Some Facts About GMOs

Joe Rappaport has it right!!

Scientific basis for GMO crops is false



Scientific basis for GMO crops is false


By Jon Rappoport

November 14, 2014


Unpredictable effects. Unknown outcomes. Potential health consequences. Uncertain gene technology.


These aren’t phrases biotech giants like to hear.


They prefer:


“One gene produces one protein.”


“Each gene has a specific function.”


This is the basis for the modern biotech industry, and it applies most definitely to GMO crops.


And it is false.


So for example, when Monsanto says the genes they insert in plants only serve to protect the plants from the herbicide Roundup and have no other function, they’re making it up.


For a brief summary of the situation, see Denise Caruso’s NY Times piece, “A Challenge to Gene Theory, a Tougher Look at Biotech,” July 1, 2007.


Caruso reports on the findings of an “exhaustive four-year effort…organized by the United States National Human Genome Research Institute and carried out by 35 groups from 80 organizations around the world.”


“…genes appear to operate in a complex network, and interact and overlap with one another and with other components in ways not yet fully understood.”


“Evidence of a networked [interacting] genome shatters the scientific basis for virtually every official risk [safety] assessment of today’s commercial biotech products, from genetically engineered crops to pharmaceuticals.”


In other words, each gene inserted in GMO food crops cannot be said to have only one function. There is reason to believe the inserted genes interact with genes already in the plants, and produce unknown effects.


Therefore, bland assurances of safety are smoke blowing in the wind.


“Jack Heinemann, a professor of molecular biology in the School of Biological Sciences at the University of Canterbury in New Zealand and director of its Center for Integrated Research in Biosafety”: ‘The real worry for us has always been that the commercial agenda for biotech may be premature, based on what we have long known was an incomplete understanding of genetics…’


Heinemann: “Because gene patents and the genetic engineering process itself are both defined in terms of genes acting independently, [government] regulators may be unaware of the potential impacts arising from these network [interacting] effects.”


Biotech companies like Monsanto are, to be sure, aware of this gaping hole in their “science” of gene-function. In fact, according to Heinemann, “Many biotech companies already conduct detailed genetic studies of their products that profile the expression of proteins and other elements. But they are not required to report most of this data to regulators, so they do not. Thus vast stores of important research information sit idle.”


This means that Monsanto or Dow can conceal what they’ve discovered about GMO hazards. They can hide findings that show unpredicted effects, when inserted genes meet and network with natural genes in the food crops.


If we were merely talking about studies done in labs and abstract articles in journals, that would be one thing. But of course, we are talking about millions of acres planted with GMO crops—and vast populations eating GMO food.


It’s all based on a simplistic and false notion about how genes function.


The biotech giants know this, government regulators know this, and many scientists know this.


But they hide what they know.


And all this dangerous fakery doesn’t even touch on the highly toxic effects of Roundup and other herbicides necessary to manage GMO crops.


Jon Rappoport

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


Use this link to order Jon’s Matrix Collections:



GMO Alfalfa spreads to non-GMO Alfalfa

Commentary: Below is a report showing that the regulatory agency is wrong about GMOs, again.  To add to the pesticide and widespread chemical contamination of air, water, soil, wildlife, and foods now include genetics. This means gene transfers between GMO species and non-GMO species that will probably produce monsters of all sorts.  At first these will be eliminated because most monsters are lethal, but given enough time we should expect real monsters.  Scientific fiction may be a realistic means for seeing the future.

Gads, where can one hide?  Nowhere, so fight we must.

Continue Reading →

Glyphosate Information

Do what u can to spread this info around. Glyphosate is everywhere and its deadly at low doses. Worldwide contamination leads to massive diseases epidemics largely unseen. Another gift from our corporate masters.


Forwarded Message

I don’t know what the delay was all about, but my article on GLYPHOSATE was finally released: I thought the format would be a little different, and different graphics, but all the information is there and there is so much to consider. I think this coverup is a very big deal if people come to grips with glyphosate’s true, long-term consequences on people, animals, and the environment. In CA, I hope people will get to the last section of the article and send comments to the CA-DPR; then we can start working on the EPA.

