Slashdot Mirror

"And you only need five minutes of sun light to completely restore vitamin D levels in the body. kids stand outside waiting on the bus longer than that."

I know that is what we have all been taught in school in past years. The problem is it is not true. Following that advice will lead to severe health problems. Here are better recommendations:
http://www.grassrootshealth.net/recommendation

The following is closer to the truth, based roughly on what Dr. John Cannell writes on his website:
http://www.vitamindcouncil.org/about-us/our-staff0/john-j-cannell-md/john-cannell/

For a light skinned adult human in a (skimpy) bathing suit under peak noon-day sun, that person will produce about 20,000 IU vitamin D (about 30X the US RDA) in about twenty minutes. For someone with dark skin, that will take two to four hours in a bathing suit. Any excess vitamin D beyond that will be broken down into other compounds that we don't yet fully understand the significance of (but may have health value). Meanwhile, the body slowly charges its fat soluble stores of vitamin D. But you may need to do that for months to saturate the body to the point where it will have a six to nine months supply (maybe longer or shorter) where you could go the winter without supplements.

For about half the year in more Northern latitudes, your body will not make any vitamin D at any time of day because the angle of the sun through the atmosphere means too much UV-B is absorbed for it to have much affect on your skin. Similarly, outside of peak sun hours, there is much less vitamin D produced.

So, while I was taught the same thing you said growing up, that even in winter your face or hands would produce enough vitamin D to get by, it just is not true. And that has serious implications. For example:
"Blacks more likely to die from cancer because of vitamin D deficiency, study finally admits"
http://www.naturalnews.com/036181_blacks_vitamin_D_deficiency_cancer.html

And also:
http://www.vitamindcouncil.org/health-conditions/neurological-conditions/autism/introduction/

And on top of that, dermatologists and those who would sell cosmetics and sun screens scare people about sun exposure without telling them to supplement with vitamin D if they avoid the sun. And even if they told them to supplement, the US RDA is about ten times too low for adults (and in any case, you need a blood test to be sure of levels as different people respond differently to supplements). For children the RDA is also fairly low. For infants the RDA is OK. Basically, the RDA is almost the same for all these ages, but since vitamin D needs correspond somewhat to weight, that is why the child and adult levels are too low.

Conflict-of-interest is one reason the US government RDAs and other nutritional recommendations are often (but not always) so wrong, as discussed here with the USDA's recent absurd recommendations to eat meat every day:
http://www.diseaseproof.com/archives/news-usda-dont-go-meatless-not-even-one-day-a-week.html

So that is why keeping kids indoor more will destroy their health (unless they take supplemental vitamin D, and even then, we don't fully understand all the supplementation issues). Many schools have already removed recess outdoors in order to have more time for in-chair paper-pushing academic work, and yet ironically the lack of exercise and sunlight may have decreased test scores as it decreases a child's general physical and mental health.

"Schools are not going anywhere. The need for social interaction while learning is common to all peop

For all of the incidents with busts of raw milk and lemonade sales http://www.naturalnews.com/035397_Ventura_county_raw_milk_rampage.html

Why can't he be arrested under the laws too? Brewing in a building held in the public trust...
Next thing you know they will be brewing in courtrooms, libraries, and public schools.

Think of the children!

Nearly every kind of childhood snack (soda, corn chips, candy) contains corn syrup in one form or another. I'd suspect that long before anti-biotics.

http://www.princeton.edu/main/news/archive/S26/91/22K07/
http://www.naturalnews.com/036886_cattle_feed_candy_corn_syrup.html

"The man does not need the surgery, chemotherapy radiation one-two into an early grave but vitamins and nutrition. Start educating yourself about health and nutrition first before you come begging for wagon loads of money to pay for "treatment". This may not sound very sympathetic in your ears if you can't move your mind past the pink-ribbon Susan-Komen TM cancer industry programming, but it is from the viewpoint of someone who beat cancer with proper nutrition and avoiding those many many toxins they put in our food and drink."

Well, the AC got modded down to -1, plus disagreed with, but their certainly is a germ of truth in the comment. I won't agree 100% with it, though. I'd agree (based on what Dr. Fuhrman writes) that most cancer is preventable by good nutrition and lifestyle choices (especially lots more vegetables, vitamin D, iodine, fasting, avoiding refined carbs and food additives, etc.). However, once you have cancer, whether nutrition can cure it is pretty iffy. It depends on the exact nature of the cancer and other factors. Slow growing cancers are more likely to be amenable to cure or management by excellent nutrition (we are talking aggressive nutritional intervention here like Dr. Fuhrman specializes in, not just eating a few extra greens now and then). Fast growing cancers that are localized, like Steve Jobs had, are places where surgery etc. may make a lot of sense, but good nutrition may still be needed to prevent recurrences. In that sense, cancer like Steve Jobs had is not so much the *disease* but it is a *symptom* of root causes like sunlight deficiency disease (like from working indoors too much and not supplementing with vitamin D3), vegetable deficiency disease, iodine deficiency disease, toxic food excess disease, etc..

I'd still be very curious what diet style AC worked from. Certainly the Rave Diet, Dr. Fuhrman's work, Dr. Mercola's work, and many others suggest that an excellent diet does max a difference in dealing with cancer. The problem is, there is so much conflict-of-interest, group think, advertising pressure, and risk adverseness from malpractice worries in the medical community these days, that it is hard to find unbiased advice. Good nutritionally-aware doctors can be hard to find (and then hard to get appointments with), given the expense and academic qualifications requirements and limited number of slots of medical schools have created an artificial scarcity of good doctors (in part to keep their fees up).

Related:
"Doctors' woeful lack of training about nutrition dooms millions to early graves "
http://www.naturalnews.com/036702_doctors_nutrition_fatalities.html
"The largest source of funding for medical schools comes from drug companies and medical schools curricula are set by the American Medical Association (AMA). Is it any surprise that doctors are taught to treat patients primarily with drugs and surgery? Given the power of proper nutrition, doctors' inability to give informed nutrition advice surely dooms millions to early graves due to illnesses which might have been prevented or healed. It is a national health tragedy which begs to be corrected."

At the end of my comment linked below are lots of background health links that ultimately link to the science of why nutrition and lifestyle make a big difference in health outcomes:
http://www.changemakers.com/discussions/discussion-493#comment-38823

I posted other stuff in various replies to an article on IBM's Watson's involvement in cancer treatment.
http://science.slashdot.org/story/11/09/12/2059243/ibms-watson-to-help-diagnose-treat-cancer
Here is one of those:
http://science

http://www.naturalnews.com/images/Radioactive-Seawater-Impact-Map-March-2012.jpg

Do not be alarmed. Roundup will eventually kill the bees, thus minimizing cross-pollination and maximizing profits.

dont' waste my fucking time.
http://www.naturalnews.com/028245_GM_food_side_effects.html
http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2012/01/the-very-real-danger-of-genetically-modified-foods/251051/

The GPP is incorrect. The NDAA does allow indefinite detention of US citizens. I verified the language in the NDAA. And also confirmed with various explanations. Please mod the parent up and the grandparent post down.

Honest question: how is the TSA worse than it was under Bush?

VIPR.
http://www.naturalnews.com/033961_TSA_security_checkpoints.html

http://saveourbones.com/osteoporosis-milk-myth/ http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kathy-freston/lean-challenge_b_1432765.html http://www.llli.org/FAQ/bflength.html http://www.notmilk.com/ http://www.naturalnews.com/031255_milk_health.html Hell, http://lmgtfy.com/?q=why+milk+is+bad+for+humans Cow's milk is essential only for their calf, and only when they are growing, just like human breast milk for their children. It is a myth that more milk is good for our bones and yadda yadda. The USDA pushes the milk campaign to keep making money.

Here is an example for you, http://www.naturalnews.com/035315_red_wine_resveratrol_scientific_fraud.html Please note that this "scientist" was funded by public money. Funding from a pool will not change misconduct by scientist who will fake results.

Why should a corporation have to put research money into a pool that anyone can draw from? Corporations donate into areas thay are interested in. Why should an energy company spend money on researching background radiation. When people donate thy usually pick a cause; cancer, homelessness, poverty, etc. Corporation are basically doing the same thing.

