Category: Genetics


The cells, made with cloning technique behind Dolly the sheep, have the potential to regenerate damaged organs and tissues

Cloning technique: a donor egg before nucleus extraction

A human egg before nuclear extraction and fusion with a skin cell. The resulting embryonic stem cells were genetically identical to the skin donor. Photograph: Oregon Health & Science University

Scientists have used the cloning technique that led to Dolly the sheep to turn human skin into embryonic stem cells – which can make any tissue in the body.

The US team overcame technical problems that had frustrated researchers for more than a decade to create batches of the body’s master cells from donated skin.

The work will spark fresh interest in the use of cloning in medical research, and reignite the controversy over a procedure that demands a supply of human eggs, and the creation and destruction of early stage embryos. The US group employed the technique to make embryonic stem cells that were genetically matched to individuals. Such cells could be used to study diseases in exquisite detail, and regenerate damaged organs and tissues.

“Our finding offers new ways of generating stem cells for patients with dysfunctional or damaged tissues and organs,” said Shoukhrat Mitalipov at Oregon Health and Science University. “Such stem cells can regenerate and replace those damaged cells and tissues and alleviate diseases that affect millions of people.”

Dolly was born in 1996 after researchers led by Sir Ian Wilmut in Edinburgh created an embryo by fusing a cell from a sheep’s udder with an egg that had had its nucleus removed. The embryo was a clone – genetically identical to the adult sheep the udder cell came from.

 

Read Full Article Here

About these ads

Biotech’s next big disaster: seeds that emit multiple pesticides

image source

Jon Rappoport
Activist Post

Tom Laskawy, writing at Grist, points out how the next generation of GMOs is following in the track of present disasters:

“…the growing pest and weed problems for GMOs have caused farmers to turn to seeds that are coated with a different pesticide—a neonicotinoid. If that name rings a bell, it’s because these pesticides… have been implicated in the increasing epidemic of bee deaths.

“And that’s aside from the evidence that biotech’s ‘next big thing’ —seeds that emit multiple pesticides—may be doomed to fail. An international team of researchers, including USDA and biotech scientists, found what they termed ‘cross-resistance’ to these pesticides in [predatory] bugs exposed to the next-generation GMO seeds. Evidence, in other words, that GMO seeds are hitting a bug-covered wall.” The seeds don’t knock out the plant pests.

Yet the venerable journal Nature recently urged patience, because just over the next hill, the biotech giants will surely succeed in bringing us better GMO crops.

This reveals an underlying assumption about technology: when scientists discover a new way of doing things, it can never be retracted; it will eventually work well; improvements will come.

That false assumption sustains a tremendous amount of false science, as well as profits, of course, for the companies involved.

“Wait, better developments are being made.”

If scientists can shoot genes into plants, that’s a step that can never be taken back. It’s automatically a sign of progress. To admit defeat would be equivalent to admitting science can be wrong.

This is the insanity we are dealing with.

We’ve seen it in the field of psychiatric drugs, all of which carry heavy toxicity. If you push a researcher up against the wall, where he has to admit problems with the drugs, he’ll say, “But we’re working on next-generation chemicals. It’ll be different. We’re just starting to understand how the brain really works. Be patient. Help is on the way.”

In recent days, we’ve seen the US National Institute of Mental Health and its British counterpart defect from orthodox psychiatry in the interpretation of what a mental disorder is. Some people have taken this as a positive development. But that’s not the case.

The defectors intend to push brain research to new dangerous heights. Even though they have no baseline for “normal brain activity,” they are racing along the track of discovering “abnormal chemical imbalances.” In other words, their better science is no science at all.

They will invent new names for mental disorders, and there will be more drugs to treat patients, and the whole edifice will be founded on lies.

In the field of gene research, scientists are advancing on a road of manipulation of the human genome. This, they say, is yielding one breakthrough after another. New humans, better humans, more talented and healthy and intelligent humans will be the result.

But really, this translates into: we can shift genes around, we can substitute new genes for old genes, we can silence genes and provoke dormant genes to express themselves—therefore, we have to keep doing it. It’s science. We have to expand our work.

No they don’t. In the same way they don’t have to build even more destructive H-bombs, they don’t have to play roulette with the human body and brain.

Just because medical researchers can come up with new chemo drugs that kill cells and destroy immune systems, it doesn’t mean they have to.

Despite failures along every front of GMO-crop production, despite the fact that predictions of higher crop yields and reduced use of pesticides and herbicides have failed to materialize, Monsanto pushes on.

Monsanto lies and pretends their work is an enormous success. Their researchers, many of whom know the catastrophic failure they are dealing with, nevertheless keep going, keep telling themselves that this is science, and therefore it will ultimately succeed.

Translation: The seven billion people of earth are the guinea pigs in a vast corporate experiment.

Technocrats who envision trans-humans, a combine of brain and computerized brain, pin faith on the idea that, since brains can be hooked up to machines, they should be. It’s “scientific progress,” and therefore it has to happen.

