Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Obamacare will cause millions of Americans to lose their health insurance
http://www.naturalnews.com/042689_Obamacare_health_insurance_freedom_of_choice.html
Natural News | Obamacare will eliminate freedom of choice in healthcare, including within the natural health community.
Something amazing is happening in Washington. Something the alleged experts said could never happen.
Now even Democrats are calling for a delay in ObamaCare.
That's right, just a week after the media called conservatives like Ted Cruz crazy for proposing an ObamaCare delay, six Democratic senators have made similar calls.
That means a majority of the Senate now supports an ObamaCare delay.
Why?
Because ObamaCare is imploding. People simply can't enroll.
Join our new movement to stop ObamaCare at ICantEnroll.com. Next week we want 100,000 Americans to speak with one voice, to declare unequivocally that ObamaCare is broken.
Go to the site. Build on our amazing momentum. Even Democrats are joining the fight.
Sign the petition at ICantEnroll.com to strike a critical blow at ObamaCare.http://icantenroll.com/
Jay Sekulow
ACLJ Chief Counsel
The Eyes Have It: Pesticides Stop Sweet Potatoes from Growing Shoots
http://www.activistpost.com/2013/10/the-eyes-have-it-pesticides-stop-sweet.html
Five year update on the guy who cured his stage IV prostate cancer with baking soda
http://www.naturalnews.com/042525_stage_IV_prostate_cancer_baking_soda_treatment_five_year_update.html
The guy is Vernon Johnston, and his story was first reported as a Natural News citizen journalism article in 2009.
That was around one year after being informed he was cancer-free from stage IV prostate cancer that had metastasized into the bone matter of his pelvic area in June of 2008.
Now here it is, over five years later, and apparently Vernon's still going strong, according to his website reports, videos and announcements. The last known blog posting from Vernon was in August of 2013.
That's five years and two months after being pronounced cancer-free at a Veterans Administration hospital.
The mainstream medical standard for considering cancer cured is five years in remission or cancer-free. That self-imposed standard is rarely met with surgeries, radiation treatments and chemotherapy sessions. Many die from those treatments within five years!
But after less than two weeks of intense bicarbonate of soda or baking soda (not baking powder) and blackstrap molasses consumption, he escaped not only cancer but toxic orthodox treatments.
Chemotherapy's dismal record
An interesting study based out of the Australian Oncology Radiology Department, Northern Sydney Cancer Centre, conducted a very thorough epidemiological meta-analysis, completed in 2003 and published in 2004.
It was an effort to determine if the contribution of chemotherapy, both as curative and adjunctive cancer therapies, with its high expense warranted the Australian medical system's financial support.
Their abstract reported: "The overall contribution of curative and adjuvant cytotoxic chemotherapy to 5-year survival in adults was estimated to be 2.3% in Australia and 2.1% in the USA."
From their conclusion: "To justify the continued funding and availability of drugs used in cytotoxic chemotherapy, a rigorous evaluation of the cost-effectiveness and impact on quality of life is urgently required."
Granted, this activity was the radiation boys attacking the chemo camp to discourage Australia's socialized medical system's funding of chemotherapy drug availability. So what. They got the numbers right, and the study was peer reviewed and published.
Thanks to cancertutor.com, that Australian abstract with full study details is available here (http://www.burtongoldberg.com).
According to the vast database cancer cure guide Cancer Tutor, 90% of cancer patients who don't undergo conventional therapies survive beyond the five year mark, while 50% who have undergone extensive conventional treatments and are sometimes left to die survive. Still much better results than chemo!
Back to Vernon and his baking soda
Vernon also incorporated a good basic diet, lots of sunshine exposure and breathing exercises along with strong emotional support by family members for him and his attempt at curing his cancer alone with an unusual approach that was available to him.
The baking soda/molasses combination caused a drastic pH alkaline spike that oxygenated his cancer cells to their demise. Since cancer cells thrive by fermenting sugar, the molasses was the bait that allowed baking soda's alkaline influence to enter and oxygenate them (http://drsircus.com).
He continued maintenance sessions every few months with two weeks of alkaline boosting using the same protocol of baking soda and molasses that he used to cure himself a few years ago, as explained here (http://www.phkillscancer.com).
Although this author and most others wouldn't go it alone with only the baking soda-molasses protocol, it worked for him. Just like super-intense carrot juicing worked for Ralph Cole and Ann Cameron, as reported here (http://www.naturalnews.com).
The statement that there are hundreds of cures for cancer that aren't toxic and expensive is not an exaggeration. Let the Cancer Tutor help you find them.
Sources for this article include:
http://www.cancertutor.com
http://www.burtongoldberg.com
http://www.phkillscancer.com
http://www.naturalnews.com
About the author:
Paul Fassa is dedicated to warning others about the current corruption of food and medicine and guiding others toward a direction for better health with no restrictions on health freedom. You can visit his blog at http://healthmaven.blogspot.com
Ya and Amen to that bro!
Portman on Meet the Press
GMO's cause caner
http://www.anh-usa.org/gmo/
GMO's cause caner
http://www.anh-usa.org/gmo/
The New Mafia Wears A Badge
http://dprogram.net/2013/09/30/the-new-mafia-wears-a-badge/#more-143256
In part one of this series, I documented how the banks are positioning for an economic crash by securing as many hard assets as possible. Whether it be your home that is stolen through MERS fraud, or your secure brokerage account which is stolen by Jon Corzine and MF Global, or if it is an unjust court ruling which allows the banks the legal right to steal your bank deposits, nobody’s private property is safe from confiscation.
An all-natural cure for cancer?
http://video.foxnews.com/v/2684348172001/an-all-natural-cure-for-cancer/?playlist_id=2647851223001
An all-natural cure for cancer?
http://video.foxnews.com/v/2684348172001/an-all-natural-cure-for-cancer/?playlist_id=2647851223001
New USDA rule allows hidden feces, pus, bacteria and bleach in conventional poultry
http://www.naturalnews.com/042274_conventional_poultry_food_contamination_USDA.html#
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) is currently in the process of trying to ram through passage of a new "modernization" rule for conventional poultry production that would eliminate a large percentage of USDA inspectors and speed up the factory production process. And existing safeguards, as minimally effective as they currently are, would also be eroded, allowing for more hidden feces, pus, bacteria and chemical contaminants to persist in conventional chicken and turkey meat.
Even though salmonella rates as detected in meat and poultry have been steadily dropping year after year in the U.S., roughly the same numbers of people seem to be getting infected with the pathogen annually. The primary reason for this statistical anomaly appears to be that the current testing methods authorized by the USDA for meat and poultry are wholly inadequate and outdated and actually cover up the presence of contaminants borne on factory farms and in processing plants.
But a whole new set of guidelines being proposed by the USDA will make things even worse by allowing companies to self-inspect themselves, as well as use an even more aggressive barrage of chemicals to treat their tainted meat before selling it to consumers. This is good news for the factory poultry industry, of course, which is expected to cut its costs by about $250 million a year, thanks to its buddies at the USDA, but it's bad news for consumers who will be subjected to all the toxic consequences.
If you have ever seen any of the shocking, undercover footage showing how chickens, turkeys and other animals are treated at factory farms, then you already know the type of filth and abuse to which these poor animals are routinely subjected. Because of their horrific living conditions, factory farm animals are often teeming with harmful pathogens, which is why their meat has to undergo chemical treatments in the first place before being packaged and served on dinner tables -- it is a truly disgusting process, to say the least.
According to documented reports, after the animals are slaughtered, conventional poultry is essentially hung on long conveyor lines and sprayed, bathed and injected with all sorts of chemical solutions, including chlorine bleach, before ultimately being hauled off to the supermarket. These chemical solutions are, of course, carefully designed to kill any bacteria and render the meat "safe" for human consumption, the ultimate "don't ask, don't tell" policy for the factory food industry, if you will.
USDA intends to throw more chemicals, less regulation at poultry industry dilemma
But like all other chemical-based solutions that compliment industrial food production, this process is ultimately failing to subdue and kill pathogens the same way that it used to back in the old days. A cohort of new scientific research recently submitted to the USDA reveals that the routine processes by which the factory food industry covers its frightful tracks are no match to a whole new generation of "superbugs" that resist these chemicals -- and the USDA's proposed solutions only further add to the problem by covering it up with even more chemicals.
"If the new rule is implemented, all chicken will be presumed to be contaminated with feces, pus, scabs, and bile and washed in a chlorine solution," explains ChickenJustice.org. "Consumers will eat chicken with more chemical residue and contaminants. With faster production rates, workers' injuries will increase. They will also face breathing and skin problems from constant exposure to chlorine wash. OSHA will take the next 3 years to study the impact of the faster processing lines on workers, but USDA wants to implement the rule immediately."
To take direct action against this heinous USDA agenda for factory chicken, you can contact the White House by visiting the ChickenJustice.org "Take Action Now!" page:
http://chickenjustice.org
Sources for this article include:
http://motherjones.com
http://articles.washingtonpost.com
http://naturalnews.com
http://chickenjustice.org
VOTE TODAY - Tell Oregon to Stop SB 633!
Today Oregon legislators and Governor John Kitzhaber will decide whether they will do the bidding of out of state multinational biotech seed giants like Monsanto and Syngenta or whether they will stand up to protect Oregon's family farmers and the future of our seed supply.
The stakes couldn't be higher. Today the Oregon legislature could pass SB 633 (LC 5), Oregon's Monsanto Protection Act, which would strip local countys' control over seeds, food and agriculture and deny county elected officials' ability to keep GMO crops from contaminating farmers' fields.
After dying in committee during the regular session earlier this year, SB 633, now known as LC 5, industrial ag corporations joined forces with the notorious ALEC and Koch brothers to slip this seed preemption bill into an unrelated emergency PERS tax and pension bill in Oregon.
Please join us in stopping this outrageous sneak attack on family farmers, their economic livelihoods, their way of life and the future integrity and survival of organic and non-GMO seed.
Already more than 1,000 family farmers and farm organizations and 28,000 individuals have signed this urgent letter - Please add your voice!
Your call could make the difference on this vote!
1. If you are a FARMER, own a farm or run a farm organization, click here to add your name to a sign-on letter to stop SB 633 and stand up to protect the future integrity of organic seeds. Please add your farm name or organization ONLY to this petition.
http://action.fooddemocracynow.org/go/1027?t=8&akid=990.520930.1TMNjj
2. If you are not a farmer, but support America’s family farmers as an INDIVIDUAL and want to protect the future of our food supply and integrity of our seed, please join to sign this letter in support of farmers in Oregon and every where who work to grow our food.
http://action.fooddemocracynow.org/go/1026?t=11&akid=990.520930.1TMNjj
3. After you take action, consider giving the Governor John Kitzhaber a call to let his office know you strongly oppose SB 633 - tell Oregon it's time to protect family farmers, not biotech seed and pesticide companies.
Governor Kitzhaber's office phone number: 503-378-4582 or Press Office: 503-689-6117 503-689-5324
Leave a friendly message on Gov Kitzhaber's Facebook page:
http://action.fooddemocracynow.org/go/1040?t=14&akid=990.520930.1TMNjj
THIS IS URGENT - PLEASE PASS THIS ON!
After you sign the letter, please pass this on to 3 friends who care about this issue so we can broaden our impact.
Why Standing up for Seed Integrity to Stop SB 633 is Important!
In the past 6 months alone, Monsanto's GMO wheat and GMO alfalfa have contaminated farmers' fields in Oregon and Washington respectively. Incredibly, Oregon and Washington farmers produce and supply the majority of beta seeds to the nation and the world. This is an issue of global and national importance for our seed supply and farmer rights.
Seed is not only the foundation of agriculture and our food supply, but also civilization and our democracy. Without access to pure, safe high-quality seeds family farmers cannot adequately meet the challenges of growing food for our nation and a growing world population and cannot protect their own economic livelihoods.
SB 633 is a poorly written bill that strips local control of decisions on seeds and agriculture production.
Current efforts to sneak SB 633, a seed pre-emption bill, into legislation pertaining to public pension cuts and new state tax increases in Oregon state, threatens to undermine the future economic survival of all family farmers, not just those in Oregon, and erode the rights of local elected officials to make appropriate decisions on how local food and agriculture should be regulated.
Farmers across the U.S. are recognizing SB 633 to be a threat to all farms and our common seed heritage. If you are a farmer, own a farm or have an organization that represents the best interests of independent family farmers, Oregon farmers need you today.
20 Obama Quotes About Islam Contrasted With 20 Obama Quotes About Christianity
http://thetruthwins.com/archives/20-obama-quotes-about-islam-contrasted-with-20-obama-quotes-about-christianity
Obama messiah
You are about to read some of the most shocking quotes that Barack Obama has ever uttered in public. A few of these have been widely circulated, but most of them are very obscure. Even though he claims to be a Christian, throughout his political career Obama has repeatedly attacked traditional Biblical Christianity and he has a very long history of anti-Christian actions. In public speeches he has repeatedly cast doubt on the Bible, he has repeatedly stated that he does not believe that Jesus is necessary for salvation, and he has consistently said that he believes that all “people of faith” believe in the same God. At the same time, Obama has always referred to Muhammed as “the Prophet”, he has always expressed great love and respect for Islam, and he has even removed all references to Islam from terror training materials used by federal government agencies. So what in the world does “the leader of the free world” actually believe? Read the quotes below and decide for yourself…
20 Quotes By Barack Obama About Islam
#1 “The future must not belong to those who slander the Prophet of Islam”
#2 “The sweetest sound I know is the Muslim call to prayer”
#3 “We will convey our deep appreciation for the Islamic faith, which has done so much over the centuries to shape the world — including in my own country.”
#4 “As a student of history, I also know civilization’s debt to Islam.”
#5 “Islam has a proud tradition of tolerance.”
#6 “Islam has always been part of America”
#7 “we will encourage more Americans to study in Muslim communities”
#8 “These rituals remind us of the principles that we hold in common, and Islam’s role in advancing justice, progress, tolerance, and the dignity of all human beings.”
#9 “America and Islam are not exclusive and need not be in competition. Instead, they overlap, and share common principles of justice and progress, tolerance and the dignity of all human beings.”
#10 “I made clear that America is not – and never will be – at war with Islam.”
#11 “Islam is not part of the problem in combating violent extremism – it is an important part of promoting peace.”
#12 “So I have known Islam on three continents before coming to the region where it was first revealed”
#13 “In ancient times and in our times, Muslim communities have been at the forefront of innovation and education.”
#14 “throughout history, Islam has demonstrated through words and deeds the possibilities of religious tolerance and racial equality.”
#15 “Ramadan is a celebration of a faith known for great diversity and racial equality”
#16 “The Holy Koran tells us, ‘O mankind! We have created you male and a female; and we have made you into nations and tribes so that you may know one another.’”
#17 “I look forward to hosting an Iftar dinner celebrating Ramadan here at the White House later this week, and wish you a blessed month.”
#18 “We’ve seen those results in generations of Muslim immigrants – farmers and factory workers, helping to lay the railroads and build our cities, the Muslim innovators who helped build some of our highest skyscrapers and who helped unlock the secrets of our universe.”
#19 “That experience guides my conviction that partnership between America and Islam must be based on what Islam is, not what it isn’t. And I consider it part of my responsibility as president of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear.”
#20 “I also know that Islam has always been a part of America’s story.”
20 Quotes By Barack Obama About Christianity
#1 “Whatever we once were, we are no longer a Christian nation”
#2 “We do not consider ourselves a Christian nation.”
#3 “Which passages of scripture should guide our public policy? Should we go with Leviticus, which suggests slavery is OK and that eating shellfish is an abomination? Or we could go with Deuteronomy, which suggests stoning your child if he strays from the faith?”
#4 “Even those who claim the Bible’s inerrancy make distinctions between Scriptural edicts, sensing that some passages – the Ten Commandments, say, or a belief in Christ’s divinity – are central to Christian faith, while others are more culturally specific and may be modified to accommodate modern life.”
#5 “The American people intuitively understand this, which is why the majority of Catholics practice birth control and some of those opposed to gay marriage nevertheless are opposed to a Constitutional amendment to ban it. Religious leadership need not accept such wisdom in counseling their flocks, but they should recognize this wisdom in their politics.”
#6 From Obama’s book, The Audacity of Hope: “I am not willing to have the state deny American citizens a civil union that confers equivalent rights on such basic matters as hospital visitation or health insurance coverage simply because the people they love are of the same sex—nor am I willing to accept a reading of the Bible that considers an obscure line in Romans to be more defining of Christianity than the Sermon on the Mount.”
#7 Obama’s response when asked what his definition of sin is: “Being out of alignment with my values.”
#8 “If all it took was someone proclaiming I believe Jesus Christ and that he died for my sins, and that was all there was to it, people wouldn’t have to keep coming to church, would they.”
#9 “This is something that I’m sure I’d have serious debates with my fellow Christians about. I think that the difficult thing about any religion, including Christianity, is that at some level there is a call to evangelize and prostelytize. There’s the belief, certainly in some quarters, that people haven’t embraced Jesus Christ as their personal savior that they’re going to hell.”
#10 “I find it hard to believe that my God would consign four-fifths of the world to hell. I can’t imagine that my God would allow some little Hindu kid in India who never interacts with the Christian faith to somehow burn for all eternity. That’s just not part of my religious makeup.”
#11 “I don’t presume to have knowledge of what happens after I die. But I feel very strongly that whether the reward is in the here and now or in the hereafter, the aligning myself to my faith and my values is a good thing.”
#12 “I’ve said this before, and I know this raises questions in the minds of some evangelicals. I do not believe that my mother, who never formally embraced Christianity as far as I know … I do not believe she went to hell.”
#13 “Those opposed to abortion cannot simply invoke God’s will–they have to explain why abortion violates some principle that is accessible to people of all faiths.”
#14 On his support for civil unions for gay couples: “If people find that controversial then I would just refer them to the Sermon on the Mount.”
#15 “You got into these small towns in Pennsylvania and, like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing’s replaced them. And they fell through the Clinton Administration, and the Bush Administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not. And it’s not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.”
#16 “In our household, the Bible, the Koran and the Bhagavad Gita sat on the shelf alongside books of Greek and Norse and African mythology”
#17 “On Easter or Christmas Day, my mother might drag me to church, just as she dragged me to the Buddhist temple, the Chinese New Year celebration, the Shinto shrine, and ancient Hawaiian burial sites.”
#18 “we have Jews, Muslims, Hindus, atheists, agnostics, Buddhists, and their own path to grace is one that we have to revere and respect as much as our own”
#19 “All of us have a responsibility to work for the day when the mothers of Israelis and Palestinians can see their children grow up without fear; when the Holy Land of the three great faiths is the place of peace that God intended it to be; when Jerusalem is a secure and lasting home for Jews and Christians and Muslims, and a place for all of the children of Abraham to mingle peacefully together as in the story of Isra — (applause) — as in the story of Isra, when Moses, Jesus, and Mohammed, peace be upon them, joined in prayer. (Applause.)”
#20 “I believe that there are many paths to the same place, and that is a belief that there is a higher power, a belief that we are connected as a people.”
About the author: Michael T. Snyder is a former Washington D.C. attorney who now publishes The Truth. His new thriller entitled “The Beginning Of The End” is now available on Amazon.com.
A likely-to-pass federal bill with a new and dangerous provision may be voted upon this weekend, and we need your help to amend it!
http://us-mg4.mail.yahoo.com/neo/launch?.rand=1805596736&action=showLetter&umid=2_0_0_1_173939_AMvWiGIAAIhAUcEppwJDql3RufU&box=Inbox#mail
The Senate compounding bill we have been telling you about has now been scrapped because of the outcry from consumers like you. That is the good news. They started over from scratch.
Here’s the bad news. They slipped in a new and very bad provision. This provision says that your doctor can only order a vitamin or mineral or other nutrient IV if the ingredients are already pre-approved or in some unrelated, synthetic, and FDA approved drug. This is outrageous.
More bad news. The same bill will likely be voted on in the House right after the Senate without changes.
IVs (nutrients injected into your veins) are very, very important for natural medicine. Please don’t let them make some really important compounded IV medications illegal! Someone you love may desperately need them.
Please read more about this terrible provision on our website, and take action immediately!
Take-Action1
P.S.: The Senate has just passed the Continuing Resolution without the Monsanto Rider! This is a tremendous victory—and is entirely thanks to your support. Let's now get this new threat dropped from the compounding bill!
A likely-to-pass federal bill with a new and dangerous provision may be voted upon this weekend, and we need your help to amend it!
http://us-mg4.mail.yahoo.com/neo/launch?.rand=1805596736&action=showLetter&umid=2_0_0_1_173939_AMvWiGIAAIhAUcEppwJDql3RufU&box=Inbox#mail
The Senate compounding bill we have been telling you about has now been scrapped because of the outcry from consumers like you. That is the good news. They started over from scratch.
Here’s the bad news. They slipped in a new and very bad provision. This provision says that your doctor can only order a vitamin or mineral or other nutrient IV if the ingredients are already pre-approved or in some unrelated, synthetic, and FDA approved drug. This is outrageous.
More bad news. The same bill will likely be voted on in the House right after the Senate without changes.
IVs (nutrients injected into your veins) are very, very important for natural medicine. Please don’t let them make some really important compounded IV medications illegal! Someone you love may desperately need them.
Please read more about this terrible provision on our website, and take action immediately!
Take-Action1
P.S.: The Senate has just passed the Continuing Resolution without the Monsanto Rider! This is a tremendous victory—and is entirely thanks to your support. Let's now get this new threat dropped from the compounding bill!
ObamaCare's Bad Surprises Begin on October 1.
Gary North - September 27, 2013
http://www.garynorth.com/public/11594.cfm
For people without health insurance, they must shop for a plan no later than September 30. On October 1, this government site shuts down (unlike the government itself).
http://finder.healthcare.gov
If you need help -- and you will -- go here. But you are running out of time.
http://www.garynorth.com/snip/1101.htm
You must have a plan by January 1, or else pay a tax to the government: 1% of your 2013 income, or $95, whichever is more. This tax will rise every year.
There is a calculator to show what coverage will cost you. It shows if you are eligible for tax credits.
http://kff.org/interactive/subsidy-calculator/
People with low incomes will not qualify for tax credits. But they will have to pay the extra premiums. This is called "helping the poor."
Congressional staffers finally read the bill the Congress passed. They panicked. They began making plans to quit. Their bosses then decided to pay the added premiums for their employees. This is called "helping the upper middle class."
Here is what is going to happen in 2014.
Millions of Americans who do not have employer-provided or other group health insurance arrangements and who don't purchase private non-Obamacare individual or family coverage before the end of 2013 -- something most people don't realize remains an alternative for just a few more months -- will be legally required to enroll in the Affordable Care Act's health insurance exchanges or to face the penalties now characterized as "taxes." The number of Americans forced to resort to the exchanges has (per my opinion) been artificially and deliberately juiced by the Obama administration's illegal decision to delay the imposition of the "employer mandate" until 2015. Many individuals and families who would have qualified for employer-provided coverage if the employer mandate had been enforced in January 2014 will now have to go to the exchanges or face the penalties.
Those who enroll in Obamacare's exchanges will be subjected to a brand new system of income-based federal taxation (again, their word) over and above Uncle Sam's existing income and FICA (Social Security and Medicare) tax regimes. This will include marginal rates for most enrollees ranging from 9.5 percent to 18 percent, along with myriad "cliffs" where premiums -- er, taxes -- skyrocket when a person or couple earns just one dollar of additional income.
The tax credit system gets pulled as you make more money.
Then look at what happens once a single person who is 50 or older hits annual earnings of $45,961. At that point, what remains of those wonderful "tax credits" goes up in smoke. (Speaking of smoke, you won't believe how steep Obamacare's tobacco surcharges are. But I digress.) For a 50 year-old single person, dollar number 45,961 causes their annual exchange premium (i.e., "tax") to increase from $4,366 to $5,390. That's because what Kaiser calls Obamacare's "government tax credit subsidy" (they're also having a hard time with the language) goes from $1,024 to zero.
http://pjmedia.com/blog/obamacares-cool-calculator-work-disincentives-like-weve-never-seen-before
As Nancy Pelosi said in 2010, Congress had to pass the bill before they could read it. Now you can read it . . . and weep.
I'm on Medicare. You pay my premiums ($12,000 a year). My wife has Christian Health Care Ministries. She pays $1,000 a year.
What about you? What about your children? They lose your coverage at age 26. Young people lose the subsidies at lower income than had been originally promoted.
ObamaCare's Bad Surprises Begin on October 1.
Gary North - September 27, 2013
http://www.garynorth.com/public/11594.cfm
For people without health insurance, they must shop for a plan no later than September 30. On October 1, this government site shuts down (unlike the government itself).
http://finder.healthcare.gov
If you need help -- and you will -- go here. But you are running out of time.
http://www.garynorth.com/snip/1101.htm
You must have a plan by January 1, or else pay a tax to the government: 1% of your 2013 income, or $95, whichever is more. This tax will rise every year.
There is a calculator to show what coverage will cost you. It shows if you are eligible for tax credits.
http://kff.org/interactive/subsidy-calculator/
People with low incomes will not qualify for tax credits. But they will have to pay the extra premiums. This is called "helping the poor."
Congressional staffers finally read the bill the Congress passed. They panicked. They began making plans to quit. Their bosses then decided to pay the added premiums for their employees. This is called "helping the upper middle class."
Here is what is going to happen in 2014.
Millions of Americans who do not have employer-provided or other group health insurance arrangements and who don't purchase private non-Obamacare individual or family coverage before the end of 2013 -- something most people don't realize remains an alternative for just a few more months -- will be legally required to enroll in the Affordable Care Act's health insurance exchanges or to face the penalties now characterized as "taxes." The number of Americans forced to resort to the exchanges has (per my opinion) been artificially and deliberately juiced by the Obama administration's illegal decision to delay the imposition of the "employer mandate" until 2015. Many individuals and families who would have qualified for employer-provided coverage if the employer mandate had been enforced in January 2014 will now have to go to the exchanges or face the penalties.
Those who enroll in Obamacare's exchanges will be subjected to a brand new system of income-based federal taxation (again, their word) over and above Uncle Sam's existing income and FICA (Social Security and Medicare) tax regimes. This will include marginal rates for most enrollees ranging from 9.5 percent to 18 percent, along with myriad "cliffs" where premiums -- er, taxes -- skyrocket when a person or couple earns just one dollar of additional income.
The tax credit system gets pulled as you make more money.
Then look at what happens once a single person who is 50 or older hits annual earnings of $45,961. At that point, what remains of those wonderful "tax credits" goes up in smoke. (Speaking of smoke, you won't believe how steep Obamacare's tobacco surcharges are. But I digress.) For a 50 year-old single person, dollar number 45,961 causes their annual exchange premium (i.e., "tax") to increase from $4,366 to $5,390. That's because what Kaiser calls Obamacare's "government tax credit subsidy" (they're also having a hard time with the language) goes from $1,024 to zero.
http://pjmedia.com/blog/obamacares-cool-calculator-work-disincentives-like-weve-never-seen-before
As Nancy Pelosi said in 2010, Congress had to pass the bill before they could read it. Now you can read it . . . and weep.
I'm on Medicare. You pay my premiums ($12,000 a year). My wife has Christian Health Care Ministries. She pays $1,000 a year.
What about you? What about your children? They lose your coverage at age 26. Young people lose the subsidies at lower income than had been originally promoted.
thank you
I have copd and it is no fun. I'll take all the prayer I can get. thanks, praise Jesus.
Monsanto Protection Act 2.0 Legislation Defeated By Activism
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=92438367
Monsanto gets its corporate behind handed to it on a platter by Daily Show
http://www.naturalnews.com/042156_Monsanto_Daily_Show_seed_patents.html
(NaturalNews) During a recent segment of The Daily Show with Jon Stewart, the prevailing trend of biotechnology companies such as Monsanto patenting seeds and suing farmers whose crops become contaminated with them was openly ridiculed for its absolute absurdity. Like it typically does with serious issues that go unaddressed by the mainstream media, The Daily Show rightfully mocked Monsanto and its shameless patent protection lobby for such seed crimes, pointing out with humor the insane amount of power this multinational chemical company now has over modern agriculture.
In the opening of the segment, The Daily Show reporter Aasif Mandvi facetiously derides America's farmers for not being grateful that the biotech industry provides them with yearly bounties that stem from patented seeds. Mandvi also satirically accuses the farming community of being the aggressors in not fully cooperating with the interests of biotech giants like Monsanto, mocking the views of biotech patent attorney Scott McBride, who facilitates companies like Monsanto in suing America's farmers.
"Sometimes farmers act in a manner that's not in the best interests of the biotechnology seed companies," states a serious and obviously nervous McBride, to which Mandvi responds with clearly risible affirmation, agreeing that the American farmers have "forced" Monsanto to pursue legal action against them.
The segment goes on to explain how Monsanto aggressively pursues legal action against farmers who it believes are in violation of its patents, a predatory litigation scheme that has plunged many farmers into bankruptcy. Playing the part of the farcical interviewer with ties to the biotech industry, Mandvi brilliantly hands Monsanto its corporate behind on a platter by bringing to light the insanely scandalous practices that have given the industry an astounding 93 percent market share in American agriculture.
"Monsanto's lawyers are accusing farmers of violating their patents, regardless of whether they're doing it or not," explains Troy Roush, a farmer and vice president of the American Corn Growers Association, to Mandvi. "It costs hundreds of thousands of dollars to defend against a patent infringement lawsuit. They've basically forced us all to fall into line with their rules."
