CREATION, the story of the beginning.

I'm trying to achieve bliss.  Not bliss, but BLISS.  For me, there is an actual Bliss Point.  Actually for everyone there is a Bliss Point.  Nobody likes to talk about it, but it exists, and for people like me, it is the ultimate expression of one's ability to create.  I do it via trial and error.  Big food manufacturers do it with lots of scientific testing, people with proven palate acumen and tasting ability sampling thousands of combinations, charting of specific ingredient densities of specified additives in which past performances and ratings have been calculated and the scariest part is the laboratory use of artificial tasting equipment that was made using living human cells that are kept alive in an artificial environment with the whole thing manufactured to give specific human type responses to levels of specified flavor constituents within a given trial recipe for a product.  All of the technical capabilities possible in modern science coming together in a laboratory by highly trained people attempting to find, The Bliss point, that point where the levels of salt, sugar, processed fats all come together with the maximum desirability with flavor, texture and ultimate satisfaction.  Oh, and yeah, the big guys also test to find out what kinds of toxic additives can be added and in what quantities without destroying the drive to The Bliss Point.  By toxins, I mean preservatives, anti caking agents, artificial colorants, artificial flavorings, artificial, well, anything.  It's difficult to imagine, but new products coming from corporate food takes hundreds of thousands of dollars to produce.  Those pesky problems with trying to mask the metallic flavors of so many of the artificial additives makes for a long and drawn out process.  And of course there is the other problem about how adding any of the good things, fat, sweet or salt are only good up to a point, and it is the technological methods of find that point, that Bliss Point, that costs so much money.

Hard to think about it, but all of the processed food in the stores has gone through, a Creation process.

Me, I have been doing this awhile and so pretty much know what tastes good, to me anyway.  And I formulate a product, make it, taste it, make more and sell it.  Seems so pedestrian when compared to how the big guys do it all.  I mean, really, I taste test a product with no added fat, sugar, salt or chemicals.  No wonder I am such a small timer.  But then I don't actually have hundreds of thousands of dollars to find out how to make something taste so good as to be, well, almost addictive.  Like Oreos.  Yep, professor Schroeder and his team at the University of Connecticut have come out with a new study about, food, specifically about Oreos.
“Our research supports the theory that high-fat/ high-sugar foods stimulate the brain in the same way that drugs do. It may explain why some people can’t resist these foods despite the fact that they know they are bad for them.”

 Oreos.  And Cocaine.  I quite eating them when they changed the gunk in the middle to hydrogenated canola and palm kernel oil back in the eighties.  Somehow I think that might have been a wise decision, especially after reading about this new stuff.  I mean we have known for quite a while about sugar and how bad it is for us, or at least the bad info and research has been available, just never talked about by the media.  Those guys don't ever want to offend those that pay them advertising dollars.  But just for fun, check out this cool 45 minute video about sugar.  (the Secrets of Sugar)  those Canadians on occasion have the cojones to put out correct info. 

One of the things that I do when I talk to people at farmers markets is to tell them about the state of the food supply in America today.  And the failure of the government to protect us, as citizens, from the damaging effects of the processed food industry.  And of course I do it with the hope that I will get a teaching job.  I do teach healthy, real cooking to people.  I use real ingredients, make real wholesome food quickly and full of flavor, not fat, sugar and salt.  And yes, I do it because I make a few bucks teaching.  But I also love to get the word out that processed foods are THE reason that Americans have higher rates of obesity, cancer, heart disease, cancer, inflammatory diseases, and well, really, everything pretty much that goes wrong with the body is a result of poor diet, toxic additives and environment.  We, those that want to alter our lifestyles and change our eating habits, must find our own personal Bliss Point in the foods that we make and consume.  It isn't hard, it is all about eating crap, and attempting to enjoy a long slow miserable death; or lowering our Bliss with good foods, no sugar, little salt and living better.

I've found my Bliss.  If you need help finding yours, contact me. 

Again with this religion stuff, you promised to never talk about it ever again.

Yes, a while back I said I shouldn't talk about religion ever again.  Well, it is a deep subject, and perhaps worthy of a mention now and again.  I guess that the conversations yesterday have led me to bring it all up again.  It seems as though some people (my brother) like to point toward the perceived problems with things that don't measure up to their world viewpoint and faith.  Anything that stresses that ideal about the infallibility of the bible, and modern religion is wrong, no possibility of compromise whatsoever.  I on the other hand understand that viewpoints differ, and accept the fact that it takes all kinds to make a world.  And that leads me into today's thoughts about, not religion itself, but about god.