All this used to be called scientism, a massive overreach of misplaced faith, but now the word is largely defunct. It was too accurate. It nailed the obsession and showed how crazy it was.

Years ago, I was invited to give a lecture to an atheist group in Los Angeles. The topic was HIV research, because I had written a book about it, AIDS INC.

I described the line of HIV research, and made a detailed case for the fact that researchers had never proved HIV caused a condition that was being called AIDS.

My analysis was met with strong opposition. The group was unhappy.

No problem. But it turned out their unhappiness was based on the notion that I was attacking science itself. And since they believed that’s what I was doing, they were angry because, get this, if I was against science, I must be for God. And they were atheists.

Therefore, I had to be wrong.

Their reaction mirrored 19th century attitudes about the rise of science. Its proponents felt they’d finally found an antidote to religion, and therefore, anyone who criticized science on any terms (e.g, flawed reasoning, bad data, bogus experiments) must be demanding a return to the Church, the Inquisition, and burning at the stake.

Read Full Article Here

New Study Links GMO Food To Leukemia

New Study Links GMO Food To Leukemia

 

Last September, the causal link between cancer and genetically modified food was confirmed in a French study, the first independent long-term animal feeding study not commissioned by the biotech corporations themselves. The disturbing details can be found here: New Study Finds GM Corn and Roundup Causes Cancer In Rats

Now, a new study published in the Journal of Hematology & Thromboembolic Diseases indicates that the biopesticides engineered into GM crops known as Bacillus Thuringensis (Bt) or Cry-toxins, may also contribute to blood abnormalities from anemia to hematological malignancies (blood cancers) such as leukemia.[i]

A group of scientists from the Department of Genetics and Morphology, Institute of Biological Sciences, University of Brasilia, Brasilia/DF, Brazil set out to test the purported human and environmental biosafety of GM crops, looking particularly at the role that the Bt toxin found within virtually all GM food crops plays on non-target or non-insect animal species.

The research was spurned by the Brazilian Collegiate Board of Directors of the National Sanitary Surveillance Agency (ANVISA), who advocated in 2005 for evaluations of toxicity and pathogenicity of microbiological control agents such as Bt toxins, given that little is known about their toxicological potential in non-target organisms, including humans.

While Bacillus Thurigensis spore-crystals have been used since the late 1960′s in agriculture as a foliar insecticide, it was only after the advent of recombinant DNA biotechnology that these toxin-producing genes (known as delta endotoxins) were first inserted into the plants themselves and released into commercial production in the mid-90′s, making their presence in the US food supply and the bodies of exposed populations ubiquitous.

What the new study revealed is that various binary combinations and doses of Bt toxins are capable of targeting mammalian cells, particularly the erythroid (red blood cell) lineage, resulting in red blood cell changes indicative of significant damage, such as anemia. In addition, the study found that Bt toxins suppressed bone marrow proliferation creating abnormal lymphocyte patterns consistent with some types of leukemia.

The researchers also found that one of the prevailing myths about the selective toxicity of Bt to insects, the target species, no longer holds true:

It has been reported that Cry toxins exert their toxicity when activated at alkaline pH of the digestive tract of susceptible larvae, and, because the physiology of the mammalian digestive system does not allow their activation, and no known specific receptors in mammalian  intestinal cells have been reported, the toxicity these MCAs to mammals  would negligible [8,22,23]. However, our study demonstrated that Bt spore-crystals genetically modified to express individually Cry1Aa, Cry1Ab, Cry1Ac or Cry2A induced hematotoxicity, particularly to the erythroid lineage. This finding corroborates literature that demonstrated that alkali-solubilized  Bt spore-crystals caused in vitro hemolysis in cell lines of rat, mouse, sheep, horse, and human erythrocytes and suggested that the plasma membrane of susceptible cells (erythrocytes, in this case) may be the primary target for these toxins [33]

The study also found:

1) That Cry toxins are capable of exerting their adverse effects when suspended in distilled water, not requiring alkalinization via insect physiology to become activated as formerly believed.

2) That a dose of Cry1Ab as low as 27 mg/kg, their lowest tested dose, was capable of inducing hypochromic anemia in mice – the very toxin has been detected in blood of non-pregnant women, pregnant women and their fetuses in Canada, supposedly exposed through diet.

3) Whereas past reports have found that Bt toxins are generally nontoxic and do not bioaccumulate in fatty tissue or persist in the environment, the new study demonstrated that all Cry toxins tested had a more pronounced effect from 72 hours of exposure onwards, indicating the opposite is true.

4) That high-dose Cry toxin doses caused blood changes indicative of bone marrow damage (damage to “hematopoietic stem cell or bone marrow stroma”).

The authors noted their results “demonstrate leukemogenic activity for other spore-crystals not yet reported in the literature.”

 

iHealthTube iHealthTube

Published on May 7, 2013

http://www.ihealthtube.com http://www.facebook.com/ihealthtube
Journalist Liam Scheff has done research into the vaccine system in the United States. He also has an interesting family history in the practice. He discusses some of the things vaccines still contain and how the premise behind vaccines is flawed.

NO to GMO in baby formula photo NoGMOinbabyformula_zps0593e7fd.jpg

While  GMO’s  are  not  allowed in  infant  formula in   the  EU corporations and their shareholders refuse to remove them from American  baby  formula’s.   They  believe,  it  seems , that since our legislators care more   about the money being  made by  Monsanto and other Agritech companies than the health of our children.  Perhaps  , they then have no moral or ethical responsibilities to the  safety of our  children’s health?

Are   American  babies any  less worthy of protection from these untested poisons?  Or  are our  children viable  guinea pigs for these  greedy monsters  that  care only for their bottom line?.

If you  spend money  , YOU HAVE A SAY AND  YOU  CAN MAKE A  DIFFERENCE  Call,  write , send e-mails let  these companies know that you will seek alternative products or simply do without until they take the  voice of the  American People and the health of our babies to heart. We  will not  be ignored any longer. The time has come to tell Washington and  corporations who is really  in charge of their bottom line!!

~Desert Rose ~

*************************************************************************************

Pressure Mounts to Remove GMOs from Infant Formula; Abbott Laboratories Shareholders Set To Vote on Non-GMO Policy

Monday, 29 April 2013 12:23 By Staff, Cornucopia Institute | Press Release

Cornucopia, WI — Shareholders of Abbott Laboratories will vote on whether the manufacturer of Similac, a leading brand of infant formula, should adopt a policy of sourcing ingredients that have not been genetically engineered.

The vast majority of corn and soy-based ingredients in processed foods in the United States, including infant formula, come from genetically engineered crops developed by Monsanto and other biotechnology companies. Dairy ingredients may come from dairy cows that were treated with genetically engineered bovine growth hormones.

The annual meeting, open to all owners of Abbott stock, takes place at Abbott Laboratories’ headquarters in Abbott Park, Illinois on April 26.

“Based on the body of existing research, nobody should be eating GMO foods, especially not babies,” says Charlotte Vallaeys, Policy Director at Cornucopia.The Cornucopia Institute, a farm and food policy research group, joined As You Sow, a shareholder advocacy group that filed the resolution, in calling on Abbott Laboratories shareholders to vote yes on the resolution. Cornucopia recently launched a social media campaign, on Facebook and Twitter, and a petition drive.

“Until infant formula makers stop using GMO ingredients, hundreds of thousands of newborns, infants and toddlers are unwitting participants in this huge, uncontrolled experiment with the health of the next generation. It’s time for formula makers to stop experimenting with the health of babies who consume their products,” she added.

Read Full Article Here

*************************************************************************************

Abbott Labs Shareholders Vote to Keep GMOs in Similac Infant Formulas

Posted on April 30, 2013 by

Baby fed with bottleAbbott Laboratories shareholders have rejected a proposal to remove genetically engineered ingredients from Similac infant formulas, according to DairyReporter.com,. [source]

In a press release dated April 23, 2013, As You Sow, an Abbott Labs investor, announced that it would present a resolution at the annual shareholders meeting, April 26, 2013, to have GMOs removed from Similac infant formula. As You Sow cited the “new and credible scientific concerns” about the safety of GMOs and the shift of public opinion illustrated by a recent poll where 91% of consumers wanted foods with GMO content to be labeled.

The proposal was presented to the shareholders by Andrew Behar, CEO of As You Sow,  and, according to a company spokesperson, it was rejected receiving only 3% of the votes. [source]  It looks like only 3% of shareholders are able to value the health of babies over a potential loss of profit.  Is this more profit at any cost?

Be assured that although shareholders rejected the proposal, it was NOT because a GMO-free infant formula could not be marketed.  Abbott Labs is already doing so in the EU.[source]

Read Full Post Here

**************************************************************************************

Abbott Laboratories shareholders reject proposal to remove GMOs from infant formula

An Abbott Laboratories shareholder proposal to remove genetically-modified organisms (GMOs) from its natural products – including its Similac infant formula range – has been rejected, the Illinois-based company has revealed.

Nestlé and Mead Johnson Nutrition dismiss call to remove GMOs from US infant formula

Nestlé USA and Mead Johnson Nutrition have dismissed calls to remove genetically-modified organisms (GMO) from their infant formula products in the US – citing the approved use of GMOs by several national and global regulatory bodies.

http://www.dairyreporter.com/Regulation-Safety/Nestle-and-Mead-Johnson-Nutrition-dismiss-call-to-remove-GMOs-from-US-infant-formula

‘Appalling irresponsibility’: Senior scientists attack Chinese researchers for creating new strains of influenza virus in veterinary laboratory

 

 

Experts warn of danger that the new viral strains created by mixing bird-flu virus with human influenza could escape from the laboratory to cause a global pandemic killing millions of people.

 

 

 

 

Senior scientists have criticised the “appalling irresponsibility” of researchers in China who have deliberately created new strains of influenza virus in a veterinary laboratory.

 

 

They warned there is a danger that the new viral strains created by mixing bird-flu virus with human influenza could escape from the laboratory to cause a global pandemic killing millions of people.