You really need to see the entire segment for yourself to get the full gist of the satire:
http://www.thedailyshow.com
Monsanto's agricultural takeover hardly a laughing matter
The use of humor and absurdity to make a point is a highly effective way to disseminate truth in today's world, and it is something the The Daily Show does very well. In this case, millions of Daily Show viewers who may not have known anything about Monsanto or its illicit agricultural agenda have now been exposed to the truth amplified using humor.
Monsanto's takeover of agriculture both here and abroad, however, is no laughing matter. It has already put many farmers out of business, put many others under the direct control of the biotech industry with no easy way out and even led to tens of thousands of farmer suicides globally. The biotech industry, after all, has never been an honest one, as some might claim, simply providing goods and services to farmers in need -- lies and deception are how the industry came to be what it is today.
"Monsanto patenting our plants is a theft of our genetic heritage," adds Roush. "Monsanto's lawyers are professionals. This is all they do is sue farmers. That's how they've gained a 93 percent market share."
To watch the full Daily Show segment on Monsanto, visit:
http://www.thedailyshow.com
Sources for this article include:
http://www.thedailyshow.com
http://blogs.browardpalmbeach.com
http://www.organicconsumers.org
Food is the Best Medicine
Hidden GMO Exposures: Is It Possible To Avoid Them?
http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/hidden-gmo-exposures-it-possible-avoid-them
Systematically bypassing public awareness and approval, GMOs have invaded a much wider market than the food industry. Dubious industrial uses surpass even the wildest imagination and show that our daily lives are far more contaminated by GMOs that we thought.
There are many genetically modified crops that have entered our food chain and that goes primarily for processed food products. However, an incredible number of very common everyday products, often completely unrelated to food have also been seriously tainted by GMs. Most of the problems come from GM corn, soy and cotton, which have dominated conventional agribusiness for many years now and the combined fact that several secondary (or even primary) products from these crops are used in many different industries en masse, thanks to the Government subsidies.
Hidden Exposure #1: GM Corn
Corn is considered an important commodity today due to the many uses in industry. 86% of U.S. grown corn in 2010 was genetically modified, accounting roughly for 55% of the world's corn export. But the bulk of corn that's produced today does not go to food production anymore. Surely corn syrup is used to sweeten most processed food (candies, confectionery, sauces, bread, biscuits, flavored yogurts, juice, sodas, cough drops etc), but when it comes to food additives, corn derivatives have many names, like "xanthan gum," "natural flavors," "free-flowing agents," "vitamin E," and "cellulose". For example, conventional iodized salt contains corn dextrose (free-flowing agent). Corn is also a very popular animal feed; animals raised in GMO grains suffer significant physiological and immunological reactions, which alter their body and hence the products deriving from them. Corn is also used for the production of ethanol, which is subsequently used in cosmetics, hand sanitizers and alcoholic beverages, and is even mandated by the federal government to be put into our gasoline at a 10% concentration. Corn germ oil is widely used in cooking oils, salad dressings, soaps (liquid/solid), detergents and insecticides.
Corn starch is another corn derivative that has invaded many industries. Thanks to its absorbent nature, corn starch is ideal for use in diapers, deodorants, baby powder and pharmaceutical drugs; it is also used in candies that are formed in molds in order to get the fine details to hold their shape – think of gummy candies that have fine details, like character shapes or imprinted logos. Corn starch or cornmeal is also used as adhesive; it is present in the adhesive stripe in envelopes, which seals it once moistened. Industrial glues also contain corn products, mainly corn germ, which replaces more expensive options like resins. The majority of vitamin C at the moment comes from corn as well. This is because corn starch is easily converted into glucose through industrial methods, making it an ideal and cheap option for the producers. Biodegradable corn-based plastic is also becoming very popular because it needs less fossil fuel than petroleum-based alternatives and therefore has reduced carbon footprint. Such plastic can be found in food containers and plastic food packaging, lining the "to-go" coffee cups, disposable dishware and gift cards. Although covering fruit and vegetables with wax is a very old practice that improves self-life and presentation, the wax covering store-bought fruit and vegetables may be corn-based or contain corn-derived additives, even in organic produce. Textile production is also using corn products, either as colorings/dyes or the textile per se. This means that your carpet may very well be based on GMO corn (if not GMO cotton).
Hidden Exposure #2: GM Cotton
The three major cotton producers at the moment are USA, China and India. 93% of cotton planted in the U.S. in 2010 was genetically modified, while 68% and 90% of China's and India's cotton production is GM as well. On a global scale, only 12 countries grow GM cotton, but they account for most of the world's cotton production. Naturally cotton is mostly used for the production of textiles (think clothes, towels, bed sheets, upholstery). In fact, the majority of our garments at the moment are made up of GM cotton. Even in countries that have banned GMOs, there is hardly a distinction in imported textiles between non-GMO or GMO varieties, which makes it close to impossible to tell what kind of clothes we are wearing. In UK alone, it is estimated that 75% of clothes are made of GMO cotton. It is becoming so difficult to get hold of organic cotton that major retailers, such as M&S, Adidas and H&M, have teamed up to ensure 'sustainable cotton' can be GM. But the problem doesn't stop here. Daily used products, such as swabs and cotton balls in your bathroom, feminine hygiene products (tampons, towels), baby products (baby wipes and diapers) are most likely made of GMO cotton as well.
Food uses of cotton are not uncommon either. Cottonseed oil is highly valued cooking and frying oil and often used a source of vitamin E. Cottonseed meal (whole grain) is used as animal feed. Leftover, non-textile fibres consist almost completely of cellulose and can be used as food additives. Cellulose (E 460) and methylcellulose (E 461) can be used as thickeners, stabilizers, emulsifiers, or fillers.
Hidden Exposure #3: GM Soy
Just like corn, soy has a variety of industrial uses, which are not limited to food products. The largest producers of soy are United States (33%), Brazil (27%), Argentina (21%), and China (7%). US and Argentina produce almost exclusively (85% and 98% respectively) GM soy, while Brazil produces approximately 64% of GM soy. As of 2007, more than half of the world's production (58%) of soy is GM.
Soy is widely used as animal feed in many countries, which poses the same health problems as GM corn. Even countries that ban GMOs for human consumption, liberally import GM soy form the three main producers, mainly for animal feed. This is well documented in European Union, where 40 million tons of raw GM soy beans are imported every year. Soybean flour is used in all aspects of industrial farming, spanning from aquacultures, to poultry, pork and beef and even for pet foods. Soybeans are widely used for food products destined for human consumption, such as breads and pastries, Asian delicacies, soy oil/cooking oils, shortening and more. For example Taiwan's imports consist up to 90% of GM soy from the US, which is used for the production of tofu, and other local specialties, without informing the public for the potential dangers.
However, it is the industrial uses of this crop that escape most regulatory mechanisms and most importantly public awareness and approval. Soybean oil is used in electrical insulations, fungicides, herbicides, paints, plasticizers, soaps, shampoos, detergents, disinfectants and even in ink (soy-based ink) and printing. On top of the above, the flour is used in pharmaceuticals, water based-paints, plywood, leather substitutes, cosmetics, polyesters and textiles. These are only selected examples of the very long list of current industrial and food uses of soy. As part of the soybean extension and research project, Iowa State University has compiled a very extensive list of soy-based products, which, depending on the origin of soy, could be GM.
References
The Telegraph. Most cotton we wear is GM today. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthnews/9590556/Most-cotton-we-wear-is-GM-today.html
University of Montana. Bt Cotton.
http://www.umt.edu/ethics/Debating%20Science%20Program/ODC/Biotechnology/Alternatives/Bt%20Cotton1/default.aspx
GMO compass. GM Cotton.
http://www.gmo-compass.org/eng/grocery_shopping/crops/161.genetically_modified_cotton.html
Commodity HQ. 13 ways corn is used in our everyday lives
http://commodityhq.com/2012/13-ways-corn-is-used-in-our-everyday-lives/
Iowa State University. Soybean Uses
http://extension.agron.iastate.edu/soybean/uses_soyproducts.html
Taipei Times. Ninety percent of soybeans genetically modified
http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/taiwan/archives/2013/03/31/2003558445
GMO compass. Soybeans
http://www.gmo-compass.org/eng/grocery_shopping/crops/19.genetically_modified_soybean.html
Hidden GMO Exposures: Is It Possible To Avoid Them?
http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/hidden-gmo-exposures-it-possible-avoid-them
Systematically bypassing public awareness and approval, GMOs have invaded a much wider market than the food industry. Dubious industrial uses surpass even the wildest imagination and show that our daily lives are far more contaminated by GMOs that we thought.
There are many genetically modified crops that have entered our food chain and that goes primarily for processed food products. However, an incredible number of very common everyday products, often completely unrelated to food have also been seriously tainted by GMs. Most of the problems come from GM corn, soy and cotton, which have dominated conventional agribusiness for many years now and the combined fact that several secondary (or even primary) products from these crops are used in many different industries en masse, thanks to the Government subsidies.
Hidden Exposure #1: GM Corn
Corn is considered an important commodity today due to the many uses in industry. 86% of U.S. grown corn in 2010 was genetically modified, accounting roughly for 55% of the world's corn export. But the bulk of corn that's produced today does not go to food production anymore. Surely corn syrup is used to sweeten most processed food (candies, confectionery, sauces, bread, biscuits, flavored yogurts, juice, sodas, cough drops etc), but when it comes to food additives, corn derivatives have many names, like "xanthan gum," "natural flavors," "free-flowing agents," "vitamin E," and "cellulose". For example, conventional iodized salt contains corn dextrose (free-flowing agent). Corn is also a very popular animal feed; animals raised in GMO grains suffer significant physiological and immunological reactions, which alter their body and hence the products deriving from them. Corn is also used for the production of ethanol, which is subsequently used in cosmetics, hand sanitizers and alcoholic beverages, and is even mandated by the federal government to be put into our gasoline at a 10% concentration. Corn germ oil is widely used in cooking oils, salad dressings, soaps (liquid/solid), detergents and insecticides.