What kind of a creature is god?  Benevolent, beneficent, sure, whatever.  God is all things to all religious men.  God has taken time to create this incredible universe and according to my brother, out of the billions and billions of galaxies each containing billions and billions of stars god has created life on this one planet out of all the other planets out there in this great cosmos.  And on that one planet, god has decreed that it is his provenance to make sure that young catholic boys don't masturbate.  Given what we know about the activities of catholic priests, there does seem to be some correlation between a man devoting his life to god and what we believe god is doing.  You know, sex wise.  Anyway, my brother tells me that the great cosmos is in fact devoid of any other life.  That all life in this universe is here on planet earth and that god created this place for us.  And we are to go forth and multiply like Mexicans and never masturbate.  And give countenance and devotion unto the god, the creator.  Through prayer.  That's how we communicate with our god, the creator.  It is not a one way street, god shows us daily the miracle that god has created for us here on planet earth by making the sun rise, the birds sing, the rain come and of course the mosquitoes bite and the germs kill, and earthquakes destroy and tornadoes kill and destroy; god makes life happen.

There is an old cartoon that I remember seeing a long time ago that is appropriate here, a man is sitting on a bench talking to god and he asks of him why does god allow war, disease, poverty and death to be so rampant here on earth.  And god looks at the man and says that he was just about to ask the man the same thing.  I take it a step further and say that man then says that he learned all that from god himself as god does a pretty good job of destroying and killing the people that were chosen to live their lives on this planet created for people by god.  When we look at all the suffering going on in this world, and all, or well most attributable to god, we begin to see why there is a need for prayer, for the people to communicate with god.  To ask forgiveness for sins, for forgiveness for masturbating, for cheating on a spouse, and most often, to ask for help to save loved ones from death as a result of all the problems that beset mankind both from god and from himself.  Plus I'm sure there are a lot of prayers to hit the lottery, or for a roll of the dice, or a horse or dog to speed it up a bit.  Given that man was created in the image of god, or so we have been told, then maybe there is a correlation between mankind and the sadistic nature of listening to the prayers of mere mortals asking for things beyond their means, and to save people from death and suffering.  So the question is in reality, does god listen to prayers?  It is the standard reply from the religious among us that god answers all prayers, we just don't always understand the answers.  That means it is all pure hokum and they have no answers either.  But what if this planet was chosen as the location of the indoctrination of hell unto those that deserve it.  A place where beings of incredible power and ability that have misused their power and are sent here to serve out a sentence from the greatest beings of all, the actual creators of the universe.  Those sentenced to serve in hell are strapped into a chair, not necessarily in the literal sense, and forced to listen to the continuous prayers of the beings created especially for that purpose.  Beings that live on this imperfect planet and living lives with free will and the actual sinner here is our god, forced to listen forever to the incessant whining of people here on this planet as they go on and on and on and on and on about how they need to win the lottery and how they are sorry for having sex with the paper boy and the gardener, and how they stole that money from petty cash and blamed the secretary, and how their parent needs to be saved from the ravages of a deadly disease, and of course how the teenage boy couldn't help himself and masturbated.

It all sounds a bit tiresome.  Having to listen to all those prayers, constantly, day in, day out.  For a god that is able to create a universe and then create human beings, having to listen to all that crap for all eternity seems like a waste of good divine ability.   

Then there is sin.  What is sin?  Is it sin to kill a man that is trying to kill you?  In war, no, in the streets, maybe, because he slept with your wife, no way.  Except in the bible, it was the duty of the populace to stone, and kill, a woman that slept with a man not her husband.  So when did that change?  Bestiality is a sin, or well, it is illegal, but when I lived in Austin I was sleeping with a woman that wanted me to urinate on her after sex.  Anal sex.  Is that a sin?  I guess the more important question, is it illegal?   And since no one was hurt, and the young maiden enjoyed the experience, on many occasions, was it a sin?

God has a mighty weird job.

Absolute Faith, blind and otherwise.

I think that faith, absolute faith, has indeed become a fixture in our modern world.  Blind faith.  Absolute total faith in a system of belief wherein the concept and details are not actually provable, at least not yet.  But for those that believe, provability is secondary to the actual belief.  And I'm not actually talking about religion, although there are many parallels with modern day religion that we can draw from.  My brother tells me that one of the causes of a breakdown in morality in America is the loss of religion, however statistics show this to be actually a bit off from reality.  Atheists statistically are more moral, commit fewer crimes, murders, tax evasions and adultery than those who profess to be religious.  So what this means is that life here in America does not require an absolute belief in blind faith.  There of course is that other argument that atheists will be the first ones on their knees praying at the first sign of a miracle; however when the Cardinals made it to the Super Bowl, I didn't see masses of people praying, and that in itself was a miracle.