Lord May of Oxford, a former government chief scientist and past president of the Royal Society, denounced the study published today in the journal Science as doing nothing to further the understanding and prevention of flu pandemics.

“They claim they are doing this to help develop vaccines and such like. In fact the real reason is that they are driven by blind ambition with no common sense whatsoever,” Lord May told The Independent.

“The record of containment in labs like this is not reassuring. They are taking it upon themselves to create human-to-human transmission of very dangerous viruses. It’s appallingly irresponsible,” he said.

The controversial study into viral mixing was carried out by a team led by Professor Hualan Chen, director of China’s National Avian Influenza Reference Laboratory at Harbin Veterinary Research Institute.

Professor Chen and her colleagues deliberately mixed the H5N1 bird-flu virus, which is highly lethal but not easily transmitted between people, with a 2009 strain of H1N1 flu virus, which is very infectious to humans.

When flu viruses come together by infecting the same cell they can swap genetic material and produce “hybrids” through the re-assortment of genes. The researchers were trying to emulate what happens in nature when animals such as pigs are co-infected with two different strains of virus, Professor Chen said.

 

Read Full Article Here

 

*****************************************************************************************************

Epidemic fears see bird flu doctors halt research

 

Saturday 21 January 2012

inShare4

 

Influenza experts have agreed to a two-month voluntary ban on research into a highly dangerous strain of bird-flu virus because of fears that it may escape from their laboratories to cause a global human epidemic.

In a joint letter to the journals Science and Nature, 39 researchers from around the world emphasise that their laboratories are safe and secure but they nevertheless acknowledge that there is grave public concern about the accidental or deliberate release of an “airborne” strain of H5N1 avian influenza which could be transmitted easily between people.

“We realise that organisations and governments around the world need time to find the best solutions for opportunities and challenges that stem from the work. To provide time for these discussions, we have agreed on a voluntary pause of 60 days on any research involving highly pathogenic influenza H5N1 viruses leading to the generation of viruses that are more transmissible in mammals,” the letter states.

Last month, the US Government announced that it had asked Science and Nature to withhold key details of two studies carried out in the US and the Netherlands where scientists mutated the H5N1 bird-flu strain into a form that could be transmitted easily between laboratory ferrets – the standard animal model for human influenza.

 

Read Full Article Here

******************************************************************************************************

Alarm as Dutch lab creates highly contagious killer flu

 

 

Fear of terrorism as university prepares to publish key details

 

 

 

Related articles

 

A deadly strain of bird flu with the potential to infect and kill millions of people has been created in a laboratory by European scientists – who now want to publish full details of how they did it.

 

The discovery has prompted fears within the US Government that the knowledge will fall into the hands of terrorists wanting to use it as a bio-weapon of mass destruction.

Some scientists are questioning whether the research should ever have been undertaken in a university laboratory, instead of at a military facility.

The US Government is now taking advice on whether the information is too dangerous to be published.

To see the graphic: The last outbreak – A deadly virus even before the latest twist

“The fear is that if you create something this deadly and it goes into a global pandemic, the mortality and cost to the world could be massive,” a senior scientific adviser to the US Government told The Independent, speaking on condition of anonymity.

“The worst-case scenario here is worse than anything you can imagine.”

For the first time the researchers have been able to mutate the H5N1 strain of avian influenza so that it can be transmitted easily through the air in coughs and sneezes. Until now, it was thought that H5N1 bird flu could only be transmitted between humans via very close physical contact.

Dutch scientists carried out the controversial research to discover how easy it was to genetically mutate H5N1 into a highly infectious “airborne” strain of human flu. They believe that the knowledge gained will be vital for the development of new vaccines and drugs.

But critics say the scientists have endangered the world by creating a highly dangerous form of flu which could escape from the laboratory – as well as opening a Pandora’s box for fanatical terrorists wishing to make a bio-weapon.

The H5N1 strain of avian influenza has killed hundreds of millions of birds since it first appeared in 1996, but has so far infected only about 600 people who came into direct contact with infected poultry.

What makes H5N1 so dangerous, though, is that it has killed about 60 per cent of those it has infected, making it one of the most lethal known forms of influenza in modern history – a deadliness moderated only by its inability (so far) to spread easily through airborne water droplets.

 

Read Full Article Here

*****************************************************************************************************

Leading scientists condemn decision to continue controversial research into deadly H5N1 bird-flu virus

 

 

Research has already led to the creation of a mutated form of avian flu that can spread easily between mammals – including humans

 

 

 

Leading scientists have condemned a decision by flu researchers to continue their controversial research into the deadly H5N1 bird-flu virus, which has already led to the creation of a mutated form of avian flu that can spread easily between mammals – including humans.

 

Forty of the world’s most prominent flu researchers have decided to lift their voluntary moratorium on studies into the airborne transmission of the H5N1 strain of bird-flu, which they imposed upon themselves last January following public outrage over the work.

They said that the benefits of the research in preventing and dealing with a future flu pandemic outweigh the risks of an accidental leak of the mutant virus from a laboratory or the deliberate attempt to create deadly strains of flu by terrorists or rogue governments.