Corn starch is another corn derivative that has invaded many industries. Thanks to its absorbent nature, corn starch is ideal for use in diapers, deodorants, baby powder and pharmaceutical drugs; it is also used in candies that are formed in molds in order to get the fine details to hold their shape – think of gummy candies that have fine details, like character shapes or imprinted logos. Corn starch or cornmeal is also used as adhesive; it is present in the adhesive stripe in envelopes, which seals it once moistened. Industrial glues also contain corn products, mainly corn germ, which replaces more expensive options like resins. The majority of vitamin C at the moment comes from corn as well. This is because corn starch is easily converted into glucose through industrial methods, making it an ideal and cheap option for the producers. Biodegradable corn-based plastic is also becoming very popular because it needs less fossil fuel than petroleum-based alternatives and therefore has reduced carbon footprint. Such plastic can be found in food containers and plastic food packaging, lining the "to-go" coffee cups, disposable dishware and gift cards. Although covering fruit and vegetables with wax is a very old practice that improves self-life and presentation, the wax covering store-bought fruit and vegetables may be corn-based or contain corn-derived additives, even in organic produce. Textile production is also using corn products, either as colorings/dyes or the textile per se. This means that your carpet may very well be based on GMO corn (if not GMO cotton).
Hidden Exposure #2: GM Cotton
The three major cotton producers at the moment are USA, China and India. 93% of cotton planted in the U.S. in 2010 was genetically modified, while 68% and 90% of China's and India's cotton production is GM as well. On a global scale, only 12 countries grow GM cotton, but they account for most of the world's cotton production. Naturally cotton is mostly used for the production of textiles (think clothes, towels, bed sheets, upholstery). In fact, the majority of our garments at the moment are made up of GM cotton. Even in countries that have banned GMOs, there is hardly a distinction in imported textiles between non-GMO or GMO varieties, which makes it close to impossible to tell what kind of clothes we are wearing. In UK alone, it is estimated that 75% of clothes are made of GMO cotton. It is becoming so difficult to get hold of organic cotton that major retailers, such as M&S, Adidas and H&M, have teamed up to ensure 'sustainable cotton' can be GM. But the problem doesn't stop here. Daily used products, such as swabs and cotton balls in your bathroom, feminine hygiene products (tampons, towels), baby products (baby wipes and diapers) are most likely made of GMO cotton as well.
Food uses of cotton are not uncommon either. Cottonseed oil is highly valued cooking and frying oil and often used a source of vitamin E. Cottonseed meal (whole grain) is used as animal feed. Leftover, non-textile fibres consist almost completely of cellulose and can be used as food additives. Cellulose (E 460) and methylcellulose (E 461) can be used as thickeners, stabilizers, emulsifiers, or fillers.
Hidden Exposure #3: GM Soy
Just like corn, soy has a variety of industrial uses, which are not limited to food products. The largest producers of soy are United States (33%), Brazil (27%), Argentina (21%), and China (7%). US and Argentina produce almost exclusively (85% and 98% respectively) GM soy, while Brazil produces approximately 64% of GM soy. As of 2007, more than half of the world's production (58%) of soy is GM.
Soy is widely used as animal feed in many countries, which poses the same health problems as GM corn. Even countries that ban GMOs for human consumption, liberally import GM soy form the three main producers, mainly for animal feed. This is well documented in European Union, where 40 million tons of raw GM soy beans are imported every year. Soybean flour is used in all aspects of industrial farming, spanning from aquacultures, to poultry, pork and beef and even for pet foods. Soybeans are widely used for food products destined for human consumption, such as breads and pastries, Asian delicacies, soy oil/cooking oils, shortening and more. For example Taiwan's imports consist up to 90% of GM soy from the US, which is used for the production of tofu, and other local specialties, without informing the public for the potential dangers.
However, it is the industrial uses of this crop that escape most regulatory mechanisms and most importantly public awareness and approval. Soybean oil is used in electrical insulations, fungicides, herbicides, paints, plasticizers, soaps, shampoos, detergents, disinfectants and even in ink (soy-based ink) and printing. On top of the above, the flour is used in pharmaceuticals, water based-paints, plywood, leather substitutes, cosmetics, polyesters and textiles. These are only selected examples of the very long list of current industrial and food uses of soy. As part of the soybean extension and research project, Iowa State University has compiled a very extensive list of soy-based products, which, depending on the origin of soy, could be GM.
References
The Telegraph. Most cotton we wear is GM today. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthnews/9590556/Most-cotton-we-wear-is-GM-today.html
University of Montana. Bt Cotton.
http://www.umt.edu/ethics/Debating%20Science%20Program/ODC/Biotechnology/Alternatives/Bt%20Cotton1/default.aspx
GMO compass. GM Cotton.
http://www.gmo-compass.org/eng/grocery_shopping/crops/161.genetically_modified_cotton.html
Commodity HQ. 13 ways corn is used in our everyday lives
http://commodityhq.com/2012/13-ways-corn-is-used-in-our-everyday-lives/
Iowa State University. Soybean Uses
http://extension.agron.iastate.edu/soybean/uses_soyproducts.html
Taipei Times. Ninety percent of soybeans genetically modified
http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/taiwan/archives/2013/03/31/2003558445
GMO compass. Soybeans
http://www.gmo-compass.org/eng/grocery_shopping/crops/19.genetically_modified_soybean.html
“This guy’s doctor told him he had six months to
live.
The guy said he couldn’t pay his bill.
The doctor gave him another six months to live.”
Vitamin C helps eliminate chronic disease
http://www.naturalhealth365.com/vitamin_c/eliminate_disease.html
Study Finds Vitamin C Can Kill Drug-Resistant TB
Whole Foods Market whistleblower says employees were deliberately trained to lie about GMOs - new Organic Spies video
http://www.naturalnews.com/042144_Organic_Spies_Whole_Foods_Market_GMO_whistleblower.html
Why You Can No Longer Trust The USDA Organic Label
http://preventdisease.com/news/13/091913_Why-You-Can-No-Longer-Trust-The-USDA-Organic-Label.shtml?utm_source=091913&utm_campaign=091913&utm_medium=email
"USDA Organic" is simply a marketing term those who take government ethics at face value. The goal has always been to increase agricultural sales, not promote organic farming. The public seems to confide in this label through sheer ignorance. The National Organic Program (NOP) which governs the "USDA Organic" label has no interest in organic farming, improving soil, quality of the produce, or factors that pollute the environment. In another blow to their organics program that will further downgrade consumer confidence, the USDA announced this week that the agency has changed the process for exempting otherwise prohibited substances (such as synthetics) in food that carries the "organic or "made with organic" label. This decision makes it easier to continue use of artificial ingredients and substances, undermining integrity of the organic label.
According to the National Organic Program, the organic label indicates that the food or other agricultural product has been produced through methods that integrate cultural, biological, and mechanical practices that foster cycling of resources, promote ecological balance, and conserve biodiversity. Synthetic fertilizers, sewage sludge, irradiation, and genetic engineering may not be used...until now.
Under the federal organic law and prior to the announcement, there was a controlled process for allowing the use of substances not normally permitted in organic production because of extenuating circumstances. Under the Organic Foods Production Act 7 USC 6517 (e) Sunset Provision, “No exemption or prohibition contained in the National List shall be valid unless the National Organic Standards Board has reviewed such exemption or prohibition as provided in this section within 5 years of such exemption or prohibition being adopted or reviewed and the Secretary has renewed such exemption or prohibition.”
Under the law, these exemptions are authorized for a five-year period, in order to encourage the development of natural (or organic) alternatives. The exemptions are required by law to expire, known as “sunset,” unless they were reinstated by a two-thirds “decisive” majority vote of the National Organic Standards Board (NOSB) and include a public review. While this is the law, USDA has said it will no longer operate the program in this manner.
USDA organics has been hijacked by big agriculture and their food scientists for some time. Senior food scientist Toby McDonald insists that the only way to protect the population is through current and modified sterilization techniques that will make food safe for all. "Current and modified practices including irradiation and pasteurization are extremely effective in reducing harmful bacteria and pathogens in the food supply," he proclaimed. MacDonald says that as food demand reaches its climax, proper sterilization will be necessary at all levels." An increase of 50 percent in food demand by 2030 will require more funding into food monitoring infrastructures so that all food with the potential to produce outbreaks can be properly sterilized to prevent those outbreaks," he added.
The USDA’s recent decision now puts the burden of identifying exempted materials for removal largely onto environmentalists and consumers. It largely suggests that the alternative media will now have to step up their efforts to identify all genetically modified and toxic sources which the USDA will eventually label as organic.
Under the new policy, an exempt material could be permitted indefinitely unless a two-thirds majority of the NOSB votes to remove an exempted (synthetic) substance from the list. The new policy allows USDA to relist exemptions for synthetic materials without the recommendation of the independent board and outside of public view, as required by current law.
This isn't the only strike on the USDA's public record. Just a few years ago, The Cornucopia Institute released an independent report that focused on the widespread abuses in organic egg production, primarily by large industrial agribusinesses. The study profiled the exemplary management practices employed by many family-scale organic farmers engaged in egg production, while spotlighting abuses at so-called factory farms, some confining hundreds of thousands of chickens in industrial facilities, and representing these eggs to consumers as "organic."
As I have been vocally stating for years now, the public perception that USDA Organic label is "truly organic" is a falsity. The USDA has repeatedly permitted certifications of organizations known to not meet the legal requirement for said certification. Two examples are CCFO and Oregon Tilth.
So What Should Organic Farming Entail?
- Free of synthetic chemicals of any kind
- Free of genetically modified organisms
- Free of irradiation, pasteurization or sterlization
- Produced in soils of enhanced biological activity
- Produced via reputable farming strategies such as on crop rotations, crop residues, animal manures, mechanical cultivation, approved mineral-bearing rocks and aspects of biological pest control to maintain soil productivity, to supply plant nutrients and to control insects, weeds and other pests.