Sorry, I digress.  But the facts are that my life here in America, and yours as well, are ruled by absolute and total BLIND FAITH. When scientists postulate about some abstract concept, they do experiments and collect data from which conclusions can be drawn.  That is called the scientific method.  For the most part it rules how science has moved forward these past several hundred years and why you can read this on your computer.  The scientific method has real provable tangible results attributable to cause and effect relationships in everything around us from the movement of the heavenly bodies to how such heavenly bodies as Sophia Vergara came to be the way she is.  The religious method of faith is just the opposite, there is a concept that must be believed, therefore scholars view the world and attempt to find facts that support the concept that they want the rest of the world to take with Blind Faith. 

In today's world, we, all of us, are expected to accept in total and complete Blind Faith, the concept that Genetically Modified foods are safe, healthy, of substantial equivalence to traditional foods and all without any scientific testing whatsoever.  Monsanto WANTED these conclusions to be the inerrant truth, and so not unlike the Creationist Method displayed above, so it is.  Back in 1996 the Senate held hearings, at the request of Monsanto, to give blanket approval for all Genetically Modified crops that were about to come out into the marketplace.  As support for their desire, Monsanto took some of the crops and fed them to rats for a grand total of sixty days.  The rats lived, and to this day, I cannot find the results of the Monsanto feeding studies of GM corn done in 1995 anywhere.  The fact that the rats lived must have been enough for Monsanto to have total and complete BLIND FAITH in their miracle foods.  They requested, and received, approval for GM crops to be grown here in America.  Without any further testing. 

 

This is just one aspect of how BLIND FAITH doesn't work.  The projected appearance that Monsanto wants us all to have is that the FDA will protect us from harm.  The reality is far far different.  Let's remember that the FDA doesn't actually do any testing of new food products, they instead utilize the research from the businesses that are introducing new food products to the world and using THAT data alone, determine whether or not approval should be granted.  Again, BLIND FAITH rules how the FDA protects us, as they take as the gospel truth, data, from Monsanto and others, as to how safe the GM crops are.  They also did the same for glyphosate, Roundup.  The problems become apparent when we begin to peek around the curtain at the man working the controls.  Just like when we question religion, we begin to see that the conclusions don't have any facts supporting them.  When Roundup was first patented by Monsanto, the BLIND FAITH claim was that it was harmless, biodegradable and completely non-toxic.  That has been proven as outright lies.  Genetically Modified crops have been presented to the world with the BLIND FAITH proclamation that they are substantially equivalent to traditional crops, harmless, and will increase productivity.  And all with virtually no research, data, or testing to substantiate the claims.  Sort of like the bible.  BLIND FAITH.  It works for a belief in a benevolent higher order of being, but for me that same concept doesn't work for the world in which I live in.  I WANT PROOF that these GM crops are safe, in long term testing.  I can't accept precursory testing done by the manufacturers when prominent scientists all over the world are doing the sorts of testing that SHOULD have been done 17 years ago and never was.  And the results of that independent testing is giving us a very disturbing reality.  One that does not fit in with the visionary BLIND FAITH required by those that demand it of us. 

I'm not an atheist, I do have a system of beliefs that work for me, and are in fact taken by me with blind faith.  Just in case you were wondering.  However I do believe that those that play at being a god, like Monsanto, the Senate, the president and my ex; need a bit of scientific proof to back up their claims.  

Corporate Rule, the vision of the future world, no more governments, corporations rule our lives

In the past I have read a few SciFi books, and there are a few out there that prophesy that some day the world will evolve into a form of government based on mega corporations becoming the ruling bodies, and absorbing the governments.  It is downplayed in the movie, the original movie not the remake, but "Rollerball" is one example.  The Energy Corporation rules with an iron hand, and what is most appropriate to today's world, the rollerball game is used to highlight the futility of individual effort. Ruling government/corporate bodies want the populace to produce for the good of the corporation, as nothing else matters.

