Will Social Networks Set Local Food Free?

Will Social Networks Set Local Food Free? - Vermont4Evolution

As we have seen, the food sovereignty movement of  La Via Campesina has recently spread across the States. The emergence of this “peasant movement” in the “First World” is due to the global economic depression and the crack down on small local farmers in the name of Food Security.

A new online network that could revolutionize the food sovereignty movement, called Community Share Association, “is a private association of American citizens who have chosen to reclaim our constitutional right to be legally liable and 100% responsible for the choices we make, most specifically with regard to food, medicine & health care.

“As members, we reclaim our right to determine for ourselves whether any food, medicine or professional service is safe and effective for us and in so doing we alleviate all state & federal government from being liable for our safety. We do this most specifically to restore our protected right to buy and sell our homegrown & homemade food and medicine to and from other members of our association.

“Community Share Association will become a huge movement empowering those individuals and communities who choose to become members to use their private land and homes to produce more food, to make delicious food products, as well as safe, effective herbal medicines and have access to a thriving marketplace where they can legally sell these products to other members.”

The legality is explained in the about section. To be a member costs a mere $10  a year. I am not a member yet so I can’t give any more specifics, but this looks like it could become the facebook of the local food movement. If anyone is a member of this network I would love to hear about your experience.

A few other recent happenings on the food sovereignty front: Occupy Wall Street started the initiative - Occupy The Food Supply

Interestingly enough even the USDA recently released a guide on Regional Food Hubs stating “The guide is a collection of information, resources and background on everything needed to develop or participate in a regional food hub.” The National Good Food Network also has a page for local food hubs.

Power to the hands that are caring for their local soils and the health of their communities!

---
This article was obtained from: Food Freedom News

Maya archaeologists unearth new 2012 monument with no apocalyptic prophecies at all

© Tulane University

June 29, 2012: Maya archaeologists unearth new 2012 monument with no apocalyptic prophecies at all - Phys.org

 Archaeologists working at the site of La Corona in Guatemala have discovered a 1,300 year-old year-old Maya text that provides only the second known reference to the so-called "end date" for the Maya calendar on December 21, 2012. The discovery, one of the most significant hieroglyphic find in decades, was announced today at the National Palace in Guatemala.

"This text talks about ancient political history rather than prophecy," says Marcello A. Canuto, Director of Tulane's Middle American Research Institute and co-director of the excavations at the Maya ruins of La Corona. "This new evidence suggests that the 13 Bak'tun date was an important calendrical event that would have been celebrated by the ancient Maya; however, they make no apocalyptic prophecies whatsoever regarding the date," says Canuto.

La Corona for many decades has been known as the enigmatic "Site Q," the source of many looted sculptures whose whereabouts had remained a mystery until its rediscovery only fifteen years ago. For the past five years, Marcello A. Canuto and Tomás Barrientos Q. (Director of the Centro de Investigaciones Arqueológicas y Antropológicas at Universidad del Valle de Guatemala) have directed the La Corona Regional Archaeological Project (PRALC) which has been investigating this intriguing Classic Maya city and its jungle environs.

In 2012, Canuto and Barrientos decided to excavate in front of a building that had been heavily damaged nearly 40 years ago by looters looking for carved stones and tombs. "Last year, we realized that looters of a particular building had discarded some carved stones because they were too eroded to sell on the antiquities black market," said co-director Barrientos, "so we knew they found something important, but we also thought they might have missed something." In fact, in 2012, excavations not only recovered 10 more discarded hieroglyphic stones but also something that the looters missed entirely - an untouched step with a set of 12 exquisitely carved stones still in their original location (in total, 22 carved stones were recovered). Combined with the known looted blocks, the original staircase had a total of no less than 264 hieroglyphs, making it one of the longest ancient Maya texts known, and the longest in Guatemala.

© Tulane University

While the archaeological team investigated when and how this particular staircase was built, Dr. David Stuart, director of the Mesoamerica Center of the University of Texas at Austin undertook the decipherment of the many new hieroglyphic texts. Stuart was part of the first archaeological expedition to La Corona in 1997, and has been reading and reconstructing the site's history ever since. The stairway inscription relates 200-years' worth of political history of La Corona, its allies, and its enemies. Consistent with these themes, some of these stones portray rulers in various poses accepting tribute, dancing, and preparing to play the Maya ballgame.

Another entirely unexpected discovery was made on another stairway block bearing 56 delicately carved hieroglyphs. Stuart recognized that it commemorated a royal visit to La Corona in AD 696 by the most powerful Maya ruler of that time, Yuknoom Yich'aak K'ahk' of Calakmul (located in modern Campeche, Mexico), also known as Fire Claw or Jaguar Paw. Calakmul had been an immensely powerful kingdom for centuries until its king was defeated in battle by his longstanding rival Tikal (located in modern Peten, Guatemala) on August 3, 695. "Scholars had assumed that the Calakmul king died or was captured in this engagement" says Stuart, "but this new extraordinary text from La Corona text tells us otherwise."

© Tulane University

It turns out that the defeated Calakmul king was neither killed nor captured; in fact, in the wake of his inglorious defeat, he was visiting La Corona and perhaps other trusted allies to allay their fears after his defeat. Why the reference to the year 2012? Does it provide a prophecy of what is to come? No, the reference to this important date has much more to do with events in the 7th rather than 21st century.

The key to understanding the reference to 2012 is a unique title that this Calakmul king gives himself. In the text, he calls himself the "13 K'atun lord" - that is, the king who presided over and celebrated an important calendar ending, the 13th K'atun cycle (9.13.0.0.0). This event had occurred just a few years before in AD 692. In order to vaunt himself even further and place his reign and accomplishments into an eternal setting, he connects himself forward in time to when the next higher period of the Maya calendar would reach the same 13 number - that is, December 21, 2012 (13.0.0.0.0).

