A recently-published Harvard University meta-analysis funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) has concluded that children who live in areas with highly fluoridated water have “significantly lower” IQ scores than those who live in low fluoride areas.
In a 32-page report that can be downloaded free of charge from Environmental Health Perspectives, the researchers said:
Just two days after it was reported that GlaxoSmithKline’s Pandemrix H1N1 swine flu vaccine has actually caused a whopping 800 cases of narcolepsy in children according to Reuters, a major publicity stunt for the efficacy of the flu shot as presented by CNN has crashed and burned. After receiving his very first flu shot live on air from vaccine advocate Dr. Oz in attempt to showcase the ‘safety and effectiveness of the shot’, Piers Morgan has now developed flu-like symptoms that even he and his guest have attributed to the reception of the shot.
In the January 23 interview with country music celebrity Dwight Yoakam, Piers and Dwight discuss the connection between the recent shot and his new sickness. In the interview, which can be seen below, Piers asks “…As you can tell, things are deteriorating. Is there any advice you can give me?”
Yoakam replies with a simple “Don’t ever take a flu shot again,” sparking further discussion surrounding the public injection that ultimately turned into a PR nightmare for Big Pharma. In a surprising reply, Piers says ““We’re both doing the math, so I mean, we both saw him put that thing in my arm and within 10 days I’m struck down.” It was Piers’ first flu shot in his life, according to his own testimony.
As pointed out by Adan Salazar, the sickness is also highly ironic as Piers actually questioned Dr. Oz about the so-called ‘myths’ surrounding the shot before it was administered. One such ‘myth’ was whether or not the shot could actually lead to the flu. In dialogue with Dr. Oz, Piers nervously asked:
“So the myth about these, and I’m told it’s a myth, is that you can actually get flu or flu-like symptoms simply by having the shot. Is that true?”
Dr. Oz, of course, regurgitated information provided by the CDC in stating that such an event is impossible due to the fact that the flu shot contains the dead flu virus. Dr. Oz also fails to mention that even the FDA’s own website admits that vaccines contain toxic additives like:
Antibiotics: Linked to the development of mental illness, obesity, and serious gut imbalance due to the depletion of beneficial bacteria in the gut, superbug-spawning antibiotics are used in vaccinations as an ‘additive’ as admitted by the FDA.
Formaldehyde: This of course is the known carcinogen used in the preservation of corpses by funeral homes and elsewhere. Even Cancer.gov admits that formaldehyde is a serious cancer-causing chemical, stating “Formaldehyde has been classified as a known human carcinogen (cancer-causing substance) by the International Agency for Research on Cancer…” So why is this cancer-causing substance being used an additive for vaccinations?
Aluminum: Popularly associated with Alzheimer’s disease and a bunch of other brain disorders, aluminum is used as a vaccine additive to ‘stimulate a response’ from the body.
Thimerosal: One of the most widely known additives, thimerosal is a mercury-containing substance that is unsafe at any dose. Your doctor is likely entirely misinformed on this additive, stating there is no mercury-containing thimerosal in a vaccine when even the FDA and CDC plainly state this. As stated by Dr. David Wallinga from the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy, mercury is ‘toxic in all its forms.”
Instead of giving Piers a vaccination full of these toxic additives, Dr. Oz could have simply recommended that Piers begin supplementing with high quality, inexpensive vitamin D3 — or simply take a walk around outside in a warmer climate. Even in considerably low doses, vitamin D3 has been found to flash the risk of flu development by nearly half – a much great success rate than the flu shot.
In this video this clearly obese news anchor valiantly stands up against a “bully” who pointed out that it is irresponsible for her to be a public figure given the fact that she is obese and obesity is unhealthy.
Many fat people have fallen over themselves with praise for this perceived heroine who has the backbone to stand up for her fatness. But I think the person who wrote the letter had it right.
I’m not advocating that all TV anchors need to be 100lb marathon runners, but obesity is an epidemic, especially in this country and parading this women on TV as a role model is irresponsible on the part of CBS. Near the end of the video she talks about standing up to bullies who bully you on skin color or sexual orientation, but last time I checked obesity is a choice and comes down to simple math, eat less, move more. It’s startlingly simple, yet now because this woman lacks the willpower to control her portions she gets some kind of immunity from criticism?
This tolerance bullshit is going to the extreme, and guess what? Bullies are necessary. When kids grow up with their parents, they think they can do no wrong because their parents treat them as though they are the most special person on the planet. I am not saying that is wrong, but it doesn’t give the kids an accurate assessment of themselves. Only when a bully says “hey you shithead you are loud and annoying and nobody likes you” does the kid do some self assessment and in the old days would say “hey, maybe I need to tone it down, perhaps I am annoying and the only one with the balls to tell me is this bully” Now though the kid would tell the teacher the bully would probably be executed and the kid continues on thinking he is the greatest thing since sliced bread and the “just tell the government and they will save you from all your problems” idea is reinforced in his impressionable brain.
I’m going way off topic from this fat lady in the video, but suffice to say it is not OK to be obese, it isn’t cool, and if you are fat you should want to lose weight. Society shouldn’t change to accommodate you because you can’t stop eating.