On 9-19 I wrote an entry here about how the FDA is targeting small businesses with regulatory restrictions that for the most part, have put a huge number of small food processing entities out of business.  ( FDA Targets)  Those FDA people must be getting a TON of pressure from giant agribusinesses to eliminate the competition because the good ol' concerned with the health of Americans FDA here at Animal Farm are now putting the bite on small local farmers.  The government, with the full support of presidents Obama, Bush, Clinton, the other Bush, Reagan and I think even Carter had a hand in the whole takeover.  There have been a few outbreaks of infectious diseases related to eggs, prepared salad, peanuts and a few other things.  Generally when there are problems with e. coli and salmonella outbreaks, those things are traced back to large corporate production facilities. So even with that knowledge, FDA regulations have been made to stop any such contamination.  And of course, the rules mean sky high costs for the small guys, and their businesses are scooped up by the big guys.  Yet the problems continue, more recalls, more illnesses, and more deaths.  I check this site all the time, it's the FDA recall site, listing all the recalls.  It's updated daily. (FDA Recalls)  You never see small independent businesses listed.  EVER. 

I was at the Central Farmers Market today and talked with Larry, one of the farmers there.  I asked him how he can sell a bag of organic salad mix for just 3 bucks.  He said because he doesn't have to pay any corporate fatcats any of his profit.  I asked if he ever had any outbreaks or problems with e. coli or salmonella, and he said no, because he cares about his products. 

Makes sense doesn't it. 

Hard to believe but when the FDA gets around to enforcing all the new rules for small farmers, Larry won't be able to pay the ten to fifteen grand a year required to comply with their new rules.  If people want his salad or any of his other products, they will have to get them on the black market.  Contraband veggies.  Or what will probably happen is that he will sell his farm to corporate agribusinesses and then the salad will be in stores, and might end up on the FDA recall list, like so many small farms in the past.

Monsanto, Dow, Syngenta, and some of the other big giant corporations have the congress of the US in their pockets.  Money ;flows and regulations continue to accumulate.  And yet we are told that life is great here, in Animal Farm. 

thank you Napolean.............

What do we as consumers do when the terms Fraud and Pharmaceuticals become synonymous

And does it make a difference to you?  That's the big question though  isn't it?  Should we as cognizant American consumers be concerned as to exactly HOW big pharmaceutical companies make their billions and billions of dollars in profits?  And just exactly how does the recent ruling by the Second Circuit Court of Appeals  for Manhattan affect how drugs will be marketed to doctors, hospitals, pharmacies and ultimately us as consumers?  And what about the billions of dollars in fines that drug companies have had to pay for their practices of paying kickbacks and outright bribery in order to market new drugs?  And what about when a major drug manufacturer prints up "FAKE" medical journals that contain a few real articles and a whole bunch of "PEER REVIEWED" articles about their newest drugs and then distributes them to doctors all over the country?  And what happens when manufacturers making generic medications are found guilty of fabricating documents showing that the drugs met all the requirements for each specific generic drug?  Or when the Attorney General of the United States takes a drug company to court for hiding negative results of testing and received approval for a new drug based solely on data that was, well, a complete lie?

What would you do if one of your friends lied to you, told your other friends lies about you, stole from you, cheated you out of your personal possessions and at every stage smiled at you and told you they were your best most loyal friend?  Yeah, I know, that does sound like my ex-wife, but it also is exactly what big pharma companies do.  Would you keep as a friend someone that does things like that?

Second Circuit Court Ruling from New York Times (NYT) In a decision that is just WRONG on every level, the court stated that drug company reps can tell doctors that the weird side effects of a specific drug can be prescribed to treat diseases the drug is NOT approved for.  The defense cited that the drug reps were exercising their right to free speech when trying to influence sales of their drugs.  If this appeal stands up in the Supreme Court, it could jeopardize over 30 BILLION dollars in fines against big pharma for doing this thing everyday, when they have been told over and over again not to.

Another Kickback Scheme from the New York Times (NYT Kickback)  Big pharma once again charged with breaking laws that they have broken over and over again

Peer Reviewed Medical Journal is a Fake from the New York Times (NYT Fake) Big pharma believes that doctors read medical journals for info on the best treatments for diseases, so they print their own and make them really fancy looking.  And pack them with articles pronouncing their new drugs are miracles.  They even put the names of prominent docs in specific fields as contributors and editors, and all without their permission.

Generic Drug Makers Guilty of Fraud from the New York Times (NYT Fraud)  One of the largest manufacturers of generic drugs pleaded guilty of falsifying testing of the drugs they made. 

Hiding Data from the New York Times  (NYT Hidden)  It isn't a secret anymore, drug companies use the positive data to apply for approval of new drugs.  Oops, they do seem to leave out the negative stuff.  Maybe that's why there are so many deaths and disabilities from those new drugs giving lawyers a guaranteed source of income and filling the TV airwaves with ads for services to sue the makers of drugs that kill and maim. 

I put in all these sources just to placate one specific person that believes I am a quack and not exactly seeing things as they really are.  Just to assure this person that I am not a quack, I give the references from their favorite purveyor of unadulterated news, the New York Times. 

