So with Christmas gone and the last of the celebrations of the year ahead of us here, what a great time to think of the year ahead and what we can take with us from the last year.
As I sit here with Daisy the beagle curled up and my lovely son opposite typing away also, studying for his first Oxford exams, It brings home to me how very lucky we are. No matter how we might think our life is tough in parts and precarious at times, we sit here in safety and with those that matter most to me in good heath.
You look around the world and see the destruction and suppression, hunger and cruelty, and it is but a stones throw from any of us. This time of year, the TV is full of appeals for money to save a child's life, to improve the health of others, to improve the life of animals, to prevent cruelty, to provide shelter etc.
It is impossible to give to all and even throwing money at these problems doesn't seem to be enough. We have these same problems decade after decade and who creates them - man himself of course. These are not problems inflicted by an outside force, but by the very decisions taken at every turn. If we are still facing the same problems in the 21st Century, then we really need to wake up.
All of us, I believe, have an inbuilt sense of what is right or wrong. We are never taught how to feel, so even if nurture plays a part, nature is there also and we learn a lot by how we feel. Empathy. We all know when greed and exploitation are our motive. We know when we are acting out of revenge and anger or doing an act of kindness.
Neglect of children and cruelty towards them is inexcusable. What defence can there be. It is not gifts that children need but the consistent love and protection of the very guardians/parents that have chosen to have this child. As adults we have the advantage of knowing the difficulties children face and how scary the world can seem to them, we have been there, they are yet to be adults and what sort of adults do we hope they become? Children are not just the responsibility of parents or guardians, we are all responsible for raising the next generation. What sort of example are we?
All around is excess in possessions and this can breed greed,envy & dissatisfaction. Imagine if this was an excess of pure love, the gap wouldn't need filling with gifts and to aspire to greater love has got to be better than aspiring to have more collateral in what ever form that collateral takes.
The way a nation treats it's animals is indeed a mark of its civility. They are a test of our innate knowing of right or wrong. I read an horrific story this morning of a couple who tied there dog upside down as a punishment. The dog was so distressed and disturbed, it had to be put down. In what mind would inflicting pain and cruelty onto any animal be considered ok? This is not just our pets of course, and after all, you don't have to have a pet, but it is also the way we treat livestock in our food supply.
Those that campaign for animal welfare do a superb job highlighting the world wide problems with the way we treat animals destined for our table. Surely the meat we want to eat we would rather had been fed well, treated well in life and at the time of death. I'm not promoting vegetarianism, but rightful respect for all life.
Then there are those that have an eye to our environment and put themselves at risk because they care so passionately about saving the planet. The very home in which we all rely, but seem to turn a blind eye when it is being stripped of all that we need to survive. These people deserve our support and not viewed as battling hopeless causes - without their actions, we could be in a much worse state. They are not afraid to take on the corporations and neither are they doing it for their own satisfaction, but for the generations they and us are yet to meet and beyond. For an outcome they may not see materialise in their lifetime, but out of sheer love of the planet. Greenpeace of course are the biggest movement in this and we all owe them more than we might ever realise.
Exploitation on many levels leads to poverty. Stripping assets, resources, taking possession, invasion - and what for? Exploitation at the hands of governments, corporations, and on a local scale, unscrupulous beings.
2014 I guess is not going to be the year to take your eyes of the likes of Monsanto and the likes of Bayer, GSK, Merck, as they struggle to keep the reins of power and exploitation in their hands
How to gain at the expense of others, cruelty, domination and neglect of care to those around us, whether we know them or not.
What if 2014 saw the reverse of this, when faced with the decision of cruelty or kindness, the option was always kindness. What if tolerance over intolerance, what if mutual support triumphed over domination and what is we stopped with our constant need to have more stuff.
It is never too late to have a new paradigm. Nature has a way of winning over in the end and she doesn't care how she does it - better we work with her than against her.
If in the process of continuing to live as we do, we wipe ourselves out - she isn't going to care. Nature doesn't favour one species over another. We are all here at her tolerance.
So when a festive season comes round that has no need for appeals to mop up our disgraces to each other, that really would be one to celebrate and the quicker that time comes the better.
To quote the philosopher, Edmund Burke 1729-1797
'Nobody made a greater mistake than he who did nothing because he could only do a little'
Tuesday, 31 December 2013
Friday, 27 December 2013
To Vaccinate or Not to Vaccinate - Find out more on vaccinations and make an informed choice.
