihood depends on the general public not ever knowing that conclusion.  So, when asked, Monsanto paid scientists will review the raw data from the two year long feeding study and "interpret" different conclusions.  Ones that don't blame money making GM crops for the cancers.  And that's what they do.

Seralini has been denounced for poor methodology in producing the results that show GM crops give cancer to rats.  The Monsanto belief is that one rat in each group did not get cancer, and in the control group, three rats did.  Therefore all conclusions that GM crops causing cancer are false.  Let's look at Syngenta, who has a whole bunch of scientists getting a paycheck from them, and as the world has come to believe, certain highly toxic insecticides have been showing up in the dead bodies of the huge numbers of dead bee colonies.  The standard interpretation is that the really highly toxic pesticides that have only been in general use since just before the bees started dying off is the culprit.  Syngenta scientists interpret the data differently, they state that their HIGHLY toxic and effective insecticide that is designed to kill all insects that touch or consume miniscule amounts; doesn't kill bees. 

For quite a few years now the consensus of scientific belief was that the toxin made by Bacteria, BT toxin, was harmless to humans.  Well some other independent researchers went ahead and checked, and found that the stuff really does do damage to human cells.  Specifically neurotransmitters, cells lining the intestinal walls as well as the liver and kidneys.  That which is lacking in our world today, common sense, would have directed Monsanto and other Gene Tech companies to check this first before introducing this toxin into our food supply.  Except, it cost money to verify.  And it is a lot easier to make money, and down the road deny any research that shows such simple concepts to be detrimental to human anatomy.  So the University of Colorado researchers, who coincidentally receive most all of the agricultural department funding from Monsanto, interpreted the data a little differently.  Those Colorado scientists now tell us that those independent scientists didn't quite have the right stuff and looked at things incorrectly and that fear not, the BT toxin in most all GM crops is in fact harmless.

I don't know, there are tons of examples, from Hull approving the toxin Aspartame using a report that didn't show how dangerous it really is and completely ignoring the 90 reports that interpreted the opposite, Hull approved Aspartame and immediately went to work for the public relations firm of the company making that same Aspartame.  All the way to today's world where the FDA approves GM crops with no testing at all and using reports that interpret data from the manufacturer that are written by the same manufacturers.  It happens every day.  Science is not an exact science, it is open to interpretation.  Well arithmetic is pretty set, but once you introduce imaginary numbers and go into other theoretical forms of advanced math, it is interpretive.  And in theoretical math right along with all the other hokum sciences, I think that whoever signs the paychecks gets to decide what the interpretations are going to be.  

I started to write this because I read some stuff about good old Dr Weil, one of several "Doctors" that make buckets of money selling their own brands of supplements and health tonics and new ways of life.  You know, Mercola is another.  Anyway, these guys have a pretty big racket going, they have these huge websites and huge email lists and they basically send out info to people in an attempt to scare them into living a healthy life, that includes lots and lots of supplements, purchased from them.  But the big things that bug me about both of those guys is how they interpret science to suit their needs to sell their products.  My problem is their interpretation of what a healthy life means.  It is an interpretation of science to claim that all grains are bad for humans, that you should eat all of your eggs and meats raw and avoid all legumes, grains and milk.  That's one interpretation.  And a pretty weird one at that.  Of course if you ate a diet like that you would absolutely NEED a ton of supplements and health tonics, at high prices from the docs of interpretive sciences, Weil and Mercola.  Anyway, I don't know everything, but I do read, look, and think for myself.  I eat bread I bake from wheat I grind into flour, and don't eat meat.

Who's the millionaire, and who's the pauper.  Maybe I'm wrong after all. But then, I don't get paid to write conclusions that mean something that isn't true.

I wish I was sooooo confident in my beliefs that I could just go ahead and sue an entire continent.

No, that's not a typo of some sort.  It really is happening, the agri giant Syngenta is filing a lawsuit against, get ready for this, the European Union.  At first i wondered how do you sue a continent, but I found out that there is a European Justice Court in Luxembourg that hears cases of this magnitude.  The case is all about the EU attempting to protect the people, citizens of the EU itself.  That protection is no where near comprehensive enough for me, but it is a beginning.  One that will never happen here in America as the political machine controlling such things takes way way too much money in the form of graft and kickbacks to ever pass laws or make policies that would protect American citizens.  The issue, neonicotinide insecticides.  The European Commission voted earlier this year to ban their use for two years in all of the EU.  The ban takes effect on December 1 of this year.  Syngenta manufactures neonicontinide insecticides.  The company would prefer to continue to sell the stuff to Europena farmers and not just sit on their hands and inventories.

The company has a website, and they talk about the bee problem.  (Syngenta propaganda)  They talk about how in their field trials, and in lab tests, the stuff never killed bees.  I don't know, but I thought that was what an insecticide did, it killed insects.  And when you use a neonicotinide insect killer that persists in the ground for years, is absorbed readily by the roots of growing plants, is measured in the pollen and nectar of fruiting plants in the incredibly low area of single digit parts per billion and still has the power to have that magical LD50 kill rate.  In the neighborhood of 1 to 2 PARTS PER BILLION!

Syngenta reports that their own tests prove that their "Cruiser" pesticide does not kill bees. 

The Syngenta website also states some other interesting things.  The claim is that Syngenta supports biodiversity as it is the foundation of sustainable agriculture.  Syngenta manufactures Genetically Modified crops, the very antithesis of biodiversity.  If all farmers grow three of four varieties of a crop instead of locally adapted strains that were derived over generations of breeding for a specific micro climate and soil then you pretty much lose any biodiversity and set the world up for huge problems should a crop fail, like from insects, disease, or infection.  All things that are possible in a world of crops that are genetically similar and where evolution is promoting the growth of resistant pests, weeds and diseases.

The website also goes into detail about the Atrazine lawsuit and how Syngenta is greatly disappointed that for once an honest judge refused to dismiss the lawsuit against Syngenta over the Holiday Shores debacle.  They settled earlier this year, for a paltry sum, and as always, the lawyers made more than the water companies did.  The lawsuit was about how to meet EPA standards of providing water that had less than 3 parts per billion of Atrazine in it they had to build huge filtration systems to remove the toxic stuff from the water supplies as it is widely used by farmers all over the place as a weed killer.  The thing is, we know it is toxic, the EPA says so, it runs off the land in huge amounts, persists for years and years, destroys aquatic life wherever it is, and is legal to make and use everywhere in the US.

Next on the Syngenta website is the statement that agricultural biotechnology is necessary in our modern world as it is the only method to improve productivity and to ensure higher quality crops grown in sustainable and environmentally safe methods.  I don't know if you the reader has ever read anything else about GM crops or not, but that whole statement is just unbelievable flawed.  GM crops are proven in laboratory testing to be inferior nutritionally.  European farming methods have far and above out produced American and Canadian use of GM crops, high amounts of herbicide and pesticide usage.  (Try this one, I write about GM crops a lot)

One of the weird things about the Syngenta website is their position on child labor.  They claim they are against it and do not ever use it.  Wow, I had never heard of this aspect of GM crop production before, so I did a search on Google for Syngenta, child labor.  And I learned a lot.  Seems that they have been deep in lawsuits and criminal activity for using child labor in the manufacture of the GM seeds for years.  So, the normal thing to do for big companies, deny it ever happened.  I wish I could just say the same thing, I never married that woman.  Sigh, it just isn't true though, no matter how hard I wish it never happened, it did.

Last is this direct quote, "Organic production methods and organic food products represent a legitimate personal choice and occupy a valid position in the market. However, there is no evidence that organic agriculture is safer or more environmentally-friendly than other types of production, or that it is resource-efficient enough to meet the demands of today and the future."

Amish farmers regularly exceed production levels than of chemical GM farms, using horses.  Yeah, a little more time involved, but then there are similar examples of people using modern techniques and organic farms become considerably more profitable than traditional chemical GM farms.  I guess the point of all of this is that Syngenta, not unlike Monsanto, my ex-wife, my eldest brother and most politicos; all feel that they are in fact not only without fault, incapable of error, and above the law as well.  If in fact Syngenta goes to court with this lawsuit, they have the backing to get numerous scientists to write whatever they want them to and those reports will show the same findings, that insecticides don't kill insects.