Anyway, what would you do if someone did this stuff to you?  Me, I divorced the wicked witch of the west and my life got a whole lot better.  I also am trying to do the same with the drug companies.  I have had four incidences of pulmonary embolisms.  The standard treatment for people like me that haven't died (and it is a miracle that I have survived four) is to take blood thinners.  And of course the sad part is that the blood clots were caused by an entirely different medication and at that time we had no idea it was a nasty side effect.  But, blood thinners kill people.  And when I found that an aspirin a day was ALMOST as effective as every single one of the poisons the drug companies are pushing on us, I stopped taking any of their expensive poisons and now take aspirin.  When the medical profession infected me with MRSA it nearly destroyed my life.  All of the treatments have been horribly invasive and devastating to my bones, my lungs, my sinuses, and well, my life.  I stopped eating meat, sugar, processed foods, GMO's and anything that might possibly be harmful to my system.  It has helped, they haven't cut my legs off as my doctor prophesied that they would have to do by now, but I'm a long way from a picture of health.  But I don't want to have anything to do with big pharma unless it is absolutely necessary.  When a person, or a big company, willingly and knowingly fucks me over and laughs about it, I don't want them as a friend, nor do I want to give the business any money.  When I get sick, I try natural remedies first.  Then if there is no success, I go to the doctor with my phone in hand and when they tell me they will prescribe a drug, I look it up on the internet.  If the side effects seem to be more devastating than the problem, then I ask for something else.  This may seem odd, but once you do it, your doctor will look at you differently, not as a sheep being led to slaughter, but as a person that cares about their treatment.  It improves your doctor patient relationship.  Believe it or not, doctors practice the AMA method of medicine, give out drugs to treat any symptoms rather than look for the root cause of the problem, then deal with problems from the drugs as they arise.  There are always more drugs to treat side effects.  If you make your doctor think outside the box, it NORMALLY is a challenge and helps them out of the drudgery of the same old same old rut that modern medicine puts them into with their tired old AMA guidelines and drug backed requirements for practice are rooted in.  Remember that the AMA guidelines are that chronic problems can only be treated with medications, and although a doctor might stray and ask you to lose weight or stop smoking or drinking, those recommendations are at the doctor's discretion only, not part of the AMA guideline of medicating to treat symptoms, not problems.

Who are your friends?  Who are your enemies?  Who do your trust? 

Most people believe that the FDA determines what food additives can go into our processed foods. Most people are wrong.

When I talk about the state of our food supply to people, I get some looks of disbelief.  Well, actually I get told that I am crazy.  A lot.  I get compared to people that claim that aliens run the government after crash landing here in Roswell, or those that think the Feds are spraying toxic chemicals onto the populations through the engines of jets in a conspiracy called "ChemTrails", or other crap like Obama is actually a robot built by Disney.  You know, whacko crap.  Well, maybe the Obama thing might be true, he does seem somewhat animated at times, and his decisions often seem as though made by a committee.   Nearly EVERYONE seems to actually believe that the American food supply is not tainted with chronic carcinogenic toxins and that just as they were told when they were school children, the all mighty and all powerful FDA is there to protect the health of all citizens.  There can be no food manufactured here in America that contains additives that have not been rigorously tested for safety, compatability with other additives, and proven to have no long term adverse side effects.

Nothing could be further from this ridiculous concept.

On August 7 of this year, the Journal of Internal Medicine published this somewhat frightening report about the actual processes used to determine how additives are approved (JAMA abstract report)  This report details the very special relationship between food manufacturers, their desire (or need) to utilize a specific additive in their products, and the FDA.  It seems that the actual guidelines in place at the FDA (FDA Guide) relies on the food manufacturer to determine if there is any sort of NEED for them to petition the FDA for approval of any specific additive that isn't already on the GRAS list (Generally Recognized As Safe) list or into the EAFUS list. (Everything Added to Food in the US) ((Careful, this list is huge and takes a long time to download))  Anyway, if a food manufacturer decides to use something new, some previously unheard of additive, then they get to decide if they want to petition the FDA for permission.  If they do determine that they will go ahead and seek approval, they do all of the research, and then when they submit the application to the FDA they get to choose which individuals that the FDA uses to make critical regulatory decisions about the new additive.  And of course, the manufacturers normally choose these decision makers not for their specific expertise; but for their financial interests.  Sort of a conflict of interest, personal interest versus the interest of the public as a whole.  Just this process alone has in fact spawned a little mini industry, groups of enterprising people ready and willing to be hired for the GRAS list consultations for the FDA. 