To vaccinate or not to vaccinate perhaps ought to be the question that all parents ask themselves. But many do not, many just assume that whatever the vaccine schedule for their country is, they follow it, after all, it is the medical profession that are administering it so it must be ok then?
Well in the short term the majority of children seem fine, some do not though and parents notice changes in behaviour and ability after the vaccinations. In the long term....well are we swapping harmless childhood illnesses for more chronic conditions in later life. Rises in chronic conditions and autoimmune problems could be a knock on effect of vaccination.
By-passing the natural route for immunity could be causing problems in our health in later life. Immunity from vaccination is not permanent and having childhood illnesses in childhood is far safer than having them later in life when they can give rise to more complex experiences.
Do we really need to be so afraid of childhood illnesses, after all, long before the vast amount of vaccinations our children are now subjected to, our parents had to look after us and manage our illness. The vast amount of children survived these illnesses with no problems, managing a fever, good nutrition, rest are all ways of supporting a body as it fights infection.
Isn't it odd that childhood illnesses are never given a high profile as a problem until a vaccine is there, then suddenly the media are declaring a mild childhood illness as a 'killer' disease.
Well parents have a difficult decision in the original question of vaccinate or not if they don't have the facts or the other side of the vaccine story, or perhaps don't know just what they can do if their child gets an illness.
There are 2 talks coming up which might just help. They are London UK based and will be held at the College of Natural Medicine. Details below
http://www.naturopathy-uk.com/events/events-special-uk/
Vaccination - The Question
Dr. Jayne Donegan
MMR – Which is better: The Disease or the Vaccine?
Dr. Jayne Donegan
Well in the short term the majority of children seem fine, some do not though and parents notice changes in behaviour and ability after the vaccinations. In the long term....well are we swapping harmless childhood illnesses for more chronic conditions in later life. Rises in chronic conditions and autoimmune problems could be a knock on effect of vaccination.
By-passing the natural route for immunity could be causing problems in our health in later life. Immunity from vaccination is not permanent and having childhood illnesses in childhood is far safer than having them later in life when they can give rise to more complex experiences.
Do we really need to be so afraid of childhood illnesses, after all, long before the vast amount of vaccinations our children are now subjected to, our parents had to look after us and manage our illness. The vast amount of children survived these illnesses with no problems, managing a fever, good nutrition, rest are all ways of supporting a body as it fights infection.
Isn't it odd that childhood illnesses are never given a high profile as a problem until a vaccine is there, then suddenly the media are declaring a mild childhood illness as a 'killer' disease.
Well parents have a difficult decision in the original question of vaccinate or not if they don't have the facts or the other side of the vaccine story, or perhaps don't know just what they can do if their child gets an illness.
There are 2 talks coming up which might just help. They are London UK based and will be held at the College of Natural Medicine. Details below
http://www.naturopathy-uk.com/events/events-special-uk/
Vaccination - The Question
CNM London
Dr. Jayne Donegan
| Date: | Monday 27th January 2014 |
|---|---|
| Time: | 6.30pm - 8.30pm (Please aim to arrive by 6.15pm) |
| Location: | CNM London |
| Tickets: | £10 per person |
Dr. Jayne Donegan, GP & Homoeopath, was a former strong supporter of the UK’s Universal Childhood Vaccination Programme, but her subsequent research led her to change her opinion. In this seminar Dr Donegan will address:
- Factors key to historic decreases in deaths from childhood diseases
- Efficacy of common childhood vaccinations
- Safety risks versus benefits of modern vaccinations
- How government & pharmaceutical companies manage vaccine data
- What historical evidence tells us about protecting children’s health today
MMR – Which is better: The Disease or the Vaccine?
CNM London
Dr. Jayne Donegan
| Date: | Monday 2nd June 2014 |
|---|---|
| Time: | 6.30pm - 8.30pm (Please aim to arrive by 6.15pm) |
| Location: | CNM London |
| Tickets: | £10 per person |
GP & Homeopath, Dr Jayne Donegan will look at the normal course of Mumps, Measles and Rubella, and what parents fear most about these diseases. She will look at what the vaccine does, and take a brief look at 'Germ Theory of Disease' and its pitfalls versus the Holistic Model of Disease. She will also cover basic strategies which will help parents to cope with any acute childhood illness or infection.