If that were true, why do they sell them then. 

Lasagna Roll Ups, an elegant and unique idea

Made this for my friends at Ambassador over the weekend, they were well received and disappeared somewhat quickly.  And they are so easy to make.  Start with good lasagna noodles and cook until pretty soft, about 12 minutes or so, drain and toss with a bit of olive oil.  Now, take two eggs and beat in a bowl and add a half cup of fresh chopped basil and a teaspoon of good Italian seasoning along with some fresh cracked pepper.  Mix in about 16 ounces Ricotta cheese and about 12 ounces of shredded Mozzarella.  Take one noodle and lay on a board, spread some of the mixture onto about 90% of the noodle.  Here is where you can sprinkle on some browned Italian sausage.  Roll it up and set it a baking pan with some of your favorite marinara. 

Fill the pan, top with more sauce and cover with foil making sure the foil doesn't touch any food.  Bake at 350 for 30 minutes, then remove the foil and top each roll with a bit more of the shredded cheese.  Return to the oven and bake another 15 minutes.  Serve with good whole wheat bread and olive oil mixed with garlic and fresh herbs.  Yummy!!!!!

So what happens tomorrow? Is recovering from the ecological and toxicological GM and Glyphosate disaster possible?

Earth can recover.  Humans, on the other hand, are just transient visitors to this living ball of rock.  The human existence so far is measured in centuries by us, but a blink of the microcosm eye by the planet upon which we live and destroy.  The question of whether humans will survive this self induced catastrophe will be hard to predict.  But make no mistake, it is in fact, a catastrophe of monumental proportions, and the end of human life is not outside the realm of possibility. 

I'm not crazy, even though my mother never had me tested, I get my conclusions by reviewing available facts.  Let's start with DDT.  And the answer is that yes, the planet is recovering, and the human presence was not wiped out by the indiscriminate use of this seriously toxic and persistent pesticide.  In 1972 the use of DDT was banned.  It is still used, a lot of it, like 3,000 tons of the stuff every year.  Mostly in India and some tropical areas of Africa to control malaria mosquitoes.  At the height of DDT usage, there were more than 82,000 tons of the stuff used every year.  With a half life in the neighborhood of about 15 years when in aquatic environments, longer in dry soil, the stuff has persisted and is still a problem in the waters of the Great Lakes with warnings not to eat shellfish near the outlets of many streams flowing into the lakes themselves.  Because of the DDT residues that still to this day flow into the lakes from agricultural runoff. 

Eagle populations rebounded, humans only have cancer rates that are one in three, not the huge numbers expected.  (I don't understand that, 1 in 3 people is a LOT) And the actual residual DDT levels in groundwater, shellfish and crustaceans in many of the waterways is less than half of the levels measured in 1970.  Forty years after the ban, and levels have dropped by fifty percent.  Somehow those figures don't work themselves out, but that's the info that I discovered in my research.  And of course the EPA would never fudge their numbers.  I mean they are government employees, they have jobs for life.  And there are always more toxins to monitor. 

So that leads us to Roundup.  When studies are presented about the main ingredient glyphosate, those studies show just how safe the chemical is.  That's the reason is was approved for use as an herbicide.  Monsanto told the world is was harmless.  That was of course, a huge lie.  When glyphosate is used it is mixed with a number of other chemicals and together they make the toxic stew that is permeating the world and causing much of the rise in cancers, infant mortality, neurological disorders and gross malformities in native invertebrate and amphibian populations.  And probably the cause of the skyrocketing numbers of miscarriages and deformities in the human populations in Argentina around agricultural areas where use of Roundup is huge.  Usage of Roundup in today's world is at about 85,000 tons annually.  Half life of glyphosate is about 5 to 8 years depending on environmental conditions, moisture, and bacterial populations.  Measurable amounts in the general population in urban areas in Europe tends to make one wonder where the stuff is coming from since most of the European Union doesn't grow Genetically Modified crops and Roundup usage is far less than in America.  I haven't found any studies of urine concentrations for Americans who on average consume directly 193 pounds of GM crops annually.  That doesn't count all the GM crap fed to the animals and animal products they consume.  The wonderful EPA has set the maximum allowable limit in drinking water at 0.7 ppm.  The sad part is that researchers have discovered that cell damage occurs in HUMAN tissues at just 0.1 ppm.

So why aren't people dropping like flies?

That one I don't have an answer for.  It does seem like all of the toxic problems in our food supply along with the problems with vaccines would cause a huge outbreak in problems, from rampant obesity to huge increases in cancer, heart disease, neurological problems, increased rates of infant mortality and corresponding increases in childhood problems like ADD, ADHD, birth defects, and along with all of that, decreases in birth rates due to loss of fertility and higher rates of sexual dysfunction.

Wait a minute, isn't that what's happening here in Monsanto controlled America?

Yeah, it is.  And it is just the beginning.  As more toxic agrochemicals are dumped onto more and more farmlands, the residual levels in water, foods we consume and in our own bodies will grow higher and higher.  Until we all die?  I don't know, but I am glad I won't be around to live through it and see what happens.  Yeah, I got a couple good years left, maybe enough to see the world wide crop failures, the total takeover of super weeds and super insects that are immune to herbicides and pesticides.  And the madness that attacks entire communities drinking contaminated water all the while their governmental watchdogs take kickbacks and allow the wholesale poisoning of the populace. 

If, and that is a big if, toxic agrochemicals were outlawed next week, as were GM crops, and sustainable farming methods were forced onto all production of foods; then it is possible for the earth and humanity to recover and live in harmony. Just like DDT, we could see that residual glyphosate levels in water, fish, humans, to drop fifty percent. Perhaps many of the human population might be less affected by the toxic nature of our food supply, and our most basic necessity, water. Humans might still thrive. Just like the insects that survive pesticides and breed super resistant offspring, and just like the weeds that survive spraying with herbicides and their progeny become superweeds; humans might survive the monetary driven poisoning of our planet and breed super humans.

I think we all know that will never happen.
  

Sweeteners, real, fake, deadly, carcinogenic, and scary.

When I review the stats for my site here, it seems that some of the largest numbers of views go to the entries about artificial sweeteners.  So I thought I would make one entry about the stuff and have a lot of info in one place, and with links to individual sites as well as more ramblings by me. 

Here is my list of most toxic to most usable.

1.  Aspartame - The absolute worst most toxic sweetener on the market (Aspartame)  There are 92 side effects listed by the FDA including death.  Yet is is still available for the manufacturers to make buttloads of money on.  92, with death in there as well.  (Side Effects)  In 1981 Arthur Hull Hayes Jr. the commisioner for the FDA approved Aspartame for use in human foods.  He then left the agency to work at Searle, the manufacturer of Aspartame, at a whopping one thousand dollars a day on a ten year contract.  His approval of the crap was done despite the fact that there was overwhelming evidence the stuff was carcinogenic and neurotoxic as well and that 70% of FDA staff researchers went on record as stating objections to any such approval.  Let's not make any bones about it, approval was all about MONEY!

2. Sucralose -  Splenda is next on list to avoid.  See (Splenda)  and this one as well (More Splenda)  This stuff is just weird, someone somewhere thought that if you take regular glucose and add three chlorine atoms so that the resulting molecule is just a tiny bit different from DDT; then that would be good for humans.  Chloro-carbons are very dangerous and although the the Tate and Lyle research that was submitted to the FDA showed that in over 100 animal tests to be non-toxic, the reality is that only two studies done on humans showed that the research fudged the truth a bit.  Human systems in fact retained as much as 15% of the chemical after even after 4 days.  Not what they claim at all, their research submitted to the FDA states that 100% is excreted in less than 24 hours, a little different from the entire report.  But then when has the making of money ever elicited honesty in any agribusiness.  Chloro-carbons are known carcinogens, a couple of atoms rearranged on the molecule doesn't make it safe.  Third party research is needed to verify, but that is pretty expensive, and manufacturers will never pay to prove their crap is toxic.