© Tulane University

Rather than prophesy, the 2012 reference served to place this king's troubled reign and accomplishments into a larger cosmological framework. "This was a time of great political turmoil in the Maya region and this king felt compelled to allude to a larger cycle of time that happens to end in 2012," says Stuart. This evidence is consistent with the only other reference to the 2012 date in ancient Maya inscriptions - Monument 6 from Tortuguero, Mexico. "What this text shows us is that in times of crisis, the ancient Maya used their calendar to promote continuity and stability rather than predict apocalypse," says Canuto.

The project continues to study and record these newly carved stones, others of which record other important episodes of ancient Maya history. Furthermore, the project plans to continue to fieldwork at La Corona, directed by Tulane University and the Universidad del Valle de Guatemala, supported by the Ministry of Culture of Guatemala.

Voyager 1 Getting Ready to Enter Interplanetary Space

© NASA
Artist's rendering of Voyager 2 in the
outer regions of the heliosphere, the magnetic
bubble around the solar system generated
by the solar wind.

June 28, 2012: Voyager 1 Getting Ready to Enter Interplanetary Space by Amy Shira Teitel

Voyager 1, the spacecraft that launched on a tour of the solar on Sept. 5, 1977, is getting ready to enter interplanetary space.

The spacecraft's journey started in 1966 when Gary Flandro, then a graduate student working at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory, discovered that the planets were about to align. Not just for him, but for the whole solar system.

He found that in the late 1970s and early 1980s, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune, and Pluto would be at the right relative positions in their orbits that a spacecraft could visit each of them on a grand tour. The secret was gravity assists, using the planets' gravity to slingshot the spacecraft from one to the next.

To take advantage of the opportunity, NASA developed the twin Voyager spacecraft. Both would fly by Jupiter and Saturn, adding valuable scientific data to what was then a very scant knowledge of the outer solar system. Ground-based studies revealed the planets' most basic properties, and hinted that there were fascinating discoveries still to make.

In the early 1970s, Pioneer 10 and Pioneer 11 made the first flybys of the gas giants and their instruments began revealing just how complex those worlds are.

With this as the background, Voyager wasn't just a great opportunity, it was the logical next step is understanding our solar system.

Voyager 2, which was actually the first to launch on August 20, 1977, ended up with more opportunities on its trajectory. After flying by Jupiter and Saturn, it would be in the right place to continue its mission and fly by Uranus.

Voyager 1 was a little more limited. Its orientation after flying by Saturn would send it out of the ecliptic, the plane where all the planets orbit the sun.

But even without another planetary target, Voyager 1 would keep on going. It would, as the 1977 pre-launch press kit described, continue "outward from the solar system and across the boundary of the wind of charged particles (solar wind) that streams outward from the Sun, thus penetrating into interstellar space." At the time, there was no concrete plan to keep in touch with the spacecraft after it left Saturn.

On Nov. 12, 1980, Voyager 1 began its trip out of the solar system. The spacecraft was on its path "searching for the outer limit of the solar wind - - that presumed boundary... where the influence of the sun gives way," as NASA described it in a 1980 press release. It kept on going, and NASA hasn't lost touch despite arguments that its continuing budget spent on the mission every year could be put to "better use."

Currently, Voyager 1 is at the furthest reaches of our solar system more than 107 times as far as the Earth is from the sun. Data suggests that the spacecraft is in a region where the environment is changing rapidly and that the protective sphere of the sun's magnetic field -- the heliosphere -- is failing. More cosmic rays seem to be hitting the spacecraft without the cushioning effect of the heliosphere.

From the edges of the solar system, it takes a signal traveling from the spacecraft fifteen hours to reach Earth. Voyager 2 isn't too far behind. It flew by Uranus and Neptune in the 1980s before slipping below the ecliptic. Both have since returned stunning portraits of the whole solar system.

Nothing is stopping Voyager 1 from talking to Earth after it passes through the heliosphere save its steadily dwindling power supply. Both Voyager spacecraft are powered by radioisotope thermoelectric generators (RTGs) that use the electricity generated from decaying plutonium 238 to make heat to keep the spacecraft working. At launch, Voyager 1's RTG was releasing 470 watts; by 2010 its output had fallen to about 285 watts.

For now, it looks like Voyager 1 will last until about 2020 before mission scientists start powering down instruments and systems to conserve what remains of its power. By then it will be through the heliosphere having exceeded its primary mission by over thirty years.

Obamacare to unleash crushing new taxes, trillions in debt, huge job losses, and it doesn't even cover natural medicine

© n/a
"Warning: Your Health is
Not a Factor Until
PROFITS HAVE BEEN MADE"

Obamacare to unleash crushing new taxes, trillions in debt, huge job losses, and it doesn't even cover natural medicine by Mike Adams

(NaturalNews) By now, we all know the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the individual mandate portion of Obamacare by declaring it a "tax." This is, in essence, a declaration that the federal government now has unlimited power to force consumers to spend some (or even all) of their take-home pay on various products, services or even intellectual property that they have no interest in buying in the first place. It is a concentration of economic power in the hands of the federal government, and it suddenly ends economic liberty in America (http://www.naturalnews.com/036329_Obamacare_Supreme_Court_economic_fr...).

It's also the largest tax increase in the history of the United States. By upholding Obamacare's individual mandate as a "tax," Chief Justice Robert just labeled President Obama the largest tax increase President in the history of the country! (http://decoded.nationaljournal.com/2012/06/roberts-labels-obama-a-tax...)

And yet President Obama himself declared the individual mandate was NOT a tax. Here's the video: http://abcnews.go.com/ThisWeek/video?id=8620606

And here's the transcript of his interview with George Stephanopoulos:
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2009/09/obama-mandate-is-not-a-t...

But now, of course, Chief Justice Roberts has declared it IS a tax, after all. Thus, Obama's key legislative achievement has become the single greatest legislative deception in the history of America.

How much will this new tax cost you? The Washington Post has published a handy online calculator:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/politics/what-health-bil...

It shows that the new tax begins in 2014, then ramps up to its maximum penalty at 2016, at which point you are taxed year after year until you cave in and buy into the monopoly Big Pharma health insurance scam. This is, for the record, the largest tax increase in history. And it's for a system of medicine which is a Big Pharma monopoly that doesn't even give consumers the freedom to choose natural medicine or alternative therapies!

21 new taxes on Americans

The high court's ruling leaves in place 21 tax increases in the health-care law costing more than $675 billion over the next 10 years, according to the House Ways and Means Committee. Of those, 12 tax hikes would affect families earning less than $250,000 per year, the panel said, including a "Cadillac tax" on high-cost insurance plans, a tax on insurance providers, and an excise tax on medical device manufacturers. (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/jun/28/republicans-ruling-fo...)

Now that Obamacare's penalty is a "tax," not a "fee," Mr. Obama is breaking a 2008 campaign pledge not to raise taxes on Americans earning less than $250,000. This new "tax" will hit across the economic spectrum, despite his campaign declaration that health care should "never be purchased with tax increase on middle-class families." Now, Mr. Obama and congressional Democrats have enacted the largest tax increase in history.
(http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/jun/28/curl-roberts-to-the-r...)

Federal government can now order you to engage in selected commerce

For the record, under the precedent now set by the U.S. Supreme Court, the federal government can simply order you to engage in whatever commerce the government chooses. All they have to do is create a penalty for refusing to go along with their order, and characterize the penalty as a "tax."

Ron Paul gets it. He understands the simple truth that the government has no power to compel people to engage in commerce. "The insurance mandate clearly exceeds the federal government's powers under the interstate commerce clause found in Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution," writes Ron Paul. "This is patently obvious: the power to 'regulate' commerce cannot include the power to compel commerce! Those who claim otherwise simply ignore the plain meaning of the Constitution because they don't want to limit federal power in any way. The commerce clause was intended simply to give Congress the power to regulate foreign trade, and also to prevent states from imposing tariffs on interstate goods. In Federalist Paper No. 22, Alexander Hamilton makes it clear the simple intent behind the clause was to prevent states from placing tolls or tariffs on goods as they passed through each state -- a practice that had proven particularly destructive across the many principalities of the German empire." (http://lewrockwell.com/paul/paul799.html)

Health insurance premiums will soar

Obamacare is going to absolutely shred the infrastructure of our medical system, it is going to send health insurance premiums soaring, it is going to dramatically expand the size and the scope of government, it is going to fundamentally alter the relationships between doctors and their patients and it is one of the largest tax increases in U.S. history. Not only that, it is also going to add about a trillion dollars to our national debt over the next decade. So no, the Obamacare decision is not good news. Obamacare was one of the worst pieces of legislation in American history, and now we are stuck with it.
http://endoftheamericandream.com/archives/15-reasons-why-the-obamacar...

Huge political revolt now expected

What are the political ramifications of all this? Obamacare remains widely hated by much of the U.S. population -- at least the portion of the population that actually works for a living -- and this Supreme Court decision will likely ruffle even more feathers of taxpayers who are tired of being pick-pocketed by the federal government at every turn. While most people don't mind paying some reasonable level of tax to the feds, having the government invade your take-home pay and start forcing you to spend it on things you may or may not want is another thing entirely.

Because of the backlash against this law, it seems almost certain that this Supreme Court decision will play right into the hands of Mitt Romney, who will now make repealing Obamacare the centerpiece of his election campaign. He has already stated, in the Weekly Standard, "If We Want to Get Rid of Obamacare, We're Going to Have to Replace President Obama." (http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/romney-if-we-want-get-rid-obamaca...)

But even if Obama is replaced in the White House, the damage has already been done. With its decision, the U.S. Supreme Court has set a precedent of government control over private paychecks, and that precedent has fundamentally crushed economic freedom in America and opened the door to limitless taxes for everything imaginable. King George III couldn't have done it better.

Nevertheless, based on this decision I now predict a sweeping victory for Republicans in the 2012 elections as a backlash against Obamacare. I'm not saying I support Romney or the Republicans, because I think all politicians are crooks for the most part, and I agree with Gov. Jesse Ventura that the two-party system is largely just two criminal gangs jockeying for power on how they can exploit the people they claim to represent. Whether it's DemoCRIPS or ReBLOODlicans in power, they're all political gangstas.

Even if Romney takes office next January, actually repealing Obamacare would be almost impossible to achieve, by the way. Unraveling bad laws is far more difficult than getting them passed in the first place. It would take a true taxpayer revolt to pull it off.

The American revolution just inched one step closer to reality

We may be headed for that sooner than you think, by the way. With this decision to seize control of the money right out of your own paycheck, the moral collapse of the U.S. government is now complete. Once this "tax" starts to come due, many taxpayers will be in a state of near revolt. That, coupled with the economic collapse heading our way from the EU, will bring many Americans to a point of financial desperation.

It is from such conditions that, historically, revolutions emerge. And that's assuming we even make it to 2014 when the Obamacare tax is supposed to be levied on the American people. By some estimates, the U.S. government may suffer a crushing financial collapse between 2012 and 2015. If the government collapses, Obamacare and all the other bad laws go down with it: the Patriot Act, the DMCA, the NDAA, and so on. That's the one interesting thing about human history: Every time governments become too large, too bloated and too deeply invested in crushing liberty, the People eventually rise up against the injustices and take their country back, starting with a clean slate (which eventually becomes corrupt a few years later, of course).

It is the cycle of human civilization... the rise and fall of civilizations. We are living in the time of the fall of the American empire, and it's going to get a lot worse before it gets better. Hope you're ready to live in "interesting times," because we all have a front row seat to history in the making.

Tens of Thousands Protest in Japan Ahead of Nuclear Restart

Tens of Thousands Protest in Japan Ahead of Nuclear Restart - CommonDreams.org

Tens of thousands of protesters showed up at the door of Japanese Prime Minister Yoshihiko Noda's residence on Friday, lining the streets of central Tokyo to express outrage over the continued push for nuclear reactor restarts in the country.

Shareholders of Japan's electricity companies voted on Wednesday to reboot nuclear power throughout the nation, despite widespread public opposition.

Noda approved the restarts of two reactors at Kansai Electric's Oi plant on June 16, but his pro-nuclear stance has prompted weekly protests outside of his residence. Friday's protest was perhaps the biggest yet. Organizers estimated the turnout to be over 100,000 people, according to Agence France-Presse.

Japan had shut down the last of its 50 nuclear facilities in early May, following continued public disapproval of nuclear power after last year's disaster in Fukushima, which continues to plague the region with record levels of nuclear radiation.

* * *

How Reverse Psychology Works

© David Rabbit Wallace

How Reverse Psychology Works by - Spring.org.uk

"We want to be free! We want to be free to do what we want to do!" ~ Heavenly Blues in the film The Wild Angels

You're probably familiar with reverse psychology: it's when you try to get someone to do something by telling them to do the opposite.

In theory people don't like to have their freedom restricted so they rebel. But what does the psychological research tell us? Do people really react to restrictions on their freedom by wanting the restricted object more?

Under some circumstances, the answer is yes, as these two experiments demonstrate:

"...two-year-olds who are told not to play with a particular toy suddenly find that toy more appealing. [...] Students who are told they have their choice of five posters, but then are told one of them is not available suddenly like that one more..." (from the excellent textbook Social Psychology and Human Nature)

Warning labels can have the same perverse effect:

"...warning labels on violent television programs across five age groups (ranging from 9 to 21 years and over) were more likely to attract persons in these groups to the violent program than information labels and no label." (Chadee, 2011)

The idea is that when you are told you can't have or do something, the following three things happen:

• You want it more.
• You rebel by reasserting your freedom.
• You feel angry at the person restricting your freedom.

In other words you are immediately turned back into an irritating teenager.

Forbidden fruit

Reverse psychology works best with people who are contrary or resistant. In contrast agreeable people are likely to go along with you anyway so you don't need to use it.

Watch out, though, people hate being manipulated. If they sense you are trying to get them to do something by telling them to do the opposite, a form of reverse reverse psychology may operate. So they end up doing what you tell them, just to spite your attempts to control them.

Reverse psychology is a tricky customer both in real life and in the psych lab. Researchers have found it difficult to pin down exactly when reverse psychology works and when it doesn't. Here are a few factors likely to increase psychological reactance:

• The more attractive and important the option that's being restricted, the greater the psychological reactance.
• The greater the restriction of freedom, the greater the psychological reactance.
• Arbitrary threats produce high reactance because they don't make sense, which makes people more rebellious.

In real life reverse psychology likely works best when used subtly and sparingly on people who are resistant to direct requests.

The Road to HERE ~ Alan Watts

Feb. 19, 2010: The Road to HERE ~ Alan Watts - RayneMarina



"Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use."

How Can You Buy or Sell the Sky?

This is a speech made in 1851 by Seattle, chief of the Suquamish, in response to a treaty proposal under which the Indians would sell two million acres of land for $150,000. Buckminster Fuller calls it "one of the most beautiful and profound environmental statements ever made".
_________________________________

How can you buy or sell the sky, the warmth of the land? The idea is strange to us.

If we do not own the freshness of the air and the sparkle of the water, how can you buy them?

Every part of this earth is sacred to my people. Every shining pine needle, every sandy shore, every mist in the dark woods, every clearing and humming insect is holy in the memory and experience of my people. The sap which courses through the trees carries the memories of the red man.

The white man's dead forget the country of their birth when they go to walk among the stars. Our dead never forget this beautiful earth, for it is the mother of the red man. We are part of the earth and it is part of us. The perfumed flowers are our sisters; the deer, the horse, the great eagle, these are our brothers.

The rocky crests, the juices in the meadows, the body heat of the pony, and man--all belong to the same family.

But in your perishing you will shine brightly fired by the strength of the God who brought you to this land and for some special purpose gave you dominion over this land and over the red man.

That destiny is a mystery to us, for we do not understand when the buffalo are all slaughtered, the wild horses are tame, the secret corners of the forest heavy with scent of many men and the view of the ripe hills blotted by talking wires.

Where is the thicket? Gone. Where is the eagle? Gone.

The end of living and the beginning of survival.

Venezuelan tribe accuses German artist of stealing sacred stone

Wolfgang von Schwarzenfeld working on the
controversial pink stone at
Berlin’s Tiergarten Park

Venezuelan tribe accuses German artist of stealing sacred stone - Press TV

A Venezuelan tribe has accused German artist Wolfgang von Schwarzenfeld of stealing a sacred pink stone and using it in one of his sculptures.

Caracas supports the Pemon Indians of Venezuela’s ‘Gran Sabana’ region demanding the return of the polished stone known to them as ‘Grandmother’ from Berlin's Tiergarten Park.

While the Venezuelan government calls it robbery, the 79-year-old German artist argues the polished stone was a legal gift.

The stone is part of the ‘Global Stone Project,’ launched by Von Schwarzenfeld to promote world peace.

The German sculptor provided a sheaf of documents authorizing the removal of the stone from Venezuela’s Canaima National Park in 1998 and defied Venezuela to take back what he called a "gift to Berlin" from former president Rafael Caldera.

Inaugurated in 1999 near Berlin's landmark Potsdamer Platz and Brandenburg Gate, the Global Stone Project consists of the handling of ten stones, five to be placed in the countries representing each continent and the other five stones to be placed in Berlin.

People of Venezuela, however, say the project has given them a sense of loss calling Von Schwarzenfeld ignorant of the stone’s cultural value for the Pemon community.

Venezuelan Culture Minister Pedro Calzadilla told state television the donation was "illegitimate" because the stone was part of "the cultural patrimony of the (Pemon) community".

The German envoy promised Pemon people to relay their feelings to Berlin, while telling them it would not be an easy task to return the stone, Reuters reported.

German Foreign ministry spokesman Andreas Peschke also said that Berlin wanted a solution "agreed by all sides - Venezuela, the indigenous groups, the artist and the city of Berlin".

TE/TE

GMO Farming, Glyphosate Significant Causes of Water Pollution

© naturalsociety.com

GMO Farming, Glyphosate Significant Causes of Water Pollution by Mike Barrett

Water pollution and air pollution has been and continues to be a serious issue in many nations. Both of these pollution types are successfully bringing down the health of not only humans, but also animals, plant life, and the ecosystem as a whole. While the causes of water pollution and causes of air pollution are many, research is actually pointing a straight finger at GMO farming and chemicals like glyphosate for being important culprits.

Causes of Water Pollution – GMO Farming, Glyphosate Big Contributors

One groundbreaking study found that glyphosate, the active ingredient residing in the ever-so-popular Roundup product from Monsanto, is making its way into groundwater across the nation through widespread contamination of aquifers, wells, and springs. The explosive study that confirmed the contamination effect of Monsanto’s Roundup was published in the journal Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry in late 2011, where researchers discovered that 41% of the 140 groundwater samples taken from Catalonia Spain were actually above the limit of quantification.

The findings indicate that glyphosate actually doesn’t break down rapidly in the environment, and is continuously building up in concerning quantities. With glyphosate growing among the causes of water pollution, it is becoming more and more apparent that the chemical is polluting groundwater in alarming quantities, enough to pose a significant threat to the purity of drinking water wherever it is used.

How prevalent is this issue, really? One study conducted by a German university found very high concentrations of glyphosate in all urine samples tested. The amount of the chemical found in the urine was quite alarming, with each sample containing concentrations of 5 to 20-fold the limit established for drinking water. Unfortunately, the study doesn’t clearly say how many samples were tested for, and needs to be translated using one of the many translators available.

In addition, the issue of water contamination is only part of the pollution problem. Other findings, published in the journal Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, came across glyphosate in 60-100% of all air and rain samples tested for. This shows that glyphosate is not only among causes of water pollution, but also resides in the air due to massive overuse.

While GMO farmers and other individuals using Roundup are the heavy contributors, biotechnology giant Monsanto is ultimately fueling water pollution surrounding glyphosate involvement. Monsanto is the world’s largest provider and producer of glyphosate, and dominates the genetically modified crops market. With many of Monsanto’s GM crops being resistant to glyphosate-containing Roundup, glyphosate is sprayed in massive amounts in order to function properly against the resistant crops. In fact, 88,000 tons were used in the US in 2007 alone.

Regarding glyphosate being found in rain and streams in the Mississippi River Basin, Paul Capel, USGS chemist and author of one study has this to say:

“Though glyphosate is the mostly widely used herbicide in the world, we know very little about its long term effects to the environment. This study is one of the first to document the consistent occurrence of this chemical in streams, rain and air throughout the growing season. This is crucial information for understanding where management efforts for this chemical would best be focused.”

With glyphosate becoming more of an issue and player in the causes of water pollution, it is becoming more apparent that the massive use of this chemical needs to cease.

Security Lapses Found at CDC Bioterror Lab in Atlanta

Security Lapses Found at CDC Bioterror Lab in Atlanta - Cryptogon.com

Via: USA Today:

A federal bioterror laboratory already under investigation by Congress for safety issues has had repeated incidents of security doors left unlocked to an area where experiments occur with dangerous germs, according to internal agency e-mails obtained by USA TODAY. In one incident, an unauthorized employee was discovered inside a restricted area.
…
The e-mails document doors being left unlocked in the building’s high-containment lab block, which includes an animal-holding area and Biosafety Level 3 labs where experiments are done on microbes that can cause serious or potentially fatal diseases and can be spread through the air. Anthrax, monkeypox, dangerous strains of influenza and the SARS virus are examples.

One e-mail by a CDC safety manager describes an unauthorized man discovered in the animal-holding area and multiple doors that were unsecured at the time. Skinner says the man was a CDC scientist but was not immediately able to provide further details about why he was in the restricted area. Skinner said the man was in an outer corridor of the BSL-3 suite of labs.

Study Disproves CDC's Primary Justification for Vaccination

© greenmedinfo.com

Study Disproves CDC's Primary Justification for Vaccination by Sayer Ji

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), "Immunity to a disease is achieved through the presence of antibodies to that disease in a person’s system."[i] This, in fact, is the main justification for using vaccines to "boost" immunity, and a primary focus of vaccine research and development.

And yet, newly publish research has revealed that in some cases no antibodies are required for immunity against some viruses.

Published in the journal Immunity in March, 2011, and titled, "B cell maintenance of subcapsular sinus macrophages protects against a fatal viral infection independent of adaptive immunity," researchers found that mice infected with vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV) can suffer fatal invasion of their central nervous system even in the presence of high concentrations of "neutralizing" antibodies against VSV.[ii]

The researchers found that while B-cells were essential for surviving a systemic VSV infection through the modulation of innate immunity, specifically macrophage behavior, the antibodies they produce as part of the adaptive immune response were "neither needed nor sufficient for protection."  These findings, according to the study authors, "…contradict the current view that B cell-derived neutralizing antibodies are absolutely required to survive a primary cytopathic viral infection, such as that caused by VSV."

The discovery that antibodies are not required for protection against infection, while counterintuitive, is not novel. In fact, not only are antibodies not required for immunity, in some cases high levels are found in the presence of active, even lethal infections.  For example, high serum levels of antibodies against tetanus have been observed failing to confer protection against the disease.  A report from 1992 published in the journal Neurology found severe tetanus in immunized patients with high anti-tetanus titers, one of whom died as a result of the infection.[iii]

These research findings run diametrically opposed to currently held beliefs regarding the process by which we develop immunity against infectious challenges.  Presently, it is a commonly held view that during viral infections, innate immunity must activate adaptive responses in order to achieve effective immunity.  It is believed that this is why the immune system has developed a series of innate defenses, including complement, type I interferon, and other "stopgap measures," which work immediately to lower pathogen burden and "buy time" for the much slower adaptive immune response to develop.

This view, however, has been called into question by the new study:  "Although this concept may apply to other viral infections, our findings with VSV turn this view upside down, indicating that during a primary infection with this cytopathic virus, innate immunity can be sterilizing without adaptive immune contributions."

Does this strike a mortal blow to the antibody theory which underlies vaccinology, and constitutes the primary justification for the CDC's focus on using vaccines to "boost" immunity?

Indeed, in vaccinology, which is the science or method of vaccine development, vaccine effectiveness is often determined by the ability of a vaccine to increase antibody titers, even if this does not translate into real-world effectiveness, i.e. antibody-antigen matching.  In fact, regulatory agencies, such as the FDA, often approve vaccines based on their ability to raise antibody titers, also known as "vaccine efficacy," without requiring proof of vaccine effectiveness, as would seem logical.

The obvious problem with these criteria is that the use of vaccine adjuvants like mercury, aluminum hydroxide, mineral oil, etc.  – all of which are intrinsically toxic substances -- will increase antibody titers, without guaranteeing  they will neutralize the targeted antigen, i.e. antibody-antigen affinity.   To the contrary, many of these antibodies lack selectivity, and target self-structures, resulting in the loss of self-tolerance, i.e. autoimmunity.

Here is another way of understanding vaccine-induced antibody elevations….



Introducing foreign pathogenic DNA, chemicals, metals, preservatives, etc., into the body through a syringe will generate a response not unlike kicking a beehive. The harder you kick that beehive, the greater will be the "efficacy" (i.e. elevated antibodies), but the actual affinity that these antibodies will have for the antigen (i.e. pathogen) of concern is in no way ensured; to the contrary, the immune response is likely to become misdirected, or disproportionate to the threat.

Also, valuable immune resources are wasted by generating "false flag" responses to threats which may not readily exist in the environment, e.g. there are over 200 forms of influenza A, B & C which can cause the symptoms associated with annual influenza A,* so the seasonal trivalent flu vaccine only takes care of little more than 1% of the possible vectors of infection - and often at the price of distracting resources away from real threats, as well as exhausting and/or damaging the entire immune apparatus.

It is clear that one can create a synthetic immune response through vaccination, but it is not likely to result in enhanced immunity, insofar as real-world effectiveness is concerned, which is the only true judge of whether a vaccine is valuable or not.  One might view the basic criteria used by vaccine researchers, namely, that generating elevated antibody titers proves the value of the vaccine, oppositely: proving the vaccine is causing harm to the body, especially that of the developing infant and child, by generating unnecessarily elevated antibodies by any means necessary, i.e. throwing the chemical and biological kitchen sink at the immune system, e.g. aluminum, phenol, diploid (aborted fetal) cells, peanut oil, pertactin, etc.

We leave the reader with a series of quotes addressing the inherent weaknesses of the antibody theory of immunity:

"Just because you give somebody a vaccine, and perhaps get an antibody reaction, doesn’t mean a thing. The only true antibodies, of course, are those you get naturally. What we’re doing [when we inject vaccines] is interfering with a very delicate mechanism that does its own thing. If nutrition is correct, it does it in the right way. Now if you insult a person in this way and try to trigger off something that nature looks after, you’re asking for all sorts of trouble, and we don’t believe it works."- Glen Dettman Ph.D, interviewed by Jay Patrick, and quoted in "The Great American Deception," Let’s Live, December 1976, p. 57.

"The fallacy of this (antibody theory) was exposed nearly 50 years ago, which is hardly recent. A report published by the Medical Research Council entitled 'A study of diphtheria in two areas of Gt. Britain, Special report series 272, HMSO 1950 demonstrated that many of the diphtheria patients had high levels of circulating antibodies, whereas many of the contacts who remained perfectly well had low antibody." - Magda Taylor, Informed Parent

"Human trials generally correlate "antibody" responses with protection - that is if the body produces antibodies (proteins) which bind to vaccine components, then it must be working and safe. Yet Dr March says antibody response is generally a poor measure of protection and no indicator at all of safety. "Particularly for viral diseases, the 'cellular' immune response is all important, and antibody levels and protection are totally unconnected."- Private Eye 24/1/2002

"Whenever we read vaccine papers the MD researchers always assume that if there are high antibody levels after vaccination, then there is immunity (immunogencity). But are antibody levels and immunity the same?  No! Antibody levels are not the same as IMMUNITY. The recent MUMPS vaccine fiasco in Switzerland has re-emphasized this point. Three mumps vaccines-Rubini, Jeryl-Lynn and Urabe (the one withdrawn because it caused encephalitis) all produced excellent antibody levels but those vaccinated with the Rubini strain had the same attack rate as those not vaccinated at all, there were some who said that it actually caused outbreaks. Ref: Schegal M et al Comparative efficacy of three mumps vaccines during disease outbreak in Switzerland: cohort study. BMJ, 1999; 319:352-3."- Ted Koren DC

*PubMed Health

---

[i] CDC.gov, Basics and Common Questions: Immunity Types

[ii] B cell maintenance of subcapsular sinus macrophages protects against a fatal viral infection independent of adaptive immunity. Immunity. 2012 Mar 23 ;36(3):415-26. Epub 2012 Mar 1. PMID: 22386268

[iii] Severe tetanus in immunized patients with high anti-tetanus titers. Neurology. 1992 Apr ;42(4):761-4. PMID: 1565228

Sayer Ji is the founder of GreenMedInfo.com. His writings and research have been published in the Wellbeing Journal, the Journal of Gluten Sensitivity, and have been featured on numerous websites, including Mercola.com, NaturalNews.com, Reuters.com, GaryNull.com, and Care2.com.

Disclaimer: This article is not intended to provide medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. Views expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of GreenMedInfo or its staff.

World's First Genetically Modified Babies Born

© n/a

World's First Genetically Modified Babies Born by Michael Hanlon

The world's first geneticallymodified humans have been created, it was revealed last night.

The disclosure that 30 healthy babies were born after a series of experiments in the United States provoked another furious debate about ethics.

So far, two of the babies have been tested and have been found to contain genes from three 'parents'.

Fifteen of the children were born in the past three years as a result of one experimental programme at the Institute for Reproductive Medicine and Science of St Barnabas in New Jersey.

The babies were born to women who had problems conceiving. Extra genes from a female donor were inserted into their eggs before they were fertilised in an attempt to enable them to conceive.

Genetic fingerprint tests on two one-year- old children confirm that they have inherited DNA from three adults --two women and one man.