Yes, you can reread that part about whether or not the MANUFACTURER decides if they want to petition the FDA to allow them to put their new chemical on the lists or not.  It's right there on the FDA Guide for you to verify if that is in fact true.  And yes it is true, most businesses do in fact apply for GRAS certification for most new additives.  That we know.  Check again, they are not required to do so.  

Just for fun, look at the GRAS list sometime.  One of the things that I have stated for the last 30 years has been that the reason Stevia was never put on the GRAS list was because the sugar refiners and chemical sweetener manufacturers would not allow it.  Up until a few years ago, you were not allowed to use any Stevia product in food.  As a sweetener.  You could buy the stuff, but it could only be sold as an herbal supplement.  But then back in 2008, with the public slowly becoming aware of just how toxic aspartame really is, big businesses started to make refined Stevia extracts.  About 14 of them have been patented and given GRAS status.  The Cargill patent actually contains over 40 steps to refine the Stevia and includes the use of acetone, methanol, ethanol, acetonitrile, and isopropanol to "purify" the stevia extract.  Then the FDA allows them to label the resulting compound as being "All Natural".

Plain raw Stevia is not allowed to be used as a food additive to this day. Just not enough money to be made on the stuff.  Or so it seems.

And that in a nutshell is how the world works.  It is all about appearances, and perceptions. 

New GMO crops resistant to stronger herbicides. Cancer in our food, but there is no conspiracy

A person of whom I am acquainted told me last week that I have irrational beliefs and that all of the stuff I write about points to conspiracies that are just not possible.  His reasoning is that since he worked at Dial, that the FDA was on top of any changes to, or any unusual ingredients that might be used and that might have any sort of negative effects.  Therefore, to his way of thinking, it was not possible that there are food manufacturers that use chemicals that are harmful in the preparation of processed foods here in America.  And that the example that I gave him of Kraft macaroni and cheese having toxic petrochemical dyes in US distributed product and natural dyes in European products was not conclusive proof.  There is no conspiracy to Destroy the lives of Americans with toxic additives, vaccines, or GMO crops.

Weeelllllll, that's probably true.  I have never specifically stated that I believe there is a conspiracy to destroy the health of Americans, I believe it is always just one person, or one corporate group of leaders with an idea to make more money than their competitors.  I mean it isn't like the Twin Towers Conspiracy, that would involve a huge number of people and a huge amount of money used as bribes (Twin Towers Conspiracy) and however plausible the evidence is that they reveal; it's just a theory and hard to prove.  I on the other hand don't subscribe to the conspiracy thing, it is just people wanting to make money, and the proven method has always shown itself to be buying governmental regulators, senators and congressmen.  This isn't just an accusation, the facts pretty much speak for themselves.  From Senator Blunt taking a hundred grand to add the Monsanto Rider to the Farm Bill, to the Keating Five Senators taking 1.5 million dollars to stop the Banking committee from investigating Keating, to the heads of the FDA making controversial decisions and then leaving their jobs to take high paying do nothing positions in the private sector.  But there is no conspiracy, it is just people purchasing an advantage.

And pretty much all big businesses do it.

Monsanto, Dow, Syngenta and a few others have invested in their own version of the future.  Genetically Modified Organisms as food.  And the execution of their vision of the future has included quite a bit of their purchase of favor from regulators.  And that last bit really is an assumption, as there is no proof that regulators have actually taken money to do specific things.  It all goes back to the mid nineties when Monsanto people went before the senate at hearings to get approval for all of their genetically altered crops.  And, without any testing of any kind, the senate gave them Carte Blanche approval to make billions of dollars on plants that are proving themselves to be more of a curse, than the blessing promised.  It isn't just the recent researchers doing long term feeding studies on GM crops showing just how harmful they are to mammalian systems; or that we were told the GM crops were identical nutritionally to standard crops even though testing has proven they are not; but that farmers have had the ability to spray toxic herbicides on their land in what the GM crop developers have told them would be a miraculous method to reap profits in unheard of amounts with less work, and greater harvests.

It does seem to all have been lies.  A conspiracy of sorts, Gene Tech companies want it all to be true, but it isn't.  The big problem of course is that nature has this thing called natural selection.  Religious people tend to deny it, but we can see it in action.  The herbicides kill most weeds, but not all.  And not the crop that was Genetically Modified to withstand the high doses of weed killer.  The crops grow, the few weeds that didn't die grow as well, and within a few years, the farms of America are populated with 16 species of weeds that used to be killed by weed killers.  But no longer are.  The EPA at the direction of the Gene Tech companies who also manufacture weed killer, helped out the problem earlier this year by allowing farmers to spray weed killer on crops in ever higher concentrations.  And they agreed that the weed killer residues left on the crops could be 4,000 times higher than what laboratory researchers have found was a level that caused damage to brain tissue and reproductive organs.