However, other leading scientists vehemently denounced the decision on the grounds that it would be more dangerous to proceed with the research than to continue with the moratorium, claiming that there has been little discussion of the decision outside the flu-research community.

Professor Lord May, a former government chief scientist and past president of the Royal Society, said the moratorium should be continued because there are two possible downsides to research that deliberately aims at making the H5N1 bird-flu virus more infectious to humans.

“As this research becomes more widely known and disseminated, there is the opportunity for evil people to pervert it. My other concern is the statistics of containment are not what they ought to be,” Lord May told The Independent.

“The dangers of going ahead with the research outweigh the benefits of what may emerge. As I look at it, on the balance of probabilities, going ahead and lifting the moratorium is more dangerous than not going ahead,” he said.

 

Read Full Article Here

*****************************************************************************************************

 

consciousness

Wednesday, May 01, 2013

by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger
Editor of NaturalNews.com (See all articles…)

 

(NaturalNews) Most people feel that a time of great change is upon us. But what kind of change is unfolding, exactly?

To answer that question, we must examine current trends and attempt to understand where they are headed.

Here’s my look at ten of the most sociologically-charged trends that I believe are leading us into a spiritual crisis (followed by a spiritual awakening, as you’ll see below).

#1) The rise of human engineered genetics

Abandoning the seeds of nature, human scientists continue to play God with plants, animals and even humans. In doing so, they challenge the laws of nature and have already given rise to “superbugs” and “superweeds.”

Superbugs are resistant to all known chemicals and drugs, and superweeds are resistant to all known chemical herbicides. Genetic pollution is rampant. No one knows where this takes us, but many understand that such reckless science puts the future of life at risk across our entire planet.

#2) Reality escapism via gaming, social networks and computer-human interface devices such as Google Glass, VR helmets

Turning to techno-immersion devices, more and more people are escaping reality and “living” in virtual worlds, or living in “augmented” versions of the real world. Though such devices and social networks promise connection, they actually deliver isolation, social detachment and depression.

As these devices become more capable of sensory immersion, the problems they foment will only become more extreme, leading to extreme isolationism, escapism and truly delusional life experiences. People will live and die in “the Matrix,” so to speak.

On the up side, immersion devices have tremendous therapeutic value and training value. They could theoretically be used to teach the fundamentals of liberty, consciousness, economics and philosophy, but history has shown they will most likely be exploited by corporate interests and abused by users to escape reality rather than enhance it. (Just look at where television ended up taking us…)

#3) The demonization of normalcy

Any idea that used to be considered “normal” is being increasingly demonized. For example, understanding mathematics and the laws of economics now makes you a “fringe whacko” in any discussion about the national debt or budget deficits.

Expressing the existence of human consciousness will earn you a sharp rebuke from conformists who insist there is no such thing as consciousness. This group already includes many the world’s top physicists such as Stephen Hawking.

Ideas like “we should be responsible for our own actions” are becoming increasingly alien across society. Even a heterosexual lifestyle is now being thought of as “abnormal” by the new metro-sexual trendies. Everything normal and natural is being marginalized and replaced with radical, anti-consciousness ideas such as “it’s okay to murder babies right after they are born, just call it a post-birth abortion.”

Normalcy is the new “closet.” If you are normal, hide it away, lest you be incessantly berated by your peers for not conforming to their “new wave” of freakish ideas.

#4) The rise of “omission journalism”

Journalism is increasingly becoming more about what is omitted from the news rather than what’s in it. As mainstream media institutions pursue agendas of social shaping rather than reporting factual news, they use the power of omission to make sure the people aren’t aware of the most socially-relevant stories.

For example, in our modern time there are two huge stories the media isn’t reporting because it’s practicing “omission journalism.” Those stories are the abortion murder trials and DHS bullet stockpiling.

When watching the news, an informed observer must now ask himself, “What are they NOT showing me?” Therein lie the real stories that will never be reported.

#5) The “Idiocracy” effect of self-selected procreation that multiplies the number of people least qualified to advance humanity

I call this the “Idiocracy” effect, named after the movie of the same name (by Mike Judge). It simply means that humans who are least qualified to advance humanity are the most likely to have the most offspring.

Put simply, smart people have fewer babies, but the idiots procreate in massive numbers. This ultimately skews the demographic profile into a society filled with people of very low cognitive function who nevertheless represent the voting majority. From there, the downfall of society and the rise of the idiocracy is only a matter of time.

In a hundred years, this article you are reading right now will be incomprehensible to even high-level scholars of the future because it uses big words like “demographic” and “cognitive.” Anyone who can do basic algebra will be considered a genius.

#6) The censorship and criminalization of knowledge

Today, publishing truthful knowledge about nutritional supplements, colloidal silver or natural medicine is considered a criminal activity. Any coherent physics analysis of WTC building 7 is also met with sheer derision.

One of the trademarks of the insane society into which we have already entered is the censorship and criminalization of knowledge. Any who speak the truth, who attempt to preserve knowledge, or who counter lies with truth are immediately branded whackos, conspiracy theorists or terrorists.

The purpose of this ploy is to eliminate all knowledge from society’s memory so that reality can be instantly reshaped at will by the governing tyrants. A population which has no connection with actual history, knowledge of natural medicine or even awareness of their natural rights is far easier to control than a well-educated population with a sense of factual context.

#7) Selective dehumanization: The abandonment of any value for the life of a newborn child or any adult who disagrees with you

Dehumanization is a key trend to watch. You see it right now with the idea that sufficiently young children have no “life” and no value and can be terminated as a “choice.” You also see it with the increasingly radical rhetoric in the mainstream media, where guests on CNN and other broadcasts call for the violent shooting of anyone who disagrees with them.

These are signs of dehumanization, and they will be extended and multiplied until all those who disagree with the governing status quo are labeled “animals” and dealt with accordingly.

 

Congress Slams NIH, CDC Reps For Evading Vaccine/Autism Evidence

Inept, disjointed agencies waste almost $1 billion, seek more funds

A government health agency director who a decade ago proposed diluting vaccine/autism data was one of two testifiers interrogated at a Congressional hearing yesterday on the federal government’s poor response to the autism epidemic costing the U.S. $137 billion a year.

Dr. Coleen Boyle, director of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control’s National Center on Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities, testified that her goal is “raising awareness of the importance of this as a health problem and one we need to address.” An April 2000 email obtained via FOIA shows that Boyle contacted the CDC’s Frank DeStefano suggesting dilution of vaccine/autism data by adding one- and two-year-olds to his dataset – children too young to have an autism diagnosis then.

“Does autism in history predate vaccines?” asked Rep. Darryl Issa (R-Calif.), chair of the U.S. House of Representatives House Oversight & Government Reform Committee. Yes, according to agencies administering the shots; no, according to legislators, physicians and parents filling in the gallery, who reported that their children regressed after receiving vaccinations.

Dr. Alan Guttmacher, a medical geneticist from the National Institutes of Health, defended his highly-criticized Interagency Autism Coordinating Committee. Both Guttmacher and Boyle testified that autism has no known cause or cure, and their only offerings of help were statistical tracking, detection tools, and behavioral therapies.

Outgoing Rep. Dan Burton (R-Ind.) stated that autism has more than one cause, but “the one we’re talking about today is mercury in vaccination and the environment.” He played a video from the University of Calgary showing destruction of brain neurons after low-level mercury exposure (here), and wondered how anybody from the CDC can watch and say that mercury doesn’t have an impact on neurodevelopment. Rep. Burton said that shortly after his grandson got nine vaccines in one day, the boy began banging his head against the wall and lost continence.

When Boyle claimed that since 2001 Thimerosal has been removed from all vaccines given to children, voices erupted from the audience. Boyle added, “With the exception of the multi-dose flu vaccine” but omitted mentioning that the 50,000 parts per billion injected is exceedingly higher than the 4 ppb “safe” limit for drinking water established by the Environmental Protection Agency and that it took until nearly 2004, not 2001.

Rep. Paul Gosar (R-Ariz.), a physician, criticized the wasted research opportunities into familial disease processes. Gosar’s physician sister has a son once labeled autistic. “As soon as we took him off wheat, gluten and milk products, this kid sits, reads, does everything appropriately.”

Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) brought up the infamous “Lilly Rider,” an industry-protective provision snuck into a Homeland Security conference report and passed before anyone could read it. He mentioned special interests such as coal emission producers, and how companies such as Eli Lilly, once a manufacturer of the mercury-based vaccine preservative Thimerosal, give millions of dollars to affect the outcome of elections. “There are reasons why this Congress and this government has not effectively addressed this issue,” said Rep. Kucinich. “You have special interest groups who resist any deeper research on it, because it is going to affect their bottom line. Meanwhile you have children all of the country turning up with autism.”

Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.) asked about services for adults with autism. Dr. Guttmacher replied with an irrelevant comment about more effective diagnosis, which prompted Del. Norton to repeat her question. After Dr. Guttmacher responded by posing a question, Del. Norton concluded, “In other words, we’re doing nothing for them.” Dr,. Guttmacher then repeated a previous statement about NIH offering “free tools for parents to identify autism, to which Del. Norton announced impatiently, “The mother knows it. The father knows it. The question is what to do…. In other words, it’s up to the family to try to figure it out.”

Rep. Patrick Meehan (R-Penn.) asked Boyle if she had ever seen a statistical trend with such an accelerating pace in a 6-year period; she said, “The only one that showed an increase was hyperactivity attention deficit disorder.” Rep. Meehan asked Boyle, “You said, ‘This is a public health concern.’ Would you explain why this is not a public health crisis?” Stumbling over her words she replied that the CDC’s “excellence is tracking epidemiologic research.” Rep. Meehan asked, “What is being done to have a genuine comprehensive plan in which we are looking for accountability year to year on the progress that is being made?” Dr. Guttmacher said the IACC is charged with that duty, but he failed to mention that that committee’s membership is new, meetings erratically attended, and recommendations are not enforceable.

Rep. Mike Kelley (R-Penn.) asked whether the CDC or NIH interview actual families, rather than just reporting statistics gathered through its handful of Autism and Developmental Disabilities Monitoring Network sites. “We have a second research program… in 6 states to get more information from medical records,” Boyle replied, saying CDC hopes to have data out in 2013. Rep. Kelley asked, if there was “anything on the horizon that could be a cure” for autism. Boyle remarked about differentiating between preventable causes vs. cure, but did not answer the question.

Rep. Bill Posey (R-Fla.) stated that his predecessor, Congressman Weldon was “a well-respected, competent medical doctor,” adding, “I gleaned from him some certainty that Thimerosal from vaccines was a contributing factor to autism.” Rep. Posey noted that African children were autism-free until vaccines were introduced on that continent. He asked whether the CDC has done a study comparing vaccinated and unvaccinated children. Boyle dodged the question, instead referring to old CDC studies on Thimerosal, saying that the Institute of Medicine evaluated the vaccine/autism issue in 2004 and 2011. Sounding frustrated, Rep. Posey asked again and Boyle admitted, “We have not studied vaccinated versus…” – to which Rep. Posey replied, “That was my question; you wasted 2 minutes of my time.

Rep. Posey also brought up the curious case of vaccine researcher Dr. Poul Thorsen, co-producer of 21 CDC studies, some used to deny any vaccine/autism link. Rep. Posey noted that Thorsen has been indicted for misallocation of resources; the vaccine researcher tops the Office of Inspector General’s Fugitive Profiles list here. Though Boyle claimed Thorsen was “really just one investigator,” Rep. Posey said the CDC had relied on “a humongous scumbag” and asked whether the CDC had gone back to validate the studies Thorsen worked on; Boyle replied with more prevarication.

Read Full Article Here

*****************************************************************************************************

Congressman introduces bill requiring study of autism rate in vaccinated vs. unvaccinated

MB Comment: The CDC has refused to study the autism rate in vaccinated vs. unvaccinated kids, because they are a captive agency of vaccine manufacturers. The former head of the CDC is now the head of Merck vaccines, the largest US vaccine manufacturer. CDC officials have been disrespectful, bumbling fools when required to testify before Congress.

The CDC is reluctant to compare autism rates in unvaxed vs. vaxed because it will likely show the same thing as the following study and survey, a huge increase in autism risk in the vaccinated. Of course such data will indict the CDC and expose their responsibility for creating the biggest epidemic in US history: Vaccine-induced autism.

1) Children who receive the entire 3-shot series of Hepatitis B Vaccine have a 9x higher rate of developmental disabilities than unvaccinated children. Hepatitis B triple series vaccine and developmental disability in US children aged 1-9 years
Toxicological and Environmental Chemistry, September 2008 Carolyn Gallagher* and Melody Goodman

2) Vaccinated children have higher rates of autism and ADHD than unvaccinated children.

Generation Rescue: Unvaccinated children phone survey. All vaccinated boys, compared to unvaccinated boys:

- Vaccinated boys were 155% more likely to have a neurological disorder (RR 2.55)
- Vaccinated boys were 224% more likely to have ADHD (RR 3.24)
- Vaccinated boys were 61% more likely to have autism (RR 1.61)

************************************************************

HON. Bill Posey
Of Florida
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Friday, April 26, 2013

I rise today to draw the attention of the Congress and the American people to the Autism epidemic that is tragically ravaging too many of America’s children.

April is Autism Awareness Month, and I am pleased to join with parents, siblings, grandparents, special education school teachers, medical care providers, and interventionists to draw attention to the rapidly expanding autism community.

When I was young, autism was virtually unheard of. In the 1980s rarely did you meet someone who knew someone with autism. Yet, in the 1990s there was an explosion of autism. Indeed, in the course of just my lifetime, Autism Spectrum Disorder has grown from a very rare condition to – according to the Centers for Disease Control – a developmental disorder affecting 1-in-50 school aged children. And, tragically, the rate for school aged boys is a disturbing 1-in-33.

On December 19, 2006, the effort to address this epidemic took a major step forward as President Bush signed into law the bipartisan Combating Autism Act. I look forward to working with my colleagues and the Autism community to reauthorize this program next year. Though the Interagency Autism Coordinating Committee each year produces a strategic plan to address Autism, the billion-dollar allocation of resources to autism has not been evenly invested among genetic, epigenetic, and environmental factors. I must concur with the experts who have been willing to speak out, that the epidemic increase in the rates of autism are not a ‘genetic’ epidemic. Indeed, you don’t have genetic epidemics. While there is likely a genetic component to many who have been diagnosed with Autism, we must seriously consider that there are likely several key factors in autism.

Also, so some who have suggested that the increase in Autism is due to better diagnosis, you don’t go from 1 in 1,000 to 1 in 80 in three decades due to better diagnosis alone. And, if that were the case, where are the tens of thousands of autistic adults in their 40s, 50s and 60s. While better diagnosis may be a factor, common sense says there is a real increase and something is causing it.

While some may be borne with Autism, there are many parents who testify to the fact and present cases where their children were progressing normally but something triggered a regression where they lost speech, abilities, and regressed from developmental milestones that they had earlier met. Was that regression due to external factors such as medical injury, exposure to environmental toxins such as lead or mercury, or was it adverse reactions to medications that lead to high fevers, brain inflammation or seizures? We must get answers to these questions.

Read Full Article Here

*****************************************************************************************************

linktv linktv

Published on Apr 30, 2013

As Europe considers expanding cultivation of genetically modified crops, the European movement against GMOs heats up. A campaign film produced by Sourced TV highlights European concerns.

Watch more at http://www.linktv.org/earthfocus.


By Dr. Mercola

Australia’s Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization (CSIRO) has developed a type of genetically modified (GM) wheat that may silence human genes, leading to disastrous health consequences.

Last year, University of Canterbury Professor Jack Heinemann released results from genetic research he conducted on the wheat, which showed with “no doubt” that molecules created in the wheat, which are intended to silence wheat genes to change its carbohydrate content, may match human genes and potentially silence them.

University Professor Judy Carman agreed with Heinemann’s analysis, stating in Digital Journal:1

“If this silences the same gene in us that it silences in the wheat — well, children who are born with this enzyme not working tend to die by the age of about five.”

Over 770 Pages of Potential Genetic Matches

Heinemann reported that his research revealed over 770 pages of potential matches between two GM genes in the wheat and the human genome. Over a dozen matches were “extensive and identical and sufficient to cause silencing in experimental systems,” he said.

Experts warned that eating the wheat could lead to significant changes in the way glucose and carbohydrates are stored in the human body, which could be potentially deadly for children and lead to serious illness in adults.

Since this adverse effect is extremely plausible, long-term studies are needed before the wheat is released into the environment and the human food chain – but a new review states that the risks are still not being adequately assessed.

A New ‘Breed’ of GM Crops

RNA is one of three major macromolecules, like DNA. Double-stranded RNA (dsRNA) is responsible for regulating well over one-third of human genes.

In a new risk assessment, Heinemann and colleagues explained that while all commercial GM plants are currently created through in vitro DNA modification typically to create a new protein, a “growing minority” are designed to change their RNA content in order to regulate gene expression.2

The technique, known as RNA interference or RNA knockdown, essentially turns off or “knocks down” certain genes. It was first used commercially in 1994 for the development of the Flavor Savr tomato, which was later withdrawn from the market, and has been applied in various GM crops since. As reported in The Atlantic:3

“Researchers have been using this phenomena to their advantage in the form of small, engineered RNA strands that are virtually identical to miRNA. In a technique called RNA interference, or RNA knockdown, these small bits of RNA are used to turn off, or ‘knock down,’ certain genes.

RNA knockdown was first used commercially in 1994 to create the Flavor Savr, a tomato with increased shelf life. In 2007, several research teams began reporting success at engineering plant RNA to kill insect predators, by knocking down certain genes. As reported in MIT’s Technology Review on November 5, 2007, researchers in China used RNA knockdown to make:

‘…cotton plants that silence a gene that allows cotton bollworms to process the toxin gossypol, which occurs naturally in cotton. Bollworms that eat the genetically engineered cotton can’t make their toxin-processing proteins, and they die.’

And: ‘Researchers at Monsanto and Devgen, a Belgian company, made corn plants that silence a gene essential for energy production in corn rootworms; ingestion wipes out the worms within 12 days.’ Humans and insects have a lot in common, genetically. If miRNA can in fact survive the gut then it’s entirely possible that miRNA intended to influence insect gene regulation could also affect humans.”

The Risks of GM Crops Containing dsRNA

According to Heinemann’s analysis, dsRNA-mediated silencing is becoming the basis of novel traits in GM plants, including biopesticides and altered nutritional characteristics. “Changing the nature, kind and quantity of particular regulatory-RNA molecules through genetic engineering can create biosafety risks,” the review reported,4 noting that, “we find evidence that the risks are not considered by some regulators.” They continue:

While some GMOs have been designed to make new dsRNA molecules, in other GMOs such molecules may occur as a side-effect of the genetic engineering process. Still others may make naturally-occurring dsRNA molecules in higher or lower quantities than before.

Some dsRNA molecules can have profound physiological effects on the organism that makes them. Physiological effects are the intended outcomes of exposure to dsRNA incorporated into food sources for invertebrates; biopesticides and other topically applied products, and could be the cause of off-target effects and adverse effects in non-target organisms.

A daunting outcome is raised, that each [dsRNA] formulation might have its own risks.…Production of intended dsRNA molecules may also have off-target effects due to silencing genes other than those intended. Unanticipated off-target adverse effects can be difficult to detect and they are not possible to reliably predict using bioinformatics techniques. Regulatory bodies are not adequately assessing the risks of dsRNA-producing GM products. As a result, we recommend a process to properly assess the safety of dsRNA-producing GM organisms before they are released or commercialized.”

 

Read Full ArticleHere

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 728 other followers