4 Things You Should Know About Your ‘Third Eye’

Waking Times: 4 Things You Should Know About Your ‘Third Eye’
July 24, 2013 | Alternet | Scott Thill

We still lack a complete understanding of the pineal gland — but that doesn’t stop us from speculating.

Located in nearly the direct center of the brain, the tiny pinecone-shaped pineal gland, which habitually secretes the wondrous neurohormone melatonin while we sleep at night, was once thought to be a vestigial leftover from a lower evolutionary state.

Indeed, according to recent research, we could be increasing our chances of contracting chronic illnesses like cancer by unnecessarily bathing its evenings in artificial light, working night shifts or staying up too late. By disrupting the pineal gland and melatonin’s chronobiological connection to Earth’s rotational 24-hour light and dark cycle, known as its circadian rhythm, we’re possibly opening the doors not to perception, but to disease and disorder. A recently published study from Vanderbilt University has found associations between circadian disruption and heart disease, diabetes and obesity.

By hacking what pinealophiles call our mind’s third eye with an always-on technoculture transmitting globally at light-speed, we may have disadvantaged our genetic ability to ward off all manner of complicated nightmares. No wonder the pineal gland is a pop-culture staple for sci-fi, fantasy and horror fandom, as well as a mass attractor of mystics and mentalists. Its powers to divide and merge our light and dark lives only seems to grow the more we take it seriously.

“We still lack a complete understanding of the pineal gland,” University of Michigan professor of physiology and neurology Jimo Borjigin, a pioneer in medical visualization of the pineal gland’s melatonin secretion, told me. “Numerous molecules are found in the pineal, many of which are uniquely found at night, and we do not have a good idea of what their functions are. The only function that is established beyond doubt is the melatonin synthesis and secretion at night, which is controlled by the central clock in the suprachiasmatic nucleus and modulated by light. All else is speculative.”

Discerning between the science and speculation of the pineal gland hasn’t been easy since long before Rene Descartes called it the “principal seat of the soul” after studying it at length nearly four centuries ago. (Although “no evidence exists to support this,” clarified Borjigin.) So here’s a handy shortlist of things you should know about the pineal gland.

1. Third Eyes and Theosophistry

The current scientific understanding is that the pineal gland probably started out as an eye, and it receives signals from light and our retinas. Whether it was our only eye which shrunk into the brain once its perceptive tasks were taken care of by our two newer eyes, or whether it was a third eye with a spiritual and physical connection to previous spiritual and evolutionary states, or both, has galvanized science and speculation for centuries.

Earth’s ancient cultural histories are filled with folklore featuring both one-eyed and three-eyed beings of great power, from Shiva and Cyclops to that amiable fellow in The Twilight Zone‘s classic episode, “Will the Real Martian Please Stand Up?” and beyond. (From Beyond even: See below.) Associations can be found in Hinduism, whose seventh primary chakra Sahasara is a multilayered lotus that looks like the pineal gland’s pinecone, and whose primary function is to perceive universal oneness, scientifically and spiritually speaking. Theosophists, who have been studying what they perceive as hidden knowledge since the Greeks and Romans ruled philosophical and scientific inquiry, have more recently claimed that the pineal gland is the spiritual engine of our evolution into “embryo gods, beings of consciousness and matter.”

 That description seems apt, given the astronomical power we have achieved in a few million yeas of evolution. While Homo sapiens‘ third eyes likely transformed into pineal glands along the way, today we can still find animals with photoreceptive third eyes, now called parietal eyes, like New Zealand’s endangered tuatara. Fossils from other ancient creatures feature similar sockets in their skulls, making our pineal gland a candidate for an ex-eye.

2. What Was Once Hidden Is Now Hi-Res

Michigan University professor Borjigin and his team are hard at work on how the pineal gland and melatonin regulate our lives.

“The central circadian clock controls timing of almost all aspects of our life, including physiology and behavior, and melatonin is the best marker to decode the fingerprints of circadian timing in both humans and animals,” he told me. “In the past, it was very difficult to study circadian properties of melatonin in animals due to technical limitations. My lab invented long-term pineal microdialysis, which permits automated, computer-controlled and high-resolution analysis of melatonin secretion from rodent pineal gland from four to 10 weeks in the same animal.”

These visualizations could go a long way toward understanding how to hack melatonin, which the pineal gland secretes when we sleep and helps the brain repair and sync our bodies to Earth’s rotation. Melatonin is a stunning compound, found naturally in plants, animals and microbes. A powerful antioxidant, its list of its medicinal uses only seems to grow each year, as we learn more about its ability to help with immune disorders, chronic illnesses, and neurodegeneration.

“Pineal microdialysis allows us to monitor melatonin secretion closely under various conditions to simulate jet lag, shiftwork, light pollution, diet manipulation and more to define the fingerprints of circadian response to environment, he added. “It also allows us to discover animals with extreme chronotypes, like early-birds or night-owls, to understand how individuals with different chronotype respond to circadian challenges differently. These are still ongoing studies, but hopefully some of the works will be published this year.”

 3. Artificial Light = Dark Future
 
What has been recently published about melatonin is already pretty significant, especially for those looking to combat breast and prostate cancer. Harvard University School of Public Health researcher Itai Kloog and his group published a series of studies in the last few years explaining how our “modern urbanized sleeping habitat” (PDF) is a massive hormone-based cancer risk. “We have blotted out the night sky” with artificial light, wrote Earth Island Journal‘s Holly Hayworth,” citing Kloog’s research and noting that half that light is wasted anyway.

“We’ve proven beyond a doubt that it’s a risk factor,” Kloog told me. “Light at night has been proven on many levels, by our group and many others, to definitely contribute to higher risk of developing hormonal cancer.”

Kloog’s team published five studies altogether, including analyses at local and global levels, and all of them found firm correlations between circadian and melatonin disruption and higher risks of cancer.

Analyzing NASA’s Defense Meteorological Satellite Program archive (to illuminate Earth’s light-at-night coverage) and data from the World Health Organization, Kloog’s group “found clearly that as women were more exposed to light at nighttime, their rates of breast cancer went up. Our Israel study found that going from minimum exposure to average exposure to light at night resulted in a 36 percent higher standard rate of breast cancer, and going from average to maximum was another 26 percent increase.”

Using kernel smoothing to create density maps showing light exposure and cancer rates, Kloog’s team found that another of its studies, which sourced more than 20,000 light sources by height and intensity, showed a clear association. For their two worldwide studies, they developed an algorithm to assign population weight average light exposure for every person in every city across the world, using WHO data, and again they found a clear association between cancer and light at night.

“For average light exposure per person, if you take an underdeveloped country like Nepal, we’re talking about 0.02 nanowatts per centimeter squared,” Kloog explained. “Compare that to the United States, where the average light exposure of a person is 57.5. Up until around 120 years ago, humans were basically exposed to 12 hours of sunlight and 12 hours of darkness on average, seasons and latitudes permitting of course. But since the invention of the lightbulb, we’ve artificially stretched the day. We go to sleep late at night, we have lights on while we sleep, we have a shorter sleep duration. We have a lot of factors stretching out our days, relative to the light period we experienced during millions of years of previous evolution.”

“It’s something that’s easy to take out of the equation,” Kloog told me. “Go to sleep in a dark room. Use less light. Close the shutters. Circadian disruption is carcinogenic to humans.”

4. Occult Classic

This is not to say that late-night viewing itself isn’t good for the mind, especially when it comes to pineal glands and third eyes. Because pineal glands and third eyes remain singular components of an otherwise binary brain with an extraordinary past, they have stimulated some stranger explorations of their spiritual and supernatural possibility. The pineal gland’s circadian dualism has achieved particular resonance with influential occultists like horror influential H.P. Lovecraft. Who, in turn, have spawned new generations of speculative talents that have used it as a quite flexible receptacle for expansive meaning.

 “My first exposure to the pineal gland came from Stuart Gordon’s movie adaptation of Lovecraft’s From Beyond,” Javier Grillo-Marxuach, creator of the cult sci-fi television classic The Middleman, told AlterNet. “In truth, everything I know about that particular endocrine body probably derives from that seminal experience, which explains why I am a television writer and not a brain surgeon.”

In From Beyond, a supernaturally activated pineal gland turns mad scientists into brain-eating zombies. The recently reissued 1957 exploitation film She Devil features a “female monster” whose hyperstimulated pineal gland turns her into ”a demon, a devil, a creature with a warped soul!” In both films, and many other third-eye head-trips, functions as a sexualized organ, rather than a circadian regulator. Today, some use melatonin supplements, available since the ’90s, to aid with sexual dysfunction. But the pineal gland’s expansive mythic and scientific history has much broader applications when it comes to folklore and entertainment.

“In The Middleman, we quickly discovered that because this most mysterious of glands is so misunderstood, even though its very name connotes a certain frisson of scientific accuracy and technical understanding, it was a fantastic shorthand for whatever otherworldly qualities we needed to justify,” Grillo-Marxuach added. “Over the course of 12 episodes, the pineal gland became the source of psychic ability, communication between parallel dimensions, the magical influence of succubi and incubi over the libidos of ordinary mortals and, finally, the power source for our main supervillain’s armageddon device. Since Stuart Gordon and H.P. Lovecraft gave me such a gift in my teenage years by providing me with so fanciful an understanding of cerebral anatomy, I figured I’d pay the favor forward as many times as possible.”

About the Author

Scott Thill runs the online mag Morphizm.com. His writing has appeared on Salon, XLR8R, All Music Guide, Wired and others.

The Hum, a Worldwide Acoustic Mystery, Stumps Researchers

The Hum, a mysterious droning sound, has been
heard in places like Bristol, England, Bondi, Australia
and Taos, N.M. (Taos Pueblo shown).
Credit: Dan Kaplan | Shutterstock.com

The Hum, a Worldwide Acoustic Mystery, Stumps Researchers
July 25, 2013 | Live Science | Marc Lallanilla

It creeps in slowly in the dark of night, and once inside, it almost never goes away.

It's known as the Hum, a steady, droning sound that's heard in places as disparate as Taos, N.M.; Bristol, England; and Largs, Scotland.

But what causes the Hum, and why it only affects a small percentage of the population in certain areas, remain a mystery, despite a number of scientific investigations. [The Top 10 Unexplained Phenomena]

Big Farma: The Hazardous Truth about Factory Farming

The Hazardous Truth about Factory Farming
July 24, 2013 | Project Censored

Factory farms are increasingly biohazards—biological breeding grounds for dangerous bacteria and viruses.  Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs)—informally known as “factory farms”—pollute our air, waterways, and bodies.  Poultry- and cattle-waste has devastating effects on waterways and often contribute to algae blooms.  CAFOs produce “waste lagoons” with high concentrations of ammonia, hydrogen sulfide, among other harmful substances.  Joseph Mercola reports, “Animals and workers have died or become seriously ill in swine IFAP [Industrial Farm Animal Production] facilities when hydrogen sulfide has risen from agitated manure in pits under the building.”

CAFOs are increasingly large, multiplying these negative effects.  According to Food & Water Watch’s “Factory Farm Map,” there are four factory-farmed chickens for every single American, and the number of cows on factory-farm dairies nearly doubled between 1997 and 2007.

Model Farm Project promotes alternatives to CAFOs.   In partnership with the World Society for the Protection of Animals and the Food Animal Initiative, the Model Farm Project aims “to establish an international network of viable, humane and sustainable model farms.”  They advocate for humane farms with local supply chains that provide employees with good jobs.  Alternatives to the industrial farm model employ lower density of animals, which is beneficial for both the animals and the environment.

Sources:

Joseph Mercola,  “A River Of Waste:  The Hazardous Truth About Factory Farms,” Mercola.com,  April 6, 2013,  http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2013/04/06/river-of-waste-documentary.aspx.

“Factory Farm Map,” Food & Water Watch, no date, http://www.factoryfarmmap.org/states/us/.

“Model Farm Project,” http://www.modelfarmproject.org/.

Student Researchers:  Jessica Lehmann, Megan Boggs, Pete Sotiras, Chet Finster and Logan Straub (Santa Rosa Junior College)

Faculty Evaluator: Susan Rahman (Santa Rosa Junior College)

Dolphins Call Out to Each Other by 'Name' Like Humans, say British Scientists

Dolphins (Representative Image) Credit: Reuters

Dolphins Call Out to Each Other by 'Name' Like Humans, say British Scientists
July 24, 2013 | IbTimes | Drishya Nair

A new study has discovered that that bottlenose dolphins call out to each other by names, just like human beings, suggesting that the concept of naming individuals is not exclusive to our species.

According to the study by researchers from University of St. Andrews in Scotland, dolphins call out to each other by using "signature whistles."

While it was already known to science closely related dolphins do copy each other's whistles, it wasn't clear if there were any sort of signature whistles.

For the study, the researchers followed different groups of wild dolphins off the east coast of Scotland and closely monitored each of their signature whistles for a span of four months. They checked if there were any repetitive styles of whistle.

With the help of an onboard computer, the scientists then created synthetic versions of the dolphin's signature whistles without their vocal characteristics to check if the dolphins responded to the whistle pattern itself without recognizing their own voices.

The researchers also recorded and created synthetic versions of non-signature whistles.

When the synthetic versions of signature whistles were played from an underwater speaker, it was found that dolphins responded. While some of them responded by whistling back immediately, others approached the boat soon after responding. This suggested that the signature whistles may be helping lost animals reunite with their group, lead author of the study, marine biologist Stephanie King said according to a report in Los Angeles Times.

Laela Sayigh, a marine biologist at Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute in Massachussetts said that all signature whistles are different from each other. She added that females especially have very distinctive whistles which may aid calves recognize their mothers more easily.

However, Sayigh said it is not clear as to how dolphins come up with their signature whistles.

Though there is a theory that there is learning involved in the process, it is not confirmed.

 "We don't really have an exact answer," Sayigh said.

Sayigh further said that the study may help answer larger questions.

"There's a big question looming as to whether dolphins use whistles in the way we use words," Sayigh said.
"We can say 'chair' and visualize 'chair' without having to see one at the same time," Sayigh said. The question if dolphins can do the same with whistles.

King said that the research team now plans to study other whistle types.

"I think we can really open the door now and look at this in more animals," she added.

The study was published on Monday in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

Italy Becomes the 9th EU Nation To Ban Monsanto's GMO Corn

Italy Becomes the 9th EU Nation To Ban Monsanto's GMO Corn
July 24, 2013 | Prevent Disease | Natasha Longo

The Italians are on to something big that could cause a ripple effect throughout the EU. Three Italian ministries have signed a decree banning the cultivation of Monsanto's genetically modified corn, citing environmental concerns, the agriculture ministry said last week.

Earlier this year, Poland had become the eighth EU member state to ban the cultivation of genetically modified (GM) crops. Seven other EU member states have already imposed bans on the cultivation of GM crops approved by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) as safe: Austria, France, Germany, Hungary, Luxembourg, Greece and Bulgaria. Now Italy has joined the ranks.

Nation ministries continue to express concerns that GM crops may cross-pollinate with non-GM crops and Monsanto’s MON810 maize pollen may find its way into honey. There exists no scientific assessments confirming that GM crops are safe for the environment and people.

The decree, which still needs to be published in the official gazette to become binding, targets Monsanto's MON810 maize, one of two genetically modified organisms (GMO) allowed in Europe and the only one currently grown commercially.

The ban was also signed off by the health and environment ministries, with the agriculture ministry citing the crop's "negative impact on biodiversity".

"Our agriculture is based on biodiversity, on quality, and those we must continue to aim for, without games that even from an economic point of view would not make us competitive," the ministry said.

The ministry said it had already notified the European Commission and other states in the European Union of the move.

"The Commission will look into the Italian safeguard measure in more detail, and we have already asked the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) to assess the scientific basis for the decision," said Frederic Vincent, the Commission's health spokesman. EFSA is the EU's food safety watchdog.

While GMO cultivation approvals are agreed jointly at the EU level, individual governments can introduce safeguards if they believe that cultivation could present a health or environmental risk. Those moves, however, are always verified by the Commission.

France put in place a similar temporary ban on GMO crops last year.

It was just two years ago that French police stood helpless as sixty people, locked inside an open-air field of genetically modified grapevines, uprooted all the plants. In Spain, dozens of people have destroyed GMO fields. In an anonymous press release that year, they wrote, “This kind of direct action is the best way to respond to the fait accompli policy through which the Generalitat, the State and the biotech multinationals have been unilaterally imposing genetically modified organisms.”

Europe is quickly becoming the most progressive continent in the world to oppose GM foods. France, Italy, Switzerland, Hungary, Bosnia, Serbia, Croatia, Latvia and Albania have all declared many regions to be GMO-free. France made an important step in the no-GMO movement by specifically defining exactly what "GMO-free" means when it comes to food labeling. Spain and Portugal are slowing advancing but they have a long way to go before declaring most of their regions GMO-free. Britain officially supports GM crops and has trials of GMOs like potatoes planted. Austria, Greece and Poland are now completely GMO-free zones thanks to public and government support.

According to official data from last year, there was no GMO cultivation in Italy, a country fiercely protective of its agriculture, although some pro-biotech farmers have planted individual crops in recent months despite the widespread opposition.

Nearly 80 percent of Italians are in support of a ban, according to Italy's biggest farmers group Coldiretti, citing the results of a recent survey.

"The protection of Italian distinctiveness must be a policy priority since it determines the existence of 'Made in Italy', which is our engine, our future, our leverage to return to growth in the food industry," Coldiretti's president, Sergio Marini, said in a statement.

The Italian ban will be valid for a period of up to 18 months, the ministry added.

Five EU member states grew MON810 maize on 129,000 hectares in 2012, data from the International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications showed.

Spain was the top producer, followed by Portugal, the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Romania.

Sources:

scientificamerican.com
foodfreedom.wordpress.com
preventdisease.com

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.

MONSANTO VIDEO REVOLT JULY 24TH-Resonance of the Earth 地球共鳴 (Earth Maiden Arjuna)

© Yatto Kame

MONSANTO VIDEO REVOLT JULY 24TH-Resonance of the Earth　地球共鳴 (Earth Maiden Arjuna)
July 18, 2013 | Yatto kame

WE DID THE MARCH, NOW JOIN THE REVOLT. JULY 24TH, 2013.

The March Against Monsanto event was an amazing step in bringing forth awareness, but we'd like to implement an even simpler way to tell the world how Monsanto and GMOs are devastating the globe. Anyone can participate with ease and in the comfort of their own home; all you need is a webcam, phone, or video camera.

Grassroots Monsanto Video Revolt 2013

Grassroots Monsanto Video Revolt 2013
July 24, 2013 | Jacqueline Georgi

This video is my contribution to the online international grassroots campaign called Monsanto Video Project that is being launched today, July 24, 2013 to raise awareness about what is happening to our food and how we are being poisoned by Monsanto Corporation. Please share and inform yourselves. Then join the international movement to expose and stop the destruction of our food, ourselves, and our planet. As caretakers of this planet, and for the future generations; it is our responsibility (excuse the music, its all I had at the moment).

‘Rider’ in House Bill Seeks to Let Dow Keep Spraying Fluoride Pesticide on Our Food

Activist Post: ‘Rider’ in House Bill Seeks to Let Dow Keep Spraying Fluoride Pesticide on Our Food
July 24, 2013 | TruthStream Media | Melissa Melton

Does the government even pass a bill anymore unless it benefits mega corporations and places profits over people?

First the Supreme Court ruled that pharmaceutical companies are exempt from lawsuits. Then a Monsanto rider magically found its way into a non-related 2013 Senate spending bill.

Now, a rider protecting Dow Chemical’s sulfuryl fluoride pesticide (known by the market name Vikane) has found its way into the 2014 House Appropriations Bill to stop the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) from phasing out the chemical’s use on the U.S. food supply.

Back Story

In 2011, the EPA announced tolerance levels for the chemical fumigant sulfuryl fluoride would be phased out:

Sulfuryl fluoride is currently registered for the control of insect pests in stored grains, dried fruits, tree nuts, coffee and cocoa beans, and for use in food handling and processing facilities. Although sulfuryl fluoride residues in food contribute only a very small portion of total exposure to fluoride, when combined with other fluoride exposure pathways, including drinking water and toothpaste, EPA has concluded that the tolerance (legal residue limits on food) no longer meets the safety standard under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) and the tolerances for sulfuryl fluoride should be withdrawn.

 Finally acknowledging that children were already exposed to too much fluoride as it is through toothpastes and fluoridated water supplies (not to mention food grown with those water supplies which tend to have high fluoride contents as well), the EPA ruled to withdraw all tolerance levels for sulfuryl fluoride.

The phase out began in 2011 was set to take three years, thus the clock is winding down on Dow’s fluoride product being sprayed all over our food. In response, Dow, one of the largest pesticide producers in the world, put out a none-too-thrilled press release.

What Is It?

 Sulfuryl fluoride is a chemical that breaks down into an inorganic fluoride compound. The product label on it reads, “Do not expose to non-target organisms. This pesticide is toxic to fish and wildlife.” Negative health and environmental effects include neurotoxicity, reproductive, and birth and developmental issues. It’s also a potent greenhouse gas. Apparently the U.S. and Australia are the only two industrialized countries that even actually allow this stuff to be sprayed on people’s food.

To give you an idea of how much of this stuff is being put on your food in a given year, an exposure risk characterization document out of California’s EPA claims the state used 3,045,084 pounds of sulfuryl fluoride in 2002 alone (and that’s just one state).

Dow’s Rider in the 2014 House Appropriations Bill

Dow has already tried to use it’s lobbying power to find a way to block the EPA and keep spraying their chemicals on our food by persuading 15 Congress members to introduce the Pest Free Food Supply Act (H.R.1496):

If passed, the bill would make the United States one of only two western nations to allow sulfuryl fluoride on food, increase the number of American children ingesting unsafe levels of fluoride, and create a food poisoning risk for consumers who purchase food that contains permissible levels of the fumigant. The act, sponsored by Rep. Tom Graves (R-GA) and 14 others, seeks to prevent the proposed phaseout of sulfuryl fluoride from taking effect.

According to the Fluoride Action Network (FAN), Dow also attempted to thwart the phase out in the most recent Farm Bill. That trick didn’t work either. Curiously, we now have Section 449 in the 2014 House Appropriations Bill which states:

SEC. 449. None of the funds made available by this Act may be used by the Environmental Protection Agency to prepare and finalize an order under section 408 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 346a) that in any way removes, withdraws, revokes, or stays tolerances for the pesticide chemical sulfuryl fluoride if that final order takes into consideration aggregate or cumulative exposure to other substances related to sulfuryl fluoride or its metabolites or degradates pursuant to sections 408(b)(2)(A), 408(b)(2)(C), 408(b)(2)(D)(v), and 408(b)(2)(D)(vi) of such Act (21 U.S.C. 346a (b)(2)(A), 346a(b)(2)(C), 346a(b)(2)(D)(v), and 346a(b)(2)(D)(vi)). Dow

This basically says the EPA CANNOT stop this stuff — a chemical lovingly brought to us from the same company that (along with Monsanto) gave us Agent Orange — from being used on our food! It’s dirty-handed and downright despicable.

Contact Your Rep and Try to Get This Stopped!

The House Committee on Appropriations’ subcommittee on Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies is currently considering this piece of legislation. Obviously the system is a broken piece of corporatist trash, but it won’t hurt to try and raise Hell to our representatives to get this stopped. It is currently being reported that the Monsanto Protection Act may be repealed because of the work of activists; maybe we can keep this from happening too!

The Fluoride Action Network has set up a pre-written letter you can email your representatives today.

It’s time we asked ourselves: when is the last time a piece of federal legislation had our best interests in mind? Is every single bill in this country rife with sneaky back doors that are basically written to benefit corporations and put profits above people?

Makes me sick (probably literally).

Melissa Melton is a co-founder of TruthstreamMedia.com. She is an experienced researcher, graphic artist and investigative journalist with a passion for liberty and a dedication to truth. Her aim is to expose the New World Order for what it is — a prison for the human soul from which we must break free.

Medical Authority’s System Kills: FDA-Approved Drugs Kill over 100,000 People Annually

© Natural Society

Medical Authority’s System Kills: FDA-Approved Drugs Kill over 100,000 People Annually
July 24, 2013 | Natural Society | Paul Fassa

Greed, fraud, and corruption within Big Pharma and the FDA are the constructs of deception, with the mantle of authority leading to over 100,000 American deaths each year from correctly prescribed FDA approved pharmaceutical drugs.

That’s an earlier conservative figure based on Dr. Barbara Starfield’s study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association July 26, 2000, “Is US health really the best in the world?”

And that doesn’t include those who are sickened, needing more medications from side effects, hospitalization, or years of rehab for crippling adverse “side effects.” Nor does it include the effects from over-the-counter (OTC) drugs that lead to an almost equivalent number of casualties as their prescribed counterparts.

How the Medical Mafia Maintains its Monopoly 

The FDA-Big Pharma partnership scheme calls for long trials involving cruel animal testing and testing on humans with their placebo control groups. The real problem is that the pharmaceutical companies pay for all this and conduct the trials themselves. This expense keeps effective, safe natural medicines from private individuals and small providers out of the FDA approval loop.

The big boys make their own reports for FDA approval, often paying ghost writers to create favorable medical journal reports that medical professionals sign off for a significant fee. Then Big Pharma pays the FDA a fee for approval. And to top it all off, many FDA “consultants” are Big Pharma insiders with financial ties whose careers depend on that big corporate/government revolving door. All of these situations are corrupt signals.

Even former New England Journal of Medicine editor and author of The Truth about Drug Companies, Dr. Marcia Angell, threw up her arms in disgust and declared “It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines.”

Related Read: 500 Page Report: FDA is Failing to Protect Consumers

Other Pharmaceutical Testing Flaws

An FDA approved substance is a deception that leads most everyone to think the drug they’re taking is safe. But even if taken according to instructions, that’s probably not true. ”Evidence based medicine” is the arrogant assertion while accusing alternative healers of fraud or lacking science. But what do they consider scientific?

Large scale studies reduce people to improbable statistics. Here’s an example: A shoe company in NYC surveys the foot sizes of 10,000 men, women, and children. Then they take the average size, make all their shoes that size and market them throughout the country. One size does not fit all.

Also, the magnitude and expense of these large studies preclude repeating any tests. But scientific methodology requires the ability to repeat an experiment with the same results.

Another aspect of Big Pharma’s reportage includes good editing. Adverse effects, non-efficacy situations, can and are often left out. Long term studies on humans are shunned.

The FDA doesn’t bother investigating until well after marketing and large real-life casualties and lawsuits pile up. By then, the pharmaceutical companies have made their money.

Actor-comedian George Burns once said, “The secret of acting is sincerity. If you can fake that, you’ve got it made.” Faked sincerity from pompous authoritative positions is what the Medical Mafia uses to promote their lies to a naive public or attack alternative systems of healing.

Keeping the Real Medicines Out of the Loop 

Researchers and research universities are financial beneficiaries from large scale studies. Alternative methods for treating cancer have more living proof, which is documented, of efficacy and safety than anything Big Pharma has created for its lost war on cancer.

Natural healing modalities were first based on scientific investigative analysis, which was then repeated consistently with greater success among actual patients with virtually no adverse effects.

It’s common for many alternative healers’ documents proving efficacy to be stolen or burned. Large vested medical institutions routinely test their protocols incorrectly to “prove” they don’t work or simply lie outright.

Independent studies from smaller, alternative sources are consistently refused from medical journal publications. Medical journals don’t make nearly as much money from underfunded resources as they do from Big Pharma’s glossy ads.

These are the rotten fruits of a profit motivated medical system and media that deceptively rules modern medicine with both cunning and an iron fist, and the mainstream media complies to maintain its pharmaceutical advertising revenue.

Worshiping authority blindly is one of mankind’s greatest weaknesses that is leading to self-destruction.

Additional Sources:

Orthomolecular medicine newsletter

NaturalNews.com/031073

Sott.net

Putting the brakes on inflammation

© Lidia Bosurgi
In this microscopic image, three cells of the
innate immune response (red with blue cell nuclei)
are seen next to two T-cells. T-cells appear blue
when they're not active. Only when they make
contact with and are activated by the innate
cells do the T-cells turn on Protein S,
causing them to glow green.

SOTT: Putting the brakes on inflammation
July 22, 2013 | Daniel Stolte | University of Arizona

Researchers have uncovered a signal that prevents the immune system from spinning out of control. The findings could help develop more effective therapies for autoimmune disorders, allergies, chronic inflammation and cancer.

A team led by a University of Arizona researcher has discovered a previously unknown mechanism that prevents the immune system from going into overdrive, shedding light not only on how our body controls its response to pathogens but on conditions such as autoimmune diseases, allergies and chronic inflammation as well.

The group found a protein previously believed to only play a role in blood clotting acts as a negative feedback signal, telling defense cells to calm down, thereby preventing an immune reaction from spiraling out of control. The results, which could lead to new therapeutics for a variety of disorders caused by a faulty immune response, are published in the scientific journal Immunity.

When pathogens such as viruses or bacteria invade our body, the immune system reacts by producing a flurry of chemical signals, known as chemokines that act as a bugle call recruiting specialized defender cells to the scene, such as macrophages, which devour the intruders. This first line of defense is known as inflammation.

"Inflammation is a necessary defense mechanism - you can't live without it," said Sourav Ghosh, assistant professor in the department of cellular and molecular medicine at the UA College of Medicine and lead author of the study. "On the flip side, if you can't regulate the inflammation, it can damage the body."

To be effective against pathogens, yet prevent collateral damage from the body's own defenses, the immune system has to maintain just the right level of inflammation, explained Ghosh, who is also a member of the University of Arizona Cancer Center and theUA's BIO5 Institute.

"It needs to be not too high and not too low," he said. "The question had always been, how does the immune system maintain that balance? Our discovery explains this."

All organisms, even plants, have some kind of immune system at their disposal that acts as an army fighting against the onslaught of microbes, viruses, parasites and other pathogens in the environment. Vertebrates have evolved the most sophisticated arsenal of "soldiers" and "weapons," relying on two powerful lines of defense: a non-specific, or innate, immune response and the specific, or adaptive, immune response.

In the non-specific response, the immune system throws a first wave of countermeasures at the intruders, consisting of - among other things - aggressive chemicals, destructive enzymes and kamikaze-like neutrophils, specialized white blood cells that destroy the attackers by devouring them, killing themselves in the process.

"First you don't know who the enemy is, so you fire everywhere with your eyes closed," Ghosh explained. "But once you know the enemy, you need to shut off this first response firing and bring in the special ops so to speak."

© Cynthia Orensztajn
The researchers discovered a negative
feedback loop preventing our immune
system from overreacting: Dendritic cells
activate T-cells, which, once activated,
trigger a signal telling the dendritic
cells to stop.

The special ops come in the form of the specific immunity, capable of targeting pathogens very precisely, taking out the enemy in a sniper-like fashion, while sparing friendly microbes and cells belonging to the body. Most importantly, this portion of the immune system contains cells that remember every attacker trying to conquer an organism throughout its lifetime, allowing the immune system to summon the most effective, specialized task force to counter a pathogen it recognizes from a previous battle.

"The innate immune response is necessary to activate the adaptive response," Ghosh said. "But once activated, there has to be a mechanism that prevents the adaptive response from going into overdrive. From previous studies, we knew there had to be some kind of signal that does this, but we didn't know the nature of that signal. Now we do."

Two kinds of immune cells turned out to be the key players in mediating the immune response: the dendritic cells, so called because of the tree-like branches they grow during their development ("dendron" means "tree" in Greek), which belong to the first wave of defense; and the T-cells, so named because they mature in the thymus gland of the second, which are part of the second wave, the specific immune response.

"The dendritic cells activate the T-cells," Ghosh explained. "Only when they're activated, not when they're resting, do the T-cells produce this protein that we knew only from the blood clotting process, called Protein S."

The T-cells display Protein S on their surface, where it makes contact with a receptor the dendritic cells carry on their surface. This triggers a signal telling the dendritic cell to stop switching on T-cells, causing the immune response to slow down.

© Anthony Perry
Using a technique that makes the
presence of Protein S visible under the
microscope, samples taken from lymph
nodes with resting T-cells reveal no sign
of the protein (A), while dark staining
indicates the presence of Protein S in
activated T-cells (B).

"We thought about which cells could be the source of that signal," said Carla Rothlin of the School of Medicine at Yale University, who led the study together with Ghosh. "You don't want to put the brakes on from the very beginning, or otherwise the immune response would never amount to anything. But you want to slow it down once it starts going too fast."

"We figured that once the specific response is underway, you don't really need the unspecific response anymore, so the T-cells appeared to be the best candidates for the source of this signal."

To test their hypothesis, the researchers studied the immune response in mice in which the gene coding for Protein S had been deactivated selectively in their T-cells, rendering them unable to communicate with the dendritic cells.

As expected, these mice were unable to regulate their immune response, resulting in higher levels of inflammation compared to their normal counterparts.

To assess the relevance of their findings to humans, Ghosh and his co-workers then studied blood from patients with inflammatory bowel diseases such as ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease. Consistent with their previous results, patients suffering from increased inflammation had lower levels of Protein S in their blood stream compared to healthy volunteers.

The findings could help scientists and clinicians develop better treatments for inflammatory diseases, for example by designing drugs that substitute for insufficient Protein S. According to Ghosh, patients with inflammatory bowel disease are 20 times more likely to develop colon cancer, further underlining the significance of this study.

Study co-author Dr. Jonathan Leighton reported anecdotal evidence from the clinical practice that is in line with the dual roles Protein S is believed to play.

"Patients with inflammatory bowel disease can develop blood clots if they have active disease," said Leighton, a UA alumnus who holds the Chair of the Division of Gastroenterology at Mayo Clinic in Scottsdale, Ariz. "From a clinical standpoint, we think that three factors predispose to inflammation in inflammatory bowel disease - genetic, environmental and the immune system. This research is exciting because it focuses on the immune system. No one has found a consistent inflammatory pathway that explains all the clinical manifestations, and it may be that different pathways are affected in different patients. We don't understand how it all relates quite yet, but this study is a step toward a better understanding that will ultimately help us treat patients more effectively."

The study was funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) grants R01 AI077058, R01 AI089824, CA95060 and T32 AI007019); the Crohn's and Colitis Foundation; the American Heart Association; the American Asthma Foundation; the Lupus Research Institute; a CONICET Postdoctoral Fellowship and a Gershon-Trudeau Postdoctoral Fellowship.

Some non-organic foods contain upwards of 180 times the fluoride level of tap water, says expert

© Natural News

Some non-organic foods contain upwards of 180 times the fluoride level of tap water, says expert
July 23, 2013 | Natural News | Ethan A. Huff

As a follow-up to our earlier report on fluoridated food crops (http://www.naturalnews.com/036753_fluoride_pesticides_grapes.html), the following report explains a bit more about the true toxicity of the food supply in regards to fluoride chemicals. According to fluoride expert Jeff Green, many non-organic foods contain extremely high levels of fluoride because of the pesticide chemicals sprayed on them -- and in some cases, non-organic produce contains up to 180 times the amount of fluoride found in tap water.

Fluoride-based pesticide chemicals such as cryolite (sodium hexafluoroaluminate) are commonly used on non-organic food crops because they are highly effective at both killing pests and protecting crops against pest damage. But these same chemicals tend to persist in, and on, produce, where unsuspecting consumers regularly consume them with their everyday meals. According to Green, about one-third of the average person's fluoride exposure comes from non-organic food grown using fluoride chemicals.

"Cryolite is actually sodium aluminum fluoride ... this sodium aluminum fluoride is especially effective at killing bugs," says Green. "It's also very sticky, so when they spray it, it's more likely to stick on your produce, unless you're ... really working at trying to get it off of it."

Many common fruits, vegetables loaded with fluoride 

Citrus fruits, it turns out, are allowed by law to be contaminated with up to 95 parts per million (ppm) of sodium aluminum fluoride, while potatoes are permitted to have up to 22 ppm on the outside skin, and two ppm on the inside flesh. Raisins are allowed to have 55 ppm of the chemical, while romaine lettuce can have up to 40 ppm. But perhaps the worst offender is iceberg lettuce, which is allowed to have a whopping 180 ppm of sodium aluminum fluoride, or 180 times the amount of fluoride typically added to municipal water supplies.

Conventional cereals, which are often made with pesticide-ridden grains, tend to contain high levels of fluoride as well. According to Green, tests have revealed that the popular breakfast cereal Wheaties, for instance, contains an average 10 ppm of fluoride, while Post Shredded Wheat contains 9.4 ppm. Conventional juices made using highly-fluoridated fruits such as grapes, apples, and cranberries also tend to test high for fluoride as well.

"As a result of fluoride-based pesticide residues on produce, researchers are finding that lettuce, tomatoes, cabbage, raisins and other common foods are also subject to even higher exposure levels than found in fluoridated water," wrote Green in a piece entitled "Hidden Fluoride in our Food." "The common pesticide cryolite (sodium aluminum fluoride containing both aluminum and fluoride) is found at alarmingly high rates in foods that easily absorb chemicals, such as potato skins, white grapes and strawberries."

Combined fluoride exposures subject the average person to 700 times the maximum government threshold for fluoride 

What this all means is that the average person's cumulative exposure to fluoride from food, beverages, personal care products, and water is up to seven times the recommended maximum level, according to a government-compiled toxicological profile. Fluoride ions are smaller than water molecules, after all, which means they easily pass through the natural filtration mechanisms found in many fruits and vegetables, not to mention water filtration systems, the vast majority of which are incapable of filtering out fluoride ions.