So anyone who arrives at a decision contrary to popular belief is an idiot piece of shit? This isn't something cut and dried like evolution, y'know. Not everyone automatically believes every study they read, and the freedom of that belief is a basic human right. I mean, we allow people to believe in fucking magic sky fairies for chrissake (pun intended).

That exact argument was had over the bill of rights. If you read the histories and such, it seems clear to me that the Constitution was supposed to be a whitelist of government powers, rather than the Bill of Rights being a blacklist of powers...

The problem is that no document is going to stop people who want to ignore it.

The fact that the courts could find that growing food for your own consumption would affect interstate commerce (cite: http://www.naturalnews.com/030799_food_freedom_Wickard_vs_Filburn.html) shows that good lawyers can go and twist anything written down so they don't even look like they're ignoring the text.

That all said, at least with the written "blacklist" regular people do seem to notice if they are egregiously enough infringed to get worked up... Would there be anything even thought about if people had to realize "all is permissible that isn't prohibited"? Because apparently people have serious issues with that sort of thought.

I take it you are not familiar with VIPR? http://www.naturalnews.com/033961_TSA_security_checkpoints.html

I knew about the bus terminal bs. I wasn't aware of the huge funding expansion last Dec. Lets hope Congress at least looks at the legal issues, as well as the notion of spending millions to harass people getting on a greyhound or illegally searching vehicles at highway rest stops. Gestapo indeed.

Prior to 9/11 hijackings were usually intended to divert the plan or hold hostages and people rarely died. Jetliners themselves had never been used as a weapon before. The simple and expedient solution to that vulnerability was simply installing secure cockpit doors and appropriate procedures about keeping it shut. Simple and cheap.

I'm waiting for Homeland Security to start scaring us about other vulnerabilities and convincing congress to pour even more money their way. Stupid simple things like blowing up pipelines or poisening water supplies. Things that are dirt cheap to do, but our govt is willing to spend billions to prevent.

I take it you are not familiar with VIPR? http://www.naturalnews.com/033961_TSA_security_checkpoints.html

From the article: "Even some of the sharpest critics of the brain-death criteria argue that there is no possibility that donors will be in pain during the harvesting of their organs...But BHCs[beating-heart cadavers]-who don't receive anesthetics during an organ harvest operation-react to the scalpel like inadequately anesthetized live patients, exhibiting high blood pressure and sometimes soaring heart rates. Doctors say these are simply reflexes." OK, but didn't we once say something similar about operating on babies without anesthesia?

I love conspiracy morons :) You always brighten up my day!

Tell me, were you this way BEFORE taking LSD? Or did this behavior only manifest afterwards?

Yeah, FDA corruption is a HUGE conspiracy. Nothing credible has EVER been released about the FDA and their shady practices. In fact, they are the most perfect government body ever formed for protecting the American consumer ever conceived of.

Thanks for pointing it all out to me. Now that you have enlightened me, I think I will go sulk in a corner and reflect on my views of the FDA, which are all obviously conspiracy theories.

More people die or are injured due to 'accidents' in America's hospitals than on America's roads - http://www.naturalnews.com/023892_hospital_hospitals_health.html .

In the USA, sbusidies include the Price-Anderson act (which provides subsidized insurance) and the Cheney energy policy of 2005 (which provides per-kilowatt incentives and removes requirements for set-aside of decommissioning costs).

I'm pretty pro-nuclear but not setting aside decommissioning expenses is a Bad-Thing(Tm), it should have been required for wind turbines as well given that End of tax credit a blow for wind power industry Up to 37,000 jobs, many in Illinois, could be lost as projects are halted or abandoned and there are already some 14,000 abandoned wind turbines.

the wind WILL (not slim chance, not might, not maybe, WILL) cross-pollinate with some of the corn in his field.

So why are the organic farmers not suing more often for pollution by Monsanto's seed?
Like this: http://www.naturalnews.com/033216_GMO_contamination_lawsuits.html

Might want to look at the transcript as well. He specifically stated the monkeys they were using were infected with other agents and could not be used. They were told to import ones from West Africa. No conspiracy, the imported ones were infected. You are also referencing a case from the 50's, when vaccination technology and research was still developing. Now, we have an enormous statistical sampling of people worldwide who are vaccinated.
As for life flourishing, you may want to consider mortality rates and life spans. Look at where we are at now compared to the pre-vaccine days.
It seems odd to have so many on a supposedly pro-technology site going against medical technology.

I think you're a little brainwashed by the MSM and the POTUS rhetoric. Yes, there is far too much collaboration among the CEO / Washington Administrator club (same guys, moving back and forth), but don't forget that only the government has the monopoly on force. And, yep, there are armed bureaucrats all over the place.

I'm not really worried about corporate power until they have government backing.

Bill Gates already said he is for reducing world population via vaccines. Why am I to think this is to help "save" lives? http://www.naturalnews.com/029911_vaccines_Bill_Gates.html

Or maybe, just maybe, there's been enough abuse in the past & present (inside & outside the USA) that regulating drugs & drug testing isn't so bad? Now the cost of drugs is one thing, but to rail against the regulations of testing?

Sometimes regulation has a reason behind it - companies are irresponsible when left to their own devices.

More like "I'll believe it when I see it" -- someone somewhere (probably the DOJ) will "realize" that just admitting the possibility there's any risk of cancer from their "radiation scanners" opens them up to a zillion liability suits and the iron wall will come back down because denial is their chief weapon. That and fear, of course ('cause it sure ain't surprise...or a ruthless efficiency, etc.!!!)

The road to hell is paved with good intentions. While scientists and engineers know how to cram foreign genes into cells, they don't know exactly how the genes will be expressed, or to what extent, if at all. It's a a crapshoot. Which means they have no idea if the genes will be expressed as a toxic chemical or not.

If you want GM food so badly, *you* eat it. Let the people who don't want GM food have a choice in the matter. Put a label on it. Subject the companies that produce it to strict liability. That means they can be sued to oblivion if they screw up the ecosystem, kill anyone with their GM food or simply fail to label the food. Dennis Kucinich put together a nice bill on the subject in Congress.

Look, this is not about feeding the planet. It's about patenting life and getting the royalties without assuming any risk. That's the game Monsanto is playing and right now they are the Microsoft of seeds.

Fortunately, there is some true riparian hope for organic farmers.

http://www.naturalnews.com/033216_GMO_contamination_lawsuits.html

That should learn'em.

Poor science and a century and a half of water rights wars with California.

See this fine article.

built a rain barrel

So you freely confess to depriving businesses downstream of you of the benefit of the rain that falls on your roof?
off to redumacation camp for you, citizen!

Yeah yeah, tinfoil hat "Big Pharma is evil!" conspiracies.

Yeah, yeah, call something a "conspiracy" an we're all right again!

At least they can provide paid reviewed "studies" and clinical trials regarding their treatments, which is a fuckload more than these quack assholes can do.

http://www.naturalnews.com/028194_Scott_Reuben_research_fraud.html
http://blog.bioethics.net/2009/05/merck-makes-phony-peerreview-journal/
http://classic.the-scientist.com/blog/display/55671/
http://classic.the-scientist.com/blog/display/55679/
http://abcnews.go.com/Health/Drugs/story?id=7577646&page=1#.TtV4Xzg6e-M
http://www.doctorswithoutborders.org/news/article.cfm?id=2066
http://www.medcitynews.com/2011/07/fda-says-cro-cetero-faked-trial-data-pharmas-may-need-to-redo-tests/
http://jeps.efpsa.org/blog/2011/11/01/lessons-from-a-fake-study/
http://www.rense.com/general66/newhigh.htm

In short - "clinical trials" and "peer-reviewed" in pharmacology are mainly just buzzwords to make shit look legit.

Bayer

HIV, 1980s.

http://www.naturalnews.com/News_000647_Bayer_vaccines_HIV.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wg-52mHIjhs

Not that anyone is going to hold them accountable....

Apple's production line does massive environmental damage....