The USDA's recent decision means there is no guarantee on any of the above. In a joint statement issued by Beyond Pesticides, Consumers Union, Center for Food Safety, and Food and Water Watch, they stated:
“The USDA’s decision minimizes all incentives for creating organic, natural alternative ingredients and lowers the standard for what consumers can expect behind the organic label. Allowing the USDA to automatically relist materials without the recommendation of the NOSB erodes the Board’s legal authority over materials decisions, a key to consumer trust in the organic label. The fact that the agency made this decision without any public input only adds to the violation felt by watchdog groups and consumers alike,”
“Potentially allowing an indefinite listing of non-natural ingredients and requiring a super-majority vote to retire a substance after five years undermines the spirit of the law for how materials head into “sunset” or retirement. It is unfair to producers trying to produce a truly organic product and it is unfair to consumers trying to make meaningful purchasing decisions. Simply put, this lowers the bar for much of the organic market. We believe USDA must reverse course and we intend to mount a fierce campaign to hold the agency accountable to the millions of Americans who expect more from the government--and the organic label.”
Organic agriculture embodies an ecological approach to farming that focuses on feeding the soil and growing naturally healthy crops, whereas chemical-intensive agriculture depends on toxic chemicals and inputs which poison the soil, as well as air, water, farmworkers and consumers. In conventional chemical agriculture there are tens of thousands of synthetic materials, including over 200 registered pesticide active ingredients used regularly
Expanding organics is literally a matter of life or death for public health, climate, and the environment. None of the largest food suppliers of our world are leading the charge to double or triple organic food and farming sales by exposing the myth of organic foods because it is not in their best interest. The industry giants will never get serious about making a societal transition to organic food and farming. The reason for this is simple: it is far easier and profitable for these conglomerates to sell conventional or even so-called natural foods at a premium price, than it is to pay a premium price for organics and educate consumers as to why "cheap" conventional and deceptive "natural food" is really more expensive than organic, given the astronomical hidden costs (health, pollution, climate destabilization) of conventional agriculture and food processing.
Sources:
organicconsumers.org
beyondpesticides.org
ams.usda.gov
Natasha Longo has a master's degree in nutrition and is a certified fitness and nutritional counselor. She has consulted on public health policy and procurement in Canada, Australia, Spain, Ireland, England and Germany
Food is the Best Medicine
Why You Can No Longer Trust The USDA Organic Label
http://preventdisease.com/news/13/091913_Why-You-Can-No-Longer-Trust-The-USDA-Organic-Label.shtml?utm_source=091913&utm_campaign=091913&utm_medium=email
"USDA Organic" is simply a marketing term those who take government ethics at face value. The goal has always been to increase agricultural sales, not promote organic farming. The public seems to confide in this label through sheer ignorance. The National Organic Program (NOP) which governs the "USDA Organic" label has no interest in organic farming, improving soil, quality of the produce, or factors that pollute the environment. In another blow to their organics program that will further downgrade consumer confidence, the USDA announced this week that the agency has changed the process for exempting otherwise prohibited substances (such as synthetics) in food that carries the "organic or "made with organic" label. This decision makes it easier to continue use of artificial ingredients and substances, undermining integrity of the organic label.
According to the National Organic Program, the organic label indicates that the food or other agricultural product has been produced through methods that integrate cultural, biological, and mechanical practices that foster cycling of resources, promote ecological balance, and conserve biodiversity. Synthetic fertilizers, sewage sludge, irradiation, and genetic engineering may not be used...until now.
Under the federal organic law and prior to the announcement, there was a controlled process for allowing the use of substances not normally permitted in organic production because of extenuating circumstances. Under the Organic Foods Production Act 7 USC 6517 (e) Sunset Provision, “No exemption or prohibition contained in the National List shall be valid unless the National Organic Standards Board has reviewed such exemption or prohibition as provided in this section within 5 years of such exemption or prohibition being adopted or reviewed and the Secretary has renewed such exemption or prohibition.”
Under the law, these exemptions are authorized for a five-year period, in order to encourage the development of natural (or organic) alternatives. The exemptions are required by law to expire, known as “sunset,” unless they were reinstated by a two-thirds “decisive” majority vote of the National Organic Standards Board (NOSB) and include a public review. While this is the law, USDA has said it will no longer operate the program in this manner.
USDA organics has been hijacked by big agriculture and their food scientists for some time. Senior food scientist Toby McDonald insists that the only way to protect the population is through current and modified sterilization techniques that will make food safe for all. "Current and modified practices including irradiation and pasteurization are extremely effective in reducing harmful bacteria and pathogens in the food supply," he proclaimed. MacDonald says that as food demand reaches its climax, proper sterilization will be necessary at all levels." An increase of 50 percent in food demand by 2030 will require more funding into food monitoring infrastructures so that all food with the potential to produce outbreaks can be properly sterilized to prevent those outbreaks," he added.
The USDA’s recent decision now puts the burden of identifying exempted materials for removal largely onto environmentalists and consumers. It largely suggests that the alternative media will now have to step up their efforts to identify all genetically modified and toxic sources which the USDA will eventually label as organic.
Under the new policy, an exempt material could be permitted indefinitely unless a two-thirds majority of the NOSB votes to remove an exempted (synthetic) substance from the list. The new policy allows USDA to relist exemptions for synthetic materials without the recommendation of the independent board and outside of public view, as required by current law.
This isn't the only strike on the USDA's public record. Just a few years ago, The Cornucopia Institute released an independent report that focused on the widespread abuses in organic egg production, primarily by large industrial agribusinesses. The study profiled the exemplary management practices employed by many family-scale organic farmers engaged in egg production, while spotlighting abuses at so-called factory farms, some confining hundreds of thousands of chickens in industrial facilities, and representing these eggs to consumers as "organic."
As I have been vocally stating for years now, the public perception that USDA Organic label is "truly organic" is a falsity. The USDA has repeatedly permitted certifications of organizations known to not meet the legal requirement for said certification. Two examples are CCFO and Oregon Tilth.
So What Should Organic Farming Entail?
- Free of synthetic chemicals of any kind
- Free of genetically modified organisms
- Free of irradiation, pasteurization or sterlization
- Produced in soils of enhanced biological activity
- Produced via reputable farming strategies such as on crop rotations, crop residues, animal manures, mechanical cultivation, approved mineral-bearing rocks and aspects of biological pest control to maintain soil productivity, to supply plant nutrients and to control insects, weeds and other pests.
The USDA's recent decision means there is no guarantee on any of the above. In a joint statement issued by Beyond Pesticides, Consumers Union, Center for Food Safety, and Food and Water Watch, they stated:
“The USDA’s decision minimizes all incentives for creating organic, natural alternative ingredients and lowers the standard for what consumers can expect behind the organic label. Allowing the USDA to automatically relist materials without the recommendation of the NOSB erodes the Board’s legal authority over materials decisions, a key to consumer trust in the organic label. The fact that the agency made this decision without any public input only adds to the violation felt by watchdog groups and consumers alike,”
“Potentially allowing an indefinite listing of non-natural ingredients and requiring a super-majority vote to retire a substance after five years undermines the spirit of the law for how materials head into “sunset” or retirement. It is unfair to producers trying to produce a truly organic product and it is unfair to consumers trying to make meaningful purchasing decisions. Simply put, this lowers the bar for much of the organic market. We believe USDA must reverse course and we intend to mount a fierce campaign to hold the agency accountable to the millions of Americans who expect more from the government--and the organic label.”
Organic agriculture embodies an ecological approach to farming that focuses on feeding the soil and growing naturally healthy crops, whereas chemical-intensive agriculture depends on toxic chemicals and inputs which poison the soil, as well as air, water, farmworkers and consumers. In conventional chemical agriculture there are tens of thousands of synthetic materials, including over 200 registered pesticide active ingredients used regularly
Expanding organics is literally a matter of life or death for public health, climate, and the environment. None of the largest food suppliers of our world are leading the charge to double or triple organic food and farming sales by exposing the myth of organic foods because it is not in their best interest. The industry giants will never get serious about making a societal transition to organic food and farming. The reason for this is simple: it is far easier and profitable for these conglomerates to sell conventional or even so-called natural foods at a premium price, than it is to pay a premium price for organics and educate consumers as to why "cheap" conventional and deceptive "natural food" is really more expensive than organic, given the astronomical hidden costs (health, pollution, climate destabilization) of conventional agriculture and food processing.
Sources:
organicconsumers.org
beyondpesticides.org
ams.usda.gov
Natasha Longo has a master's degree in nutrition and is a certified fitness and nutritional counselor. She has consulted on public health policy and procurement in Canada, Australia, Spain, Ireland, England and Germany
TED aligns with Monsanto, halting any talks about GMOs, 'food as medicine' or natural healing
http://www.naturalnews.com/042112_TED_conferences_pseudoscience_GMO.html
Allow me to be the first to announce that TED is dead. Why? Because the group that organizes so-called "TED talks" has been thoroughly hijacked by corporate junk science and now openly rejects any talks about GMOs, food as medicine, or even the subject of how food can help prevent behavioral disorders in children. All these areas of discussion are now red-flagged from being presented on any TED stage.
This is openly admitted by TEDx itself in a little-known letter publicly published on December 7, 2012. Click here to view the letter.
In that letter, TED says that people who talk about GMOs are engaged in "pseudoscience." Those who discuss the healing potential of foods are spreading "health hoaxes."
The letter also advises TEDx organizers to, "reject bad science, pseudoscience and health hoaxes," meaning anyone who talks about GMOs, "food as medicine" or similar topics.
The TED organization, incredibly, believes that food cannot be medicine and does not contain medicine. Perhaps someone should educate TED about resveratrol, curcumin, phycocyanins, polyphenols and ten thousand other chemicals created by plants that have medicinal functions in the human body. To deny this is to nearly admit you believe the Earth is flat and that the sun and stars revolve around our planet. It is a sure sign of a feeble mind that cannot grasp the very simple and readily evident idea that the human body evolved in an environment full of plants with beneficial physiological effects, including many medicinal effects.
Maybe someone should remind TED that nearly 25% of all prescription medicines are in some way derived from plants, including statin drugs. Drug companies expend enormous resources searching the world's botanical treasures for amazing molecules that they can pirate from nature and alter in some way to make them patentable as a drug. Even the World Resources Institute readily admits this, while also reminding us that 80 percent of the world population still relies largely on plant-based medicine.
TED apparently thinks 80 percent of the world population is purely delusional, because obviously, as TED insists, real medicine can only come from pharmacological factories spewing out deadly chemicals, right?
TED falls in line with Monsanto: no talks that question GMOs will be allowed
It's a sure sign that you've jumped into a circle of dogma when the very act of asking intelligent questions is no longer allowed. Any speakers who might ask questions about genetically engineered foods are strictly forbidden by TED. This makes TED a source of pseudoscience because it censors and silences any dissenting views that don't align with Monsanto and the Frankenfoods biotech industry.
The TEDx letter mentioned above actually claims that anyone who questions the wisdom of genetically engineering food crops grown in open fields is a quack or a hoaxer.
Read the letter yourself. It reads as if it were written by someone with the intellectual capacity of an 8th grader -- someone who is so naive that they still haven't caught on to the fact that corporations routinely lie to the world by hijacking science to push their agenda of profit and domination. And it makes you wonder just how stupid TED thinks the public really is on the subject of GMOs. Even though 90% of the public believes GMOs should be labeled on foods, TED thinks anyone who dares talk about GMOs is spewing "pseudoscience."
Does TED also think that spraying the world with glyphosate is a boon to mankind? Does TED even know what glyphosate is and how glyphosate causes cancer at concentrations of parts per billion?
TED's letter filled with false information
The TEDx letter attacking "pseudoscience" is, itself, filled with factually false information. The letter says, "Andrew Wakefield's attempt to link autism and vaccines was exposed as a hoax last year."
That statement is blatantly false. For starters, Dr. Wakefield never conducted any studies whatsoever that linked autism and vaccines. That is a complete fabrication / delusion invented by the intellectually dishonest critics of Dr. Wakefield. TEDx obviously believes that if a lie is repeated often enough among critics of real science, that lie become a "truth."
Secondly, the actual hoax is on the medical journals and critics of Dr. Wakefield who were caught deliberately lying about his research and inventing wildly false claims in order to try to discredit him. They are currently being sued over their false allegations, by the way, and as the facts of this lawsuit come out, Dr. Wakefield will be completely vindicated.
For the real evidence that TED doesn't want you to see on Dr. Wakefield, check out these articles:
BMJ admits that fraud claim against Dr. Andrew Wakefield has no basis in fact
Documents emerge proving Dr Andrew Wakefield innocent; BMJ and Brian Deer caught misrepresenting the facts
Dr Wakefield demands retraction from BMJ after documents prove innocence from allegations of vaccine autism data fraud
Other areas of investigation banned by TED
It turns out that TED isn't only a proponent of GMOs, vaccines and whatever corporate-sponsored status quo science is currently being spouted -- it's also wholly aligned against a wide range of topics it considers "pseudoscience."
These so-called "pseudoscience" topics include:
• Consciousness, free will and the non-material "mind"
• "The fusion of science and spirituality" -- as if higher spiritual awareness is somehow not a valid pathway for the discovery of truth.
• Nearly all neuroscience.
• The placebo effect, something that has been experimentally proven to exist through tens of thousands of clinical trials.
• Any and all "healing," including Reiki or hands-on healing, healing touch, etc.
Yep, according to TED, these are all pure hokum and bunk. There is no placebo effect, they insist, even though it has been experimentally proven to be the strongest across-the-board form of medicine available today. The reason they cannot acknowledge the existence of the placebo effect is because it is contingent upon the interaction between the body and the mind. Because TEDx and its cabal of closed-minded junk scientists cannot admit to the existence of a non-material mind, they also cannot admit to the existence of the placebo effect even though their own experiments prove its existence beyond any rational doubt.
In fact, the placebo effect is so widely documented that in order to discard it, you would have to throw out all randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies altogether. Is TED saying that all such studies are bunk because, taken as a whole, they show the placebo effect to be statistically significant in its effectiveness?
See, this is how TED destroys its own argument (and credibility). If the placebo effect doesn't exist, then virtually all modern clinical trials must be deemed invalid, and that means TED doesn't believe in any real science at all.
TED is a cult of "scientism"
Like the Church that once suppressed scientific understanding long before the Age of Reason, TED is now part of the new Cult of Scientism, a dogmatic circle jerk of intellectual bullies who insist the only "science" that's true is their own selected brand of corporate-sponsored science. All legitimate science is excluded and attacked if it dares question the core beliefs of the Cult of Scientism. Those beliefs include some real whoppers, such as, "Corporate science is the only science that counts," and, "GMOs are automatically safe, even without long-term testing, because we say they are."
In this cult, there is no room for the simple, scientific act of questioning today's scientific beliefs. "Bad science," says TED, is anything that "has failed to convince many mainstream scientists of its truth."
This, of course, is nothing more than "mob science" which isn't really science at all. If new science were only recognized once all the existing scientists were convinced of its truth, then science would never have advanced.
According to TED, then, in 1616, then, the idea that the Earth was spherical would have been considered "bad science." TED would have agreed with the "Congregation of the Index" which cited holy scripture and decreed the Earth stood still and the Sun and stars revolved around it. Anyone who questioned this belief would have been attacked as a pusher of "pseudoscience" by TED.
The idea that invisible, microscopic bacteria spread disease would have been considered "bad science," too, because before the invention of the microscope, most "scientists" thought the idea of a microbiological world of invisible living organisms was sheer lunacy. When a now-famous doctor named Semmelweiss suggested that doctors should wash their hands between delivering babies, he was condemned by the "scientific" community and fired from his job. Meanwhile, an alarming number of women giving birth soon died from infections. This would have been completely acceptable to TED, as it was the "science" of the day, and "science" cannot be questioned.
(For historical references, see my article entitled, Why Doctors are Idiots: 150 Years of Disastrous Advice on Children's Health.)
Einstein's Theory of Special Relativity would have been considered "bad science," too. It was such a whacky theory that almost nobody believe it was true (at first).
In fact, throughout the history of scientific discovery -- microbiology, quantum physics, genetics and epigenetics, cosmology and chemistry -- any self-proclaimed scientist who declared "we now know everything and no new questions can be asked" is now seen in retrospect to be a complete fool.
Real science explained to TED
Science is not a static collection of knowledge, it is a process of exploring the nature of reality to discover and embrace new truths that very often displace old truths. Anyone who believes that science is "fixed" and that modern-day scientists have somehow stumbled upon the final answers to everything is nothing short of a complete fool. The great strength of the scientific method is that it is based on the asking of questions, even in the face of self-important, delusional "scientists" who have convinced themselves they are the final word on the subject at hand.
Through the process of asking questions and being willing to explore unexpected answers, science has made tremendous advances in understanding the material universe (although science has utterly failed to understand the non-material universe).
And yet, like any method of exploring the nature of reality, science is fallible. Science has made tremendous, horrifying mistakes such as giving pregnant women thalidomide as a morning sickness drug, or using African Americans for medical experiments in the Tuskegee affair. Science has created weapons of mass destruction and actually dropped them on civilian populations in Japan. Science invented DDT, Agent Orange and countless other toxic chemicals which now threaten the very survival of the human species.
See some of these failures of science in my related mini-documentary called "The Dark Side of Science"
The Many Benefits And Uses Of Sea Minerals
http://www.seaagri.com/docs/many_benefits_and_uses_of_sea_minerals.pdf
Thursday, November 29, 2007 by: Mike Donkers
http://www.newstarget.com/022309.html
(NewsTarget)
We humans are design
ed to take in trace elements. How does it work? Plants feed off of
minerals in the soil. They will take up only those minerals they need for their growth and development.
The plants digest these minerals by adding a carbon atom. When we consume these plant
s we eat
whatever mineral traces they still contain (trace elements) plus the carbon atom. The minerals find their
way into our system and we breathe out the carbon. Plants in turn use carbon as oxygen. This is simple
carbon chemistry and it’s how we form
a natural cycle with
nature
and plants.
While the full dose of
minerals
may be good for the plant it’s not good for human consumption because carbon
chemistry is not part of our digestive process. Though
sea salt
contains no less than 84 elements it’s
nevertheless a bad idea to put sea
salt
directly in or over your food. Instead, it’s better to eat plants that contain
lot
s of trace elements. Doctors who put people on a salt
-
free diet never tell their patients not to eat a celery
stick. Yet a celery stick contains roughly the same amount of salt you would normally put in your food. This is
because the celery uses carbon che
mistry to predigest the various salts. Besides sodium chloride (
table salt
)
there are other mineral salts, among which contain magnesium, calcium and
potassium
. These are all
completely harmless for human consumption provided they have been predigested by plants, not when taken
directly in the form of s
ea salt.
I can’t think of a better argument for growing plants in mineral
-
rich soils. Modern
agriculture
is based on the
NPK method, referring to Ni
trogen (N), Phosphorus (P) and Potassium (K). Commercially grown vegetables
and fruits available in supermarkets may look nice from the outside but they are grown with only three
elements. What’s worse, these elements are also synthetic, i.e. scientific ap
proximations of the real thing.
Compare that to the natural, organic and mineral
-
rich compost used in organic or, better still, bio
-
dynamic
farming
and you’l
l see why
crops
grown in this way are favorable. Though recognizing the superior flavors
people are not always willing to pay for them. But which would you rathe
r pay with, your wallet or your health?
Besides, you save a lot of cash if you buy these products directly from local farms or
farmers
markets.
One way of t
aking in trace elements in animal form is by consuming meat and dairy from ruminants (cows,
sheep, goats) that graze on mineral
-
rich pastures lush with grass and clover. Once again this means organic or
bio
-
dynamic meat. I don’t suppose I have to tell you
about the miserable and unhealthy circumstances in which
animals are kept in the intensive farming industry. Don’t forget all that pain, stress and suffering, as well as
hormones, antibiotics and
pesticides
will be on your plate when you choose to buy the cheaper meats. Once
again the question arises, would you rather pay with your wallet or your health? Healthy animals eat
omega
-
3
and mineral
-
rich grass and not grain pellets and hay. Contrary to humans, ruminants are in fact able to eat sea
salt directly and digest it with their four stomachs. A little bit
of sea salt through their feed won’t harm them, in
fact it’s good for them. By consuming grass
-
fed meat and dairy we can also get trace elements in this way.
To summarize, people are better off not taking minerals in their full dose. It is often believed
that sea salt is
healthy to use in meals and table salt isn’t. This is a half
-
truth. It should be blatantly obvious that isolating only
one of 84 elements in sea salt to make table salt is as mad as making white flour from the starch in grains and
not usin
g the germ and bran. Nature works with synergy and complex, organic wholes. Refining is the stuff of
scientists stuck in mechanistic and reductionist thought
–
it may seem intelligent but in reality it’s short
-
sighted.
What is more refined, the total packa
ge as offered by nature or playing God by using just one compound?
In that sense, unrefined sea salt is certainly healthier than table salt, because it contains all the minerals and
trace elements. However,
sodium
chloride is toxic and drives up our
blood pressure
. It’s part of sea salt in its
natur
al form and doesn’t cease to be toxic just because it’s in sea salt. The bacteria in our digestive system are
able to handle small amounts of sea salt but that’s not to say sea salt doesn’t affect our blood pressure. It’s better
to consume mineral salts th
rough the products of plants and animals that use these salts as food. In its original
state sea salt is inorganic. Only when it literally passes through an organism does it become organic and truly fit
for human consumption.
Sea minerals and cereal grass
es
Grass is a great crop. Just look at the muscular build of grazers such as horses, cows, sheep and goats. Grass is
truly unique in that it takes up 100% of all minerals in the soil. Grass is able to grow on next to nothing and on
everything. Sea
water
contains 92 elements, sea salt contains 84. Give your grass these elements and minerals
and they will happily take them.
Upon germination most grains form a fas
t
-
growing grass. Cereal grasses such as
wheat grass
, rye grass, barley
grass and oat grass are the healthiest. They can be easily and quickly grown.
They grow even faster on sea
minerals. Because of the salts they also use water more efficiently and therefore need less water to grow. Cereal
grasses can be grown both indoors and outdoors, with soil or without it.
Cereal grasses have a large content of
important
vitamins
, such as pro
-
vitamin A (beta carotene), vitamin B
complex (including B17), vitamin C, vitamin E, and vitamin K. These vitamins are all i
n organic form. Name
any other food that has this combination of vitamins and minerals! Cereal grasses contain huge quantities of
chlorophyll
. Chloro
phyll is the blood of the plant and is therefore instantly recognized and processed by our
blood, thus (re)vitalizing it.
Cereal grasses are rich in healthy
omega
-
3 fatty acids
. This is why grains are much healthier in their vegetative
state. Once grains get past the grass stage the omega
-
3
fatty acids
change into omega
-
6 fatty acids, the complex
sugars
turn into simple sugars (starch), and proteins called gluten form. Young cereal gras
ses have much more
life energy than the adult plant.
Omega
-
3 fatty acids reduce inflammation and are sadly lacking in our bread and grain culture. Through massive
consumption of cheaply available polyunsaturated fats such as sunflower oil and corn oil ins
tead of healthier
monounsaturated fats and
saturated fats
like olive oil, coconut oil and grass
-
fed butter, we get way too much
omega
-
6 and not
enough omega
-
3. By consuming grass
-
fed meat and dairy or by directly consuming juiced
cereal grasses we can restore this balance and maintain our health.
And not just our health, this goes for the grazers’ health too. Weston Price was a dentist from Clev
eland who
traveled around the world looking for indigenous populations who lived in perfect harmony with nature and ate
no western foods such as white bread, white rice,
sugar
, jam, canned foods, etc. He noticed these people not
only sported fantastic teeth and jaws (without brushing their teeth!) but their overall physical and mental
constitution was unsurpassed.
He took the lessons he learned from the natives t
o the U.S. and wrote
Nutrition and Physical Degeneration
in
1939. In this book he speaks highly of young and fast
-
growing cereal grasses. He describes experiments done
with farm animals and concluded that cereal grasses led to unlimited health for the anim
als and with it their
meat and dairy. Price ranks wheat and rye grass among the top cereal grasses. He also mentioned the minerals
in cereal grasses as a key factor and identified vitamins and chlorophyll as important ingredients. We now know
that enzymes
and
amino acids
are also part of the picture.
Like minerals, enzymes and amino acids are activators. They are necessary for the absorption of vitami
ns and
proteins. Enzymes are sensitive to heating, however. Because cereal grasses are offered raw to animals and, as a
juice, to people, both man and animal can benefit from the richness of enzymes and amino acids contained in
cereal grasses.
Cereal gras
s is concentrated
nutrition
and should therefore be regarded as a superfood. Some health benefits of
this grass: cleanses the liver and intestines, purif
ies the blood, stabilizes blood sugar levels, chelates heavy
metals, stimulates hair growth, boosts the immune system and self
-
healing. The great thing is, you don’t need
much of it. A few glasses of juice a day will make your feeling of hunger go away. Th
e grass helps you lose
weight with whole nutrition and you can last longer on it than vegetable or fruit juices when fasting.
But you don’t need to fast to reap the benefits of cereal grasses. Just take 4 ounces of ocean
-
grown wheat grass
juice a day as a
food supplement. If you want to grow cereal grasses either in soil or hydroponically and you
have a TDS meter and concentrated ocean water, use a dilution of 2000 ppm (parts per million). If you don’t
have a TDS meter but you do have unrefined, good quali
ty sea salt simply dissolve a level teaspoon of sea salt
or Himalaya salt into a quart of water. That’s how little you need.
Sea minerals and agriculture
The idea of using diluted sea water as
fertilizer
for soil and plants came from a doctor named Maynard
Murray. He describes the method in his book
Sea Energy Agriculture
(1976), which details 40 years of
research into ocean farming. You can get this b
ook through acresusa.com:
http://www.acresusa.com/books/closeup.asp?prodid=768&catid=27&pcid=2
Read also Acres USA founder Charles Walters’ book on this subject:
http://www.acresusa.com/boo
ks/closeup.asp?prodid=1317&catid=27&pcid=2
As a young doctor Murray developed an interest in life in the sea. He wondered why plant and animal life was
free from disease in the sea and why land life, including humans, was not. He also found that life in
a healthy
sea environment did not have cell degeneration in the form of aging and that sea life reached twice the size and
age of life on land. He soon discovered that it must be the minerals in the sea. All of the earth’s minerals are
concentrated in sea
water.
Murray had some connections with the Navy and had samples taken from all of the world’s seas. Analyses
showed that all sea water contains the exact same minerals in the exact same proportions. 92 of them have been
identified so far by science (ther
e’s more) and sea water contains all of them in the proper balance. Murray
figured that if sea water contains all of the planet’s minerals and covers 70% of the earth’s surface it should be
possible to recycle sea water on the 30% land mass we live on and
fertilize land crops and soils with it.
His theory was that the minerals in the sea originally came from land and were washed into the sea through
rainfall and snow. Underwater volcano eruptions are also responsible for minerals in the sea. By using sea
m
inerals as a fertilizer you’re using the natural balance of minerals in sea water and performing agriculture in
perfect harmony with nature. The sea contains an infinite source of minerals and rainfall and snow eventually
cause them to wash back out to the
sea. You are therefore not depleting the oceans while at the same time
preserving land soil for depletion. Think also of the life energy and information you are giving to the soil.
Maynard Murray’s book isn’t called
Sea Energy Agriculture
for nothing.
He
had the Navy ship sea water inland in large tank trucks. Friendly farmers willing to partake in his
experiments donated entire acres of land. After fertilization with diluted sea water the crops showed tremendous
growth, they could be harvested sooner, th
ey were of exceptional quality and disease
-
free. Pesticides weren’t
necessary as the job of insects is to clean up only the weaker crops
–
which is saying something about modern
commercial NPK methods which only deplete soils of minerals and trace elements
.
How do they get away with this?
Did you catch the recent TV advertising blitz from the radiation industry?
No, it didn't come during commercial breaks. You saw it DURING the news.
It might have been dressed up as news. But what it really was was a coordinated genuflection to mammography.
Newscasters may not have realized they were delivering a sales pitch, as they read the latest propaganda rolling off the teleprompter.
But they were certainly cheering the new "study" declaring that women should start getting regular screening at 40.
And maybe they aren't as bad as Ron Burgundy when it comes to letting people put words in their mouths. But not one of them seemed to stop and think about the "wisdom" of exposing women to radiation every...single...year, from 40 on.
Stay classy, guys.
Because here's what they ignored...
That path leads directly to an INCREASED risk of breast cancer.
So what are they actually reporting on?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Something is missing
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The basics actually seem pretty solid. At first, that is. But when you read a few lines down, it all falls apart.
Among hundreds of women who were diagnosed with breast cancer in their 40s and later died, about 70 percent did not get regular mammograms.
The too-easy conclusion is that mammograms would have saved them.
And there's your teleprompter version of the story.
But one doctor saw right through this bunk.
A Dartmouth professor of medicine pointed out to Fox News that the study only tells half the story. In addition to those hundreds of women who died from breast cancer, the study also looked at THOUSANDS who survived.
But THEIR mammogram stats are a no-show.
The Dartmouth doc said, "If, among women who live, 30 percent were screened and 70 percent were not, everyone would agree that screening had no effect."
So...why are those stats missing?
Hmmm... If I were a betting gal, I'd say it's because they didn't fit with the dogma about starting yearly mammograms at 40?
Ladies, you do not have to submit to radiation and "smushing" to get screened. There's an alternative that's MUCH safer and more effective than mammography.
Of course, we're the only ones talking about it. Since it doesn't meet the national propaganda guidelines...
If you want to really annoy the radiation cheerleaders, just go here http://hsionline.com/2013/07/18/this-is-goodbye/ to read about the breast screening alternative that will someday bring mammography ad blitzes to a grinding halt.