You can read Green's full fluoride in food paper here: http://elearning.zaou.ac.zm

Sources for this article include:

http://naturalsociety.com

http://www.naturalnews.com/fluoride.html

http://science.naturalnews.com/fluoride.html

Why GMOs Can Never be Safe

© unknown

Farm Wars: Why GMOs Can Never be Safe
July 22, 2013 | ISS | Dr. May-Wan Ho

Institute of Science in Society

The new genetics tells us that organisms need to engage in natural genetic modification in order to survive; artificial genetic modification interferes fundamentally with the natural process, and it is well-nigh impossible to avoid doing so Dr Mae-Wan Ho

This report is based on invited lectures delivered in GMOs and Food Safety International Forum 2013, 9-10 July 2013, Yunnan University of Finance Economics, Kunming, Yunnan; and 13 July 2013, Gloria Plaza Hotel Beijing, China.

Power point presentation available for download here

From ivory tower academic to science activist 

I was an ivory-tower academic who had rejected mechanistic biology from the start, and kept changing fields in search of the meaning of life, until just over 20 years ago, when some of the world’s top physicists and chemists inspired me (see [1] Quantum Jazz Biology, interview) to invent a new quantum physics of the organism [2] The Rainbow and the Worm, The Physics of Organisms. Soon after that, I met remarkable people like Vandana Shiva and Chee Yokeling of the Third World Network, who taught me just how important science is in shaping people’s lives and how crucial to get the science right. To me, science is the most intimate knowledge of nature that is beautiful beyond compare; it is also reliable knowledge that enables us to live sustainably with nature, and I have dedicated my life since to defending and promoting that science.

The greatest danger of GM

One main theme of my book [3] Genetic Engineering Dream or Nightmare, the Brave New World of Bad Science and Big Business – first published by Vandana in 1997 and by Third World Network in 1998 ahead of the commercial publications and translations – is to elaborate what I consider to be the greatest danger of genetic modification: its being misguided by the ideology of genetic determinism.

The rationale and impetus for genetic engineering and genetic modification is the ‘central dogma’ of molecular biology that assumes DNA (deoxyribose nucleic acid) carries all the instructions for making an organism. Individual ‘genetic messages’ in DNA faithfully copied into RNA (ribosenucleic acid),  is then translated into a protein via a genetic code; the protein determining a particular trait, such as herbicide tolerance, or insect resistance; one gene, one character.  If it were really as simple as that, genetic modification would work perfectly. Unfortunately this simplistic picture is an illusion.

Instead of linear causal chains leading from DNA to RNA to protein and downstream biological functions, complex feed-forward and feed-back cycles interconnect organism and environment at all levels to mark and change RNA and DNA down the generations (Figure 1).  Molecular geneticists have coined the term ‘fluid genome’ by 1980. The fluid genome belongs in the organic quantum paradigm of interconnectedness, as Vandana says. Organisms work by intercommunication at every level, and not by control. Control belongs in the static mechanistic paradigm of the central dogma.

Figure 1   The new genetics of the fluid genome versus the central dogma

In order to survive, the organism needs to engage in natural genetic modification in real time, an exquisitely precise molecular dance of life in which RNA and DNA respond to, and participate fully in ‘downstream’ biological functions.  That is why organisms and ecosystems are particularly vulnerable to the crude, artificial GM RNA and DNA created by human genetic engineers. It is also why genetic modification can probably never be safe.

More importantly, the human organism shapes its own development and evolutionary future; that is why we must take responsible action to ban all environmental releases of GMOs now. Not only have GM crops failed to deliver on the many false promises, they are unsafe for health and the environment [4] (Ban GMOs Now, ISIS publication), and obstructing the shift to sustainable non-GM agriculture that’s productive, resilient and health-promoting (see [5] Food Futures Now *Organic *Sustainable *Fossil Fuel Free , ISIS/TWN publication), and precisely what we need in times of climate change.

Big difference between natural and artificial genetic modification 

A  GMO (genetically modified organism) is simply an organism with synthetic genetic material inserted into its genome.  It is made in the laboratory with sterile techniques, which also means without sex. The genome is all the genetic material of an organism (apart from those in mitochondria and chloroplasts), a copy of which is in practically every cell; and in cells with a nucleus, the genome is enclosed within the nucleus, organised into chromosome

Figure 2   What is involved in making a GMO (see text)

A transgene (Fig. 2) is a unit of the synthetic genetic material transferred into cells to make a GMO that expresses the required protein. It consists of a signal for starting the transcription, the promoter, the coding sequence determining the amino acid sequence of the protein and the signal for ending, the terminator. The three parts of the transgene are typically from different sources and variously modified with synthetic sequences that bear no relationship to any natural DNA; and this applies to each of the parts as well. More than one transgenes are usually included in a GM construct, most often, an antibiotic resistance gene to help select for cells that have taken up the GM construct.

There are big differences between natural genetic modification done by organisms themselves and the artificial genetic modification done by ‘genetic engineers’ in the lab (Table 1). Natural genetic modification is precise and predictable. It happens in the right place, at the right time without damaging the genome, and as appropriate to the organisms as a whole in relation to its environment. In contrast, artificial genetic modification is crude, imprecise, unpredictable and uncontrollable. The artificially created GM constructs have to be smuggled in by (disarmed) pathogenic bacteria and viruses that infect the cells, or otherwise forced into the cells by gene guns or electric shocks. The artificial constructs get scrambled in the process and could land anywhere in the genome, scrambling and damaging the genome in the process. Aggressive promoters are used essentially to force foreign genes to be expressed out of context.

Table 1   Contrasting natural and artificial genetic modification
Natural genetic modification	Artificial genetic modification
Precisely negotiated by the organism as a whole	Crude, imprecise, unpredictable uncontrollable
Takes place at the right place & time without damaging the genome	Forced into cells with no control over where & in what forms the artificial constructs land with much collateral damage to the genome
Appropriate to the organism as a whole in relation to its environment	Aggressive promoters force foreign genes to be expressed out of context

There is, therefore, nothing natural about artificial genetic modification done in the lab.

• It lacks the precision and finesse of the natural process
• It is greatly enhanced gene transfer without sex, also called horizontal gene transfer
• GM constructs are designed to cross species barriers and to jump into genomes with aggressive promoters to force expression of transgenes out of context
• It enables genes to be transferred between species that would never have exchanged genes otherwise
• GM constructs tend to be unstable – with weak joints from being cobbled together from different sources as well as well-known break points associated with promoters and terminators –  and hence, more prone to further horizontal gene transfer after it has integrated into the genome

Consequently, all the signs are that genetic modification is inherently hazardous.

GM inherently hazardous 

Reliable evidence obtained by scientist independent of the biotech industry fully corroborates real life experiences of farmers in the field from different parts of the world (hitherto dismissed by the scientific establishment as “anecdotal evidence”): GM feed and other exposures to GMOs invariably cause harm, regardless of the species of animal, the GM crop, or the genes and constructs involved. A full list is presented in our report [4], and it includes the most horrendous cases of excess deaths, birth defects, infertility, tumours and cancers (some of which will be presented by other scientists at this conference). The inevitable conclusion one comes to is that genetic modification is inherently hazardous, on account of the new genetics of the fluid and responsive genome. I list the categories of hazards in Table 2.

Table 2   Hazards of GMOs

1. Uncontrollable, unpredictable impacts on safety due to the genetic modification process* Scrambling the host genome* Widespread mutations* Inactivating genes* Activating genes* Creating new transcripts (RNAs) including those with regulatory functions* Creating new proteins Creating new metabolites or increasing metabolite to toxic levels* Activating dormant viruses* Creating new viruses by recombination of viral genes in GM insert with those in the host genome*

2. Toxicity of transgene protein(s) introduced (intentionally or otherwise) Transgene protein toxic* Transgene protein allergenic or immunogenic* Trangenic protein becoming allergenic or immunogenic due to processing* Unintended protein created by sequence inserted may be toxic or immunogenic

3. Effects due to the GM insert and its instability* Genetic rearrangement with further unpredictable effects* Horizontal gene transfer and recombination* Spreading antibiotic and drug resistance* Creating new viruses and bacteria that cause diseases Creating mutations in genomes of cells to which the GM insert integrate including those associated with cancer*

4. Toxicity of herbicides used with herbicide tolerant GM crops*

*Documented in scientific literature

Although the weight of evidence against the safety of GMOs is overwhelming, we are still largely in the dark as to the precise nature of the hazard(s) associated with different GMOs. Toxicity has been found for transgene products such as the Bt proteins from different strains of the soil bacteria Bacillus thuringiensis expressed in many GM crops,  while the multiple toxicities, endocrine disrupting propensity and carcinogenicity of glyphosate herbicides, heavily used with glyphosate tolerant GM crops, are no longer in doubt as reviewed in detail in our report [4]. There remains a range of hazards not so easily identified without dedicated research, even though evidence exists for most, if not all of them in the scientific literature. These are due to the unpredictability and uncontrollable nature of the genetic modification process itself (Table 2, category 1), which can activate or inactivate genes, scramble genomes, create new proteins, new nucleic acids, new metabolites, and others due to the transgenic DNA and its instability (Table 2 category 3), of horizontal gene transfer – the direct transfer of DNA into the genomes of cells – from the GMO to all other species that come into contact with the GMO.

Transgene instability & the illegality of GMOs 

Since the 1990s, some of us have raised the possibility of unintended secondary horizontal gene transfer from GMOs released into the environment with detailed reviews and reports, many of which were sent to our regulators (see [4] for references). At first the regulators and GM proponents denied that horizontal gene transfer could happen at all, or the probability is so tiny as to be practically zero. Later, when it became clear from molecular genetic analyses that rampant horizontal gene transfer has taken place in the course of evolution and in recent times, they said horizontal gene transfer is a natural process and therefore no need to worry; anti-GM is just anti-science.

Horizontal gene transfer is indeed a natural process, normally under the control of the organism itself, which is why GM DNA is such a threat. On account of its increase propensity for horizontal gene transfer, GM DNA can take over the natural process to gain access to the organisms’ genome regardless of whether it is appropriate or not.

The increased propensity of GM DNA for horizontal gene transfer translates into the instability of transgenic lines. Transgenes not only get silenced (no longer expressed) in successive generations, but can also become rearranged or lost. Transgene instability is an open secret buried under the permissive regulatory carpet. Independent scientists in Europe first discover that all commercially approved and hence risk assessed and molecularly characterized GM inserts were different from what was reported by the companies. Since then, at least one of them, MON 810, was found to have rearranged again, and now there is a substantial literature on transgene instability (see [4]). This is not at all surprising, given that GM DNA is unstable, and the foreign DNA does not really fit in with the whole organism, which is why transgenes tend to be silenced or lost.

The implications of transgene instability are far reaching. Transgene instability makes a mockery of the risk assessment process, because any change in transgene expression, or worse, rearrangement or movement of the transgenic DNA insert(s) would create another transgenic plant different from the one that was characterized and risk assessed. And it matters little how thoroughly the original characterization and risk assessment may have been done. The legislature should take note: unstable transgenic lines are illegal. Not only should they not be still growing commercially, they are also strictly ineligible for patent protection.

Horizontal gene transfer from GMOs does happen and often

There is now no doubt that horizontal gene transfer from GMOs does happen. For the first time, a proper study was carried out in 2012 by scientists in China, who found ampicillin resistance bacteria in all 6 of China’s major rivers [6]. Sequencing confirmed that the gene is a synthetic version derived from the laboratory, and different from the wild type. It is the same as the version present in numerous GM crops released in China commercially or in field trials (see [7] GM Antibiotic Resistance in China’s Rivers, SiS 57). The researchers suggested that horizontal gene transfer of genetically engineered plasmids may underlie the rise in antibiotic resistance in animals as well as humans.

In the only authenticated feeding trial of GM food on human volunteers carried out by scientists in the UK, the complete transgene DNA of Roundup Ready soybean was recovered from the colostomy bag in 6 out of 7 subjects after a single meal, at levels up to 3.7 % of intake. In 3 subjects, about 1 to 3 per million bacteria cultured from the contents of the colostomy bag were positive for the GM soybean transgene, showing that horizontal transfer of GM DNA had occurred; but no bacteria were found to have taken up the vastly more abundant non-transgenic soybean DNA. This is direct evidence that GM DNA has a much greater propensity for horizontal gene transfer, as I have maintained from the start [3].

It is now clear that horizontal transfer of GM DNA does happen, and very often. Evidence dating from the early 1990s indicates that ingested DNA in food and feed can indeed survive the digestive tract, and pass through the intestinal wall to enter the bloodstream. The digestive tract is a hotspot for horizontal gene transfer to and between bacteria and other microorganisms.

Recent evidence obtained with direct detection methods indicates that horizontal transfer of GM DNA is routinely underestimated, largely because the overwhelming majority of bacteria in the environment and particularly in the gut cannot be cultured. GM DNA transfers at high frequencies to bacteria and fungi on the surfaces of leaves and stems, helped by the plant wound hormones; and the soil around the plant roots (rhizosphere) is also a hotspot for horizontal gene transfer. Higher organisms including human beings are even more susceptible to horizontal gene transfer than bacteria, because unlike bacteria, which require sequence homology (similarity) for incorporation into the genome, higher organisms do not.

To make things worse, DNA and RNA are now known to be actively secreted by living cells in a nucleic acid intercommunication system; the nucleic acids are taken up by target cells to modify gene expression and may be integrated into the cell’s genome. The profile of the circulating nucleic acids changes according to states of health and disease. Cancer cells use the system to spread cancer around the body. This nucleic acid intercom leaves the body very vulnerable to GM DNA and RNA, because they can take over the system for horizontal gene transfer into cells of all tissues including germ cells.

One type of nucleic acids, the microRNAs (miRNAs), are specifically involved in gene silencing via a vastly complex and flexible process that changes according to the environmental context. Consequently, GMOs based on miRNAs have many potentially adverse off-target effects, which are radically unpredictable and uncontrollable [8] RNA Interference “Complex and Flexible” & Beyond Control, SiS 59).

Dangers of GM DNA and its horizontal transfer 

What are the dangers of GM DNA from horizontal gene transfer?  Horizontal transfer of DNA into the genome of cells per se is harmful, but there are extra dangers from the genes or genetic signals in the GM DNA, and also from the vector used in delivering the transgene(s).

· GM DNA jumping into genomes  cause ‘insertion mutagenesis’ that can lead to cancer, or activate dormant viruses that cause diseases

· GM DNA often contains antibiotic resistance genes that can spread to pathogenic bacteria and make infections untreatable

· Horizontal transfer and recombination of GM DNA is a main route for creating new viruses & bacteria that cause diseases

· The CaMV 35S promoter, widely used in GM DNA for crops on the mistaken assumption that it works only in plants, actually works in practically all living species including bacteria and human cells; recent research also suggests it may enhance the multiplication of disease-associated viruses including HIV (human immunodeficiency virus). In addition, the promoter overlaps with a virus gene (gene VI) that inhibits gene-silencing, a crucial host defence against viral infections

· The Agrobacterium vector, most widely used for creating GM plants is found to transfer genes also to fungi and human cells, and to share genetic signals for gene transfer with common bacteria in the environment. In addition, the Agrobacterium bacteria and its gene transfer vector tend to remain in the GM crops created, constituting a ready route for horizontal gene transfer to all organisms that come into contact with the GMO or the soil on which GM crops are grown. In 2008, Agrobacterium was linked to the outbreak of Morgellons disease. The Centers for Disease Control in the US launched an investigation but failed to investigate the link to Agrobacterium.

The full story of what I have tried to convey is in the final chapter of our report [4] with more than 140 references for that chapter alone. I hope this convinces you to avoid GMOs as far as possible; and especially don’t let your children eat GM food.  We must ban further environmental releases while we recall and destroy existing ones. We can’t wait for our central governments, or the European Union, or the United Nations to do that. Ban them from your home, your local community, your fields, your village, your town, your city, your province. The governments will follow your lead.

It is often said that GMOs once released is uncontrollable. But nothing is really controllable in the new fluid-genome organic paradigm. Fortunately, organisms are resilient, and able to heal themselves, and ecosystems are like organisms [2]; once we stop releasing GMOs and stop insulting them with other practices of industrial monoculture, ecosystems can recover and regain their health and productivity under sustainable agro-ecological farming [5]. That’s all the more reason for us to stop GMOs now; before it is really too late.

References

1. Riley D, McCraty R, and Snyder S. Quantum jazz biology, Mae-Wan Ho, Pioneering work in understanding life. Science in Society 47, 4-9, 2010.
2. Ho MW. The Rainbow and the Worm, the Physics of Organisms, World Scientific, 1993, 2nd edition, 1998, 3rd enlarged edition, 2008, Singapore and London, http://www.i-sis.org.uk/rnbwwrm.php
3. Ho MW. Genetic Engineering Dream of Nightmare? The Brave New World of Bad Science and Big Business, Third World Network, Gateway Books, MacMillan, Continuum, Penang, Malaysia, Bath, UK, Dublin, Ireland, New York, USA, 1998, 1999, 2007 (reprint with extended Introduction). http://www.i-sis.orucg.uk/genet.php
4. Ho MW and Sirinathsinghji E. Ban GMOs Now, ISIS Report, 2013, http://www.i-sis.org.uk/Ban_GMOs_Now_-_Special_ISIS_Report.php
5. Ho MW, Burcher S, Lim LC, Cummins J. et al. Food Futures Now, Organic, Sustainable, Fossil Fuel Free, ISIS/TWN, London/Penang, 2008. http://www.i-sis.org.uk/foodFutures.php
6. Chen J, Jin M, Qiu ZG, Guo C, Chen ZL, Shen ZQ, Wang XW, Li JW. A survey of drug resistance bla genes originating from synthetic plasmid vectors in six Chinese rivers. Environmental Science & Technology 2012, 46, 13448-54.
7. Sirinathsinghji E. GM antibiotic resistance in China’s rivers. Science in Society 57, 6-7, 2013.
8. Ho MW. RNA interference “complex and flexible” & beyond control. Science In Society 59 (to appear).

Please circulate widely and repost, but you must give the URL of the original and preserve all the links back to articles on our website. If you find this report useful, please support ISIS by subscribing to our magazine Science in Society, and encourage your friends to do so. Or have a look at the ISIS bookstore for other publications.

s.  Each chromosome unwinds into long threads of chromatin, consisting of proteins coating the double helix DNA. Strip off the proteins, and the DNA can be chopped and changed and recombined in test tubes, copied, amplified, and transferred into any organism, and that is what artificial genetic engineering and genetic modification involves (Figure 2).

We’re Here in This Reality to Learn About Who We Are

We’re Here in This Reality to Learn About Who We Are
July 21, 2013 | Waking Times | Angela Pritchard

What is life for? So many things seem important; there are so many things to do. All of them are vying for our attention, and our interests drive our lives via the many seemingly small and insignificant choices we make each day.

But what is it that is ultimately important? Why does this world, with all its limitations, struggle, opposition, and darkness exist? I believe the answer is fundamentally quite simple—that this world exists for us (consciousness) to learn about who we are. The ancients called this self-knowledge.

The ever increasing number of recorded near-death experiences (NDEs) provide some of the most compelling evidence for this. Floating away from their bodies, no longer constrained by the physical world and soaring into the majesty of an eternal and spiritual realm, the experiences of those who have died and been sent back share many consistent and common themes.

All of a sudden, the career, the kids, the TV, the projects they were working on are totally gone, and many are faced with what is called a “life review” in which they experience every moment of their life all over again, but feeling in a profound way not only what they went through, but also how their own actions made others feel. This learning is the sum total of what they took from the life they’d left behind.

What was important was not what they’d learnt from reading or degrees, or watching videos or the news, but from their interactions with others. Most of all—how they had treated those around them. It’s easy to get caught in the events of life and to miss what is really important; it’s easy to go off on tangents of just acquiring intellectual knowledge and information (even of a spiritual kind), and feel a sense of progress. But an intellectual knowledge is totally different from self-knowledge, which is based on conscious experience.

In NDEs there are no congratulations for becoming a bestseller, and no one else to blame for whatever they did or didn’t do. There is no special treatment for the famous or the expert – everyone is graded by their level of consciousness.

Many who’ve had an NDE also describe experiencing an understanding and knowledge of the universe from a spiritual perspective that was beyond words, and that this understanding was instantaneous. It becomes apparent then, that the understanding they had to get in life was not even about the universe itself, but about who they are.


 This video interviews a number of people who had an near-death experience, with many of them recalling a life review and being guided as to what was important in their lives.
 
Life is a school for consciousness; sometimes people from NDEs are told to go back to learn and do more. The higher part of our being has chosen for us to be here, whatever our circumstance, and our job while we’re here is to learn about ourselves and realize our full inner potential. It is the one type of understanding that can’t be gained anywhere else or in any other way, and is what this world is for. The understanding of the world around us only serves as a mirror in which we can see ourselves more clearly.

 Like any school, life has different grades and levels, and someone can progress to higher and higher levels of learning the more they grow in consciousness (and all its qualities like love and peace); graduation from this school of life is called enlightenment, but the learning is infinite. The interactions we have each day are what we are being graded on. How we spend our day, is how we spend our year, and how we spend our life; it’s important to get it right and actively determine where we are headed through our own learning.

The struggle against darkness in the world, and the wish to spread the light of truth, brings even greater opportunities for learning as well as creating them for others too. Someone working for truth in the world, for example, is going to learn more about who they are as well as help others to realize the same, than someone who spends hours in front of a television and even shut away in a meditation room.

Today, is an important day. There is something each of us has to take from it right now and use in the eternal journey of our consciousness.

[Jesus said] Now, since it has been said that you are my twin and true companion, examine yourself, and learn who you are, in what way you exist, and how you will come to be. Since you will be called my brother, it is not fitting that you be ignorant of yourself. And I know that you have understood, because you had already understood that I am the knowledge of the truth. So while you accompany me, although you are uncomprehending, you have (in fact) already come to know, and you will be called ‘the one who knows himself’. For he who has not known himself has known nothing, but he who has known himself has at the same time already achieved knowledge about the depth of the all.
~ Jesus to Thomas from The Book of Thomas the Contender
His disciples asked him and said to him, “Do you want us to fast? How should we pray? Should we give to charity? What diet should we observe?” Jesus said, “Don’t lie, and don’t do what you hate, because all things are disclosed before heaven. After all, there is nothing hidden that will not be revealed, and there is nothing covered up that will remain undisclosed.”
~ The Gospel of Thomas

About the Author

Angela Pritchard is the author of a number of books on out-of-body experiences, dreams, self-knowledge, and esoteric wisdom including A Course in Astral Travel and Dreams which became a bestseller in its genre. His book Gazing into the Eternal was finalist in the Best Book Awards 2009 in spirituality, and he has appeared on over 60 radio and television programs internationally.

Please visit her excellent website, Belsebuub.com.