Nearly every employer most people reading this have worked for always has these little 'keep this on the downlow SOPs' for ways they get around regulations/rules.....

Yeah... like ethics ever mattered in the pursuit of cash.

On a global scale, the view of success is measured wrong; like the Mayo clinic, the rest of the world can be modeled --- success and recognition going to those who have improved human life, not to those who are good at getting money off people (immoral or otherwise).

What you are referring to is energy concentrated in a small part of the body as opposed to the whole body. The scanners distribute the energy over the whole body

That's not what I read. Most of the energy of the scanner is absorbed by the skin, and the analogy is very much correct. I'm not copying the entire content of that URL here, please go there and have a look - the letter with concerns is written not by a couple of nerds in a basement but by scientists (unless membership in the National Academy of Sciences means nothing.) Let me just cite one small paragraph:

"Unlike other scanners, these new devices operate at relatively low beam energies (28keV). The majority of their energy is delivered to the skin and the underlying tissue. Thus, while the dose would be safe if it were distributed throughout the volume of the entire body, the dose to the skin may be dangerously high."

any breakdown with the scanning mechanism will be immediately evident in the image.

That would be of little consolation to you. Let's imagine a real world scenario: the scanning stops - because, for example, someone shoved a blob of chewing gum into the gears. The machine starts working slower, slower and finally stops, with the X-ray beam focused on something totally unimportant, like your eyes or your brain (upper or lower :-) Let's say the interlocks failed and the beam is not shut off.

What would you expect from a team of inept users of this technology? Do you believe they have a clue how the machine works? Do you think they care to know? Maybe there is one geek in the whole TSA, and he is not operating the machines anyway.

The operator sees that the image is bad or incomplete. What do you think will happen? The operator WILL REPEAT THE SCAN - again and again and again, potentially burning raster tattoos into your skin with the X-ray beam. Only after several attempts he will give up. You will not be told what happened. You will be told to go to another machine or you will be molested by hand. You will not know what just occurred, and the TSA will get rid of you as fast as they can (or not, even if they themselves have no idea what they just did to you.) In any case, you will be getting radiation burns on your body within days, and good luck matching this to any specific machine in any specific airport. TSA will tell you that "safety of passengers is #1 concern of TSA and nothing like what happened to you could possibly happen to anyone, you included."

Sure, there's a lot of FUD out there about vaccines. You've got everything from the folks still convinced something in the vaccines causes Autism (despite lots of recent research trying to find such a link and failing to do so), to people convinced getting vaccinated for anything means exposing oneself to risk of mercury poisoning.

But I wouldn't be so quick to brush off accusations that the HPV vaccines out here have potential serious risks, either. It's one thing to vaccinate against childhood diseases known to be highly contagious killers of millions, and another to vaccinate against an STD that many people will contract at some point in their lives and never even realize they have it, and practically nobody contracts at all for as long as they abstain from having sex. I'm not saying such a thing is a BAD idea, but I'm saying it rightfully deserves a higher barrier to acceptance than a vaccine proven to help wipe out a major killer of small children through no fault of their own.

Just do a random Google search on the brand-name of one of these vaccines, Guardasil, and look how many pages come up discussing the risk of death, paralysis and other issues.

For example, here's a recent article on it in "Natural News", a certainly biased source, but one that uses results of legitimately run studies and other facts to form their conclusions: http://www.naturalnews.com/031454_Gardasil_risks.html

Hmm..
Evidently the wackjobs at the EPA think straw/hay is evil...

http://www.naturalnews.com/033537_hay_pollutant.html

---Now that EPA has declared hay a pollutant, every farmer and rancher that stores hay, or that leaves a broken hay bale in the field, is potentially violating EPA rules and subject to an EPA enforcement action,â responded Callicrate. âoeHow far are we going to let this agency go before we stand up and do something about it?---

but not on the scale that the submitter has everyone worried about. Congratulations, you all have been trolled.

Yeah, TFS chose the wrong article to link to this week. He wanted the one about Rhode Island.

http://www.naturalnews.com/030274_Suzanne_Somers_Michael_Douglas.html
http://www.amazon.com/Knockout-Interviews-Doctors-Cancer-Prevent/dp/0307587460

And see my other comments here on vitamin D, iodine, and veggies...

The TSA has repeatedly lied about these scanners in the past, why should they be believed now?

Pot calling the kettle black?

http://www.naturalnews.com/030787_child_pornography_TSA_agents.html

Not at all baseless! There is the excellent Journal of Vertebral Subluxation Research, Dr. Mercola, NaturalNews.com to start.

Not to mentioned countless excellent Chiropractic videos on YouTube. Some have dozens of thumbs up from other Chiros: peer review in action.

Considering the new e-coli http://www.naturalnews.com/032622_ecoli_bioengineering.html#ixzz1OTqLw4WU I think we need to put the bananas nest to a melt down! :)

"Anything" doesn't seem to be an exaggeration: how low do you have to be to produce fake rice from plastic and fake chicken eggs from chemicals?

and you thought you'd be funny, eh?

http://www.naturalnews.com/029286_rainwater_collection_water.html

it's actually illegal now to collect RAIN WATER?

Actually the world of fake meat is a marvellous one. There are Tofurky Sausages, vegan lamb (made out of tofu and mushrooms!), and of course veggy burgers! All of these things taste pretty @#! good and gain the same advantages over cattle as insects perhaps moreso... But it still sounds like eating bugs is better than eating cows as long as we dont unleash a plague of locusts or anything...

When I first became a vegetarian I started eating meat substitutes and drinking soymilk, but no longer do. Those are loaded with soy. There are several reasons to avoid soy:

• Soy is high in estrogen. I definitely got some breast growth from consuming all that soy (I'm male). Fermented forms of soy (ie, soy sauce) are not bad in this regard, but textured vegetable protein, tofu and soy milk are.
• Soy (including fermented soy) suppresses the thyroid.
• Most soy is Genetically Modified.

Here's a good article on soy.

I now use hemp instead. Hemp seeds in salads, salad dressing made with hemp oil, milk made from hemp seeds, hemp protein powder in smoothies, etc.

http://www.naturalnews.com/z030209_placebo_medical_fraud.html
http://www.wired.com/medtech/drugs/magazine/17-09/ff_placebo_effect?currentPage=all
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2010/11/lies-damned-lies-and-medical-science/8269/
http://www.its.caltech.edu/~dg/crunch_art.html
http://www.theatlantic.com/past/docs/issues/2000/03/press.htm
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL9910/S00096/rankin-on-thursday-where-communism-succeeded.htm
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2004/jul/15/the-truth-about-the-drug-companies/
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-10-26/glaxo-said-to-settle-u-s-drug-manufacturing-lawsuit-for-750-million.html

Wired on the orginal article:
http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2010/12/the-truth-wears-off/

Anyway, this New Yorker article once again underscores the folly of going to extremes against common sense or long standing cultural traditions, based on some new scientific report or another, without looking at the broad big picture on overall weight of all the evidence we have from a variety of perspectives.

But even when there is a wide variety of good science, often policy ignores it.
Problems with the recent timid vitamin D recommendation:
http://www.grassrootshealth.net/recommendation
Dr. Joel Fuhrman on how much money the USA spends on sick care for very poor outcomes:
http://vimeo.com/16682935

Thank you for that one link to back up your wide ranging assertions regarding vaccination, quack doctors, and GMO foods. Me wonders why you are so defensive that you have to use terms like woo-woo to get your argument across.
Here's an interesting video clip about a man called Allan Smith who was in hospital in New Zealand. The doctors decided he was beyond hope and were going to turn off life-support. His family demanded that he be given high doses of Vitamin C and it was administered although the doctors tried their best to stop it from happening. Poor old Allan then came back from the dead. It's terrible that quack sites push the idea that modern medicine doesn't have all the answers.
Every single thing you have stated above can be contradicted by using Google. You may even find peer reviewed scientific papers supporting the assertion that GMOs aren't proven to be safe/beneficial.
And everyone knows that a tin foil helmet can protect a person from the voices in their head.

The term ScepDic seems just so appropriate.