3. Acesulfame Potassium - or Ace-K, sold as Suneet and Sweet One.  The company website (Ace-K) states that over 90 studies have been done proving that this stuff is harmless.  Much the same as Number one and Numer two above make the same claims.  However in several independent studies there were far different findings, from large increases in cancers in male rats to moderate destruction of neurometabolic functions.  It has been discovered that the stuff also stimulates the excretion of insulin.  A whole host of possibilities open up there, and yet the manufacturer Hoechst, in all of its testing, did not in any way find anything wrong.  Here is info from the NCBI on their review (Ace K and NCBI) The stuff contains methylene chloride, a known carcinogen.  Again, more testing NEEDS to be done, but money is tight for protection of humanity, and pretty loose when it comes to buying the approval from regulators to use toxins to make more money. 

4. High Fructose Corn Syrup - HFCS, a favorite subject for me to write about here (HFCS) (HMS)  It isn't just the coverup by the FDA and mainstream media about the huge mercury contamination problem discovered in 2005, or the use of GM corn to make the stuff without ever performing long term studies to see if GM foods are safe (They aren't) or the incredibly stupid advertising campaign telling us that HFCS is exactly the same as sugar, or any of the other hundreds of things about the stuff that make it number four on my list of crap to avoid.  It is simply that it increases the likelihood of unscrupulous people (raise your hand Lorena, my ex)((Big believer in lying and cheating her customers to make money)) to adulterate honey sales.  Corn Syrup, a touch of real honey and yellow coloring makes for an impressive imitation honey.  And I think most people would be surprised to learn that virtually all of the honey in supermarkets is HFCS and not honey at all.  (Not Honey at all)  Of course that isn't the only reason, I mean really, the stuff is pretty nasty.

5. Agave  -    Touted as the miracle sweetener, made from desert cacti and sweeter than sugar without the bad glycemic problems sugar causes.  What a load of poop.  Agave is nothing more than a different source for which manufacturers are able to make HFCS.   Hmm.  We should call it HFAS. (Agave)  It ain't pretty folks.  The drive to acquire larger supplies of Agave has driven Mexican farmers to scavange ANY agave species to feed the mills that ferment the raw plant into fructose.  Many of which are not exactly non-toxic. Check the link, lots of info on the saponins, the poor quality control and why there are different grades.

6.  Truvia/ Nectresse -  Stevia and Monk Fruit are the parent plants that these toxins are derived from.  But they are NOT all natural as the manufacturers claim. (Truvia)  Not as toxic as some, but still there.  Most of the chemical sweeteners on the market are cut with erythritol, which is a GM corn product that is processed and fermented using a whole host of toxic chemicals to make it palatable.  As are the stevia and monk fruits, which actually make up a tiny percentage of the final product.  Hunh, back to that unscrupulous practice thing again, and as long as the Gods at FDA allow them to label chemicals as "All Natural" then manufacturers will do so.

7.  White Sugar -  Enhhhh, been around for centuries, modern stuff contains bleaching agents, and is usually just plain sucrose.  Not great for you, but better than all of the above.

8. Colored sugars - Brown, raw, turbinado sugars are pretty much just white sugar with molasses added back to them.  Stronger flavor, but still mostly just white sugar.

9.  Organic Evaporated Cane Juice. - They take sugar cane juice and run through an evaporator.  Pretty simple and better for you than anything above.  This is what I use.  I put some in a blender and grind on high to make confectioners sugar.  It is nice, not as sweet with a nuttier, lightly molasses like flavor. 

10.  Honey/Maple syrup - Yes I know, they are both pretty much fructose, but there is a chemical difference and these are digested and absorbed in a very different manner.  And they have no nasty chemicals added from manufacturing processes.  Much better choices.  

11. Stevia -  My favorite for tea.  I use plain stevia leaves, steep in hot water along with mint leaves, or green tea, or any herbs, and it is just fine.  Some people say that there is a slight licorice like aftertaste, but I have been drinking the stuff for thirty years and I don't notice it anymore.  There are a huge number of stevia extract products on the market, read the ingredients, if they contain erythritol or any other artificial ingredient, avoid it.  Make your own, buy the leaves, steep in water or alcohol.

So that's it for now, some bad stuff, some not so bad stuff, and some that might taste a little like licorice.  I admit I bake stuff like cinnamon rolls on occasion, and use cane juice, sometimes brown sugar.  But I never drink diet soda, and I never ingest anything with items 1 through 7 in the list above.  

Most of the BILLIONS of dollars in drug sales, are unneccessary, and harmful.

Many of the world's best selling drugs are absolutely useless.  Well, not necessarily useless, they make billions and billions of dollars for their manufacturers, the Big Pharma companies.  For the most part, the biggest groups of drugs are actually dangerous.  With billions of dollars feeding the frenzy, no one wants you to know that there are multitudes of cheap and extremely effective natural treatments. OH CHEF ROY IS CRAZY!!!!!   No, not CRAZY, drugs are not a necessary part of having a good healthy life, the AMA and Big Pharma want us to believe they are.  If the modern world were to discover that simple dietary and lifestyle changes could DRAMATICALLY affect your health, then how would they continue to bring in tons of money.  And let's face it, they make TONS of money.  Okay, let's look at some simple stuff.

Statins, these are a group of drugs that are fast becoming one of the most prescribed drugs in America.  These drugs are used to lower cholesterol.  Certainly some people need to lower their levels, but what is not widely known is that in the nineties several studies were done on this very subject, and a very nice Scottish study showed that with no other changes, people that ate two carrots and a stalk of celery every day lowered their total as well as bad cholesterol levels more than the new emerging class of drugs, statins.  Yikes!  And here is the latest FDA update on the HUGE numbers of things that can possibly happen to you if you take statins. (FDA Stuff)  and it includes liver damage, loss of muscle mass and or muscle damages, loss of cognitive mental functions, increased risk of diabetes.  These are just the updates to the list of known side effects of most statins that include anemia, sexual dysfunction, cataracts, vision loss, neuropathy, increased risk of cancer, increased risk of pancreatic problems, decreases in immune system functionality, and, well, isn't that enough.  The truth is that the SAD,  (Standard American Diet) is the cause of higher cholesterol levels.  It isn't just eating too much red meat, it is about eating modern meat, which has little resemblance to the type of meat that humans evolved eating.  And well of course just the rest of our diets as well, processed everything, HFCS, crap.  If a couple carrots helped 50 volunteers, think about what might happen to the whole country if we all ate better.  Yikes again, the Big Pharma companies might not make so much money and all of our insurance rates would drop like stones.

Blood Thinners, these are drugs that affect the clotting capabilities of blood.  Sometimes this is a problem, although no one actually knows why, or why the actions of these specific drugs actually work.  But then, most of the drugs on the market are the same, researchers don't really know HOW they perform the effects that they do.  There are times though where a person's blood has a tendency to clot too much, and therefore anti-clotting drugs are prescribed.  These particular drugs are supposed to prevent strokes, recurring heart attacks, pulmonary embolii and other asundry problems associated with an accelerated tendency for the blood to clot.  Most popular, Warfarin, or commonly called coumadin.  This is an actual rat poison that was discovered that the reason it killed rats was because they bled to death internally.  A new class of anti-clotting agents are out now as well, with Plavix being the biggest.  All of these drugs have unbelievably horrific side effects.  When I was told I needed to take Warfarin to attempt to stave off another pulmonary blood clot that the medical community through all of their best efforts could not tell me why I continued to have, actually I had them four different times, the side effects are what made me look for an alternative.  I was happy to learn that Plavix was about to be approved for people like me until I discovered that Plavix reduced the risk of stroke in patients down to 6.78 per 100,000 people.  Then, I found that taking one baby aspirin a day would drop the risk of stroke to 6.97 per 100,000 people.  And a very low possibility of death, unlike Plavix.  And at about 1 cent an aspirin, 600 times cheaper.  Let me tell you what happened to me with coumadin.  About 80% of my hair fell out, my skin became so thin that if I walked out into the sun then I would be covered with big red blotchy bruises.  Many of which would open up if touched and I would bleed for hours.  I couldn't shave with a razor as the same thing, people died by bleeding to death after shaving.  The stuff reduces your ability to fight infection, maybe that is why I acquired MRSA in my sinuses.  Anyway, I stopped taking the stuff and started taking Ginko Biloba, Natokinase, baby aspirin and even when not taking the rat poison for 4 months, I went to the doctor to have my blood INR tested and my natural treatment gave me an acceptable reading of 2.0 or 2.1 at the highest.  I haven't looked back.