(NaturalNews) In the aftermath of the Aurora, Colorado Batman movie theater shooting, President Obama chimed in on the gun control debate yesterday, saying, “Every day, the number of young people we lose to violence is about the same as the number of people we lost in that movie theater. For every Columbine or Virginia Tech, there are dozens gunned down on the streets of Chicago or Atlanta…” (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/jul/25/obama-calls-measures-…)
What he didn’t say, however, is that every day 290 people are killed by FDA-approved prescription drugs, and that’s the conservative number published by the Journal of the American Medical Association.
As no one seems to believe these numbers are real, I’ll quote the source: The Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) Vol 284, No 4, July 26th 2000, authored by Dr Barbara Starfield, MD, MPH, of the Johns Hopkins School of Hygiene and Public Health.
That study, which is twelve years old — and drug deaths have risen considerably since then — documents 106,000 deaths per year from the “adverse effects” of FDA-approved prescription medications.
To reach this number from outbreaks of violent shootings, you’d have to see an Aurora Colorado Batman movie massacre take place every HOUR of every day, 365 days a year.
(story continues at the top link)
(NaturalNews) A recent study published in the Journal of Toxicology in Vitro has found that, even at very low levels, Monsanto’s herbicide formula Roundup destroys testosterone and ultimately leads to male infertility. The findings add to the more than 25 other diseases known to be linked to Roundup, which include DNA damage, birth defects, liver dysfunction, and cancer.
For their study, Emilie Clair and her colleagues from the Universite de Caen Basse-Normandie Institute of Biology in France tested the effects of glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup, on testicular cells from rats. Ranging in dilution from one part per million (ppm) to 10,000 ppm, which accounts for varying exposure levels in real life situations, each of the tests revealed undeniable cell toxicity caused by Roundup.
Interestingly, the findings revealed that even at one ppm, Roundup was responsible for causing severe endocrine disruption that reduced testosterone levels by 35 percent. And a one ppm exposure level is considered to be extremely low, and much lower than typical exposure levels in everyday environmental situations.
At higher exposure levels, Roundup was shown to induce testicular cell death in a little as one hour, and typically no later than 48 hours after exposure. And this is only acute toxicity, as the study did not analyze the long-term effects of continual and repeated exposure to Roundup, which has already been shown to seep into rivers and groundwater supplies.
A similar study published in the journal Reproductive Toxicology back in 2007 found similar results. In vivo tests with Roundup revealed that the ducks exposed to Roundup exhibited “alterations in the structure of the testis and epididymal (a part of the male reproductive system) region as well as in the serum levels of testosterone and estradiol, with changes in the expression of androgen receptors restricted to the testis.”
So contrary to the claims made by Monsanto, there is truly no safe exposure level to Roundup. At typical exposure levels, it has been proven to destroy human cells and cause serious reproductive harm. And at trace levels, it has been proven to severely disrupt proper hormonal function and lead to low testosterone in men.
“Because it’s a systemic pesticide and sprayed in high doses, produce and fruit and nut trees often take up the poison into the parts of the food we eat,” writes Leah Zerbe in a recent Rodale News piece on Roundup. “Three easy ways to reduce your exposure? Eat organically grown foods … [a]dopt organic lawn care techniques in your yard, and start an organic garden to further reduce your exposure to harmful chemicals.”
(NaturalNews) It takes a special kind of humility for a medical professional to admit that something he or she was taught in medical school, and has long since clung to as fact, is actually false. But a growing number of dentists from around the world, many of whom formerly supported water fluoridation, are now boldly speaking out against it as a long-held, unsubstantiated medical dogma purported to prevent tooth decay, but that actually damages health and provides no legitimate oral health benefits.
Recently, there has been intense pressure in many communities to remove fluoride chemicals from water supplies. Particularly in the US where fluoridation is quite common, many local residents have been sending information about fluoride’s dangers to their city council members, and even attending and speaking at meetings.
But what is often missing from reports about anti-fluoridation efforts is the fact that many medical professionals, including dentists, are also in agreement that fluoride ingestion is dangerous. In other words, these are not just concerned citizens without medical degrees that are raising an issue, but they are people that have been extensively educated in oral health.
“When I graduated from University, we weren’t given any information about where [fluoride] came from,” says Dentist Caree Alexander, a former Navy practitioner who also had a private dental practice for 20 years, in the documentary FIRE WATER: Australia’s Industrial Fluoridation Disgrace. “We all assumed it was [pharmaceutical-grade] calcium fluoride.”
You can watch the official full-length documentary for free at:
Other prominent dentists that have spoken out against fluoride include Dr. Thomas Connelly from New York City; Dr. Andrew Harms, former president of the Australian Dental Association; Dentist Hardy Limeback, PhD, from the University of Toronto’s Department of Preventive Dentistry; Dentist Bill Osmunson from the Fluoride Action Network (FAN); and Dentist David Kennedy from the International Academy of Oral Medicine and Toxicology (IAOMT), just to name a few.
“My [published] work showed that fluoride accumulates in the human pineal gland and lowers melatonin production in animals,” says Dentist Jennifer Luke, PhD. “I find it extraordinary that no government promoting fluoridation has chosen to pursue these worrying findings.”
Beyond simply ignoring the science surrounding fluoride’s dangers, the US government and its media pawns routinely take the offensive against those opposed to water fluoridation, slandering them as paranoid conspiracy theorists. But there is no denying that thousands of medical professionals, including dentists, are adamantly against it as well.
More than 3,790 professionals, 324 of which are dentists, have already signed FAN’s Call for an End to Water Fluoridation, which you can view here:
You can also learn more about the dangers of fluoride by visiting: