Tuesday, March 1, 2016
Gates' Predictable Plan Is Coming True
Bill and Melinda Gates have been called the world’s greatest philanthropists and the world’s “most generous people.”1 It’s true that, even with his net worth of $87 billion, Bill Gates’ $28 billion in donations is impressive, as are many of his world health goals — at least on the surface.2
If you dig a little deeper into the Gates Foundation’s philanthropy, however, you’ll find questionable alliances and partnerships, such as the one with biotech giant Monsanto, as well as some curious projects, like spending $1 billion on training programs for journalists and research on effective crafting of media messages.3
I have previously stated Bill Gates might be one of the world's most destructive do-gooders. He seems completely oblivious to the fundamental flaws in the science behind genetically engineered (GE) foods, for example.
This oblivion apparently extends to the genetic engineering of other living creatures beyond plants, like the use of GE mosquitoes, which is being increasingly accepted due to the latest public health “emergency,” the Zika virus.
Gates Foundation Funded GE-Mosquito Development
The Gates Foundation has spent at least $20 million to fund the development of GE mosquitoes designed by a biotech company called Oxitec to stop the spread of chikungunya and dengue, tropical diseases spread by Aedes mosquitoes.4
The Oxitec mosquitoes are unlike any that exist in nature. They’ve been genetically altered to carry a “genetic kill switch,” such that when they mate with wild female mosquitoes, their offspring inherits the lethal gene and cannot survive.5
To achieve this feat, Oxitec has inserted protein fragments from the herpes virus, E. coli bacteria, coral and cabbage into the insects, dubbed OX513A. The GE mosquitoes have proven lethal to native mosquito populations.
In the Cayman Islands, for instance, 96 percent of native mosquitoes were suppressed after more than 3 million GE mosquitoes were released in the area, with similar results reported in Brazil.6
The release of GE mosquitoes in the wild has been criticized by many. The potential exists for these genes, which hop from one place to another, to infect human blood by finding entry through skin lesions or inhaled dust.
Such transmission could potentially wreak havoc with the human genome by creating "insertion mutations" and other unpredictable types of DNA damage, for starters.7
WHO Supports Research on the Use of GE Mosquitoes to Fight Zika
Zika virus, which has made headlines for supposedly increasing rates of microcephaly in Brazil in recent months, is also spread by Aedes mosquitoes.
The World Health Organization (WHO) has called mosquito control “the most immediate line of defense” against its spread and is encouraging further testing of GE mosquitoes for this purpose.8 According to a WHO statement:9,10
“Given the magnitude of the Zika crisis, WHO encourages affected countries and their partners to boost the use of both old and new approaches to mosquito control as the most immediate line of defense.
… For genetically modified mosquitoes, the WHO Advisory Group has recommended further field trials and risk assessment to evaluate the impact of this new tool on disease transmission.”
There has been chatter on the Web that the Gates Foundation has been involved in promoting the spread of Zika virus via the development of GE mosquitoes — but the GE mosquitoes cannot promote Zika’s spread (at least not intentionally, as some people have suggested).
There remain serious potential problems with their use, however.
Why GE Mosquitoes’ ‘Kill Switch’ May Fail
These GE mosquitoes were designed to die in the absence of tetracycline, which is introduced in the lab in order to keep them alive long enough to breed. They were designed this way assuming they would NOT have access to that drug in the wild.
Brazil, however, is the third largest consumer of antibiotics for food and animal production and, according to a 2009 analysis, an estimated 75 percent of the tetracyclines administered to farm animals end up being excreted in waste.11
The use of manure and sewage sludge as fertilizers is a major route of spread of antibiotics in the environment.
According to Oxitec documents, in the presence of tetracyclines the survival rate of the GE mosquitoes' offspring may be as high as 15 percent, which means they may not decimate the mosquito population as efficiently as intended.
15 Companies Racing to Develop Zika Vaccine
WHO has reported that at least 15 companies and academic groups are in the process of developing a lucrative Zika vaccine.
One of them, Inovio Pharmaceuticals, announced in February 2016 that mice exposed to their Zika vaccine developed antibodies and generated a response from T-cells, which suggest the vaccine may be working.