Prednisone, and related steroids.  These drugs are prescribed for a variety of reasons, most having to do with inflammation.  Whether the inflammation is in your lung passages, or around your muscles, joints or wherever, (trying not to say rectum) these drugs have great short term benefits.  When I was living in an apartment with black mold in it, I couldn't breathe, my lungs were so inflamed I could not get enough air into them.  I was on steroids almost continuosly for 4 or 5 months.  I developed something called Avascular Necrosis.  Which is where the ends of the bones, generally the ball part of the hip joint, begins to die and causes great pain.  For me, it is a little more advanced and it seems to be affecting knees, ankles, fingers and who knows, maybe my brain, I do seem to be a little more insane of late.  But anyway, some of the other fun effects are high blood pressure, easy bruising, reduced resistance to infection, bone loss other than AN, bone fractures, spine problems, cataracts, and of course, death.  Here I don't have a lot of recommendations about what to do as an alternative.  I tried the natural stuff, Boswellia, Mulein, Reishi, Ginkgo and others, it might just be that the black mold I was living in was worse than any benefits possible.  Best advice though is just take an interest in your treatment and don't take steroids for long periods of time.

PPI's or Proton Pump Inhibitors.  These are the drugs that make Big Pharma Billions and Billions for a disease that virtually none of the people taking these drugs actually have.  GERD is an extremely rare problem with genetic defects in the linkage of the esophagus to the stomach.  However the drug makers want us to think it is as common as Body Odor.  PPI's will destroy your gut, destroy your ability to fight infections, causes ulcers, ulcerative colitis, they block nutrient absorption, cause loss of bone density leading to easy fracturing and can PERMANENTLY destroy your body's ability to manufacture the acids it needs to digest the foods you eat, but may never get to again if you take the stuff.  Glaxon-Kline doesn't want you to know that a few years on their crap and you will be drinking nutritive shake type substances for the rest of your life instead of eating food.  Oh yeah, says right on the warning label, not for extended long term use.  Ask your doctor, he might not tell you that part, he probably got a free vacation to Barbados paid for by Glaxo to not tell you the important stuff.  So what do you do if you have heartburn a lot?  Really, it isn't hard to figure out.  First, change your diet, most people with recurrent heartburn are overweight.  There just might be a correlation there.  Also if your gut bacteria are ailing, so will your other systems, and an attempt by the body to rid itself of unwanted bacteria in your gut is to excrete larger amounts of acids.  Yikes, simple huh?  Eat better, fresh raw and fermented.  Good words to go by, even yogurt (NOT THE STUFF WITH ALL THE SUGAR) adds back needed bacteria that are beneficial.  Change your lifestyle to improve your body.

Oh yeah, again, cut out the modern meat, that will help immensely.

Lisinopril and other meds to reduce blood pressure.  Wow, these things come right from the manufacturers website.  Side effects include headache, dizziness, diarrhea, and cough, however there are significant numbers of these side effects reported as well:

• difficult breathing, nausea, vomiting, fever, stuffy nose, fatigue, taste changes, fainting, chills, depressed mood, low energy, flu symptoms, allergic reactions, hoarse voice, gain weight, oliguria, anuria, hair loss, linitis, sensitive to light, hives, insomnia.
• muscle pain, chest pain, stomach cramps, indigestion, sore throat, muscle weakness, joint pain, infection of the nose or throat, face, lips, tongue or throat edema, gout.
• rash, mild skin itching, psoriasis, tingly feeling, jaundice, sun sensitive skin, flushing, blistering skin, toxic epidermal necrolysis.
• palpitations, low blood pressure, heart attack, slow heart rate, weak pulse, uneven heartbeats.
• hypoglycemia, extreme loss of water in the body, high amount of potassium in the blood, decreased neutrophiles and granylocytes.
• altered interest in having sexual intercourse, erectile dysfunction.

There are others side effects of lisinopril but rare even though very serious as: kidney diseases, Steven-johnson syndrome, uncoordinated, life threatening allergic reaction, hemolytic anemia, toxic epidermal necrolysis, inflammation of the pancreas, fluid in the lungs, angioedema (intestinal, in neck and head)
Yikes again, sure seems like this is the stuff that the Nazis came up with to torture us Jews and see what makes us tick.  Anyway, high blood pressure is a pretty simple fix, lose weight, don't eat salt, don't eat processed foods, make your diet at least 50% raw vegetables and don't eat meat.  Perhaps that is too tough for most people, I mean after all, the Big Pharma drug lords have more drugs to treat all of the side effects that this drug causes.

This isn't the complete list of bad drugs, this is a partial list, and again, I urge everyone to take control of your own personal medical treatment.  Doctors in reality have very little idea what is going on with you personally unless you tell them and even then, they prefer to prescribe drugs that the manufacturers and the AMA have told them to.  Modern medicine is the single largest cause of death in America today (Number one)  Question everything, demand answers, don't submit to drugs just because a doctor says he thinks it might work. 

Try to remember, as long as you are willing to live the lifestyle that causes your body parts to fail, there will always be someone around to profit from it.  Yeah, some things are unavoidable, but for the most part, most are self inflicted.  Read my blog more, learn about modern meat, GM foods, pesticide residues and all the stuff that is killing us, slowly, and with ever more certainty. 

Modern Meat. Tyson Foods sees it, and will not use it anymore. Hip hip hooray!

Yes, it's true.  I like to eat meat.  I love meat, especially sausages, and the things I do with chicken have made me the ultimate chef in the hearts of more than a few young maidens.  It's just that I don't like to eat Modern Meat.   (MM) (Meat of the Matter) (More on MM)  A lot of people don't like to eat it either.  In fact I think it would be safe to say that most people wouldn't eat the stuff if they knew what was in it.  The nice thing though is that virtually every country in the world except the US and Canada have outlawed the use of a nasty drug called Ractopamine.  And their citizens don't get to eat it.  Unless they eat meat imported from the US.  Earlier this year, both China and Russia banned imports of US meats because they are contaminated with Ractopamine.  Well the term contaminated is a misnomer, the Ractopamine is given to the steers in ever increasing doses in an intentional attempt to get the cattle to put on sheer muscle mass at rates that are faster than possible through normal dietary methods.

Lean muscle mass.  Seems like a rather unique drug that would make a few athletes have giant erections in anticipation.  Well, it did back when it was first discovered.  Back then it was called Zilpaterol, and was used to treat asthma.  With the side effect of adding muscle, and, well, central nervous system problems, ADD, ADHD, death, the usual stuff that drug companies consider minor side effects.  It was immediately banned by sports, all sports.  And it was taken off the market to treat asthma as well, just too many minor side effects killing off the patients.  But the miracle of modern pharmacology is that what kills people, can be injected into people food.  Such as, beef, pork, chicken, turkeys and whatever else you want.  It makes cattle put on huge amounts of lean muscle.  It also makes them run around the pens in a crazed state, very similar to the proverbial "Mad Cow Disease".  That's okay though, still good meat on those bones.

Right now there are no FDA regulations as to how much residual Ractopamine is allowed to remain in the meat when taken to slaughter.  There is no way of knowing what dose you might be getting.  It is estimated that 70 to 90 percent of American beef has Ractopamine residues.  40 to 65 percent of pork.  And an unknown percentage of poultry.  A couple of years ago California passed a law stating that if a steer can't walk up the ramp to be killed, then it could not be used for human food.  Ranchers went to the Supreme Court with money and lawyers and got that law declared unconstitutional.  Ranchers have the right to feed beef to you that are so sick as to be unable to walk.  It is their constitutional right!  Makes me a little concerned as to what your constitutional rights still might be.  I think that the days of a vote having much in the way of any rights is over, money, and a lot of money, has rights that simple consumers used to have.