Later — Stephen

Corporate deception in the fossil fuel industry threatens all life by denying climate change

Jul 15, 2015 by Casey Coates Danson
Catalyst Summer 2015
Climate denier dossiers
Leaked internal memos reveal a coordinated, decades-long disinformation campaign.
by Elliott Negin
When internal documents revealed earlier this year that ExxonMobil and other fossil fuel interests were secretly funding scientifically discredited studies authored by climate contrarian Wei-Hock “Willie” Soon, the news didn’t come as a complete surprise.
Back in 2007, a Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) report identified Soon—an aerospace engineer with little formal training in climatology—as one of a dozen scientists affiliated with more than 40 ExxonMobil-funded think tanks that then constituted the backbone of the climate change–denier PR machine. Soon, who erroneously claims the sun is largely responsible for global warming, produced work for at least five of these ExxonMobil-backed groups, including the now infamous Heartland Institute.
But the latest cache of documents, obtained by Greenpeace and the Climate Investigations Center through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request, lays bare a wealth of detail that was not available eight years ago. For example, they show that Soon received his funding exclusively from fossil fuel interests, including ExxonMobil, utility giant Southern Company, and Charles Koch. He described his scientific work and congressional testimony as “deliverables” to his funders. And some of his contracts specifically dictate that the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, where Soon works, not disclose the names of his funders. These internal documents, on top of what UCS had already uncovered, indisputably establish Soon’s efforts as part of a calculated climate deception campaign.
Dossiers of Deception
Willie Soon, however, is just a small part of a much bigger story, according to a new UCS report, The Climate Deception Dossiers. After spending nearly a year reviewing and analyzing a wide range of internal corporate and trade group documents, a team of UCS researchers has, for the first time, compiled a broader tale of climate deception. The Climate Deception Dossiers draws upon evidence culled from 85 documents that were pried loose by leaks, lawsuits, and FOIA requests.
Spanning nearly three decades, these documents reveal that the world’s largest fossil fuel companies—BP, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, ExxonMobil, coal giant Peabody Energy, and Shell—were fully aware of the reality of climate change but continued to spend tens of millions of dollars to sow doubt and promote contrarian arguments they knew to be wrong. Taken together, the documents show that these six companies, in conjunction with the American Petroleum Institute (API)—the oil and gas industry’s premier trade association—and a host of front groups, have colluded to intentionally deceive the public; their corporate officials have known for at least two decades that their products are harmful; and their disinformation campaign continues today—despite the fact that most of the companies now publicly acknowledge the reality of anthropogenic, or human-caused, climate change.

Special Issues from BIRC about alternatives to conventional pesticides.

We and our associates founded and published two journals for over 30 years through a non-profit called the BioIntegral Resource Center (BIRC).  When we left the organization we turned management over to Bill Quarles who has carried the task since while maintaining the same high standards in publishing and research.  Here are some recent publications of special interest for those concerned about the toxic effects of pesticides on and detailed methods for using alternatives, especially within Integrated Pest Management Programs,
Continue Reading →

Breast Cancer is Already Solved so Don’t Donate to Cancer Research

Don’t support breast cancer research – the problem is already solved.

Comment by WO: We have known for years that “chemicals cause cancer” so the solution, at least for starters, is not to be exposed. Here is the latest in the battle to stop a few of these poisons.
Note also that with a Republican Congress one can expect the chemical pollution to get worse. Republicans apparently don’t get breast cancer. Continue Reading →



by William Olkowski

republished again today 11.21.14 previously 2.1.12

“Consider the Ant” is good advice. After all, as social experiments go, ant colony life looks robust. Ants go back, way back, when Insects started in or before the Cambrian Geological period almost 400 million years ago (mya). So they must have experimented and learned a bunch over the million of years, right? Well, from my view it’s a heartless social organization, not worth emulating. But one can learn from almost any bad idea. But then again their survival over this long period tells something we may want to learn from. Continue Reading →


Comment by Bill Olkowski

I was so impressed by this talk that I want others to see the video and read the transcript that I thought it worth putting on my blog. see if you agree.

by Paul Stamets

Transcript downloaded from: Paul Stamets Talks on TED:

I love a challenge, and saving the Earth is probably a good one. We all know the Earth is in trouble. We have now entered in the 6X, the sixth major extinction on this planet. I often wondered, if there was a United Organization of Organisms — otherwise known as “Uh-Oh” –(Laughter) — and every organism had a right to vote, would we be voted on the planet, or off the planet? I think that vote is occurring right now. <!–more–>
I want to present to you a suite of six mycological solutions, using fungi, and these solutions are based on mycelium. The mycelium infuses all landscapes, it holds soils together, it’s extremely tenacious. This holds up to 30,000 times its mass. They’re the grand molecular disassemblers of nature — the soil magicians. They generate the humus soils across the landmasses of Earth. We have now discovered that there is a multi-directional transfer of nutrients between plants, mitigated by the mycelium — so the mycelium is the mother that is giving nutrients from alder and birch trees to hemlocks, cedars and Douglas firs.
Dusty and I, we like to say, on Sunday, this is where we go to church. I’m in love with the old-growth forest, and I’m a patriotic American because we have those. Most of you are familiar with Portobello mushrooms. And frankly, I face a big obstacle. When I mention mushrooms to somebody, they immediately think Portobellos or magic mushrooms, their eyes glaze over, and they think I’m a little crazy. So, I hope to pierce that prejudice forever with this group. We call it mycophobia, the irrational fear of the unknown, when it comes to fungi.

Continue Reading →

Genetic Engineering: Safe for Prime Time?

Genetic Engineering: Safe for Prime Time?

Forget this GE engineering as we need to learn more before using this technology so widely. Consider the Monsanto efforts with GMO crops. And now people are working to kill mosquitoes with GMOed mosquitoes.

All new technology is not safe and GE technology is not safe yet, maybe someday it will be, but right now the push to make money dominates safety efforts and regulatory controls.  And when saving lives gets into the argument, many cautions are neglected.  Remember, genetic pollution is forever. Continue Reading →


BPA, a chemical that mimics the hormone estrogen, has been used to harden plastics for more than 40 years but has been banned from baby bottles and children’s products because of growing concerns that it may be linked to a host of health issues.

Now comes news from Oakland’s Center for Environmental Health that some cups labeled BPA-free contain other chemicals that appear to pose an equal if not greater health hazard. Continue Reading →













Tampons are used by up to 85 percent of menstruating women and may contain dioxins or pesticide residues linked to cancer, hormone disruptors, allergens and irritants from fragrance, WVE said. Feminine wipes, feminine washes and feminine deodorant products contain toxic preservatives like parabens, which may be hormone disruptors, or quaternium-15 and DMDM hydantoin, which release cancer-causing formaldehyde. Most feminine care products are fragranced and commonly contain known fragrance allergens—including anti-itch products. These chemicals sometimes exacerbate the very symptoms a woman is attempting to self-treat with these products.


Potential HealtH Hazards associated

witH feminine care Products

Tampons: Hazardous ingredients may include dioxins and furans (from the chlorine bleaching process), pesticide residues and unknown fragrance chemicals. Exposure concerns include cancer, reproductive harm, endocrine disruption, and allergic rash.

Pads: Hazardous ingredients may include dioxins and furans, pesticide residues, unknown fragrance chemicals, and adhesive chemicals such as methyldibromo glutaronitrile. exposure concerns include cancer, reproductive harm, and endocrine disruption. studies link pad use to allergic rash.

Feminine Wipes: Hazardous ingredients may include methylchloroisothiazolinone, methylisothiazolinone, parabens, quaternium-15, dmdm Hydantoin and unknown fragrance chemicals. exposure concerns include cancer and endocrine disruption. studies link wipe use to allergic rash.

Feminine Wash: Hazardous ingredients may

include unknown fragrance chemicals, parabens,

methylchloroisothiazolinone, methylisothiazolinone, dmdm Hydantoin, d&c red no.33, ext d&c violet #2, and fd&c yellow #5. exposure concerns include endocrine disruption, allergic rash, and asthma.

Douche: Hazardous ingredients may include unknown fragrance chemicals and the spermicide octoxynol-9. Studies link douche use to bacterial vaginosis, pelvic inflammatory disease, cervical cancer, low-birth weight, preterm birth, Hiv transmission, sexually transmitted diseases, ectopic pregnancy, chronic yeast infections, and infertility.

Feminine deodorant (sprays , powders and

suppositories): Hazardous ingredients may include unknown fragrance chemicals, parabens, and benzethonium chloride. exposure concerns include reproductive harm, endocrine disruption and allergic rash.

Feminine anti-itch creams: Hazardous ingredients may include unknown fragrance chemicals, parabens, methylisothiazolinone and an active ingredient, benzocaine, a mild anesthetic. exposure concerns include endocrine disruption, allergic rash, and uunresolved itch.

still more:

Vulvar and vaginal tissue are structurally different than the skin of the rest

of the body. For example, these tissues are also more hydrated and more permeable than other skin. That means this area of the body is potentially more vulnerable to exposure to toxic chemicals and irritants.7  In addition,

the inner parts of the vulva and the vagina

are covered in mucous membranes, which

serve an immune defense function, creating

a barrier against pathogens which could lead

to disease.8 The walls of the vagina are filled

with numerous blood vessels and lymphatic

vessels, which allows for direct transfer of

chemicals in to the circulatory system.9

In fact, there is considerable interest in

vaginal drug delivery systems because the

vagina is such an effective site to transfer

drugs directly into the blood without being

metabolized first.10




A new, in-depth review on the synthetic sweetener sucralose (marketed as Splenda), published in the journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health, is destined to overturn widely held misconceptions about the purported safety of this ubiquitous artificial sweetener.

Found in tens of thousands of products and used by millions of consumers around the world, sucralose’s unique ability to dissolve in alcohol and methanol as well as water, makes it the most versatile and therefore most widely used artificial sweetener in production today. And yet, its popularity is no indication nor guarantee of its safety, as is evidenced by the widespread use of other artificial sweeteners like aspartame, which while being safety approved in 90 nations around the world, has been linked to a wide range of serious health conditions including brain damage. 

But the tide may be turning…

Already this year, the Center for the Public Interest in Science downgraded Splenda from “safe” to “caution,” citing their need to evaluate a forthcoming Italian study linking the artificial sweetener to leukemia in mice as a basis for their decision.  

Another recent human study linked Splenda to diabetes-associated changes, calling into question its value as a non-calorie sweetener for those suffering with, or wishing to prevent, blood sugardisorders.

The new study, however, may be the most concerning yet to surface in the peer-reviewed literature. Titled, “Sucralose, a synthetic organochlorine sweetener: overview of biological issues,” it reveals an extensive array of hitherto underreported safety concerns, not the least of which is theformation of highly toxic chlorinated compounds, including dioxins, when Splenda is used in baking, an application which its manufacturer, McNeil Nutritionals (a subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson), actively encourages it to be used for. [see: Cooking and Baking: SPLENDA®]

 Sucralose is a toxic chemical that we should go to great lengths to avoid exposure to rather than something we should intentionally add to our food. You will also find a growing body of research that indicates that sucralose not only does not break down in the environment, but survives water treatment plant purification techniques, with the inevitable consequence that it is accumulating in concentrations in our drinking water and the environment that may adversely impact humans and wildlife alike. 

Research is showing that sucralose can break down into the following concerning compounds when heated:

  • ·         Chloropopanols are generated when sucralose was heated in the presence of glycerol. Chloropopanols are a group of contaminants that include known genotoxic, carcinogenic and tumorigenic compounds.
  • ·         Other chlorinated compounds formed when sucralose is heated in the presence of food include dibenzo-p-dioxins, dibenzofurans, dioxin-like polychlorinated bisphenyls and polychlorinated naphthalenes.


Chlorinated compounds like dioxins and DDT are notorious for being both highly toxic and resistant to breaking down once released into the environment, which is why they are classified as ‘persistent organic pollutants.’

The discovery that thermal breakdown through cooking can lead to the formation of highly toxic and equally persistent chlorinated compounds, including dioxins, should raise a series of red flags for consumers, manufacturers and regulators as the information becomes more widespread. A cursory perusal of the World Health Organization’s description of ‘Dioxins and their effects on human health,’ which lists it as belonging to the “dirty dozen” of the world’s most dangerous pollutants, will see what is at stake here. For more information on the formation of toxic chlorinated byproducts following the heating of sucralose read a 2013 study published in Scientific Reports titled, “Polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins and dibenzofurans formed from sucralose at high temperatures,” which goes into the topic in greater depth.

The Acceptable Daily Intake of Splenda (Sucralose) May Have Been Set 100’s of Times Too High To Ensure Safety

Lastly, an equally concerning issue addressed by the paper is the problem of the acceptable daily intake (ADI). The FDA approved an ADI for humans of 5 mg/kg/day in 1998 based on toxicity studies in rats by determining a no-observed-effect level (NOEL) of 500 mg/kg/day, and then applying a 100-fold safety factor. Since then, research has emerged showing that the NOEL in the microbiome (‘gut bacteria’) of rats for Splenda is actually as low as 1.1 mg/kg/day – 454 times lower than first determined – and 3.3 mg/kg/day for changes in intestinal P-gp and CYP – 151 times lower than first determined. 

For additional research on sucralose’s adverse health effects, visit our research page that collates peer-reviewed research on its toxicological properties. Also, for research on natural sweeteners not associated with these adverse effects, take a look at the following alternatives:





Stevia has a blood pressure lowering effect in patients with mild essential hypertension.– GreenMedInfo Summary

Abstract Title:

Efficacy and tolerability of oral stevioside in patients with mild essential hypertension: a two-year, randomized, placebo-controlled study.

Abstract Source:

Clin Ther. 2003 Nov;25(11):2797-808. PMID: 14693305

Abstract Author(s):

Ming-Hsiung Hsieh, Paul Chan, Yuh-Mou Sue, Ju-Chi Liu, Toong Hua Liang, Tsuei-Yuen Huang, Brian Tomlinson, Moses Sing Sum Chow, Pai-Feng Kao, Yi-Jen Chen

Article Affiliation:

Department of Medicine, Taipei Medical University–Wan Fang Hospital, Taipei City, Taiwan.


BACKGROUND: Stevioside, a natural glycoside isolated from the plant Stevia rebaudiana Bertoni, has been used as a commercial sweetening agent in Japan and Brazil for>20 years. Previous animal and human studies have indicated that stevioside has an antihypertensive effect.

OBJECTIVES: This study was undertaken to investigate the long-term (2-year) efficacy and tolerability of stevioside in patients with mild essential hypertension. Secondary objectives were to determine the effects of stevioside on left ventricular mass index (LVMI) and quality of life (QOL).

METHODS: This was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in Chinese men and women aged between 20 and 75 years with mild essential hypertension (systolic blood pressure [SBP] 140-159 mm Hg and diastolic blood pressure [DBP] 90-99 mm Hg). Patients took capsules containing 500 mg stevioside powder or placebo 3 times daily for 2 years. Blood pressure was measured at monthly clinic visits; patients were also encouraged to monitor blood pressure at home using an automated device. LVMI was determined by 2-dimensional echocardiography at baseline and after 1 and 2 years of treatment. QOL was assessed using the Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey. Electrocardiographic, laboratory, and QOL parameters were assessed at the beginning of treatment, and at 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years.

RESULTS: One hundred seventy-four patients (87 men, 87 women) were enrolled in the study, and 168 completed it: 82 (42 men, 40 women; mean [SD] age, 52 [7] years) in the stevioside group and 86 (44 women, 42 men; mean age, 53 [7] years) in the placebo group. After 2 years, the stevioside group had significant decreases in mean (SD) SBP and DBP compared with baseline (SBP, from 150 [7.3] to 140 [6.8] mm Hg; DBP, from 95 [4.2] to 89 [3.2] mm Hg; P<0.05) and compared with placebo (P<0.05). Based on patients’ records of self-monitored blood pressure, these effects were noted beginning approximately 1 week after the start of treatment and persisted throughout the study. There were no significant changes in body mass index or blood biochemistry, and the results of laboratory tests were similar in the 2 groups throughout the study. No significant difference in the incidence of adverse effects was noted between groups, and QOL scores were significantly improved overall with stevioside compared with placebo (P<0.001). Neither group had a significant change in mean LVMI. However, after 2 years, 6 of 52 patients (11.5%) in the stevioside group had left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH), compared with 17 of 50 patients (34.0%) in the placebo group (P<0.001). Of those who did not have LVH at baseline, 3 of 46 patients (6.5%) in the stevioside group had developed LVH after 2 years, compared with 9 of 37 patients (24.3%) in the placebo group (P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS: In this 2-year study in Chinese patients with mild hypertension, oral stevioside significantly decreased SBP and DBP compared with placebo. QOL was improved, and no significant adverse effects were noted.



Science Confirms Turmeric As Effective As 14 Drugs

Posted on: 

Monday, May 13th 2013 at 2:00 pm

Written By: 

Sayer Ji, Founder

Turmeric is one the most thoroughly researched plants in existence today.  Its medicinal properties and components (primarily curcumin) have been the subject of over 5600 peer-reviewed and published biomedical studies.  In fact, our five-year long research project on this sacred plant has revealed over 600 potential preventive and therapeutic applications, as well as 175 distinct beneficial physiological effects. This entire database of 1,585 ncbi-hyperlinked turmeric abstracts can be downloaded as a PDF at our Downloadable Turmeric Document page, and acquired either as a retail item or with 200 GMI-tokens, for those of you who are already are members and receive them automatically each month.

Given the sheer density of research performed on this remarkable spice, it is no wonder that a growing number of studies have concluded that it compares favorably to a variety of conventional medications, including:

  • ·         Lipitor/Atorvastatin(cholesterol medication): A 2008 study published in the journal Drugs in R & D found that a standardized preparation of curcuminoids from Turmeric compared favorably to the drug atorvastatin (trade name Lipitor) on endothelial dysfunction, the underlying pathology of the blood vessels that drives atherosclerosis, in association with reductions in inflammation and oxidative stress in type 2 diabetic patients. [i]  [For addition curcumin and ‘high cholesterol’ research – 8 abstracts]
  • ·         Corticosteroids (steroid medications): A 1999 study published in the journal Phytotherapy Research found that the primary polyphenol in turmeric, the saffron colored pigment known ascurcumin, compared favorably to steroids in the management of chronic anterior uveitis, an inflammatory eye disease.[ii]  A 2008 study published in Critical Care Medicine found thatcurcumin compared favorably to the corticosteroid drug dexamethasone in the animal model as an alternative therapy for protecting lung transplantation-associated injury by down-regulating inflammatory genes.[iii] An earlier 2003 study published in Cancer Letters found the same drug also compared favorably to dexamethasone in a lung ischaemia-repurfusion injury model.[iv]  [for additional curcumin and inflammation research – 52 abstracts]
  • ·         Prozac/Fluoxetine & Imipramine  (antidepressants): A 2011 study published in the journalActa Poloniae Pharmaceutica found that curcumin compared favorably to both drugs in reducing depressive behavior in an animal model.[v] [for additional curcumin and depression research – 5 abstracts]
  • ·         Aspirin (blood thinner): A 1986 in vitro and ex vivo study published in the journalArzneimittelforschung found that curcumin has anti-platelet and prostacyclin modulating effects compared to aspirin, indicating it may have value in patients prone to vascular thrombosis and requiring anti-arthritis therapy.[vi]  [for additional curcumin and anti-platelet research]
  • ·         Anti-inflammatory Drugs: A 2004 study published in the journal Oncogene found that curcumin (as well as resveratrol) were effective alternatives to the drugs aspirin, ibuprofen, sulindac, phenylbutazone, naproxen, indomethacin, diclofenac, dexamethasone, celecoxib, and tamoxifen in exerting anti-inflammatory and anti-proliferative activity against tumor cells.[vii] [for additional curcumin and anti-proliferative research – 15 abstracts]
  • ·         Oxaliplatin (chemotherapy drug): A 2007 study published in the International Journal of Cancer found that curcumin compares favorably with oxaliplatin as an antiproliferative agenet in colorectal cell lines.[viii] [for additional curcumin and colorectal cancer research – 52 abstracts]
  • ·         Metformin (diabetes drug): A 2009 study published in the journal Biochemitry and Biophysical Research Community explored how curcumin might be valuable in treating diabetes, finding that it activates AMPK (which increases glucose uptake) and suppresses gluconeogenic gene expression  (which suppresses glucose production in the liver) in hepatoma cells. Interestingly, they found curcumin to be 500 times to 100,000 times (in the form known as tetrahydrocurcuminoids(THC)) more potent than metformin in activating AMPK and its downstream target acetyl-CoA carboxylase (ACC). [ix]




In 2012, a study published in the Journal of Indian Society of Periodontology compared the efficacy of a .1% curcumin extract mouthwash + .01% eugenol (Group A) to a more strongly concentrated .2% chlorhexidine gluconate mouthwash (Group B), in subjects with mild to moderate gingivitis. Both Group A and Group B consisted of 30 subjects who were advised to use 10 ml of mouthwash with equal dilution of water for 1 min twice a day 30 min after brushing.  They were then tracked for plaque and gingival changes at day 0, day 14h and day 21. Both their direct experience (subjective) and objective criteria were assessed at days 14 and 21.

The results were as follows:  

On comparison between chlorhexidine and turmeric mouthwash, percentage reduction of the Plaque Index between 0 and 21 st day were 64.207 and 69.072, respectively (P=0.112), percentage reduction of Gingival Index between 0 and 21st day were 61.150 and 62.545 respectively (P=0.595) and percentage reduction of BAPNA [The N-benzoyl-l-arginine-p- nitroanilide assay; a measurement of pathogenic bacterial activity] values between 0 and 21st day were 42.256 and 48.901 respectively (P=0.142). [emphasis added]

In all three objective parameters tested, turmeric extract was at least as effective as chlorhexidine mouthwash at improving the patient’s oral health. However, technically, the curcuminformulation beat out the chemical mouthwash in all 3 measurements, and at only one-half the concentration.



Wheat is not a genetically modified organism (GMO). But evidence suggests that genetically modified foods, such as soy and corn, may help explain the recent explosion of gluten-related disorders, which now affect up to 18 million Americans.


The best way to avoid GMOs is to consult the or download thefree iPhone app ShopNoGMO. Look for products with either the “Non-GMO Project Verified” or the “Certified Organic” seal. Avoid ingredients derived from the foods most likely to be genetically modified. These include soy, corn, cottonseed, canola, sugar, papaya from Hawaii or China, zucchini, and yellow squash.

Another possible environmental trigger may be the introduction of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) to the American food supply, which occurred in the mid-1990s. GMOs are created by a laboratory process that transfers genetic material into the DNA of an organism. There are nine genetically modified (GM) food crops currently on the market: soy, corn, cotton (oil), canola (oil), sugar from sugar beets, zucchini, yellow squash, Hawaiian papaya, and alfalfa. Notice that wheat is not one of these. Although wheat has been hybridized through natural breeding techniques over the years, it isnot in fact a GMO.

Most GM crops are engineered to tolerate a weed killer called Roundup®, whose active ingredient is glyphosate. These crops, known as Roundup-Ready crops, accumulate high levels of glyphosate that remain in the food. Corn and cotton varieties are also engineered to produce an insecticide called Bt-toxin. The Bt-toxin is produced in every cell of genetically engineered corn and ends up in corn chips, corn tortillas, and other ingredients derived from corn. A recent analysis of research suggests that Bt-toxin, glyphosate, and other components of GMOs, are linked to five conditions that may either initiate or exacerbate gluten-related disorders:

  • Intestinal permeability
  • Imbalanced gut bacteria
  • Immune activation and allergies
  • Impaired digestion
  • Damage to the intestinal wall


Health Statistics Overview (from same source as above).

Yes, it’s true that people are living longer than ever but I wouldn’t say they are arriving in style.

  • ·         50% of people over 60 years old are on 5 or more pharmaceutical drugs
  • ·         The United States is ranked 38th in lifespan among all countries despite outspending all of them by large margins on health care.
  • ·         50% of Americans will have cataracts by the age of eighty
  • ·         Based on a study from 2009, Nearly half of people aged 85 and older (43 percent) have Alzheimer’s disease.
  • ·         Digestive disease affects 3 in 4 people over age 45.
  • ·         Most persons over the age of 75 are affected with osteoarthritis in at least one joint, making this condition a leading cause of disability in the US

Take a look at some recent headlines:

  1. 1.      Dementia cases ‘to double by 2030′ says World Health Organisation
  2. 2.      100 Million Plus in Chronic Pain in U.S.
  3. 3.      Fat Future: 42% of Americans May Be Obese by 2030
  4. 4.      U.S. autism rates reach new height – CDC
  5. 5.      CDC: More American Adults Hobbled by Arthritis
  6. 6.      Osteoporosis on the Rise in the U.S.
  7. 7.      Global cancer cases to rise 75 pct by 2030 as developing countries adopt bad habits from West
  8. 8.      Federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention study finds an alarming increase in Type 2 diabetes and pre-diabetes among adolescents age 12 to 19
  9. 9.      Type 2 Diabetes Rates Rising Around the World
  10. 10.                Almost 3/4 of the Nation is Overweight…
  11. 11.                Reports of Acid Reflux Symptoms Double, Study Finds
  12. 12.                Liver disease deaths ‘up by 25%’
  13. 13.                U.S. asthma rates at all-time high, CDC says
  14. 14.                Strokes in Children and Young Adults on the Rise Researchers Say Findings Should Be a Wake-Up Call for Lifestyle Improvements
  15. 15.                40% New York City children either obese or overweight
  16. 16.                Eye diseases rising at rapid rates in U.S.
  17. 17.                Deadly strain of MRSA now resistant to last-line antibiotics for infections
  18. 18.                High Blood Pressure a Rising Risk for Kids, Teens
  19. 19.                Diabetes now affects nearly 20 percent of the U.S. population.
  20. 20.                In 2010, according to WHO, there are an estimated 42 million children under five years old who are overweight, and this figure is increasing at an alarming rate.
  21. 21.                By 2050, the worldwide incidence of hip fracture in men is projected to increase by 240% in women and 310% in men.
  22. 22.                50 million US adults (or 22 percent of the population) have arthritis
  23. 23.                One in 2 people will develop osteoarthritis during their lifetime
  24. 24.                More than 40 million people in the US have some form of arthritis (one in every six people)

Over the last 30 years their have been increases in the rates for Obesity, Diabetes, Autism, Asthma, ADHD,Food Allergies, Acid Reflux, Alezheimers, Back Pain, Cancer(all types combined), Celiac disease, Chronic fatigue, Chronic Obstructive Pulminary Disease, Gout, High Blood Pressure, Kidney Stones, Lupus, Migraines, Rheumatoid Arthritis, Septicemica, Depression, Cardiovascular Disease, Bipolar Disorder, Dementia. Hypertension, GERD, Strokes and Migraines. Despite all the great technology and all the great inventions, the health of people and the environment has never been more threatened.

Excerpts from Recent News Stories:

  1. 1.      Scientists Paid to Promote Junk Food
  2. 2.      Bias Can Exaggerate Drugs’ Effectiveness
  3. 3.      Half of U.S. Corporations in Study Skewed Climate Science
  4. 4.      Strides in Scientific Integrity at FDA Hindered by Special Interests
  5. 5.      FDA’s Huge Conflicts of Interest with Big Pharma
  6. 6.      Big Pharma Routinely Suppresses Data from Clinical Trials—but FDA Approves These Dangerous Drugs Anyway!
  7. 7.      Organic Food Advocates Condemn USDA’s Cozy Relationship With Corporate Agribusiness
  8. 8.      Funding the American Diabetes Association
  9. 9.      MIT’s Fracking Report Backs Its Donors: Gas Companies
  10. 10.                Harvard To Be Tried for Alzheimer’s Research Fraud
  11. 11.                70% of DSM Psychiatrists Financially Tied to Drug Companies
  12. 12.                Think the drugs your GP gives you are safe? Well, don’t be so sure
  13. 13.                Secret Clinical Trial Data is a Bonanza for Big Pharma but a Risk to Your Health
  14. 14.                US Advisory Group on Fracking Has Abundant Ties to Energy Industry
  15. 15.                Methyl Iodide Controversy: California Officials Ignored Scientists In Approving Dangerous Pesticide
  16. 16.                Why is Massive Conflict of Interest Allowed in Government Health Recommendations?


  1. 17.                Statin Drugs Shown to Increase Risk of Diabetes Significantly — Yet the Media Scramble to Protect the Drugs’ Reputation




UPDATE 11.29-12.1.13 Pope, Triclosan, Saturday Night Live, Laundry Gases

UPDATE 11.29-12.1.13
The Pope Speaks Some Sense
Triclosan finally gone after 35 years
Watch out for Laundry Gases
The Pope Speaks Some Sense
HERE IS AN EXAMPLE OF SOMEONE IN POWER PROCLAIMING A TRUTH AND A WAY FOR ACTION BASED ON THAT TRUTH, but alas its from the head of an organization that teaches fear where there is no fear, and hope where there is no hope. The fear that it teaches is fear of god, when there is no god. The hope that it teaches is life after death, when there is no such life. Still I welcome anyone who can say a bit of truth to a world gone crazy with greed, violence, stupidity, and religiosity. God will not get us out of our mess, we must do it ourselves.

Continue Reading →

Update 11.23-26.13 Zeitgeist, GMO, Nuclear, Monarch and Bees









Continue Reading →

Update 11.21.13: Organic, Espionage, Climate Change, Fukushima, HIV, Hubble










  Continue Reading →