They have plans to test the vaccine in non-human primates and then begin Phase I testing in humans before the end of 2016.12
Bharat Biotech of India, which somehow got a head start and began working on two Zika vaccines in November 2014, also has plans to start pre-clinical animal trials of its experimental Zika vaccine.13,14
Sanofi and the U.S. National Institutes of Health are also working on Zika vaccines of their own. WHO estimates it will be at least 18 months before any of the vaccines enter into large-scale clinical trials.15
Ring Vaccination Suggested for Zika Virus
At the American Association for the Advancement of Science's (AAAS) annual meeting, held in February 2016, researchers from WHO and the University of Florida shared how their experimental Ebola vaccine trial may be relevant to the so-called Zika outbreak.
During the height of the Ebola outbreak in West Africa, the researchers used a technique known as “ring vaccination,” which was first used in the 1970s during smallpox outbreaks. It involves vaccinating populations in “rings” around those who are already diagnosed.
So in the case of Ebola, close neighbors and family members of victims were vaccinated first, followed by wider “rings” of the community 21 days later. The study found the technique to be “100 percent” effective in preventing Ebola when used via the ring vaccination strategy.16
At the AAAS meeting, the researchers discussed that the strategy would also be useful for testing the experimental Zika vaccine, if and when one becomes available.
Study researcher Ira Longini, Ph.D. a statistician at the University of Florida, told Popular Science, “This approach should work for Zika vaccine if we have one, and I think we will need one.”17 But comparing Zika virus to Ebola is not comparing apples to apples.
For starters, Zika virus is harder to transmit than Ebola, and it’s far from deadly; in most people, it causes no symptoms and when it does cause symptoms, it’s typically mild fever and rash.
The major concern is for pregnant women, among whom the virus has been linked to microcephaly in babies. But vaccinating pregnant women at all is controversial, as is whether or not the Zika virus is to blame for microcephaly at all.
Gates Foundation Linked to Zika Vaccine Makers
If you’re wondering what all of this has to do with Bill Gates, his foundation has close ties with Zika vaccine makers. Bharat Biotech, for instance, received $50 million from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation to research and conduct human trials on a malaria vaccine.18
Merck, Syngenta and Bayer are also partners in the Gates Foundation, as are chemical giants Monsanto and DuPont.19 This unholy alliance is just one of the reasons why I don't trust Bill Gates' philanthropy; he might be one of the most dangerous individual powers on the planet.20
Interestingly, in the summer of 2015, Dr. Kathryn Edwards, director of the Vanderbilt Vaccine Research Program, received a $307,000 grant from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation to study the immune responses of pregnant women receiving the pertussis-containing Tdap (tetanus, diphtheria, and pertussis) vaccine.
In October 2014, the Brazilian government mandated that all pregnant women must receive the Tdap vaccine, effective as of 2015. The fact that birth defects began rising in Brazil toward the end of 2015 seems more suspicious in light of this mandate than the possibility that Zika infection is solely responsible.
This is especially true when you consider that pertussis vaccine has previously been linked to brain inflammation and brain damage in infants, and the safety of administering Tdap to pregnant women has never been proven.
Global Health Emergency Declared
WHO declared the Zika virus a global health emergency on February 1, 2016 noting that the "main worry" is the virus' potential link to microcephaly and subsequent brain damage. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) is urging pregnant women to avoid traveling to countries with reported transmissions of the Zika infection — about two dozen countries so far.
Meanwhile, even with the increasing releases of GE mosquitoes, increased fogging and spraying for mosquitoes have been recommended even though they're largely ineffective against Aedes aegypti, the species of mosquito in question.
These tiny black and white striped mosquitoes do not fly far — their range being a mere 300 to 600 feet. Since it's so difficult to catch them airborne, insecticidal sprays and foggers are mostly useless for controlling them. Also, they feed during the daytime, not at night, which is typically when the fog-trucks will roll through the neighborhood.
Groups like the Manhattan Institute are even calling for the return of DDT to address the mosquito problem, despite the fact that DDT passes freely through the placenta during pregnancy where it gains direct access to the developing fetus and its brain.21 Moreover, DDT has also been linked to microcephaly!
Of course, the race to develop a Zika vaccine is also on, and it's worth remembering that any pandemic vaccine fast tracked to market in the U.S. during a "public health emergency" is completely shielded from liability for injuries and deaths.
Is Panic Over Zika Virus Warranted?
In Brazil, microcephaly, in which babies are born with unusually small heads, is said to have surged from an average of about 150 cases annually to more than 4,300 cases since October 2015. Of these, fewer than 500 cases have been confirmed, and the Zika virus has only been identified in 41.22 Meanwhile, in the U.S. approximately 25,000 infants are diagnosed with microcephaly each year — without Zika.
As I wrote last month, the evidence suggests implicating Zika virus may be a matter of convenience — leaders of the public-private partnership between industry and government may be quickly blaming the rise in microcephaly on disease-carrying mosquitoes in order to sell more GE mosquitoes, to sell more toxic insecticides, and to have an excuse to develop and sell more vaccines.
All the while, they are keeping hidden some of the most likely culprits of microcephaly, namely poor nutrition and toxic environmental exposures like pesticides, as well as vaccines given during pregnancy when the fetus is most susceptible to harm. By throwing up a convenient veil in the form of Zika-infected mosquitoes, business can not only go on as usual but also grow and expand profits to boot.
article used by permission: Dr. Mercola's original article
Saturday, August 21, 2010
Click here to go to Dr. Mercola's page to view the commentary in full!
As usual, if you have questions or comments about this, please feel free to call our office, send me an email, or stop by for an appointment. I'd love to speak with you about this!
Hilltop Wellness & Chiropractic
Thursday, June 24, 2010
I like this quote, "On the positive side, the analysis also showed no significant association between the use of statins and the risk of Parkinson's disease, rheumatoid arthritis, blood clot, dementia, osteoporotic fracture, or many cancers including gastric, colon, lung, renal, breast or prostate."
It basically says they haven't seen a significant risk of parkinsons, R.A, clots, dementia, fracture, or cancers...YET! 6 years is not a very long 'long term study,' especially when you consider that we have patients who have been on statins for 15-20 years (the first FDA approved statin was Mevacor, in 1987).
But what I think is the most interesting is the ratio of benefit to side-effects: In women, there was a reduction of 279 events (esophageal cancer and cardiovascular disease) BUT an INCREASE of 442 side-effects, many causing death. THE MEN FARED MUCH WORSE, with 552 side-effects!
I don't know, do you think I'm off-base in presenting this information? Please don't read me incorrectly - I'm not saying statins are the bane of civilized healthcare, but I am saying that statins are a horrible alternative to simply taking control of your health and diet.
If you have questions about this, please feel free to contact me.
Sunday, June 20, 2010
What's interesting to me, is that most people taking antacids are actually doing the exact OPPOSITE of what would be best for them. That's right. Most people taking antacids are actually acid-depleted. They are making too LITTLE acid and that lack of acid in the stomach is allowing the food to putrify and essentially rot. This rotting food is not pleasant and off-gases quite a bit, which forces air - and usually stomach acid - into the esophagus, giving the individual the sensation of 'heartburn.'
This is self-induced heartburn, though. In taking an acidic supplement, most people would then have enough stomach acid to properly break down the food that is entering the stomach, thereby avoiding the heartburn!
So, onto the FDA's 'scoop:'
The FDA has mandated that proton pump inhibitor heartburn medications must carry a label warning of increased fracture risk. This group of drugs include Prevacid, Prilosec, and Nexium.
The FDA suggests those taking these drugs should consult with their doctors, and those using such drugs over-the-counter limit their use to no more than three 14-day periods a year.
According to the FDA website:
"... [The decision is] based on the Agency's review of several epidemiological studies that reported an increased risk of fractures of the hip, wrist and spine in patients using proton pump inhibitors."
If you or someone you know is taking the damaging medications and would like help in getting off of them, please give our office a call. We'd love to help you, just as we have helped so many others!
Tuesday, May 11, 2010
Scientists gave 1500 mg of glucosamine sulfate to the study participants, but some also received 200 mg of omega-3 fats. Both groups had about the same number of participants who reported a 20 percent or less reduction in pain.
But according to Dr. Christiane Northrup:
If you are one of the millions who suffer from arthritis, please give our office a call - I won't promise that we will cure you of arthritis, but we can help you get back to living a much more pain-free and productive life, and with that comes the ability to participate in hobbies and recreational activities, playing with children and grandchildren, and even going back to work, which may have not been an option because of pain. Please don't settle on taking poisonous drugs to mask the pain - get to the source of the problem.
“However, when researchers asked those who experienced an 80 percent reduction in pain, those in [the glucosamine plus omega-3 group] reported reduced morning stiffness and pain in the hips and knees by between 48.5 and 55.6 percent, compared to 41.7 to 55.3 percent for those in [the glucosamine only group].”
Monday, May 10, 2010
More and more scientists who study depression and the drugs that treat it are concluding that antidepressants are basically expensive Tic Tacs.
Research has found that patients do improve, often substantially, on SSRIs, tricyclics, and even MAO inhibitors. This improvement is the basis for the ubiquitous claim that antidepressants work.
But when researchers compare the improvement in patients taking the drugs with the improvement in those taking dummy pills, they find that the difference is minuscule.
Nonetheless, the number of Americans taking antidepressants doubled in a decade, from 13.3 million in 1996 to 27 million in 2005.
This is a very important point, folks. In many cases, your beliefs are as or more effective than pills when it comes to achieving health.
The second article linked below frowns on the notion of homeopathy, because some people think it may work as a placebo. But the article shouldn't be so dismissive. The placebo effect is very powerful. Thousands of clinical studies have found that the placebo effect can aid in healing or even cure disease.
What it comes down to is the crucial mind-body connection. Those who have hope and belief in the solutions they try will likely find them working. That's why it is so key to keep your health freedom, and pay attention to the huge corporations that continually discredit alternative methods.
Typically, more natural healing techniques won't harm you, and many of the drugs will. In time, energy medicine will be better understood, and perhaps this placebo element will be utilized in such a way that no pill will ever be necessary -- your mind will be stimulated to heal on its own. Similarly, those who pray or meditate for healing should not be ridiculed either.
Simply labeling something as a placebo and not pursuing it any further misses a key point. The so-called "placebo effect" may very well point the way to the future or medicine.The Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) January 6, 2010; 303(1):47-53
Depression is tough, and I don't think you will find a reputable doctor arguing that it doesn't exist. There's a lot that goes into being depressed, and, quite honestly, I believe many of the subtle details are overlooked. With that said, I firmly believe there is a way out of all depression, it's just a matter of finding the correct key to the puzzle - it might be more exercise, might be more omega-3s, might be working on less addictive behavior, dealing with the death of a loved one, or it might be coming to grips with abuse you'd rather not face...it could be as simple as realizing there's a greater plan out there - just knowing there is a loving and caring God looking after you and wanting the best for you - that could be your key. Whatever the issue, I urge the struggling to continue the quest and solve the puzzle -
The Center for Science in the Public Interest points out that Coca-Cola, whose products are not exactly heart healthy, is a strange partner for the NHLBI.
Are such partnerships a benign win-win? History suggests otherwise.
In 1984, Kellogg cooked up a partnership with the National Cancer Institute to put health claims for fiber on the boxes of All-Bran cereals. In doing so, Kellogg (and NCI) went around the FDA and undermined that agency’s control over health claims on food packages -- leading to problems that the agency is still struggling to fix.
If you are struggling with addiction to pop, or sugar in general, please give our office a call - I would love to help counsel you toward your nutritional goals!
From Dr. Mercola's blog:
Diet Coke teaming up with the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) to raise awareness for women’s heart health programs is laughable … if it weren’t such a sad testimony to the cozy relationships between corporate giants and U.S. public health organizations
The irony here is that Coke is one of the main retailers of sugar in the U.S. and it is very clear that sugar, primarily in the form of high fructose corn syrup, which provides the most food calories in the U.S., is actually leading the charge for increasing heart disease.
Drinking diet soda has been clearly linked to an increased risk of metabolic syndrome, a cluster of risk factors such as excessive fat around your waist, high cholesterol, high blood sugar and high blood pressure, all of which can raise your risk of heart disease, not to mention diabetes.
Diet soda, like most all diet foods, also increases your chances of becoming obese, and we all know that obesity in turn raises your risk of heart disease!
And, again, this doesn’t even take into account Coca-Cola’s other mainstay product, regular Coke, which is loaded with high fructose corn syrup -- the major cause of the obesity epidemic.
Can You Say “Sell-Out”?
The National Institutes of Health (NIH), which is the parent organization to NHLBI, is seen by many Americans as a group of neutral government experts who set out to provide the public with honest, reliable, unbiased health information.
In reality, NIH scientists have long been open to partnerships with the “enemy,” so long as the pay-off was lucrative enough. According to records, at least 530 government scientists at the NIH have taken fees, stock or stock options from biomedical companies in recent years.
Sad to say, but I’ve come to expect these kind of underhanded dealings when it comes to federal agencies … but I expected better of the Olympics.
Olympics Sells Out to Coke, McDonald’s
If you watched this year’s winter Olympics, you’ve surely seen the ads from companies like Coke and McDonald’s, both of which were among the most highly visible Olympic sponsors.
Now kids and adults alike have the pleasure of seeing two of the world’s biggest junk-food brands side-by-side with some of the world’s greatest athletes … and are left with the impression that to win Olympic Gold they need only grab a Big Mac and fries, and wash it down with a long swig of Coke.
It’s really incredible that Coke is the official “Beverage of Choice” for the Olympics, while McDonald’s is the “Restaurant of Choice.” You can rest assured that the U.S. would not have topped the world in total medals won if their athletes subsisted on a diet of Coke and McDonald’s!
McDonald’s has even been promoting shameless games encouraging people to guess how certain Olympic athletes eat their McNuggets, while running commercials showing athletes celebrating a victory with McDonald’s value meal!
For an event that prides itself on physical fitness and athletic greatness, what are they teaching the world’s children? Surely we can do better than this.
The Major Cause of the Obesity Epidemic
Getting back to Coca-Cola’s partnership with women’s heart health … it has to be pointed out that soda is sweetened with high fructose corn syrup. Fructose is actually the number one source of calories in the United States, and it is very clear that it is the primary cause of the obesity epidemic.
If you received most of your carbs from vegetables and fruits as most people did a century ago, you’d only consume about 15 grams per day -- a far cry from the 73 grams per day the typical person receives from their diets today. Sadly another 25% of people consume more than 130 grams of fructose per day.
It isn’t that fructose itself is bad -- it is the MASSIVE DOSES you’re exposed to that make it dangerous.
There are two reasons fructose is so damaging:
Your body metabolizes fructose in a much different way than glucose. The entire burden of metabolizing fructose falls on your liver.
People are consuming fructose in enormous quantities, which has made the negative effects much more profound.
The metabolism of fructose by your liver creates a long list of waste products and toxins, including a large amount of uric acid, which drives up blood pressure and causes gout.
And where as glucose suppresses the hunger hormone ghrelin and stimulates leptin, which suppresses your appetite, fructose has no effect on ghrelin and interferes with your brain’s communication with leptin. The result is overeating, weight gain and ultimately obesity.
If you’re obese, you’re also at an increased risk of heart disease, which is another glaring reason why Coca-Cola’s partnership with the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute is so absurd.
I strongly recommend you keep your fructose consumption to below 25 grams per day, and you view some sample fructose contents in fruits here. There are about 40 grams of HFCS per can of soda, so if you drink one a day you’re already way over the limit.
And please don’t be fooled by the myth that diet soda is somehow better than regular. Drinking diet soda is clearly linked to obesity as well!
Keep Your Eyes Wide Open
Deceptive marketing practices, such as those being used by Diet Coke and McDonald’s, can lead you to subconsciously prefer certain foods. If you see enough Olympians with a Coke in hand, for instance, suddenly your daily habit may not seem so bad.
Children, of course, are especially vulnerable to these messages.
So please make an effort to seek out the ulterior motives that are present when health agencies join forces with junk food manufacturers. And, if you’re a parent or teacher, please take the time to explain the realities to your children as well.
We don’t need a generation of kids aspiring to become Olympic athletes by making Coke and McDonald’s their “foods of choice.” And we don’t need to set women up with the false knowledge that drinking Diet Coke is a smart choice for a healthy heart.
If you want REAL tips to keep your heart healthy, I’ve compiled many of them here -- and you’ll notice that not one involves sipping on an artificially sweetened soda of any kind.