So, that background info about Ractopamine behind us, the news this week is that Tyson Foods beginning on September 6 of this year will no longer buy any cattle that have been given the drug Ractopamine.  (Reuters News on the Event)   Here, it is a little difficult to say what the reason for the ban might be.  Are the agri-giant food processing companies really concerned with the livelihood of the consumers?  Or are they more concerned that other countries besides Russia and China will jump on the real food bandwagon and ban imports of products that are contaminated with a known toxic agent?  I personally think that the second option is the preferred one.  Pretty certain that Tyson hasn't suddenly gotten a conscience and started to make foods that are wholesome.  If that were the case, then the MSG manufacturers would go out of business in no time as Tyson and other processed food makers use that stuff by the railcar full every day.

Anyway, it is still a small step forward.  I just hope that consumers don't get caught in any two steps back.

The tide just might be turning. Hmmm, maybe I will see changes before I die

I think that most of us consumers understand how the real world works, at least I hope so.  Businesses, well, at least manufacturers, agrigiant cooperative farms, processors of food products etc, all are in business for the express purpose of making money.  One of the key rules in business is that all things being equal, the guys that pay less for their product, make more money than the competition.  Walmart has been the prime company utilizing this basic law of business to the absolute ultimate.  And it has worked.  Walmart is the largest retailer in the world, sales reached 500 billion dollars last year.  Half a trillion.  And all of it sold to consumers at what Walmart advertises to be the lowest price available.  Anywhere.

So how do they do it.  Buy stuff and pay less for it than everyone else.  They used the growing economic upheaval of manufacturing in China and other southeast Asian countries to manufacture products, and buy as much, or in some cases, all, of their production.  All in all, a spectacular business model.  Except last month, JP Morgan downgraded Walmart, to neutral.  Yikes, a business that has performed fabulously for 30 years, is suddenly having some difficulties.  Whereas small businesses in America this year have seen the largest growth in just about ever; Walmart is experiencing sluggish sales.  Where small businesses have had growth in employment, Walmart has not.  Where small businesses generally distribute money around within the community, Walmart takes money and distributes it to foreign businesses and rich Wall Street do nothings.

So what does this one bit of info mean?  Well it means that maybe, just maybe, Americans are beginning to see the light, to see the path of their downfall, their imprisonment, their slavery to the whims of their rulers, their deaths at the hands of corporate greed.  Maybe.  Sales of products via alternative methods such as farmers markets, farm stands and retail Internet sales is growing at rates that make retailers in the world salivate with lust and jealousy.  Public sentiment is changing, the populace is slowly becoming aware of the GM food problem, that the greed of big business is the reason for the lowly bumblebees dying, which will cause food prices to increase, and that some of the foods we eat, just might not be good for us as we have been told they were.  And all that means that consumers are looking toward alternate methods to feed, clothe and maintain the lifestyles for which  they have become accustomed. 

According to Food Business News, over 1100 new products,  mostly beverages, have been introduced this year alone that use Stevia as a sweetener.  Not any of the toxic ones approved by the FDA, but plain old Stevia.  The USDA has approved a new label for products that are certified GMO free.  They claim that they still believe GM foods to be "safe", however they now have an easily identifiable label that allows their families easy access to purchase non GM products for themselves.  Oh, and for you as well.  Anyway, the world is changing, maybe the Wall Street do nothings are seeing the tides change.  The sad part is that I truly believe that those same do nothings are working hard to figure out how to make money on the farmers market industry.  That and local small businesses, and Internet sales, and all the stuff that is making them crap in their pants when other people make money, and they can't get a piece of the pie.  They should get into the government sector of organized crime, taxation is the way to do all that.

Think local, spend local, grow as a nation.

I'm wrong, I wrote something that was not true, well, sort of.

I was looking at the FDA website today looking to find out what has happened with the attempt of the dairy industry to allow themselves to add aspartame and other artificial sweeteners to 17 milk products without any requirement for them to list it in the ingredients.  Seems that according to the FDA website, updated 5/23/13, that what I had thought is not actually so.  I admit that I got the original info from my old "friend" Dr. Mercola.  The king of fear mongering and the ultimate purveyor of overpriced health remedies and supplements.  Yes, I did read his page and his info stated that the dairy guys wanted this done.  (Mercola)  When I read the FDA page, the proposal by the dairy industry is for a change in the "Standard of Identity" for milk.  And that the change would mean that instead of flavored milk products saying "Reduced Calorie" on the label, which they feel is harmful in the eyes of consumers, the dairy guys won't have to put that particular phrase on the label.  The ingredients will still list the specific toxic additive like aspartame, they just won't have to label it as low calorie or some other such BAD monicker that would in any way confuse someone buying the product based on the major wording on the label. 

I was wrong, I should have researched the petition myself instead of relying on someone else.  Someone that makes millions pushing fear into the world. 

the reason stores sell crap is because people buy it.

I guess it all started with some company back in the fifties using this chemical additive that was used in certain African countries to make yeast grow faster, increase the bonding strength of the gluten molecules as they formed, and was relatively tasteless.  It was cheap, it made for bigger fluffier and as an added bonus, whiter, bread.  The chemical was potassium bromide, and it started a revolution in food manufacturing.  That one chemical was soon joined by MSG, which when added to processed foods that had most of their natural flavors and nutrients removed, made the taste almost irresistible. 

Thus came the sellout of the agency that was formed to protect the American way of life from unscrupulous food and drug manufacturers, The FDA.  The sad part of course is that the American People actually need to be protected from our protectors as it turns out, they are the ones that have become unscrupulous and our lives and welfare are now secondary as the leaders of the FDA position themselves to move into the private sector with favorable approvals for substances that are known to be harmful but in fact make manufacturing of foods to be cheaper, last virtually forever, and unfortunately, toxic.  So facts on the problem (Revolving Door)

So anyway, our food supply has year after year, become more and more toxic.  And of course big agri-businesses continue to make toxic foods because they quite frankly, can.  And the worst part is, that people continue to buy them.  The reason they can make crap is because nearly every food processor out there makes and uses the same toxins in their foods.  If people start to get sick and die prematurely ( IF ) then no single food processor can be blamed.  They ALL use the same toxins, they ALL might be guilty; however there is no way to blame any one specific company.  (My five articles on this subject) 

The same thing happens at the retail level.  The reason that you can't find any bread on the shelves that does not have the big seven bread toxins in it is because they all bake toxic breads, and people buy them.  The reason every single condiment, soda, jelly, bread, ice cream and most products in the market contain High Fructose Corn Syrup is because we as consumers, buy them.  I was looking at mustard the other day, about three fourths of the ones on the shelves had HFCS as an ingredient.  IN MUSTARD!!!!! 

The only way for us to get the crap out of our food supply is to not buy it.  It starts with letting our retailers know what we want.  Sounds simple, and basic.  But I know for a fact that store managers have no idea that there are breads that don't contain potassium bromide, or Azodicarbomide, or the other five of the big nasty seven.  Or that they don't even know that most green and yellow summer squash and papaya are Genetically Modified and it is up to them, as retailers, to demand non-GM produce.  But only if consumers ask for it.  Yeah yeah yeah, don't be an ass like I was last November and get yourself kicked out of Safeway for making a scene and attempting to blame Safeway's lack of non-GM products on their desire to destroy the health of their customers.  I was upset, Prop 37 failed, and Safeway donated a million to the defeat Prop 37 movement.  But never the less, if we, as consumers go into stores and let them know what we want, real food, with no toxic additives, then the stores will get the message.

If we don't tell them, then they will think that all is good, and keep getting in the crap they have been getting and that will be all that is available to us.  It doesn't hurt to ask the store manager if they think Sprouts or Whole Foods might carry what you want.  Get them to think for a change. 

GM Corn versus Non-GM Corn. Controversy, extremists battle both sides.

Well, it seems that there is a whole lot of controversial mud slinging going on right now.  Well, let's just call it what it is, childish bickering and whining.  There are people on both sides of the issue, some are standing fast and defending the group MomsAcrossAmerica as well as my old friend (NOT REALLY) and favorite purveyor of high priced get well supplements, Dr. Mercola; against those that want to arrest and prosecute them for quoting a report that shows that GM corn is lacking in minerals when compared to non-GM corn.  The first such report to show this was done by a private firm expressly for a seed company.  the report was termed confidential and basically was for internal use only and not for public release. 

Now here's the thing.  Whoever actually grew the GM corn was contractually prohibited from testing the corn for nutrient content by the absolutely unbreakable contract that the farmer signed when he was forced to grow that particular Genetically Modified corn.  Forced is not such a harsh word, try to remember that Monsanto and a couple other gene tech companies have bought nearly all of the seed producing companies and so the ONLY seed available to farmers to purchase has been, for many years, GM corn.  And to buy the corn, a contract must be signed.  A contract that does not allow the farmer to in any way shape of form, test the crops he grows.  And of course the farmer can't save the seed to replant the next crop, he can't buy chemicals such as fertilizer, herbicide, pesticide or fungicides, except from the manufacturer of the GM corn.  Pretty slick monopoly.  Personally, I can't see me ever signing a contract to do that, but I haven't ever been in a situation where if I wanted to make money doing what I do, and there was only one alternative, then the choice was make money or go broke. 

Anyway, most people probably won't take the time to go on the Internet and look up all of the hundreds of blogs, webpages, fb posts and other crap about whether or not  the Moms group or Dr. Mercola had the right to reprint the article, or whether or not the facts in the article were even true or not.  Believe me, it isn't worth it.  A whole lot of self important fools that are not very nice and extremely crude at times and most of which have extremely poor grammar.  So, don't waste the hour that I did trying to find this one article about the differences.  (GM corn Vs NonGM corn)   Some Brits have a bunch to say about the chemical makeup of corns grown on adjacent fields.  One GM, one non-GM.  Of course the testing was done with standard gas chromatography and showed what I thought were results that mimicked very similar results done back in the early seventies when tests were done on Organic corn versus conventionally grown corn.  Organic far surpassed non organic in mineral content.  The same would hold true with corn grown on land that was sprayed with toxins regularly and the fragile bio infrastructure of the soil denuded of life.  So I for one am not surprised.  What is surprising is that the GM corn tested had 200 ppm of formaldehyde present along with the barely legal limit of glyphosate.  Formaldehyde?  Yup, a toxin that is extremely destructive to the Central Nervous System in humans.  And of course although that is widely known, and even though the EPA, the FDA and the USDA have limits of how much of this stuff we as humans should ingest on any given day; is still allowed in our food supply in the form of Aspartame.  And it seems, in GM crops.  The British researchers postulate that the formaldehyde is coming from the breakdown of the glyphosate residues on the crops.  (more on that here)

Really?

Who would have guessed that having a diet cola, eating yogurt, and snacking on corn chips would give you enough formaldehyde to permanently damage your central nervous system enough to mimic ALS, MS, and a whole host of disorders.  Well, I did.  But then most people don't.  The standard rebuttal is, "I'm just getting old." or "The kid's fine, so he has a hard time concentrating, he's a kid!"  And pretty much a whole host of concepts that people use to sweep the problem under the table, until the pile is so huge it takes over your life. 

The most important policy that our government has before it at this time is the labeling of Genetically Modified foods.  That is just the uppermost tiniest tip of the iceberg, because after that is the need to reform campaign financing, ridding the planet of the toxic GM plants while we still have a slight chance of doing so, stopping the use of toxic pesticides and herbicides, removing toxins from vaccines for human use (it is possible) and well, a whole host of things that will make the world a better place to continue to live.  As opposed to the slow deadly path of death, corruption and despair of which we are heading.

So, such a fun note to leave you with on this sunny August day.  Well, okay, one more.  Did you know that most supermarkets in the country today devote more shelf space to liquor and tobacco than to fresh food?

A recipe for any novice and for every gourmand. Eggs and potatoes poached in salsa.

There are some scary things that I see frequently.  When I am out selling my products at the farmers markets, I am told by young people all the time that they don't cook, so they wouldn't use my products.  Really, they don't cook.  But they are there at the market buying stuff, so must be a brush off, right?  Maybe, but then maybe they don't, I mean I think that the reason all of the Mickie D's and Burger Barn places are jam packed with people might be because other than a few vegetables, most of the population gets their dietary needs from purveyors of junk food.  Who am I to say anything though, I mean I smoke cigars and drink artisan beer.  What I don't do is eat meat, high fructose corn syrup in any form, white flours, rice, or sugars, nor do I eat anything with added MSG, or well, anything you have a hard time pronouncing.  And never anything from the mighty gilded boobs.

Sorry, I digress.  Let's talk about a simple dish that anyone can make.  And it is very nice, very tasty, and mighty good and easy.  You need a skillet with a lid.  Hopefully everyone has one, no aluminum or toxic non-stick crap.  Good stainless or ceramic.  Now heat on the stove over medium.  Take a couple of well scrubbed potatoes, your favorite kind, or if cooking is new to you, try the Yukon Gold variety, they are very nice.  Slice them into thick slices about three quarters of an inch thick.  Take a fork and jab each cut side a few times.  Now, to the skillet, add a couple tablespoons olive oil.  If it smokes, take off the stove and let cool a bit, and turn heat down.  Back on the stove, throw in the potatoes.  Place them with a cut side down.  Cover and turn heat to low medium and cook for about 10 minutes.  Remove lid, turn over.  Add about a cup and a half of salsa.  Your favorite will do nicely.  It should not be a really thick salsa, you want it kiind of runny, so add a little water, or beer, to make it thinner.  Cover.  Let cook until the salsa begins to bubble up.  Now, scoot the potatoes into groups, leaving open areas.  If possible, if not, you can just crack the eggs anywhere, they will still poach.  For fun, throw in some washed jalapeno peppers wherever there are open spots.  Place some grated cheese on top of each egg.  Place the cover back on the skillet and set the timer for about 10 to 14 minutes.  The time difference depends on how much stuff you add.  To check. tilt the pan.  Undercooked eggs will still be really loose.  Eggs that are just right, the yolks will just barely move.  remove from heat, add some sliced green onions or olives.  Chopped cilantro if desired.  And serve.  The jalapenos that are poached this way get soft and they pick up a whole different complexity with the salsa as the cooking medium.  And the potatoes, yum.  Beginners will love this, seasoned cooks will be inspired.  for me, this is a great dish and when I make whole wheat tortillas to go along with it, all my guests have just raved about it all.

Try it, get away from the fast food addictions, do something real for a change.

Monsanto Hype, Myths about GMO's. Fascinating!

The great state of Washington is now the hotbed of controversy about labeling foods that contain Genetically Modified Organisms.  GMO.  Last year it was California with proposition 37 being the juicy issue of controversy with GMO manufacturers spending nearly 50 million dollars on deceitful propaganda to fill the heads of voters with scary lies in a successful attempt to have them vote against passage of the labeling law.  It was all pretty silly, Monsanto claiming that passage of a labeling law would increase food costs for the average family by over four hundred dollars a year.  That's a lot of ink.  Oops, not actually ink, this little quote from the No on Prop 37 website tells us what they actually base that 400 bucks on.  
"by forcing food products to be repackaged or remade with higher priced ingredients, Prop 37 would cost the average California family up to $400 per year in higher grocery costs."  
Of course the law never said that products had to be repackaged, just adding a tiny disclaimer label stating it contained GM foods was all that was needed.  At least until current packaging stocks ran out and new ones printed.  But then the really big one, "remade with higher priced ingredients"  Yup, the truth is right there on their own propaganda website.  Monsanto and all know for a fact that consumers won't buy their crap.  Food manufacturers will have to reformulate their shitty food products using traditional ingredients that do in fact cost more money because of their scarcity since GM crops dominate the marketplace after the Monsanto drive to create their own personal monopoly over seed production thus limiting availability of non-GM seeds for planting.  

Monsanto knows people don't want to eat their Genetically Modified Crapola!

They are desperate to keep GM labeling out of AmeriKa.  They have done a great job so far.  The states that bent to consumer pressure and passed in-state labeling referendums in fact were only attempts by the legislatures to placate the populace while still keeping the grubby monetary handouts from Monsanto coming.  The labeling laws only take effect if neighboring states enact similar laws.  Therefore no blame can be assessed against those lawmakers.  None of the elected rulers in our land want to ever offend the gift of free money handed out to them by big corporations.  And Monsanto and the food industry are in fact the biggest in the land.  Well except for the drug companies.  And they already have their industry protected by purchasing the favors of our leaders.  Well, actually just purchasing our leaders.  I understand that congressmen and senators come pretty cheap when you purchase them in wholesale quantities.

Anyway, with the upcoming passage of an actual voter decided law to label GM foods, Monsanto and the others are preparing for a battle again.  Monsanto is out there telling the residents of Washington a whole host of lies about their products.  Here are some of the lies that Monsanto et al are spreading via their website, their propaganda machine and actually if you write to your elected representatives and senators about GM foods, they send this crap back to you.  Charles Keating (remember him) taught us just how much it costs to purchase the favors of senators. (one point five mil per five senators)  It was a lesson well learned by Monsanto and other big corporations.  Anyway, here are the more salient points that they attempt to pass off as "Truths".

1. No one has ever proven that GMO's are harmful to people.

Surprisingly, this is true.  Researchers from all over the world have proven that GM foods are harmful to rats, pigs, hamsters, mice, insect populations including bees.  They have proven that the BT toxin that was previously thought to be harmless does in fact harm human tissues.  But to corral a bunch of humans and feed them GM crops long term then actually dissect those humans and determine what caused all of their disrupted systems, no, that hasn't been done yet.  (GM REPORT) ((I think the heads of Monsanto should volunteer to do this))

2. GM crops are the only way to stop world hunger.

Well, nice if it was true.  It isn't.  Transportation is the major cause of world hunger today.  And of course, governmental corruption.  A recent study showed that traditional farming methods in Europe have far and above outperformed GM crop production.  (GM Report Card)  And with far less pesticide and herbicide use.

3. GM crops need less pesticide use

Again, this one is a true sore spot with me.  It is simple and BASIC science.  Insecticides and Herbicides don't kill every single individual targeted plant or insect.  Those that survive, breed and pass on their resistance.  The fields of AmeriKa are choking on sixteen herbicide resistant species of weeds and hundreds of species of insects.  All because of wholesale spraying of chemicals and the failure of the BT toxin inserted into the genetic makeup of the GM crops.  

4. GM technology is the same as cross-breeding of crops that has taken place for thousands of years

Lies lies lies lies.  See number 7 at (Frankenfood) 

5. The FDA and the USDA have approved all GM crops as safe

No they haven't.  Congress gave Monsanto permission to market all GM crops during congressional hearings in 1996.  Approval is a formality for individual products and is BASED on TESTS PERFORMED BY THE MANUFACTURER of any given new plant.  Neither the FDA nor the USDA do ANY testing themselves on any GM plants.  EVER!

6. GM foods are exactly the same as their non GM counterparts

What a crock.  Nutritional analysis has shown us just how far off this myth is.  See number 6 on this one again (Frankenfood)  And as a side note, the EPA has just RAISED the allowable limit of glyphosate residues on crops fed to animals up and past levels that are KNOWN to be harmful and destroy human tissues.  Where is the substantial equivalence there?  Traditional farming uses far less herbicides and organic uses none.  And quite successfully too!

If you know anyone that lives in Washington state, let them know that they need to be careful of the Monsanto propaganda machine that is gearing up there to spread the usual lies and rhetoric there that they did in California last year.  Tell them to not be mislead, that the government in AmeriKa does not prosecute corporations for spreading untruths about products that make money for them, and for your elected rulers.  As always, listen, learn, research and discover the truth for yourself. 

Don't let advertising do your thinking for you, that is unless you are the type that thinks that Honey Bo Bo is the epitome of salient and progressive entertainment.  If so, there is no hope for you whatsoever.

 

I just have to say something about the Jenny Witch Hunt

Jenny McCarthy.  I must admit that I never watch those TV shows that talk about celebrities.  Ever.  Why, I mean I could care less about what they do.  Or who they have sex with, or how they bought themselves out of mandatory jail time, or which Kardasian is pregnant or screwing their own cousin or brother or whatever.  And there is some weird show about hillbillies that make duck quackers that is completely beyond human sensibilities.  Preschool potty humor.  And then Honey Bo Bo.  I sort of lump together the antics of MOST of Hollywood celebrities in the same category as those two.

And then some friends told me that some talk/news show called "The View" hired Jenny McCarthy.  And they inquired as to what I thought about the controversy.  My friends were being quite serious when they asked, so I had to say that I had no idea who she was, other than I believed her to be the big boobed boob that teased Charlie Sheen on his old TV show.  Ahhhhhh, they then told me she is an advocate for NOT vaccinating your children as she believed vaccines caused her son to become autistic.  Wow!  I had to read up on this. 

Jenny McCarthy.  Big boobs, as stated previously.  Playboy girl of the year etc.  Actress, of sorts.  I remember seeing her in Two and a Half Men.  She was seductive.  I'm not much of a judge of acting ability, I think Richard Dean Anderson is the bomb in Stargate.  So what do I know.  But then in 2002 she gave birth to a son.  Then the unthinkable, in 2005 he was diagnosed with autism.  Since then she has written books about and is a very outspoken advocate of parents NOT vaccinating their children as she believes that modern vaccines are the vehicle that instigates the onset of autism.  Sort of what I believe.  Here, you can go and look at some of my blog entries about vaccinations:
(Vaccine Propaganda)  Per CDC and WHO figures, a vaccinated child has a greater chance of death and or lifetime disability from the vaccine than they have of contracting the disease for which they are being vaccinated.
(Mercury in Vaccines) Maybe, just maybe, the huge numbers of kids with autism are affected by vaccines because they contain heavy metals like Mercury.
(Infant mortality in America) not specifically about autism, but links about how the vaccine industry in America just possibly might have something to do with the US having a VERY high infant mortality rate.  Higher than Cuba and some third world countries.
(The Government dealing with a problem) The government recognizes that vaccines are unsafe, they passed laws that exempt the manufacturers from liability
(Tough world for babies)  It is tough for babies, their systems can't take the influx of toxic crap in vaccines and especially so for Hepatitis B vaccine, of which a baby has a 1 in a billion chance of contracting, yet it is a required vaccination.  Over 1500 babies have died from this one vaccine alone, and that does not count all of those permanently disabled.

Hmmmm, maybe I need to rethink this blond bimbo.  So I read about her on the internet.  There is a lot of stuff, interviews with doctors, newsgrabbers, people filled with their own self importance, prime examples of the Dunning-Kruger Effect (Wiki) One thing that was said struck me as very odd.  This guy said that if Jenny McCarthy is allowed to go on the view show and spout her anti-vaccine rhetoric that has no scientific basis, then people will die.

Yikes, that is unreal.  The First Amendment guarantees that this guy can say crap like that, without actually looking at any research or studies detailing the specifics of the mortality and morbidity associated with vaccinations.  Instead he hammers in the AMA line of bullcrap that perpetuates the standard total control that they want to have over healthcare in the world.  Forget the bad, look only toward the drive to make money.  His attitude is just one of dozens that trumpet the need to silence Jenny McCarthy and her anti-vaccine voice.  They seem to forget that the First Amendment covers her as well.  And she has facts and figures to back up her stand.  Opponent have the vaccine manufacturers word that they make a safe product.  And the US government backs them up with total and complete immunity from any liability for those same safe vaccines.

Hey, I'm a guy.  I like women that are, well, big boobed.  I like them with small boobs too.  I like women.  I especially like women that stand up for their beliefs.

I now can say that I am a fan of Jenny McCarthy.  I might even find out when this View show is on and watch it.  Well, maybe, don't hold your breath.

Every single person on this earth fears it. Cancer.

I may be wrong, (according to the ex, I was ALWAYS wrong) but I believe that every single person out there has this absolute total and tremendous fear of being one of those statistics, diagnosed with cancer.  Yikes, cancer, the BIG C.  But wait a minute, TV people tell us all the time that survival rates for cancers are going up.  Still scary, but now, you can survive.  Well, that's what they tell us.  (Nobody wants cancer)

It might in fact have a little bit of truth, there are some increases in survival for breast cancer and prostate cancer.  More patients reach and pass that magical 5 year milestone.  However, those increases have not in anyway kept up with the increases in the incidences of diagnosed cancers.  Back in 1900 cancer was expected to hit about 1 in 100 people.  In 1940, it was 1 in 20.  Jump ahead to our lifetimes and it goes to 1 in 10 in 1970.  Today, it's a different story.  One in three people will get cancer in their lifetime.  Personally I believe that it is in a large part, the food we eat that causes the problem.  But this is about cancer, plain and simple.  One million new cases of cancer each year.  And in reality, it is all about the over FIFTY Billion dollars that is taken in by the cancer industry to prolong the lives of those cancers.