But it isn't a conspiracy, just big businesses wanting to make money.

So there will come a time in the near future when it won't matter, the weed killer will not work at all on the weeds anymore.  And so there is an answer, stronger weed killer.  Isoxaflutole is the newest one.  Dow, the manufacturer has named this new toxin, Balance.  A Herbicide for a New World of Agriculture, Balance.  Here is are the facts as posted on the EPA site. (Isoxaflutole Fact Sheet)  It is way more toxic, more cumulative, has a hugely greater half life, will accumulate in groundwaters, rivers, lakes and our food supplies faster and deadlier than the old weed killers ever have.  The old weed killer Glyphosate is no longer effective, therefore new poisons are needed.  After careful searching for a weed that was resistant to this new poison Balance, weeds were in fact found that lived after being drenched with it.  A simple matter of determining which genes were responsible for the ability to survive, and they were added to corn, soy, canola and cotton.  And now they are about to hit the open market and become the leading cause of ever more stronger and more toxic poison being introduced into the environment.

But there is no conspiracy, only money.

Balance is a Class III carcinogen.

I don't know what happens at the cafeteria at the Dow factories, but I do know that Monsanto cafeterias only serve organic foods to the masters of money making at the expense of the health of the populace.  Just like the kitchens at the White House, that only serves organic foods to the family of the leader of our nation.  And the cafeterias at the Senate and Congress as well.  Maybe Dow people do the same.  Seems like a very sensible thing.

But there is no conspiracy.

Vaccine research, it all means that I am not a crackpot!

I was talking with some friends the other day and one of them mentioned that his granddaughter was getting her vaccinations.  I sighed, and asked if he really did read my blog or just tell me he did.  He told me that he did in fact read some of it, but that a lot was just way way out there and that the vaccine thing was just speculation, and that their doctor has told them there is no actual scientific evidence of any correlation between vaccination and autism.  Hunhh.  I thought I listed references in my blog in the past, however I grew up in a household with aluminum cookware and my mind is not what it once was.  So, here, for all those that think I make up all this crap, are some studies done by real scientists about this very fact.

1. Stony Brook University Medical Center, NY, published in "Annals of Epidemiology"  Giving Hepatitis B vaccine to newborn baby boys triples the risk of Autism Spectrum Disorder compared to boys who were not vaccinated as neonates.

2. Researchers at the Neural Dynamics Group, Dept of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences at the University of British Columbia, published in the "Journal of Inorganic Biochemistry" determined that Aluminum used as adjuvant in vaccines is a contributing factor in the rising prevalence of ASD in the Western World.  The correlation between ASD and aluminum appears to be highest at the 3-4 months of age when vaccinated.  The study shows that several major milestones of brain development coincide with major vaccination timeframes for infants.  These include the onset of synaptogenesis, maximal growth velocity of the hippocampus and the onset of amygdala maturation. 

3.The department of Economics and Finance at the University of New York, published in "Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health"  shows that one or more environmental triggers are needed to develop autism.  Their determination is that one or more triggers might be the "battery of vaccinations that young children receive".  Their statistical model shows a statistically significant relationship between autism and vaccinations. 

4. The Department of Neurosurgery at the Methodist Neurological Institute in Houston, published in "The Journal of Toxicology"  shows that ASD is a disorder caused by  problem in brain development.  Researchers determined that ASD patients have a heightened sensitivity to thimerosal, the mercury based additive to all vaccines.

5. The NCBI published in "Journal of Biomedical Sciences"  determined that autism could be the result from an atypical measles infection that produces neurological symptoms.  The source, MMR vaccine.

6. Study published in "The Annals of Clinical Psychiatry"  states that ASD is likely triggered by a virus, and that MMR vaccines are a likely candidate.

7. Study published in "American Journal of Clinical Nutrition" determined that increased vulnerability to oxidative stress and decreased capacity for methylation may contribute to ASD.  Viral infections increase oxidative stress and metals, including those found in many vaccines are directly involved in increasing oxidative stress.  This one study alone did it for me and the data is pretty conclusive, heavy metals in vaccines can be the trigger for ASD in children.

8. Northeastern University in Boston published in "the Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences" determined that the inhibition of the methionine synthase (MS) activity is obstructed by ethanol, lead, mercury, aluminum, and thimerosal.  All are definite neurodevelopment toxins. 

