Advert of woman's breasts causes 500 car crashes in 24 hours

by Yahoo7 and Agencies
Yahoo Philippines

blue strip across the nipples

An advertisement showing a woman's bare breasts has reportedly caused more than 500 accidents in a single day after a poorly-thought out promotional campaign.

The photograph shows a woman cupping her breasts with her hand, with a thin blue strip across the nipples.

It was placed on the side of 30 vans in Moscow, Russia.

The advert simply read: 'They attract'.

However, as soon as the vans hit the city’s streets, cars started crashing into one another.

It is thought 517 accidents happened in total.

One of the motorists affected was 35-year-old Ildar Yuriev.

"I was on my way to a business meeting when I saw this truck with a huge photo of breasts on its side go by," he said.

"Then I was hit by the car behind who said he had been distracted by the truck."

The company behind the sign has since said it will offer compensation to all those who crashed because of the advert.

5 Warning Signs of Skin Cancer

by Sandeep Godiyal
Natural News

Scratch Itch Skin

Skin cancer is one of the most common types of cancer and millions of people across the world are diagnosed with it each year. It can take the form of basal or squamous cell cancer or melanoma, the rarest form of skin cancer but also the most deadly. It can also be anywhere on your body, not just the arms, legs or back, as many people think. The good news is that it is very treatable if caught early. Below is what is known as the ABCDE criteria to help you decide if your mole or pigment spot should be checked by a health professional.

A: “Asymmetry”

Your mole or spot is symmetrical if, were you to cut it in half, the two sides would be mirror images of one another. If, on the other hand, the area is asymmetrical or lop-sided, this could be an early warning sign that it is cancerous.

B: “Border”

Check out the border of your mole or spot. If the border or edge of the spot is well-defined and clear, that is a good sign that it is benign. If, however, the border is irregular, has a scalloped edge or it just poorly defined, this is another sign that you need to go into a health professional immediately to have them check it out.

C: “Coloration”

If your mole is a one color – usually a solid brown – this is normal. On the other hand, if moles have a color that varies in shade from one area to another or have different colors – such as blues, reds, whites, or blacks – this is also a reason to be concerned and to make an appointment with a doctor immediately for further examination.

D: “Diameter”

Size of a mole or spot is also important – in general, healthy areas should be smaller than the end of a pencil eraser. Areas that are larger than this – or an area that has grown since the last time it was checked – should also be checked out immediately. In general, melanomas are greater than six millimeters in diameter.

E: “Evolution”

Even if you have no other symptoms such as the ones mentioned above, if a spot or mole begins to change – whether it grows, changes color or adds color or alters its shape – this is another sign which requires further medical examination and possible testing.

Skin cancer takes many lives each year. However, wearing sun screen, avoiding the sun during the hottest hours of the day and wearing protective clothing are all great ways to avoid this. So is knowing the five warning signs of cancer that need to be checked out as soon as possible, since early treatment is linked to higher survival rates and better prognosis.

Ramen Noodles Connects to Chronic Disease

Ramen Noodles

While it is well-known that processed foods are not a healthy choice (and should really be avoided entirely), many specific foods in this category have not been widely analyzed as to their health pitfalls. One very popular processed food choice worldwide is instant noodles.

A new study published in The Journal of Nutrition took a closer look at the effects of instant noodle consumption, and found that they may increase the risk of metabolic syndrome. Metabolic syndrome is defined as a series of risk factors that make one more susceptible to chronic illnesses such as type 2 diabetes and heart disease.

The study consisted of analyzing the data of just over 10,000 adults who participated in the Korean National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey IV, between 2007 and 2009. Each of the participants completed a food questionnaire to determine their dietary habits. Focus was placed on the South Korean population because of their high rate of instant noodle consumption, and the nation’s recent spike in heart disease rates.

When the results of the study were analyzed, the study authors concluded, “the consumption of instant noodles was associated with increased prevalence of metabolic syndrome in women, independent of major dietary patterns.”

Specifically, eating two more more servings per week of ramen noodles or another type of instant noodle was linked to metabolic syndrome. The association was especially pronounced in women. According to Dr. Hyun Joon Shin, the primary investigator of the study, this may have to do with biological differences between men and women, as well as varying accuracies in food reporting.

Dr. Shin also hypothesizes that the bisphenol A (BPA) found in many instant noodle packagings may be connected to the higher metabolic syndrome risk that women who ate these noodles experienced. BPA has been found to interfere with estrogen function in the body.

One major reason that instant noodles were found to have these risks, for both sexes, may well be the monosodium glutamate (MSG) that many brands contain. MSG has been linked to a long list of health detriments, including headaches, numbness, depression, obesity and a higher risk of certain cancers.

On the new instant noodle study, Dr. Shin states, “this research is significant since many people are consuming instant noodles without knowing possible health risks. My hope is that this study can lay a foundation for future research about the health effects of instant noodle consumption.”

The bottom line? When it comes to instant noodles (and other processed foods, for that matter), it’s safest to stay far, far away.

- The Alternative Daily

Tattoo Ink Possibly Causing Infections

Woman Pain in Tattoo

If you're reading this, there's a good chance that you have a tattoo. After all, nearly half of the population has decided at some point in their life that it was a good idea to permanently ink an image, or special symbol, onto their skin. Many hold no regrets when it comes to their tattoos; however, others embrace them less so with age.

But now there's a new reason to rethink getting inked. Have you ever considered exactly what tattoo ink is made of? The ink is really pigment, and most are made of metal salts; however, some are made of plastics or vegetable dyes, and if organic, they're usually plant-based.

Body-art lovers have complained of scarring, allergic reactions, and phototoxic reactions (adverse reaction to light or sunlight), and depending on the type of pigment, other complications can occur. Brightly colored plastic-based pigments have been particularly problematic for some, and glow-in-the-dark tattoos can be radioactive and toxic.

FDA has not approved any tattoo pigments for injection into the skin

Tattoo parlors are regulated by the state and city, but the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) does not require manufacturers to release their ink's ingredients; doing so could supposedly give away trade secrets.

The lack of regulation is slightly unnerving considering that 36 percent of people ages 18-25 have tattoos, as do 40 percent of those 26-40 years old. That means approximately 45 million Americans have been inked, and one-third of those did so because it makes them feel "sexy."

Unfortunately, what makes you feel sexy now, could possibly make you feel sick later. The chemicals and heavy metals in tattoo ink can cause various forms of cancer, birth defects, certain mutations, and be destructive to your immune system.

Many pigments used in tattoo inks are industrial-grade colors suitable for printer ink or automobile paint

The FDA's website warns about tattoo ink possibly causing infections, allergic reactions, keloids (formation of a scar), granulomas (inflammation) and potential complications while receiving MRIs.

Although rare, some people might experience swelling or burning in the tattoo while receiving magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), according to the FDA.

A team of researchers is working with an Arkansas-based FDA laboratory to learn more about the chemistry between tattoos and the body. Chemist Paul Howard, Ph.D., with the National Center for Toxicological Research (NCTR), is investigating the "chemical composition of the inks and how they break down (metabolize) in the body."

They're also looking at the short-term and long-term safety of tattoo pigments, and how the body responds to the interaction of light with the inks.

"There have been no systematic studies of the safety of tattoo inks," said Howard, "so we are trying to ask--and answer--some fundamental questions."

Part of the team's research is to understand what happens to tattoo ink when it's exposed to sunlight and fades over time. "Where does the pigment go?" asked Howard.

Some experts theorize that body cells digest and destroy the ink, ridding themselves of bacteria and other foreign matter as a defense mechanism. Yellow 74 pigment is believed to be broken down by enzymes, or metabolized, similar to the way our bodies excrete other substances, according to NCTR research.

Sunlight breaks down the pigment Yellow 74 into colorless compounds that, while invisible, most likely still remain in the skin and could potentially be toxic.

Research has also shown that some pigment migrates from the tattoo site to the body's lymph nodes, explained Howard.

"Lymph nodes are part of the lymphatic system, a collection of fluid-carrying vessels in the body that filter out disease-causing organisms. Whether the migration of tattoo ink has health consequences or not is still unknown," states the FDA's website.

Further research is definitely needed to fully understand the effects of tattoos; however, it's worth considering next time you think about getting inked.

- by Julie Wilson of Natural News

Wi-Fi Health Dangers And What To Do About It

Wi-Fi Health Dangers

Wi-Fi is so convenient these days that is has become a common part of our daily life. We use Wi-Fi on our phones, laptops, computers, and tablets. It floats around our homes, bars, restaurants, and work environment.

But are those invisible electromagnetic fields (EMFs) coming from our technology healthy or are we under constant threat of dangerous radiation? Well actually we all know deep down that it is bad for our health, scientific results are clear and shocking, but nevertheless we are expanding our magnetic fields every day.

Wi-Fi Health Dangers

Wi-Fi is everywhere and these days more and more people are feeling its negative effects on their health. One study found that in modern and urban areas almost 40% of the people who live there have minor complaints that are linked to heavy concentrations of EMFs, while 8% suffer more serious issues.

Mild Symptoms

Maybe you may not be aware that your body is reacting to those invisible fields. Symptoms can be vague and mimic other diseases, but if you constantly struggle with the following symptoms, try and disconnect your Wi-Fi and see what happens.

- Dizziness
- Spontaneous and stubborn headaches
- Sleep disorders
- Unexplainable fatigue
- Brain fog or memory loss
- Mild feelings of depression or anxiety
- Digestive disorders

Serious Healthy Issues

Because the use of Wi-Fi is relatively new, scientist are just unraveling its negative effects. They found that EMFs might be linked to several severe health issues, especially our children and more sensitive people are at risk. Long-term exposure can lead to:

- Insomnia
- ADHD
- Reduced sperm count or infertility
- Damaging childhood development
- Birth defects
- Parkinson’s
- Chronic migraine
- Heart rhythm disorders or palpitations
- Cancer

How To Reduce The Dangers Of Wi-Fi?

Wi-Fi is something that is growing so fast. Some people estimate that the amount of hotspots is going to triple by 2015. EMFs are all around us. People around you are beaming signals straight from their pockets or purses. Stores, restaurants, and bars all offer free Wi-Fi and more homes are installing wireless routers to provide them access to the internet from everywhere in their house.

So even if you don’t have a phone that is connected to the web or not using wireless internet connections, people around you are, making it nearly impossible to avoid these harmful EMFs.

Luckily there are a few things you can do to strengthen your body and help it reject radiation or reduce the amount of radiation you send out into the world.

1. Use landlines as much as possible. Opt for a cored phone or internet connection at home or at work.
2. Don’t keep your phone in your pocket, carry it away from your body.
3. If you use your laptop, keep it off your lap.
4. If you are using your phone choose messaging over calling. It is less dangerous than holding the phone directly to your brain.
5. Keep your kids away from cell phones. Their developing bodies are more prone to the effects of Wi-Fi and EMFs.
6. Use the airplane mode whenever you can. It disables Wi-Fi and saves your battery.
7. Turn off your phone, laptop, or tablet during the night.
8. When you leave your cell phone on overnight, don’t place it on your nightstand but leave it downstairs or in another room.
9. Strengthen your immune system through a healthy and well-balanced diet. A stronger immune system enables you to reject more radiation effects.

It is impossible to avoid all radiation, but with more studies linking it to DNA damage, sleeping disorders, and cancer it is up to you to take matters in your own hands and try and reduce exposures as much as possible.

- by Amy Goodrich of Natural News Blogs

Oregon man serving prison sentence for collecting rainwater on his own property

Rainwater

An Oregon landowner has been subjected to a 30-day prison sentence for what he says was a simple act of collecting rainwater on his own property. CNS News reports that Gary Harrington was convicted of nine misdemeanors and sentenced to 30 days in prison, as well as slapped with a $1,500 fine, for diverting snow runoff and rainwater into three reservoirs on his property, a move that local officials say violates an antiquated law governing personal water use.

Known as the "Rain Main," Harrington reportedly built the reservoirs, which hold some 13 million gallons of water, for his own personal use. One of the reservoirs he stocked with largemouth bass for leisure purposes, and when wildfires emerge in the area, he says the water from this and the other two reservoirs can be used for mitigatory purposes. In Harrington's mind, the operation is perfectly legal and a legitimate use of his own property.

But the state of Oregon disagrees, claiming that Harrington is actually diverting water intended for the Big Butte Creek watershed and its tributaries, which are governed by the nearby city of Medford, onto his own property. Some have even accused Harrington of hoarding natural resources that do not belong to him, insisting that he should instead allow water that runs onto his property to flow into the city's water coffers for redistribution.

"They issued me my permits," stated Harrington to CNS News about the legality of his water collection efforts. "I had my permits in hand and they retracted them just arbitrarily, basically. They took them back and said, 'No, you can't have them.' So I've been fighting it ever since."

Water controllers cite outdated 1920s law in pursuit of Harrington

State water managers, however, have cited a 1925 law that provisions exclusive ownership of all "core sources of water" by the city of Medford, not private landowners. They say Harrington's three water reservoirs are included under this provision, and that water flowing through his property belongs to the state.

But Harrington insists that his water collection efforts are legal, and that water stored on his property serves a primary purpose of dealing with frequent wildfires. Harrington also uses the water in his dwelling for non-potable purposes, similar to rain collection efforts that involve diverting water from roofs and other non-porous surfaces into barrels or storage tanks.

"I'm sacrificing my liberty so we can stand up as a country and stand for our liberty," Harrington announced before a small crowd gathered outside the Jackson County jail, prior to beginning his sentence.

Harrington had previously been fighting the state after being issued a three-year bench probation back in 2007. This probation mandated that Harrington close up his reservoirs and stop collecting water, which he shortly thereafter violated after reinstating the reservoirs. This, says the state, is the impetus behind Harrington's booking, and the reason why he was pursued so aggressively in this matter.

"Mr. Harrington has operated these three reservoirs in flagrant violation of Oregon law for more than a decade," stated Oregon Water Resources Department Deputy Director Tom Paul to the Medford Mail Tribune, as quoted by Mother Nature Network (MNN). "What we're after is compliance with Oregon water law, regardless of what the public thinks of Mr. Harrington."

According to CNS News, Harrington plans to fight his sentence tooth and nail, and has vowed not to "lay over and die." Doing so, he says, will allow the government bullies to become even bigger bullies, further threatening individual liberty in the state of Oregon.


- by Ethan A. Huff of Natural News

Infected Ebola patient being flown to Atlanta

Hazmat Suit Chemical Dangerous Virus

A patient infected with Ebola is being flown into the United States to be held for medical examination and treatment at Emory University in Atlanta, reports The Guardian. (1) "Emory University Hospital in Atlanta is set to receive a patient infected with the deadly Ebola disease currently sweeping through swaths of west Africa," the paper reports. The patient is reportedly one of the American doctors who was recently infected with the disease.

This event will make the first time in history that a level-4 biohazard infectious agent is being transported by air into a large U.S. city while still multiplying inside a living patient. This startling revelation brings up all sorts of questions that range from the gullibly hopeful to the impossibly sinister. Here are some of the thoughts going through people's minds on this right now:

Thought #1) HUH? Why are they bringing an infected Ebola patient into the USA? Do they want to start a pandemic here?

Thought #2) Hooray for Emory! They are reaching out to save the life of a brave American doctor!

Thought #3) They are going to use this guy as a human guinea pig to run medical experiments on him, hoping to produce a profitable treatment for Ebola.

Thought #4) This is commendable! There's simply better medical care in the USA and medical professionals want to save this doctor's life.

Thought #5) At what risk? Isn't transporting an infected patient by air, even in a private aircraft, just begging for a pandemic outbreak across the United States? Doesn't this risk the lives of 300 million people?

Thought #6) The Department of Defense needs the body so they can harvest newer strains of Ebola as part of their viral weaponization program.

Save the doctor!

Personally, I tend to think there are multiple layers of agendas happening here all at the same time. At the most basic level, front-line doctors and medical scientists simply want to save their colleague, and they likely believe bringing him back to the USA offers him the best chance of survival.

At the same time, we cannot refute the fact that there are drug company profit interests at stake in all this. The worse the Ebola problem becomes, the more money can be made from future Ebola vaccines or anti-viral treatment drugs. We already know one company called Tekmira has already been awarded a $140m contract by the Department of Defense for its Ebola drug development program.

At an even spookier level, we also know that Ebola is one of the most easily weaponized viruses on the planet. We also know the U.S. Department of Defense has already developed weaponized strains of Ebola and keeps them supercooled in a level-4 biohazard facility somewhere. This is justified on the grounds of "national defense," of course, just in case the survival of the nation one day depends on deploying a global killer virus on enemy territory, I suppose.

You can bet blood samples from this patient will be shared with Pentagon virologists, just in case it's some new strain with a mutation that makes it an even better bioweapon than what the military already has.

At what risk?

Nobody argues with the compassionate idea of saving the life of an American doctor. The man put his life on the line for others, and he deserves our best efforts to save his. My prayers are with him as he struggles to overcome this terrible disease.

At the same time, we must all very carefully consider the risks associated with intentionally bringing Ebola into the USA, transporting it across a large body of water in which the virus could never survive on its own. By transporting this patient into North America, U.S. health authorities may have just followed the steps the virus "wanted" them to follow.

What happens if someone makes a mistake during this patient transfer and the virus gets loose? The proof that mistakes can happen even among well-meaning doctors is readily apparent in the fact that this well-meaning doctor sadly became infected himself. He obviously did not intend to become infected with Ebola. Thus, even medically-trained personnel can and will underestimate the ability of this Ebola strain to spread.

What happens if there is an air transport accident? Suppose the jet experiences a critical flight systems failure and barrel rolls into the forests of Georgia? The chance of this happening may seem very, very small but it is not zero. And if it happens, then suddenly we have Ebola on the loose in Georgia, possibly spreading across the streets of Atlanta.

What happens if a terrorist organization operating inside U.S. borders stages some sort of raid or attack on the Emory University isolation room for the sole purpose of acquiring (and then deploying) Ebola as a bioweapon? Is this doctor's room going to be guarded by Special Forces teams to prevent this? What security will exist around this patient?

What happens if this Ebola victim infects others at Emory University who are working on him or near him? Surely there will be blood draws taking place, and blood draws and IVs involve sharp objects. Sharp objects pierce protective gloves and clothing. One little prick from a needle is all it takes for a full-blown infection to occur, and yes it has happened many times in the past with a variety of infectious agents.

Obviously, infectious disease experts are going to be extremely careful with this patient and everything he comes into contact with, but 100% containment is impossible to achieve. You might achieve 99.999% containment or even better, but the physical process of moving a doctor from an aircraft into a hospital isolation room involves a level of risk which is greater than zero. No one can honestly say there is zero chance of an Ebola outbreak occurring from this situation, because "zero" isn't a valid concept when Ebola is at your doorstep.

Why not send the medical teams to the patient instead?

Why are U.S. health authorities not sending U.S. medical teams to the infected patient instead of bringing the infected patient to America? This is not an irrational question. Why not give this doctor the advanced treatment he deserves and keep Ebola a continent away at the same time?

These are questions we should all be seriously asking right now as the future of all our lives may be impacted by these decisions. Ebola is nothing to play around with, and over-confidence in dealing with Ebola can be fatal to a great many people.

Remember, this particular strain of Ebola has already overwhelmed the full government resources of several countries in West Africa. Doctors who were fully versed in safety measures involving biohazards underestimated their own exposure and allowed themselves to become infected. This virus has already shown an ability to out-maneuver a surprising number of health experts, including one of the world's top Ebola doctors who died from the disease earlier this week. Now, Emory University infectious disease experts are bringing this virus to the continental United States, and the rest of us can only sit back and hope they haven't grossly underestimated the ability of this virus to leap from victim to victim.

Because if they're wrong, it's not just a simple matter of a doctor making another mistake: it's something that could place all our lives at risk by subjecting us to a deadly pandemic with a horrifyingly high fatality rate of 50 - 90 percent. (Interestingly, the high fatality rate actually works against the virus because it causes victims to die so quickly that they don't live long enough to spread it around. A more "successful" virus would have a much lower fatality rate of around 5% coupled with very long incubation times in infected carriers.)

The recent discovery of loose smallpox vials in CDC labs doesn't exactly give me confidence in the government's ability to handle infectious disease agents in a safe manner. As Natural News previously reported: (2)

The virus was stored recklessly in six glass vials inside a cardboard box. It was previously thought that this pathogen, "one of the most virulent infectious diseases" known to mankind, was kept only in two places, one at the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) headquarters in Atlanta, Georgia, and the other at the State Research Center of Virology and Biotechnology (VECTOR) in Novosibirsk, Russia.

- by Mike Adams of Natural News

Ebola outbreak may already be uncontrollable

Ebola Virus Attack Cell

A global outbreak of deadly Ebola is underway and has crossed national borders. One infected victim of the horrifying disease flew on international flights, vomiting on board and exposing hundreds of people to the deadly virus which can be transmitted through airborne particles. Ebola has an 8-10 day incubation period, meaning thousands of people could be carrying it right now and spreading it across the cities of the world without even knowing it.

Passengers in Hong Kong and the UK have already shown symptoms of the disease and are being tested, reports USA Today. (2) The Peace Corps has evacuated its volunteers from the region after two were exposed to Ebola. (3)

"Expert claims panic over death of U.S. man in Nigeria is 'justified'" reports the Daily Mail. (1) "He warned the spread of Ebola could become a global pandemic."

Ebola is the closest thing to real-life zombie infections

With apologies to those victims who have suffered the horrible fate of Ebola, I'm offering a medically accurate description here as a warning to everybody else. Believe me when I say you do NOT want to contract Ebola. Warning: Graphic language below.

Ebola is a gruesome disease that causes cells in the body to self-destruct, resulting in massive internal and external bleeding. In its late stages, Ebola can cause the victim to experience convulsions, vomiting and bleeding from the eyes and ears while convulsing, flinging blood all over the room and anyone standing nearby, thereby infecting those people as well. This gruesome ending is the reason Ebola spreads so effectively. The virus "weaponizes" the blood, then causes the victim to fling it around on everyone else almost like you might see depicted in some horror zombie flick.

"Haemorrhaging symptoms begin 4 - 5 days after onset, which includes hemorrhagic conjunctivitis, pharyngitis, bleeding gums, oral/lip ulceration, hematemesis, melena, hematuria, epistaxis, and vaginal bleeding," reports the Pathogen Safety Data Sheet from the Public Health Agency of Canada. (8) That same publication also explains, "There are no known antiviral treatments available for human infections."

Read that again: There are NO KNOWN TREATMENTS for human infections.

Sierra Leone's top Ebola doctor tragically died yesterday from an Ebola infection. Although well trained in infectious disease, even he underestimated the ability of this insidious killer to leap from person to person. Around half of those infected with Ebola die, making it one of the most fatal diseases known to modern medical science. And yet medical staff around the world still aren't exercising sufficient precautions when interfacing with infected patients.

Monsanto and Dept. of Defense help fund pharma company that could earn billions from Ebola treatment

There are some experimental drugs under development by pharma companies that show some promise, but nothing is commercialized yet. (9)

One fascinating development worth investigating further is that TEKMIRA Pharmaceuticals, a company working on an anti-Ebola drug, just received a $1.5 million cash infusion from none other than Monsanto. Click here to read the press release, which states "Tekmira Pharmaceuticals Corporation is a biopharmaceutical company focused on advancing novel RNAi therapeutics and providing its leading lipid nanoparticle (LNP) delivery technology to pharmaceutical partners."

The money from Monsanto is reportedly related to the company's developed of RNAi technology used in agriculture. The deal is valued at up to $86.2 million, according to the WSJ. (11)

Another press release about Tekmira reveals a $140 million contract with the U.S. military for Ebola treatment drugs:

TKM-Ebola, an anti-Ebola virus RNAi therapeutic, is being developed under a $140 million contract with the U.S. Department of Defense's Medical Countermeasure Systems BioDefense Therapeutics (MCS-BDTX) Joint Product Management Office.

Additional Tekmira partnership are listed at this Tekmira web page.

Not to invoke any charges of collusion or conspiracy here, but a whole lot of people are going to have raised eyebrows over the fact that Monsanto just happened to be giving a cash infusion to a key pharma company working on an Ebola cure right in the middle of a highly-publicized Ebola outbreak which could create huge market demand for the drugs. The fact that the U.S. Department of Defense is also involved with all this is going to have alternative news websites digging hard for additional links.

Sadly, the history of medicine reveals that drug companies, the CDC and the WHO have repeatedly played up the severity of disease outbreaks in order to promote sales of treatment drugs. I'm not saying this outbreak isn't very real and very alarming, of course. It is real. But we always have to be suspicious when windfalls profits just happen to line up for certain corporations following global outbreaks of infectious disease. Vaccine manufacturers, remember, made billions off the false swine flu scare, and tens of millions of dollars in stockpiled swine flu vaccines later had to be destroyed by the governments that panicked and purchased them.

Has air travel doomed humanity to a pandemic outbreak?

Air travel creates the "perfect storm" for Ebola to devastate humanity. It all starts with these irrefutable facts about air travel:

1) All passengers are confined to the same enclosed space.

2) All passengers are breathing THE SAME AIR.

3) Ebola can become airborne via very small particles in the air, and just a single Ebola virus riding on a dust particle is sufficient to infect a human being (see below).

4) Following the flight, infected passengers then intermingle with thousands of other people at the airport, each doing to a different unique destination somewhere else across the country or around the world.

5) The speed of air travel vastly out-paces the speed of governments being able to deploy infectious disease prevention teams.

A global pandemic wipeout from Ebola, in other words, could originate from a single person on a single international flight. And it could circle the globe in less than 48 hours.

Just one organism is sufficient to infect a new host

Just how much Ebola virus does it take to infect someone? Alarmingly, as the Public Health Agency of Canada explains, "1 - 10 aerosolized organisms are sufficient to cause infection in humans." (8)

Read that again: it takes just ONE aerosolized organism (a microscopic virus riding on a dust particle) to cause a full-blown infection in humans. This is why one man vomiting on an international flight can infect dozens or hundreds of other people all at once.

Some experts fear that has already happened. As the Daily Mail reports: (1)

Nigerian health officials are in the process of trying to trace 30,000 people, believed to be at risk of contracting the highly-infectious virus, following the death of Patrick Sawyer in Lagos. It comes as Nigerian actor Jim Lyke sparked outrage, posting a picture of himself wearing an Ebola mask while sitting in a first class airport lounge as he fled Liberia.

Dave Hodges of The Commonsense Show reports: (7)

A desperate search is on to find the hundreds of passengers who flew on the same jets as Sawyer. A total of 59 passengers and crew are estimated to have come into contact with Sawyer and effort is being made to track each individual down. There is an inherent problem with this "track down". Presumably, some of the passengers connected to other flights, which known to be the case. Let's just say for the sake of argument that only 20 people, a low estimate given the nature of the airports that Sawyer was traveling in, were connecting to other flights, the spread of the virus would quickly expand beyond any possibility of containment because in less than a half a day, nearly a half a million people would be potentially exposed. Within a matter of a couple of hours, Sawyer's infected fellow travelers would each have made contact with 200 other passengers and crew. Hours later, these flights would land and these people would go home to the friends, families and coworkers across several continents.

CBS News adds: (4)

"Witnesses say Sawyer, a 40-year-old Liberian Finance Ministry employee en route to a conference in Nigeria, was vomiting and had diarrhea aboard at least one of his flights with some 50 other passengers aboard. Ebola can be contracted from traces of feces or vomit, experts say."

American family members quarantined in Texas

A U.S. doctor named Dr. Kent Brantly has reportedly contracted Ebola. "Brantly and the couple's 3- and 5-year-old children left Liberia for a scheduled visit to the United States on July 20. Days later, Kent Brantly quarantined himself in the isolation ward of a hospital where he had been treating Ebola patients after testing positive for the disease," reports CBS News. (3)

That same story goes on to say, "Amber Brantly and the children are in Abilene, Texas, under a 21-day fever watch," which is essentially a quarantine. This means the necessary quarantine of American citizens on U.S. soil has already begun.

Nobody is yet talking about what all this might mean if a large U.S. city shows an outbreak of infections. Will the federal government use the military to quarantine an entire city? Ultimately, it must! And make no mistake: this possibility is already written up and on the books for national emergencies. One declaration of martial law is all that's required to seal off an entire U.S. city at gunpoint.

Another CBS News article reports: (4)

"If it gets into a big city, that's everybody's worse nightmare," said Dr. Tim Geisbert, a professor of microbiology and immunology at University of Texas Medical Branch, in an interview with CBS News. "It gets harder to control then. How do you quarantine a big city?"

The answer, by the way, is by deploying America's armed forces against its own citizens in a domestic national emergency scenario. Everybody in the federal government already knows that. It's only the mainstream media that pretends such plans don't already exist.

Ebola detection kits deployed to all 50 U.S. states

Although the federal government's official reaction to all this is low-key, in truth the U.S. government is rapidly preparing for the possibility of an Ebola outbreak reaching the continental USA.

As reported above, the U.S. Department of Defense already has a $140 million contract awarded to Tekmira for its Ebola treatment drugs.

Additionally, as SHTFplan.com reports: (5)

The Department of Defense informed Congress that it has deployed biological diagnostic systems to National Guard support teams in all 50 states, according to a report published by the Committee on Armed Services. Some 340 Joint Biological Agent Identification and Diagnostic System (JBAIDS) units have thus far been given to emergency response personnel. The systems are "rapid, reliable, and [provide] simultaneous identification of specific biological agents and pathogens."

On one hand, we might all applaud the government's preparedness actions in all this. It's smart to have diagnostic systems deployed nationwide, of course. But it begs the question: When was the government planning on telling the public about all this? Probably never. There's no sense in causing a panic when half the people won't survive an outbreak anyway, they figure.

The perfect bioweapon against humanity?

I also need to make you urgently aware that Ebola is a "perfect" bioweapon. Because of its ability to survive storage and still function many days, weeks or years later, it could be very easily harvested from infected victims and then preserved using nothing more than a common food dehydrator.

As the Public Health Agency of Canada explains: (8)

The virus can survive in liquid or dried material for a number of days (23). Infectivity is found to be stable at room temperature or at 4 (C) for several days, and indefinitely stable at -70 C.

To translate this into laymen's terms, this means the Ebola virus can be:

• Stored in a liquid vial and easily smuggled across international borders.

• Dehydrated and stored in a dried state, then easily smuggled.

• Frozen at very low temperatures where it remains viable indefinitely.

Once dried, contained or frozen, Ebola pathogens can be smuggled into target countries with ridiculous ease. In the United States, for example, people can literally walk right through our Southern open borders with zero security whatsoever.

Open borders is an open invitation for bioweapons terrorism

Once inside the target country, a bioweapons terrorist could then easily infect people in public transit hubs such as subway stations, airports, bus stations and so on. Unfortunately, spraying a few Ebola particles into people's faces is ridiculously easy, especially if the terrorist carrying out the activities decides he is on a suicide mission and doesn't care about self-exposure.

An outbreak of Ebola in a major U.S. city would quite literally threaten the public health of the entire nation. That's why an "open borders" policy in the middle of a global Ebola outbreak is unconscionable from the point of view of public health. CDC officials must be tearing their hair out over this issue.

Think about it: America is a country where public health officials freak out and go crazy when two children acquire whooping cough in a public school in Maryland. But when tens of thousands of people are streaming into the country, unbounded, with near-zero medical scrutiny in the middle of an international Ebola outbreak, federal officials do almost nothing at all. If there is an Ebola outbreak in the U.S., this is most likely how it will arrive.

- by Mike Adams of Natural News

Strawberries proven to block mercury in fish

Fish and Strawberries

As part of my ongoing scientific research into heavy metals, elemental retention and metals capturing (see explanatory videos here), I have identified and documented anti-heavy-metals substances which have a remarkable natural affinity for binding with and "capturing" heavy metals.

This is especially important because of all the mercury found in certain types of fish. The FDA has recently warned that expectant mothers should eat fewer servings of the kind of fish that contain the highest mercury levels, yet the agency did not empower those women with any real solutions to blocking mercury absorption during digestion.

I'm currently the only private-sector food contamination researcher in the world who is actively developing these defensive solutions for the public. Recently, I developed and launched Heavy Metals Defense, a dietary supplement that binds with lead, cadmium, mercury, arsenic and other metals. I'm also publicly sharing research results like those described in this article, where simple dietary strategies can help protect men, women and children from dietary mercury and other heavy metals.

That's why I humbly ask that you share this article with as many people as possible, and especially share the chart below which describes the most effective natural foods and dietary substances for binding with mercury.

This information can protect your health and help save your life

What I'm about to share with you here are lifesaving secrets which can help protect you and your children from toxic dietary substances. Why does this matter? Because we are finding and documenting heavy metals in all sorts of dietary products, including organic foods, protein supplements, herbal supplements, beverages, vitamin pills and more. Much of what health-conscious people are eating today is contaminated with mercury, lead, cadmium and even tungsten as we have shown in related research.

Fortunately, there are ways to protect yourself from these toxic heavy metals during digestion. The secret to all this is found in certain natural substances which bind with, capture and help eliminate heavy metals from your digestive tract, preventing you from reabsorbing them.

Here at the Natural News Forensic Food Lab, I have spearheaded the pioneering research that searches for and documents these substances. So far, I've tested over 1,000 candidate substances for these metals capturing properties, and I've been able to identify many winners which are remarkably effective. One of my many goals with this research is to share these discoveries with the world so that lives can be protected and even saved.

How to easily (and cheaply) capture dietary mercury

Mercury is the most easily-captured heavy metal of all. In any laboratory environment, mercury is well known to be a "sticky" element because it sticks to instrument tubing and vials. If I place a known quantity of mercury in a vial of nitric acid and water, for example, a measurement of the vial shows less mercury than should be present because some of that mercury sticks to the walls of the very instrument used to carry out the testing.

Interestingly, it turns out that mercury is also "sticks" to certain dietary fibers. In particular, my research has found that insoluble fruit fibers are extremely effective at capturing mercury during digestion. Mercury is unique in this way, as such fibers are very poor at binding with lead, cadmium, arsenic and other metals. But they stick to mercury like glue.

As part of my research into this phenomenon, I tested many dietary fibers, including psyllium husk fiber, guar gum, vegetable fibers and fruit fibers. The most effective fruit fiber of all was -- believe it or not -- strawberry fibers. (See full list below for the mercury binding effectiveness of various foods.)

Until today, nobody has known this seemingly simple fact, and even I didn't know it until I conducted this research. Now, I'm freely passing on the knowledge to you in the hopes that you will share it with others: Eat strawberries to block dietary mercury!

Captures over 95% of dietary mercury

In my tests, strawberries were able to capture over 95% of all the mercury added to the gastric acid solution in a human digestion simulator.

This effect was also confirmed for freeze-dried strawberries but not strawberry juice because pure juice lacks fibers (pulp).

Freezed-dried Half StrawberriesWhy strawberries? Because strawberries are the only common fruit with seeds on the outside. Under a microscope, you can see that each tiny strawberry seed is connected to the center of the strawberry via a bundle of plant fibers. These fibers, it turns out, are incredibly strong and are not easily digested in human digestion. They pass through you largely intact, much like psyllium husk fibers or insoluble vegetable fibers.

Isolated under a microscope, these strawberry fibers are also translucent, by the way. And what's really amazing is that they even resist digestion with nitric acid. Somehow, these fibers are amazingly strong and resilient, yet nearly invisible to the naked eye.

In the gastrointestinal tract, they function as "mercury sponges" that mop up mercury with amazing efficiency.

Even better than green grasses

In my laboratory testing, strawberries worked even better at binding to mercury than green grasses such as barley grass or wheat grass (see the full chart below).

This is great news for those who want healthy eating options which are also great-tasting. Simply eat some strawberries with your meal to mop up most of the mercury found in whatever else you ate (such as sushi, tuna, ocean fish, etc.).

If you don't like strawberries, you can use other fruits such as citrus fruits (eaten raw and whole, of course, with all the fibers intact). The next best fruits after strawberries are citrus fruits, followed by apples and pears.

Peanut butter even better than strawberries!

You'll probably find this fascinating, but peanut butter was even better than strawberries at binding with mercury, turning in an amazing 96% efficiency score at capturing dietary mercury. Apparently, the "stickiness" of peanut butter really gels with the stickiness of mercury. How about a tuna fish peanut butter and jelly sandwich?

Care to guess what was even better than peanut butter? Hemp protein.

I know, it seems counterintuitive. But I confirmed the results with several different hemp protein brands. All hemp proteins have a powerful "anti mercury effect." They capture around 98% of dietary mercury.

There was only one substance, however, that was even more powerful than strawberries, peanut butter and hemp protein. That substance is Clean Chlorella, our in-house chlorella brand which is so free of heavy metals that it seems to attract them like crazy. And just so you don't think I'm merely plugging our own product, it turns out that all chlorella products we tested were very good at capturing mercury, with effectiveness ranging from 93% to 99%.

Eat strawberries with all the following foods

Here's the practical upshot of all this: When you're eating ocean fish, tuna fish, seafood or sushi, you're probably eating mercury. We even found mercury in seafood snacks and pet treats.

How do you protect yourself from that mercury? Eat some fresh, whole strawberries with your meal. Or if you don't like strawberries, eat some peanut butter, hemp protein or take some chlorella. If you can't get any of those, eat a salad and chew it really well to loosen up the fibers and thereby increase their "stickiness" to mercury.

My research has revealed that eating ocean fish or seafood without something to mop up the mercury can be very toxic and dangerous to your health because you absorb the mercury through your intestinal walls. But eating ocean fish or seafood together with strawberries is extremely safe because virtually none of the mercury gets absorbed during digestion. The strawberries make your entire meal safer to consume!

And isn't that what we've already known about meals, anyway? Eat whole, fresh fruit or greens with every meal and you'll be a whole lot healthier. To do this in an easy-to-carry portable format, get some freeze-dried whole strawberries and take those with you to lunch (or on the airplane).

All this explains why I now carry freeze-dried strawberries and chlorella with me when I travel. Even if I'm forced to eat a less-than-healthy meal at a restaurant, I can eat some strawberries or chlorella with the meal and know I'm eliminating mercury instead of absorbing it. At many restaurants, you can even find strawberries at the salad bar. So chow down on some fresh fruit!

Mercury binding and capturing: Research results from the Natural News Forensic Food Lab

This list shows the reduction in mercury achieved by each substance I tested, using a proprietary Metals Capturing Capacity protocol combined with ICP-MS analytical instrumentation. When you share this list, please credit Mike Adams at NaturalNews.com as the source, as this is original research conducted at great cost and without any government grants whatsoever.

- by Mike Adams of NaturalNews.com

Scientists ready to create genetically modified babies from three parents

Baby DNA Womb Scan Genes

Pending approval from the appropriate regulatory authorities, biotech scientists are gearing up to start manufacturing genetically modified (GM) human babies within the next two years, according to BBC News. A novel form of in vitro fertilization (IVF) that involves combining the eggs of two different women with the sperm of one man could soon be made publicly available as a way to prevent deadly mitochondrial diseases.

The body's energy powerhouses, mitochondria are absolutely essential for life. When they don't work properly, a person is unable to manufacture enough energy to function properly, leading to muscle weakness and loss, heart failure, blindness, and potentially even death. But reconstructing human embryos using science could provide a viable solution.

A scientific panel assembled by the Human Fertilization and Embryology Authority (HFEA) in the U.K. recently took a closer look at the technology to assess its safety. While it was unable to determine without a shadow of a doubt that the process is safe, the panel claims to have observed positive developments when the unhealthy mitochondria of the actual parents was replaced that of the donor parents.

"The direction of travel still suggests that it is all safe, but we don't know what's around the corner so we're being a little cautious," stated Professor Robin Lovell-Badge from the Medical Research Council (MRC), which was in charge of the research.

According to reports, a so-called "three person" baby is constructed by fertilizing two different sets of eggs with the same sperm. Pronuclei from the baby's actual parents, which contains the appropriate genetic information, is extracted from both embryos, and only the actual parents' is kept. This pronuclei is added back into the donor embryo, and the resulting embryo is implanted back into the mother's womb.


Will mutated mitochondria from GMO babies be passed from generation to generation?

In theory, the concept sounds like a viable way to ensure that a child has the best possible chance at living a healthy life. But scientists are unsure whether or not it can be accomplished this easily, as mutated mitochondria could end up being transferred in the process.

"Are these techniques safe in humans? We won't know that until it's actually done in humans," stated Prof. Andy Greenfield, chair of the scientific review panel, to reporters, noting that safety is "not a straightforward issue."

"Until a healthy baby is born we cannot say 100 percent that these techniques are safe," he added. "If you think back to when IVF was a new technology, all of these questions were asked before IVF."

Since mitochondria come with their own unique DNA sets, babies born from three people instead of two will have an additional set of DNA. The resulting gene expressions from this DNA cocktail could lead to unforeseen health problems in children that receive it, something that will remain unknown until the procedure is actually initiated.

"This research is, by definition, eugenics and will inevitably be used for convenience -- that is its raison d'etre," wrote one BBC News commenter about the issue. "The idea that you can, or should, cure every disability implies rejection of the existence of disability. What's next: 'cure' the elderly of their burdens with painless euthanasia?"

Surprisingly, scientists in the U.S. seem to lean more in this direction, as a scientific panel here in the states came to a much different conclusion about the technology. According to The Verge, a domestic panel back in February found that the safety of IVF from three parents is both inconclusive and lacking, which will hopefully bar its regulatory approval.

- Ethan A. Huff of NaturalNews.com

Between 300 to 400 doctors commit suicide in the United States every year

Doctors commit suicide

According to the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention, between 300 to 400 doctors kill themselves annually in the United States. Suicide rates among male doctors are 70 percent higher when compared to males in other professions, while suicide rates among female doctors are a whopping 250 to 400 percent higher when compared to females in other professions. The suicide rate among doctors is so high in the West, in fact, that "physician" earned the number 2 spot on Business Insider's list of the 19 jobs in which you're most likely to kill yourself.

What could be causing this epidemic of suicides among a people who, according to the perception of society, have reached the top of the game? Could it be the dawning realization that they're a cog in an amoral machine that deliberately keeps patients sick to continue earning profits? Well, not quite. The reasons are a little more mundane -- but they still paint a picture of a vocation which, far from being glamorous and rewarding, is actually pretty miserable and depressing for the majority of its practitioners.

Want to enjoy a fulfilling life? Don't become a doctor

Though divorce and other external factors do account for a small number of doctor suicides, most of them are the result of work-related issues. Firstly, there are the excessively long working hours. "While most practicing physicians are not working anywhere near the 80+ hours per week required by certain residency programs," claims MedFriends.org, "many specialties are well into 60 hours per week and some even approach 70 hours per week on average."

Aside from taking their toll on doctors' personal lives, these long hours often lead to serious mistakes that can affect their mental health. Indeed, an estimated 98,000 patients, including babies and children, die every year from mistakes made by doctors. Moreover, the Institute of Medicine found that 7,000 people die annually due to the sloppy handwriting of doctors.

Realizing that people are dead because of personal errors is bad enough, but the problem gets worse: mental illness is a stigma in a profession that prides itself on stoicism. This means that many doctors suffer in silence and avoid speaking about their problems to the only people who truly understand them: other doctors. "[Depression is] not a safe topic to be as open about in that profession because you're responsible for the well-being of others," says Dr. Glenn Siegel, who runs a program in Chicago that treats doctors with drug abuse and depression. "If you're admitting something like that, you're saying maybe you're not fit to do your job."

Many doctors want out

Given the excessive working hours and unpleasant working environment, it's unsurprising that many doctors either crack and commit suicide, or want to leave the profession. Programs that cater to the latter are a growing breed. For example, part-time business training programs for doctors are flourishing. Moreover, a website called the Drop Out Club, which finds doctors jobs at hedge funds and venture capital firms, also has a robust following.

Finally, there are the doctors who choose the old-fashioned route: word of mouth. According to a survey provided by The Doctor's Company, 9 out of 10 doctors in America are actively discouraging others from entering the medical profession. "The physician sentiments expressed in the [survey] are deeply concerning and disheartening," said Dr. Donald J. Palmisano, former president of the American Medical Association. "[W]e may be facing a shift from a 'calling,' which has been the hallmark for generations among physicians, that could threaten the next generation of health care professionals."

- Michael Ravensthorpe of NaturalNews.com

Real global warming could be unleashed by a hidden technology

Global Warming

Depending on whom you ask, so-called "free energy devices" are either a total hoax or a systematically suppressed technology that's being kept away from the public. There's a lot of interesting ground to cover on this subject of "over unity devices," but that's not the point of this article. Instead, let's look at an unintended side effect of free energy devices that even the free energy proponents don't usually realize exists.

And here it is: if free energy technology were to be developed and openly shared with the world, it would very rapidly lead to runaway global warming. I don't mean by emitting greenhouse gasses because obviously such devices don't burn fossil fuels. What I mean is literal, actual WARMING: the production of heat that's released into the atmosphere. Joules and BTUs, in other words.

Where would all this heat come from? From the work performed by the devices, obviously. And if these devices really produce energy from nothing (or from zero point energy, a parallel universe, or whatever), then they are introducing heat into this world that didn't exist here to begin with. "Over-unity" also means "new heat" that's dumped directly into the environment, and all physical work generates heat, which means engines, pumps, vehicles, generators and everything else that runs on free energy devices simultaneously produces heat.


Water desalination generates heat, too

Here's an example: The world's water aquifers are running dry, leading to what even the mainstream media now admits could cause "billions to starve" as global crops fail. But if free energy devices were a reality, then water would no longer be a challenge: just string every coastline with free energy desalination devices that produce fresh water to be pumped inland. Sounds great, right?

Except there's an unintended consequence: HEAT.

Desalination produces a lot of heat. After all, it's part of the process of turning ocean water into fresh water by removing the salt and minerals. A world that's producing billions of gallons of fresh water each year from free energy powered desalination plants is also a world that's producing a very large number of gigajoules of heat energy each year. Where does all that heat go? Into the environment and the atmosphere, of course, raising the temperature of the entire planet and causing global warming from a whole new perspective.

If you're a skeptical thinker, though, you might think water desalination plants alone couldn't produce enough heat to be a problem. After all, the planet loses a certain amount of heat into outer space, and only some portion of the heat generated on the planet stays on the planet. Right you are, but there's much more to this story. If free energy devices really work, then guess what everybody will drive to work? Electric automobiles recharged by over-unity devices that also generate heat.

The very act of driving your vehicle, in other words, will produce considerable excess heat even if you're driving a 100% zero emissions vehicle. The "emissions" are the heat generated by your car as you drive (using the brakes and motors produces excess heat) as well as the heat produced by the free energy devices used to charge the batteries of those cars.

In fact, if energy becomes "free," suddenly the whole world wants to build and use more free energy devices. Powering huge boats through the ocean is suddenly "free" in terms of fuel. Electric bulldozers and construction equipment can be powered at zero fuel cost, making demolition and construction remarkably cheaper. The transportation of goods across the highways becomes nearly cost-free in terms of fuel.

Every single thing currently accomplished on the planet with the help of a machine or a motor suddenly because less costly. As a result, the pursuit of such activities explodes... and not in a good way.

How free energy would destroy the planet

If you truly understand economics and human behavior, it doesn't take long to realize that free energy devices -- if they were ever truly invented and openly shared -- would destroy our natural world. How would they do that? Let me count the ways:

1) Massive population explosion due to incredibly cheap food production.

2) Explosion of residential and commercial development due to zero-cost fuels.

3) Huge increase in resource extraction (mining, fossil water, etc.) in order to supply the increasingly large population.

4) Huge growth of the number of vehicles on the road, ships in the sea and airplanes in the sky.

5) An abandonment of nearly all energy efficiency efforts as energy prices plummet to near-zero. If electricity costs nearly nothing, after all, then what motivation is there for efficient use of heaters and air conditioners? Why even bother to buy insulation?

Human civilization without limits would be extremely destructive

If you really ponder the issue, in fact, the only thing that prevents unlimited human expansion right now is the cost of energy and resources. The fact that fuel costs money -- and fuel is needed to grow food, build homes, pave parking lots, etc. -- places limits on human expansion. If that expansion is suddenly not limited, then humans, being incredibly shortsighted and stupid, will pursue a path of unlimited greed and expansion that destroys the entire natural world.

In other words, humans are not ready for free energy technology. The species has not yet shown the level of maturity and self-restraint needed to ensure responsible use of it. And even though I have long been a proponent of CLEAN energy, my broad understanding of human history, civilization and behavior leads me to the irrefutable conclusion that free energy technologies must NOT be allowed into the public domain, even if they exist, until humanity advances in maturity.

So far, humanity has only demonstrated pathetic short-term thinking and the sacrificing of future sustainability for present-day profits. That behavioral profile matches the actions of an infant, not an adult, and infants should not be allowed to play with technologically advanced toys for the same reason that children aren't sent to kindergarten with portable nukes in their backpacks.

Humanity, in other words, doesn't deserve free energy technology. The species can't be trusted with it.

Interestingly, many people also believe humans can't yet be trusted with advanced space travel technology either, because we would pollute, exploit and destroy too many neighboring planets if we could reach them more easily. This is not an irrational position. In fact, I agree with it. Until humanity grows up, it shouldn't be engaged in genetic engineering, nuclear weapons development, free energy research, terra forming or planet colonization activities of any kind.

Remember: Modern human civilization is one in which adult members of the species cry like little babies when their soccer teams fail to win. Is this really a population of wise, noble people who are ready to reach for the stars?

While I'm a proponent of free energy technology eventually being made public, it's clear that humanity isn't yet ready for it. We need to grow up a little before we unleash this profound technology on the open world.

Count your blessings that energy isn't free

All this helps explain why we should be quite happy with the fact that energy isn't free. If it were, we would destroy the natural world and human civilization along with it. Even now, with energy being relatively cheap and plentiful, we're at risk of achieving that destruction anyway.

In fact, if energy were far more expensive than it is today, humans would be forced to find a way to live more sustainably. It's simple economics. That's probably why Europeans -- who pay the highest gas prices in the world -- also happen to be the most advanced in terms of clean, renewable energy. Germany, for example, has achieved the remarkable feat of generating about HALF its electricity from renewable sources. (Extraordinary!)

Low energy consumption is wise; high energy consumption is stupid

If you think about the people you know personally, you might also realize that those who live with the lowest consumption of energy tend to be among the wisest. Living with less takes wisdom and maturity, while living large -- with a large consumption of energy -- is the trait of a society with a juvenile mentality.

The worst thing you can do for a civilization that hasn't yet learned how to live within its means is give it free energy technology. It's a lot like handing a suitcase full of cash to a meth addict, or turning over a fresh new credit card to a shopaholic teenager. Modern human civilization is addicted to energy and hasn't figured out how to conserve it or respect it, so until those lessons are learned, humans simply aren't ready for the responsibility that comes with the raw power -- literally -- of free energy.

For the record, I am fan of the late Eugene Mallove and his explorations into breakthrough science. I'm not "anti" free energy. In fact, I've written extensively about the reality of LENR research, and I was a personal friend of the late Dr. Brian O'Leary, NASA astronaut and free energy pioneer. But I'm also wise enough to know humanity isn't yet ready for any of this. We would all be wise to keep this technology carefully reserved and out of the hands of the imbecilic masses until the day comes when we can apply these incredible gifts of the universe with wisdom and maturity.

- Natural News

Is Your Bra Making You Sick?

Bra

Health experts warn that if you’re suffering from headaches, back pain or indigestion and aren’t sure why, it might be because you’re wearing an ill-fitting bra, particularly if you have large breasts. It’s estimated that as many as 80 percent of women wear a bra that doesn’t fit properly.

Bras can affect your posture, which frequently leads to back pain, indigestion and tendonitis. Straps that are too tight can also trap nerves and cause headaches.

One of the biggest problems is that women tend to overestimate cup size and underestimate the width of their back.

According to chiropractor Lorna Mills, what this means is that the straps are too big so they’re continually tightened, which then pulls the shoulders and neck down, curving the spine and creating tension and discomfort.

If the back band is too big, owner of Brava Lingerie Lin Windram says, “women tend to round their shoulders out which is bad for for the posture and may cause pain,” because it’s the back band that should support the breasts and not the shoulder straps.

Exercising in the wrong sports bra can also cause problems like skin chafing as well as damage to ligaments, which are what give the breasts their shape and position. This makes it important to be sure your sports bra is tight enough to support you around the band.

To choose the right bra, you should get fitted by a professional as breast sizes tend to change frequently – the size you wore a few years ago may not be the right one now. Be sure the straps don’t dig into your skin, but fit comfortably next to the body, and that the back band doesn’t ride up.

You should be able to get two fingers underneath along the back and one in the middle of the front. You breasts should fit well into the cups, not spilling out or leaving a gap between it and the cup.

There is another issue to be concerned with when it comes to buying a bra: chemicals. Formaldehyde in clothing is not uncommon, and several years ago women brought a class action suit against Victoria’s Secret claiming their bras caused serious rashes, hives, itching and even permanent scarring.

One woman, Roberta Ritter, who described herself as a longtime Victoria’s Secret shopper to ABC News, said, “I had the welts … very red, hot to the touch, extremely inflamed, blistery. It itched profusely. I couldn’t sleep, waking up itching.”

A law firm representing Ritter did some investigating by purchasing the same bra types named in the suit and sent them to a lab. The results showed the bras tested positive for formaldehyde, although Victoria’s Secret denied the accusation, saying that there is no formaldehyde in its bras.

Ritter’s physician diagnosed her with an allergic reaction that could have been caused by the chemical, and her attorney believes it is something in the manufacturing process that caused formaldehyde to be present upon testing.

In January of 2013, Victoria’s Secret pledged that by 2020, all of its products would be free of hazardous chemicals, although their claim seemed to be unrelated to the formaldehyde issue, referring mainly to the endocrine-system disrupting chemicals known as phthalates.

The bottom line is that the best way to avoid toxins in clothing, including bras, is to buy organic fabrics. As your underwear is the closest thing to your body, whatever is in these fabrics will leach into your skin.

While you may think you’re getting a good, high quality value from a typical Victoria’s Secret bra, which can cost $40 or even more, a simple organic cotton bra is likely going to cost much less without potentially causing harm.

Sources:
Link 1 | Link 2 | Link 3 | Link 4

Credits:
Link

Higher education levels linked to increased nearsightedness


Study Hard
Myopia - or nearsightedness - is a common condition that affects around 42% of all Americans. Now, new research suggests that higher levels of education and more years spent in school are linked with a greater prevalence and severity of the eye condition.

The research is published in Opthalmology, the journal of the American Academy of Opthalmology.

According to the organization, nearsightedness is a refractive error, whereby the eye does not bend or refract light correctly, causing close objects to look clear but distant objects to appear blurred.

Though the condition is common, the researchers - led by Dr. Alireza Mirshahi of the University Medical Center in Mainz, Germany - say nearsightedness has become even more common around the world recently, making it an increasing global health and economic worry.

For example, in developed Asian countries, myopia rates have increased to nearly 80%, and the researchers say this rapid increase suggests environmental factors may be to blame.

Not only does severe nearsightedness cause visual impairment, but it is also linked with increased risk of retinal detachment, myopic macular degeneration, premature cataracts and glaucoma.

To further investigate the relationship between nearsightedness and environmental factors, the researchers examined 4,658 Germans with myopia who were between the ages of 35-74, after excluding any subjects with cataracts or anyone who had refractive surgery in the past.

Nearsightedness gets worse for every additional year of school

Their work is known as the Gutenberg Health Study and is the first population-based study to show that environmental factors outweigh genetics when it comes to myopia development.

 Overall, their results show that as education level increased, myopia became more prevalent.

In detail, they found that 53% of university graduates were nearsighted, compared with 35% of high school graduates and 24% of subjects without a high school education.

Additionally, the team observed that people who spent more years in school were more myopic, with nearsightedness getting worse for every additional year of school. After looking at the effect of 45 genetic markers, they found them to be a much weaker factor in nearsightedness, compared with education level.

As a result of their findings, Dr. Mirshahi says children and young adults should be encouraged to go outside more often:

"Since students appear to be at a higher risk of nearsightedness, it makes sense to encourage them to spend more time outdoors as a precaution."

 Furthermore, the team notes that recent studies of children and young adults in Denmark and Asia have shown that the more time spent outside exposed to daylight, the less the prevalence and severity of nearsightedness.

Just last month, the American Academy of Opthalmology released two new studies that added to the growing evidence that spending time outdoors may help prevent or minimize nearsightedness in children.

Credits:
Link

Watching TV for over 3 hours daily could increase risk of early death


When you arrive home after a hard day's work, sometimes there is nothing better than relaxing on the sofa in front of the television. But you better not watch it for too long; 3 hours or more of TV watching a day could double the risk of premature death, according to a new study.

The research team, led by Dr. Miguel Martinez-Gonzalez of the Department of Public Health at the University of Navarra in Spain, recently published their findings in the Journal of the American Heart Association.

Past research has established a link between sedentary behavior and increased risk of health problems. Earlier this year, Medical News Today reported on a study suggesting that sedentary behavior may increase the risk of heart failure, while a 2013 study found it could even lower sperm quality among young men.

In this latest study, researchers wanted to determine how three types of sedentary behavior - television watching, computer use and driving - independently influenced the risk of death from all causes.

Adults should reduce TV watching to no more than 1-2 hours a day

To reach their findings, the team analyzed the sedentary behavior of 13,284 healthy Spanish university graduates who were an average age of 37. Participants were monitored for a median of 8.2 years.

During follow-up, 97 deaths occurred, of which 19 were from cardiovascular causes, 46 were from cancer and 32 were from other causes.

The study results revealed that participants who reported watching 3 or more hours of television each day had double the risk of early death from all causes, compared with participants who reported watching 1 hour or less of television a day.

This finding remained even after taking other factors into account that may have influenced the risk of early death.

The researchers say they found no significant link between the amount of time spent driving and using a computer and increased risk of premature death from all causes, although they note that further research is needed to better determine this finding.

According to the investigators, their study findings are significant since more than 50% of adults in the US report leading sedentary lives. A 2013 study published in JAMA also revealed that older women spend around 10 hours a day sedentary.

Martinez-Gonzalez says:

"As the population ages, sedentary behaviors will become more prevalent, especially watching television, and this poses an additional burden on the increased health problems related to aging.

Our findings suggest adults may consider increasing their physical activity, avoid long sedentary periods and reduce television watching to no longer than 1-2 hours each day."

It is not just adult health that is affected by watching television. In May, Medical News Today reported on a study suggesting that children who spend more than 2 hours in front of a TV, computer or video game each day have an increased risk of high blood pressure.

An earlier study published in JAMA Pediatrics also found that children who have TVs in their bedroom are more likely to become obese.

Credits:
Link

Cocoa Extract prevent Alzheimer's?

Cocoa Beans

More than 5 million Americans are living with Alzheimer's disease and by 2050, this number is expected to increase to 16 million. With figures like these, the race is on to find ways to prevent Alzheimer's. Now, a new study by researchers from the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai in New York, NY, finds that a cocoa extract could do just that.

The research team, led by Dr. Giulio Maria Pasinetti, a professor of neurology at the Icahn School of Medicine, found that a cocoa extract - called lavado - may reduce or block damage to nerve pathways found in patients with Alzheimer's disease. This means that symptoms of the condition - such as cognitive decline - could be prevented.

According to the investigators, lavado cocoa extract is a minimally processed cocoa that is high in polyphenols - antioxidants that are also found in fruits and vegetables. Past research has indicated that polyphenol-rich diets may reduce the risk of Alzheimer's.

With this in mind, the team wanted to see how lavado cocoa extract - alongside natural and Dutched cocoa extracts - affected disease progression.

Lavado 'reduces Aβ oligomers formation and reduces synaptic damage'

To reach their findings, recently published in the Journal of Alzheimer's Disease, the team genetically engineered mice to mimic the human form of Alzheimer's disease.

Each of the three cocoa extracts were tested on the mice, and the lavado cocoa extract was found to be the most effective against Alzheimer's. It reduced the formation of Aβ oligomers in the brains of the mice and reduced damage to synapses.

The team explains that Aβ oligomers are groups of molecules that clump together and disturb synaptic structures in the brain that are responsible for the function of memory circuits.

The Aβ oligomers activate inflammatory responses with the intention of destroying a foreign body, but they actually cause damage to the brain's own cells.

"Our data suggest that lavado cocoa extract prevents the abnormal formation of Aβ into clumped oligomeric structures, to prevent synaptic insult and eventually cognitive decline," says, Dr. Pasinetti, adding:

"Given that cognitive decline in Alzheimer's disease is thought to start decades before symptoms appear, we believe our results have broad implications for the prevention of Alzheimer's disease and dementia."

Dutched cocoa extract - which undergoes an alkalizing process known as "Dutching" to remove its acidity - did not have any beneficial effect against the formation of Aβ oligomers and synaptic damage, according to the researchers. This could be because the Dutching process reduces polyphenol levels.

"Our finding of protection against synaptic deficits by lavado cocoa extract, but not Dutched cocoa extract, strongly suggests that polyphenols are the active component that rescue synaptic transmission, since much of the polyphenol content is lost by the high alkalinity in the Dutching process," says Dr. Pasinetti.

Extract may hold potential for Alzheimer's treatment and prevention

Dr. Pasinetti says that the loss of synaptic function in the brains of Alzheimer's patients may be more likely to lead to memory loss than the loss of nerve cells, therefore reducing damage to the synapses could be a more reliable target for the development of drugs for Alzheimer's.

This study, according to the researchers, suggests that lavado cocoa extract could pave the way for such drugs, but further studies are needed to better determine how the extract works in the brain.

Furthermore, the team says it could be worth turning lavado cocoa extract into a dietary supplement, as it may provide a "safe, inexpensive and easily accessible" way to prevent Alzheimer's disease.

This is not the first time cocoa has been associated with brain health. Last year, Medical News Today reported on a study by researchers at Harvard Medical School in Boston, MA, which suggested that drinking two cups of hot chocolate a day may prevent memory decline in older adults.

And cocoa has been linked to other health benefits. A recent study published in The FASEB Journal found that dark chocolate may be good for the heart, while other research suggested chocolate may even prevent obesity and diabetes.

Our Knowledge Center article on the health benefits of chocolate reveals some of the other ways chocolate may be good for you.

Via:
Link

Top 10 Health Benefits of Avocados

Avocado
The avocado (Persea americana) is a tree native to Mexico and Central America, classified in the flowering plant family Lauraceae along with cinnamon, camphor and bay laurel. Avocado or alligator pear also refers to the fruit, botanically a large berry that contains a single seed.

Avocados are commercially valuable and are cultivated in tropical and Mediterranean climates throughout the world. They have a green-skinned, fleshy body that may be pear-shaped, egg-shaped, or spherical. Commercially, they ripen after harvesting. Trees are partially self-pollinating and often are propagated through grafting to maintain a predictable quality and quantity of the fruit.


Here are the 10 Benefits of Avocados:

Prostate Cancer Prevention
Avocados have been shown to inhibit the growth of prostate cancer.

Oral Cancer Defense
Research has shown that certain compounds in avocados are able to seek out pre-cancerous and cancerous oral cancer cells and destroy them without harming healthy cells.

Breast Cancer Protection
Avocado, like olive oil, is high in oleic acid, which has been shown to prevent breast cancer in numerous studies.

Eye Health
Avocados have more of the carotenoid lutein than any other commonly consumed fruit. Lutein protects against macular degeneration and cataracts, thus disabling age-related eye diseases.

Lower Cholesterol
Avocados are high in beta-sitosterol – a compound that has been shown to lower cholesterol levels. In a study, a group of 45 volunteers experienced an average drop in cholesterol of 17% after eating avocados for only one week.

Heart Health
One cup of avocado has 23% of the recommended daily value of folate. Studies show that people who eat diets rich in folate have a much lower incidence of heart disease than those who don’t. The vitamin E, monounsaturated fats, and glutathione in avocado are also great for your heart.

Stroke Prevention
The high levels of folate in avocado are also protective against strokes.

Better Nutrient Absorption
Research has found that certain nutrients are absorbed better when eaten with avocado. In a study, when participants had salad containing avocados, they absorbed five times the amount of carotenoids (a group of nutrients that includes lycopene and beta carotene) than those who didn’t include avocados.

Glutathione Source
Avocados are an excellent source of glutathione – an important antioxidant that researchers say is important in preventing ageing, cancer, and heart disease.

Vitamin E Powerhouse
Avocados are the best fruit source of vitamin E – an essential vitamin that protects against many diseases and helps maintains overall health.

- My Daily Alternatives