Notice that I didn't say cure, or prolong the lives of the victims; it is to prolong the cancer.  Other than those with cancer, no one in this country wants to cure cancers.  Why would they?  There is FIFTY Billion dollars at stake going into the coffers of the AMA, the doctors, the hospitals, the research facilities, the American Cancer Society and all of its subgroups, the insurance companies (well they don't like paying for it, but they do get to keep a percentage of their payouts) and most of all, BIG PHARMA!  The drug industry.  A major portion of that ANNUAL FIFTY Billion dollar handout to the medical industry goes to the drug companies.  A forty year war on cancer that has provided absolutely no results.  Well, again, breast and prostate cancers have a small increase in survivability.  Big pharma can give men an erection at will, but cure cancer, not likely.
Does anyone know what causes cancer yet?  Theories abound in the medical community.  And what's even more astounding is that theories have been formulated in some medical circles and treatments devised, that had huge significant results in actually CURING those with cancer. Yikes, if this is true, why aren't we seeing these treatments being used in mainstream medical circles to cure cancer?  Well, because most of them are cheap, unpatentable, and the people that developed them had hearts of gold and their desire was to GIVE the solution  to cancer to anyone that needed it, free of charge.

O H   M Y   G O D !    F  R  E  E   the ama  the ncs  the acs  the drug lords and the fda don't want that.

How can you make a living on the misery and FEAR of the populace if there are cheap or even free alternative treatments to the world's BIGGEST money making medical problem, cancer?  You can't.  So the solution is to keep cancer in the scary realm of life and debunk and deride these imposters of science.  Some actual doctors, medical doctors, have cured cancers.  Not a hundred percent recovery, but in significant percentages (like 60 to 95 percent in some types of cancer)  that the drug companies the fda and the cancer society were crapping their pants to shut these guys down.  Probably because their own "cures" only at best have success rates in single digits.  People like Rene Caisse who gave away an herbal concoction she got from an older Canadian Indian and that cured thousands of cancer patients.  Or Dr. Hoxsey that developed an holistic approach to a cancer cure, built 18 clinics and cured thousands of people before the FDA and the AMA shut him down and arrested him for helping people.  Or Max Gerson, who developed a dietary plan and herbal remedy that had an amazingly high success rate over 80 percent and was shut down and branded a charlatan and had his license to practice stripped from him.  Or Gerd Hamer, or Dr. Bryzenski, or Tulio Simoncini, or even at the turn of the 19th century, Armand Hammer.  All people with insight, and an astounding ability to cure patients with incurable cancers.  People that were given the death sentence to by traditional medicine.  (Cancer info)  And you might even remember some other treatments that have been BANNED in the US even though they had cure rates for progressive incurable cancers that were in many cases, in the 80 percentage rates.  Cancers that standard treatments gave a death sentence to but that could, if the patient desired, extend their lives by a few months, or a year, after horrific chemo and radiation treatments.  The alternative and controversial treatment options were Liatril and shark cartilage.  Huge cure rates, and banned because they were cheap, and actually cured people.

My absolute favorite quote about the FDA comes from a former head of the organization itself.   This is what he tells us.  "People think the FDA is protecting them - it isn't. What the FDA is doing and what people think it's doing are as different as night and day." - Herbert L. Ley, Jr., M. D., former Commissioner of the FDA.

I don't always agree with Dr. Mercola about a LOT of things when it comes to diet, nutrition and him selling all of his exorbitantly priced crap, sorry, stuff, but here is a link that will take you to a video about cancer and the treatments banned from use here in money making AmeriKa.  Watch it if you can and have an hour and a half.  It gives some poignant stories from survivors that were shunned by traditional medicine yet found cures from those alternative treatments available that have been banned.  (Mercola video) 

So, I hope you never get cancer.  If you do, I hope you seek some relief in non-traditional methods that have in the past, actually cured cancer in people, and not just taken their money and given them a long slow horrific death sentence.

Yeah, cancer in AmeriKa is still the biggest fear of people today.  A pretty horrific way to die.  Doctors giving you toxic and radioactive poison, afraid to touch the stuff themselves, giving you even more drugs to keep you from vomiting up the stuff, to keep you from keeling over right there, warning you not to touch anyone, and keeping you filled with hope, promises of life without cancer in maybe a couple of percent of the time.  And all the while, robbing you of whatever money you might possibly have, depleting your insurance benefits, and destroying any possibility of you having a normal life. 

Check out alternative treatments, your future would depend on it.

They're at the starting gate, and they're off,....Organics are moving up in the field, toxic laden natural foods are losing ground.....

It's not really a race, but it has the same outcome.  Winners, and losers.  It's just that we, the consumers, are both.  The Race, such as it is, is the sales of "Organic Foods" versus the sales of all other grocery foods.  The biggest contender is the increase in foods that are termed "NATURAL" and of which there is no regulation, no definitive rules nor guidelines for which the production of any food product so labeled as "ALL NATURAL" has to stop the inclusion of toxic additives, being grown in human sewage effluent and liberally sprayed with poisonous herbicides and pesticides.  Yeah, the term "NATURAL" is an advertising ploy and has nothing whatsoever to do with the product inside.

And the money keeps pouring in to the "NATURAL" food producers.  Sales this year of the crud labeled "NATURAL" are expected to reach $70 Billion.  Sales of Certified Organic products are expected to reach $35 Billion.  In the last five years, the Certified Organic food industry has seen a growth of over 35%.  The crud sales have grown as well, I just don't think anyone has ever taken the time to find out how much.  Plus, the propensity of agri-giant mega-companies that manufacture products that they like to claim as "NATURAL" tend to add that description to a whole lot of products.

Let's look at some stuff labeled "NATURAL"  (Me and Bread)  This was the first blog entry I wrote about WHY agribusinesses add toxins and crap to our food supply.  IT starts with details of Roman Meal 100% Whole Wheat All Natural bread.  It contains 7 chemical additives of which 2 are listed as Class II Carcinogens. And yet, right on the label, it proudly shows to consumers that it is "ALL NATURAL".  The group, The Cornucopia Institute keeps tabs on food products and even rates some groups of products as to how well they are made according to Organic standards.  (Cornucopia) These are the guys that have documented that some growers of grains that have ended up in products labeled as "ALL NATURAL" have routinely used dried sewage sludge residue to fertilize their fields and then used sewage effluent to irrigate the crops.  Have you ever used a cleanser to clean your bathtub, toilet bowel, or sink.  Then rinse the stuff down the drain.  And then eaten cereal grown in what you rinsed down the drain?

Probably.

And it was probably labeled "ALL NATURAL" as well.  Because the all powerful FDA here in AmeriKa has deemed that agribusinesses need an edge to compete with the huge growth in Certified Organic foods.  And to give big business that needed an edge, so they allow them to use the words "ALL NATURAL" in labeling, advertising and where ever they can, with absolutely no regulation. 

NONE!

It's up to us, as consumers, to look at the labels on food products to verify that there are no ingredients that we personally do not want to ingest.

Should we have to do that, shouldn't the term "ALL NATURAL" mean, no toxins added?

And what about the upcoming new rules for milk and milk products that state that milk producers can add Aspartame and NOT PUT THAT INFORMATION ON THE LABEL! 

Where does that fit into our ability to decide what we, as consumers, get to decide what we eat?

Today, Aspartame in sixteen milk products, with no requirement to put it on the label.  Tomorrow,......?

Maybe, just maybe, these are just a few of the reasons why sales of Certified Organic foods have grown 35% in the last 5 years.  I think that it has to do with a lot of what I write about here on this blog, the absolute and total FAILURE of the governmental organizations that are charged with protecting all AmeriKans.  The FDA and the USDA are two of the biggest most corrupt examples of the failure of our government.  (the revolving door)  I illustrate just that very thing.

Around the first turn, they're heading down the stretch,  Organics is breaking away and heading up fast.  Consumer education is making a break for it and the leaders are slowing down.

The race is on.