9. Department of Psychology, University of Northern Iowa, published in "Journal of Child Neurology"  researchers determined that a significant relation does exist between blood levels of mercury and the diagnosis of ASD

10. Researchers at Johns Hopkins in Baltimore published in "Journal of Child Neurology" determined that ASD can be associated with mitochondrial dysfunction and that children with such dysfunction might be more prone to develop ASD regression between 18 and 30 months of age if they have immunizations.

11. Center for Morphometric Analysis by the Department of Pediatric Neurology  shows that oxidative stress, brain inflammation and microgliosis are documented with toxic exposures to heavy metals.  The brains of children with ASD may be conditioned by chronic biomedical abnormalities such as inflammation and heavy metal exposure.

12. Department of Pediatrics, University of Arkansas determined that thimerosal induced cytotoxicity was associated with depletion of intracellular glutathione (GSH).  The study outlines how many vaccines have been neurotoxic, especially to the developing brain.  Depletion of GSH is commonly associated with ASD

13, And a whole bunch of docs did this one for "the Public Library of Science" and they determined that elevation in peripheral oxidative stress is consistent with, and may contribute to more SEVERE functional impairments in ASD.  We know that oxidative stress is triggered by heavy metals, like the ones in multiple vaccines.

14. NCBI study published in "Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health"  has determined that mercury exposure can induce immune, sensory, neurological, motor and behavioral dysfunctions similar to ASD.  Based on differential diagnoses, 8 of 9 patients examined were exposed to significant mercury from thimerosal containing vaccine preparations during infancy.  These previously normal developing children suffered mercury encephalopathies that manifested with regressive ASD.  Their recommendation it to look for mercury intoxication in the differential diagnosis of regressive ASD.

15. Study by the University of Texas Health Science Center published in "US Library of Medicine" states that persistent low-dose exposures to various environmental toxicants including mercury, that occur during critical windows of neural development may increase the risk for developmental disorders such as AUTISM.

16. The University of Pittsburgh study showed that Macaques are commonly used in pre-clinical vaccine safety testing.  They feel that there is a large amount of evidence and research that already indicated the links to vaccines cognitive development.  The findings raise important safety issues for examining aspects of causation and disease pathogenesis in ASD.

17. Study by the George Washington University School of Public Health Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics determined that significantly increased rate ratios were observed for ASD as a result of exposure to Mercury from Thimerosal containing vaccines. 

18.  The Kinki University in Osaka Japan published in "Cell Biology and Toxicology" that in combination with the brain pathology observed in patients diagnosed with autism, that there is a plausible pathway for how low dose exposure to mercury from thimerosal vaccines as a cause of ASD.

That's probably enough for now, I have a lot to do today to get ready for the farmers market this afternoon.  But I think that this is good start for people to look at to see that there is in fact quite a bit of research that has been done to show the relationship between higher rates of autism and vaccination.  It is not just some whacko group of dissidents trying to make trouble somewhere.  The real troubling things to me are that a lot of research is being done, however it is all single causation factor research.  There is definitive evidence that the heavy metals and formaldehyde and MSG used in vaccines  individually might be the cause or maybe a trigger along with other environmental and genetic predisposition towards ASD.  However, no one has done any research into the entire spectrum of environmental toxicity and developmental disorders.  We know that BT toxin is harmful and it is in every GM food you eat, we know that glyphosate and pesticide residues on our foods is harmful and that GM crops contain huge quantities, we know that heavy metals in our food and in vaccines are harmful, we know all of this, but what happens when they all happen to us at the same time.  That is where I personally feel the problems lie, it's the whole kit and kaboodle in its entirety.  And the vaccines are in fact for some, the trigger, that little bit of heavy metal poison into a baby's system that puts them over the edge and decreases mental development. 

Try to remember that when big pharma tests vaccines on monkeys to see if they die off or not, they don't have any idea if the monkeys develop autism. 

According to the FDA, vaccines represent a special category of drugs as they are generally given to healthy individuals. Further according to the FDA, “this places significant emphasis on their vaccine safety”. While the FDA does set an upper limit for Aluminum in vaccines at no more that 850/mg/dose, it is important to note that this amount was selected empirically from data showing that Aluminum in such amounts enhanced the antigenicity of the vaccine, rather than from existing safety. Given that the scientific evidence appears to indicate that vaccine safety is not as firmly established as often believed, it would seem ill advised to exclude pediatric vaccinations as a possible cause of adverse long-term neurodevelopment outcomes , including those associated with autism.