Monsanto are one of the largest investors of this elaborate project, and anyone who has studied Monsanto knows that Monsanto is NOT TO BE TRUSTED.

They take absolutely every chance they get to strengthen their death-grip on international agriculture, if we give them an inch they will take a mile. This is about world domination of agriculture.

They always sell their modified crap as being greatly beneficial and liberating to the poor farmers, when in reality they are shackling third world countires to rely on first-world corporations to produce food. Total enslavement.

"When you control the oil, you control the county. When you control the food, you control the population" - Henry Kissenger

Please people, open your mind and consider the history of Monsanto and the other groups involved in this project - we cannot afford to allow things like this to happen. Monsanto's seed is designed to produce only a single yield, and is modified to withstand the poisonous pesticides they produce; they have a very elaborate marketing machine working to deceive poor farmers across the globe to buy into this rip-off, this rabbit whole goes quite deep and when you get to the bottom of it, it's a total travesty that words can scarcely describe. If ever there was an organization worthy of the moniker "Evil Corporation" it would be Monsanto.

I implore you all to take the time to watch the documentary The World According to Monsanto and follow the claims up with your own research - only when you have verified the length and breadth of the crimes against humanity commited by this corporation will you understand the gravity of what is transpiring. These people are presenting enslavement as a solution, seeking to rule us with an iron fist in a velvet glove - we must be vigilant to avoid deception.

FYI, the Monarch butterfly report showing harm was discredited due to the concentrations of pollen placed on the milkweed. It was way more than would normally by found in the wild.

And thank your for for the support.

That said, here are some links you might find informative;

Monsanto
more Monsanto
Yet more Monsanto (busy aren't they)
intersting site
Canola
GM canola in the wild
Possible wipe out of terrestrial plant life
another one

Have fun reading.

_

While this may be good news if true, I recently read a news article that tests concluded that radiation from cell phone towers was the culprit: http://www.naturalnews.com/029958_mobile_phones_honeybees.html

I find it strange that there's more than one thing being blamed for this.

This is much like the news from earlier this year about Aspartame being renamed as AminoSweet, by its manufacturer Ajinomoto. There has been a growing awareness of the dangers of Aspartame, so renaming their product is presumably an attempt to confuse the public.

So now the same thing is being done by renaming high fructose corn syrup as "corn sugar," also presumably because of its bad reputation. I will be sure to watch for either of those new names when shopping, so that I can avoid products that contain either "corn sugar" or AminoSweet.

Here are a couple of articles about the renaming a Aspartame as AminoSweet:

• Beware AminoSweet, Toxic Aspartame's New Name
• Aspartame has been renamed and is now being marketed as a natural sweetener

It sounds like we are mostly on the same page. We are in agreement that there should not be patents on seeds. And, in that context, we are in agreement that GM seeds can be very beneficial. However, the reality is that patent law on seeds is being enforced globally and Monsanto continues to try to "give" it's patented seeds away http://www.naturalnews.com/029222_GMOs_Haiti.html while suing farmers who get the seeds blown into their fields. Therefore, although I can appreciate the good GM seed can do, I am far more concerned with the harm that is already happening due to the patents involved.

Is that why the FDA produced a "food pyramid" which bases the diet on carbohydrates which we know and for centuries have known will cause heart disease and obesity in cases of overconsumption?

Which for centuries were also what built civilizations before our age of abundance. Societies around the globe were built on carbs, whether wheat, or rice, or maize, or sorghum, or potatoes, or cassava, or ensete, or amaranth, or quinoa, or sago, or breadfruit, or plantain, or teff, or millet, or whatever. High carb foods are what sustained humanity throughout most of its existence. This is because we've known for centuries that those foods provide the large amounts of energy that the body needs to keep going, and in the case of the food pyramid, it is assumed that you're using that energy. You can't retcon a conspiracy because lifestyles changed.

that the FDA requires any dairy product which states that it does not use rBGH to carry a notice that the FDA has detected no difference between milk from cows with and without rBGH

There's an xkcd for everything.

which is an outright lie?

Got a strong source for that? And no, sites like this are not valid citations.