The fact that the children have inherited the extra genes and incorporated them into their 'germline' means that they will, in turn, be able to pass them on to their own offspring.

Altering the human germline - in effect tinkering with the very make-up of our species - is a technique shunned by the vast majority of the world's scientists.

Geneticists fear that one day this method could be used to create new races of humans with extra, desired characteristics such as strength or high intelligence.

Writing in the journal Human Reproduction, the researchers, led by fertility pioneer Professor Jacques Cohen, say that this 'is the first case of human germline genetic modification resulting in normal healthy children'.

Some experts severely criticised the experiments. Lord Winston, of the Hammersmith Hospital in West London, told the BBC yesterday: 'Regarding the treatment of the infertile, there is no evidence that this technique is worth doing . . . I am very surprised that it was even carried out at this stage. It would certainly not be allowed in Britain.'

John Smeaton, national director of the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children, said: 'One has tremendous sympathy for couples who suffer infertility problems. But this seems to be a further illustration of the fact that the whole process of in vitro fertilisation as a means of conceiving babies leads to babies being regarded as objects on a production line.

'It is a further and very worrying step down the wrong road for humanity.' Professor Cohen and his colleagues diagnosed that the women were infertile because they had defects in tiny structures in their egg cells, called mitochondria.

They took eggs from donors and, using a fine needle, sucked some of the internal material - containing 'healthy' mitochondria - and injected it into eggs from the women wanting to conceive.

Because mitochondria contain genes, the babies resulting from the treatment have inherited DNA from both women. These genes can now be passed down the germline along the maternal line.

A spokesman for the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA), which regulates 'assisted reproduction' technology in Britain, said that it would not license the technique here because it involved altering the germline.

Jacques Cohen is regarded as a brilliant but controversial scientist who has pushed the boundaries of assisted reproduction technologies.

He developed a technique which allows infertile men to have their own children, by injecting sperm DNA straight into the egg in the lab.

Prior to this, only infertile women were able to conceive using IVF. Last year, Professor Cohen said that his expertise would allow him to clone children --a prospect treated with horror by the mainstream scientific community.

'It would be an afternoon's work for one of my students,' he said, adding that he had been approached by 'at least three' individuals wishing to create a cloned child, but had turned down their requests.

Monsanto's Seedy Legacy

Monsanto's Seedy Legacy - Abby Martin - GRTV

Agricultural giant Monsanto is best known for their production of pesticides and genetically modified foods, but they have a controversial history as a chemical company with a slew of toxic cover-ups.

In addition to their battle against small farmers, the newest buzz about the corporation is the speculation that their GM seeds are linked to the die-off of bees.

Abby Martin of RT brings us more on their seedy practices and what they are up to now.

For more on this story, see also:
http://youtu.be/oVz5Z9QfOK8

URGENT: Don’t Let the GMO Industry Make an End Run around the Courts!

© anh-usa.org

URGENT: June 26, 2012: Don’t Let the GMO Industry Make an End Run around the Courts! - Alliance for Natural Health

We just have a few days to stop this lawlessness among our own lawmakers.

Congress is close to approving a sneaky, pro-GMO rider to an important funding bill, and it may become law without most people realizing it—unless you take action NOW. The GMO industry has inserted the worst kind of crony capitalist rider in support of genetically engineered crops into the FY 2013 Agriculture Appropriations bill, and we weren’t able to stop it last week in committee. The bill will likely reach the full House later this week, so it is vital that all of us contact our congressional representatives immediately and voice our opposition! This is our last chance to stop this extraordinarily bad legislation in the House.

As we explained last week, the pro-GMO amendment would strip federal courts of the authority to halt the sale or planting of illegal, potentially hazardous genetically engineered (GE) crops while USDA is assessing potential hazards. In other words, even if a court said to halt the sale or planting of the genetically engineered crop until a USDA environmental impact statement was completed, the crop planting could still go forward!

Further, the provision would compel USDA to allow continued planting of that same crop upon request, even if USDA finds that the crop poses previously unrecognized risks. That’s right—the provision specifically mandates that the Secretary of Agriculture shall, upon request by a farm operator or producer, immediately grant a temporary permit authorizing the crops to be planted or cultivated, even if a court has called a halt until an Environmental Impact Statement is completed. They’re calling it the Farmer Assurance Provision (Section 733). But far from safeguarding farmers, the only parties whose interests are “assured” by this rider are those of GE crop developers, in particular Monsanto, the company which we believe is almost certainly behind it.

Read more..

How Monsanto Is Sabotaging Efforts to Label Genetically Modified Food

Photo Credit: illuminating9_11

June 26, 2012: How Monsanto Is Sabotaging Efforts to Label Genetically Modified Food by Charlotte Silver

Lobbyists from the biotech industry are ardently opposing GMO labeling.

As the 2012 Farm Bill continues to take shape in the halls of the United States Congress, the immense influence of corporate interests is on display.

On June 21 the United States Senate voted overwhelmingly against the Sanders Amendment that would have allowed states to pass legislation that required food and beverage products to label whether or not they contain genetically engineered ingredients.

The amendment, proposed by Independent Senator from Vermont, Bernie Sanders, is particularly relevant as many states prepare to vote on a ballot initiatives that would require such labelling of genetically modified (GM) foods.

Lobbyists from the biotech industry have ardently opposed GMO labelling. These opponents argue that because food labelling has historically been handled by the Food and Drug Association (FDA), it is a federal issue and, therefore, individual states do not have the right to implement such legislation. Indeed, in the case of Vermont, Sanders' home state, Monsanto successfully intimidated the state legislature from voting on a bill that would have required GMO labelling.

Patty Lovera, the assistant director of Food and Water Watch, explained that states planning to vote on GM labelling in November could face a legal fight to defend their right to enact such laws.

"However, this amendment would have taken this threat away," Lovera told IPS.

In a move heralded by food advocates, Sanders introduced amendment 2310 on June 14 this year, after his own state legislature backed out of voting on the popular bill, H.722, also known as the Vermont Right to Know Genetically Engineered Food Act.

Vermont lawmakers allowed the bill to stall – and ultimately die – in the Vermont House Agriculture Committee in April, after a representative from biotech giant, Monsanto, threatened to sue the state if the bill passed.

Significantly, the Senate vote, 73-26, did not fall along partisan lines, with 28 Democrats voting against the Sanders Amendment.

Lovera emphasised that the powerful biotech lobby informs how politicians vote. "This doesn't happen overnight, this is a result of years and years of lobbying and pressure from the biotech industry," she said.
In a report published in November 2010, Food and Water Watch revealed that the largest food and agricultural biotechnology firms and trade associations spent a total of 572 million dollars on campaign contributions and lobbying over the course of ten years.

Importance of Labelling

Ad

The Senate vote comes amidst near global agreement that there is a need for GMO labelling.

Codex Alimentarius, the food safety arm of the United Nations, concluded last year after nearly 18 years of debate, that countries were free to label goods as containing genetically engineered ingredients and that labelling of genetically-modified organisms would indeed help inform consumers' choices.

"GMO labels are a risk management measure to deal with any scientific uncertainty," said Dr. Michael Hansen, a senior scientist with the Consumers Union, who has been a long-time advocate for mandatory testing and labelling of genetically engineered (GE) foods.

"Labelling is the only way to track unintended effects," Hansen said. "How can you know what you are allergic to if you do not know you are eating GMO's?"

In fact, the U.S. Food and Drug Association's hands-off approach to regulating genetically engineered foodstuffs runs contrary to international standards. Currently the U.S. is the only developed country that does not require safety testing for GE plants. However, the Codex Alimentarius instructs countries to conduct safety assessments of all GE plants.

According to testimony written by Dr. Hansen, "This means the U.S. cannot meet the global standards for safety assessment of GE foods. Consequently, countries that require food safety assessments for GE foods could block shipment of such GE foods from the U.S."

Recent polls conducted by MSNBC and Thompson Reuters found that between 93 and 96 percent of the American public believe genetically engineered foods should be labeled as such.

California's GMO labelling initiative collected close to one million signatures, doubling over the requisite 500,000 signatures to secure a place on the November ballot, and the FDA received over 850,000 letters in support of labelling GE food.

Voting as they did, the U.S. Senate did not in any way reflect the desires of their constituents or reflect the guidance of food experts.

Visit IPS news for fresh perspectives on development and globalization.

Vitamin B: The Happy Vitamin that Packs a Punch

Vitamin B: The Happy Vitamin that Packs a Punch by Melissa Crossman

Vitamin B is sometimes called the "happy vitamin," and for very good reason. Vitamin B is a dietary powerhouse, boosting energy levels and enhancing performance of nearly every system in the body. Hundreds of delicious and abundant foods are packed full of vitamin B, ready to unleash the raw power in even the most timid consumer.

© preventdisease.com

Benefits of Vitamin B
Vitamin B converts food into energy. These nutrients also help the nervous system function properly, enabling the energized body to move in an efficient and coordinated way.

Vitamin B beefs up the bloodstream, promoting healthy red blood cell production and reducing or eliminating anemia. A diet rich in vitamin B reduces the risk for heart disease or birth defects. Vitamin B helps the body feel robust and ready for action. It reduces depression and puts a bounce in anyone's step. The vitamin B complex, especially vitamin B6, eases or eliminates the severity of PMS symptoms, helping women stay active every day of the month.

Types of Vitamin B
There are eight nutrients in the vitamin B complex. Each nutrient has a chemical name along with a vitamin B number. For example, thiamine is vitamin B1. The other B vitamins are riboflavin (B2), niacin (B3), pantothenic acid (B5), pyridoxine (B6), biotin (B7), folic acid (B9) and cyanocobalamin (B12).

Vitamin B Deficiencies
Because of the important role vitamin B plays in a person’s overall health, vitamin B deficiency can have a profound effect. An individual might suffer a deficiency of just one B vitamin or a combination of B vitamins. Signs of a deficiency include cracking and fissures at the corners of the mouth, sensitivity to light, sore throat, inflammation of the tongue and flaky or scaly skin.

High Vitamin B Foods
A healthy diet is loaded with vitamin B. Manufacturers supplement whole-grain cereals with vitamin B. Bread, red meat, egg yolks, green leafy vegetables, legumes, sweet corn, brown rice, berries and yeast contain vitamin B1. Milk, meat, eggs, cheese and peas are rich in vitamin B2. Eat plenty of protein-rich foods to get the daily requirement for vitamin B3, including meat, fish, milk, brewer’s yeast, eggs, legumes, potatoes and peanuts.

Look for vitamin B5 in meats and legumes. Liver, brown rice, meat, fish, butter, wheat germ and soybeans are packed with vitamin B6. Vitamin B9 is in liver, yeast and green vegetables. Find vitamin B12 in liver, meat, egg yolk, poultry and milk.

Other Sources of Vitamin B
Most people get all the vitamin B complex they need through food, but some individuals require vitamin supplements because they suffer from conditions that prevent them from eating or metabolizing a balanced diet. Vitamin B supplements are available in tablet form without a prescription.

Recently, people have begun injecting vitamin B12 to increase energy levels and improve weight loss. Supporters of this technique assert that vitamin B12 boosts metabolism and energy levels and therefore enhance diet and exercise.

Vitamin B Overdose
Although the body flushes out excess vitamin B through the urine, it is still possible to overdose on vitamin B supplements. Symptoms of overdose vary according to which vitamin B complex has reached toxic levels. In general, symptoms of overdose include:

• Skin Rashes
• Changes in Blood Pressure
• Fatigue
• Nausea and Vomiting
• Anemia
• Joint Pain
• Insomnia
• Numbness or Tingling
• Mood Swings
• Heart Palpitations
• Muscle Cramps

Consult with a qualified doctor, dietician or nutritionist about the benefits of a high vitamin B diet. Learn how this important nutrient revitalizes a tired body, boosts metabolism and enriches the blood.

Melissa Crossman is a freelance writer who enjoys covering health, wellness, cancer and cancer prevention. She lives in Indianapolis with her two dogs.