There will be an opportunity for questions.
Call 01342 410 505 or email info@naturopathy-uk.com for further information.
Location Map (opens in new window)
Tuesday, 3 December 2013
Interview with Patricia Peat - Cancer Options. (link)
Great link below to an interview with Patricia Peat from Cancer Options
http://naturalhealthradio.co.uk/keith-hern-13-sept-talks-with-patricia-peat/
Patricia has featured in some of my past blogs and really leads the way in integrative oncology treatments.
Enjoy!
http://naturalhealthradio.co.uk/keith-hern-13-sept-talks-with-patricia-peat/
Patricia has featured in some of my past blogs and really leads the way in integrative oncology treatments.
Enjoy!
Another use for Statins?
I'm sure the makers of the wonder drug 'statins' must be clapping their hands as it now seems that not only can it reduce your cholesterol but apparently it could have the possibility to prevent cancer.......
Reported on the BBC website, it suggests that a by-product of cholesterol can fuel the growth and spread of breast cancer.
As you read through the story it really comes back to the fact that obesity can be a factor in breast cancer and other cancers, which probably everyone knows, and that is due to the fat producing hormones such as oetroegen which in higher levels, can increase the risk of certain cancers.
So taking statins are not the answer to losing weight though. High cholesterol is not only related to weight of course nor is it always related to food.
There are suggestions that there is a link between statin use and heart attacks due to the decrease of the CO Q10 enzyme through the taking of statins. So how fortuitous for the makers to have this discovery.....Of course it is one of those headline grabbing stories that when you read it, it is a very small study so far and in its infancy, but this is a drug that is out there and if anyone was considering not taking it for the original reason it was prescribed for them, now they might be persuaded to keep taking it for a different reason, but one yet totally not proven and a result that can be achieved without a drug.
Far better if these stories came up only when all tests are done and proven in its effectiveness plus all trials which didn't come out favourable were published also - All trials!
Far better if these stories came up only when all tests are done and proven in its effectiveness plus all trials which didn't come out favourable were published also - All trials!
Perhaps cholesterol isn't the problem but what we should be investigating is the cause of the problem that requires the body to use it. Fix that and no reliance on a drug.
It is interesting though, that our bodies make and recycle cholesterol - it wouldn't do that if it wasn't crucial in our survival. Weight gain seems to be one of the factors for increasing cancer, but that's down to us as individuals in what we eat. Our high sugar content in our diet has more of an impact on our obesity and hence may be increasing our risk of cancers. Is the answer really in a pill? If we do develop an illness, the conditions that brought about that need to change or the ground is still the same and the same growth can occur. So it comes back to what we do and not what pill we take. Pity that study is never done! but no money in that medicine.
Sunday, 17 November 2013
To Alkaline or Not to Alkaline
I managed to catch some of a UK series called 'Health Freaks' which I think was a Channel 4 programme. In it, for those who have missed its delights, you find 3 doctors who sit and listen and pass a judgement on various 'cures' that members of the public present for a variety of conditions. - You know I really shouldn't watch these programmes as I'm sure they do the blood pressure no good what so ever.
If the idea meets with the 3 'experts' approval then it might get trialled. I have to say the criteria is really arbitrary at this stage and seemingly harmless 'cures' that have worked for the individual concerned are dismissed.
One cure that was totally dismissed was the taking of cider vinegar and honey in a little water for arthritic pain. The lady who presented this was indeed happy with its results and she was clearly given it by someone else that had success with it, in fact it is one that i have suggested to many people, and in those that have used it regularly have also been pain free and not needed the use of medical drugs. It just so happened that this lady also lost some weight, which of course would always help arthritis, but that has not been a factor in those I know that use this cure. The 3 docs, decided that it was the weight loss that did it.
The rationale behind it is one of lessening the acidity in the body. On that basis the doctors dismissed it instantly - stating that scientifically we cannot alter the ph of our bodies.......Well we clearly can to some extent, or why else do they prescribe antacids! Of course various organs of our body require different ph levels and much of maintaining this is down to the kidneys.
But something else must be happening then, many of us will know people who suffer arthritis or rheumatics and they know that for them, avoiding strong acid forming foods helps relieve the pain. Onions, tomatoes, potatoes etc are often those cited as causing inflammation. My own fathers hands will swell around the knuckles if he eats tomatoes. If you look up Gout, all medical websites will advise people to cut out acid forming food - so doctors, which is it to be?
There is much talk about alkaline diets being beneficial for people with serious health issues - well on the basis of these 3 doctors views - that would seem a pointless regime to follow then if our kidneys will deal with it all anyway.
So I thought I would have a look and see what is out there and what makes sense. This was the best explanation from a doctor I could find, that works well for an everyday view of the subject......
When people encourage you to "alkaline your blood," most of them mean that you should eat plenty of foods that have an alkaline-forming effect on your system. The reason for making this suggestion is that the vast majority of highly processed foods - like white flour products and white sugar - have an acid-forming effect on your system, and if you spend years eating a poor diet that is mainly acid-forming, you will overwork some of the buffering systems mentioned above to a point where you could create undesirable changes in your health.
For example, your phosphate buffer system uses different phosphate ions in your body to neutralize strong acids and bases. About 85% of the phosphate ions that are used in your phosphate buffer system comes from calcium phosphate salts, which are structural components of your bones and teeth. If your body fluids are regularly exposed to large quantities of acid-forming foods and liquids, your body will draw upon its calcium phosphate reserves to supply your phosphate buffer system to neutralize the acid-forming effects of your diet. Over time, this may lead to structural weakness in your bones and teeth.
Drawing on your calcium phosphate reserves at a high rate can also increase the amount of calcium that is eliminated via your genito-urinary system, which is why a predominantly acid-forming diet can increase your risk of developing calcium-rich kidney stones.
This is just one example of how your buffering systems can be overtaxed to a point where you experience negative health consequences. Since your buffering systems have to work all the time anyway to neutralize the acids that are formed from everyday metabolic activities, it's in your best interest to follow a diet that doesn't create unnecessary work for your buffering system.
So given that there is logic to the theory, and ph levels can be controlled by diet and need to be if the buffering system is under pressure through years of bad diet, what a pity that this innocent concoction of cider vinegar and honey wasn't explored.
Still the programme that featured duck tape reducing verrucas, it was agreed that it worked but sadly never said why! Odd that what ever is in duck tape, wasn't considered to be a problem leeching into the skin - where as other such remedies were dismissed on that basis.
Many 'cures' were dismissed on the grounds there was no medical evidence...which was odd as clearly there never will be if no one does the trials and surely that was what this programme was about.....you see, I knew it was a mistake to watch it.
So despite the dismissing of influence of diet over ph by the TV Doc's, there are doctors out there that go that extra mile in the chemistry of the body and hence can show some sound evidence as to what goes on with the acid/alkaline balance in our bodies and why recommending including more alkaline forming foods in the diet is advantageous to health in the long term.
Of course the programme at several junctions mentions that it is essential for viewers to follow the advice of their GP's....Is this always the case?....The latest stats state that 250.000 people world wide die from taking the prescribed meds, in the right dose, at the right time, every year....
But then I think it was Mark Twain that said one should be careful of reading health books, as you might die of a misprint.
Perhaps in this age, it could be death by Wikipedia or overzealous drug companies and ill informed doctors.
Where does that leave us all?
If the idea meets with the 3 'experts' approval then it might get trialled. I have to say the criteria is really arbitrary at this stage and seemingly harmless 'cures' that have worked for the individual concerned are dismissed.
One cure that was totally dismissed was the taking of cider vinegar and honey in a little water for arthritic pain. The lady who presented this was indeed happy with its results and she was clearly given it by someone else that had success with it, in fact it is one that i have suggested to many people, and in those that have used it regularly have also been pain free and not needed the use of medical drugs. It just so happened that this lady also lost some weight, which of course would always help arthritis, but that has not been a factor in those I know that use this cure. The 3 docs, decided that it was the weight loss that did it.
The rationale behind it is one of lessening the acidity in the body. On that basis the doctors dismissed it instantly - stating that scientifically we cannot alter the ph of our bodies.......Well we clearly can to some extent, or why else do they prescribe antacids! Of course various organs of our body require different ph levels and much of maintaining this is down to the kidneys.
But something else must be happening then, many of us will know people who suffer arthritis or rheumatics and they know that for them, avoiding strong acid forming foods helps relieve the pain. Onions, tomatoes, potatoes etc are often those cited as causing inflammation. My own fathers hands will swell around the knuckles if he eats tomatoes. If you look up Gout, all medical websites will advise people to cut out acid forming food - so doctors, which is it to be?
There is much talk about alkaline diets being beneficial for people with serious health issues - well on the basis of these 3 doctors views - that would seem a pointless regime to follow then if our kidneys will deal with it all anyway.
So I thought I would have a look and see what is out there and what makes sense. This was the best explanation from a doctor I could find, that works well for an everyday view of the subject......
When people encourage you to "alkaline your blood," most of them mean that you should eat plenty of foods that have an alkaline-forming effect on your system. The reason for making this suggestion is that the vast majority of highly processed foods - like white flour products and white sugar - have an acid-forming effect on your system, and if you spend years eating a poor diet that is mainly acid-forming, you will overwork some of the buffering systems mentioned above to a point where you could create undesirable changes in your health.
For example, your phosphate buffer system uses different phosphate ions in your body to neutralize strong acids and bases. About 85% of the phosphate ions that are used in your phosphate buffer system comes from calcium phosphate salts, which are structural components of your bones and teeth. If your body fluids are regularly exposed to large quantities of acid-forming foods and liquids, your body will draw upon its calcium phosphate reserves to supply your phosphate buffer system to neutralize the acid-forming effects of your diet. Over time, this may lead to structural weakness in your bones and teeth.
Drawing on your calcium phosphate reserves at a high rate can also increase the amount of calcium that is eliminated via your genito-urinary system, which is why a predominantly acid-forming diet can increase your risk of developing calcium-rich kidney stones.
This is just one example of how your buffering systems can be overtaxed to a point where you experience negative health consequences. Since your buffering systems have to work all the time anyway to neutralize the acids that are formed from everyday metabolic activities, it's in your best interest to follow a diet that doesn't create unnecessary work for your buffering system.
So given that there is logic to the theory, and ph levels can be controlled by diet and need to be if the buffering system is under pressure through years of bad diet, what a pity that this innocent concoction of cider vinegar and honey wasn't explored.
Still the programme that featured duck tape reducing verrucas, it was agreed that it worked but sadly never said why! Odd that what ever is in duck tape, wasn't considered to be a problem leeching into the skin - where as other such remedies were dismissed on that basis.
Many 'cures' were dismissed on the grounds there was no medical evidence...which was odd as clearly there never will be if no one does the trials and surely that was what this programme was about.....you see, I knew it was a mistake to watch it.
So despite the dismissing of influence of diet over ph by the TV Doc's, there are doctors out there that go that extra mile in the chemistry of the body and hence can show some sound evidence as to what goes on with the acid/alkaline balance in our bodies and why recommending including more alkaline forming foods in the diet is advantageous to health in the long term.
Of course the programme at several junctions mentions that it is essential for viewers to follow the advice of their GP's....Is this always the case?....The latest stats state that 250.000 people world wide die from taking the prescribed meds, in the right dose, at the right time, every year....
But then I think it was Mark Twain that said one should be careful of reading health books, as you might die of a misprint.
Perhaps in this age, it could be death by Wikipedia or overzealous drug companies and ill informed doctors.
Where does that leave us all?
Monday, 14 October 2013
March Against Monsanto
On Saturday 12 October, demonstrators in an estimated 400 cities in 50 countries took to the streets to protest against the corporate psychopathic organisation - Monsanto.
How many people out there still don't know who Monsanto are and why those of us that marched feel so moved to do so?
Monsanto are one of the main players behind the GM seed. In the thousands of years that we have been farming on this planet, these farmers have never needed genetically modified seed.It has never been about a monoculture system of farming. When I was at school in the 70's, we learnt the importance of crop rotation and why it was important to do this to allow the land to recover and not to replant the same crop in the same place year in and year out. Farmers for thousands of years have been following these rules and working in harmony with nature. But now we are the age of the monoculture, and so we have had to become the age of the nutrient depleted food - the land does not recover, it does not support more than one crop - it is stripped of its nutrients and destroyed with stronger and stronger pesticides.
Our health suffers as a result of that nutrient depletion. Iodine is scarce in soil these days - is this a factor in the rising number of under active thyroid cases in people and all the knock on effects in the body that brings?
For the last 20 years or so, we have had to contend with the idea that genetically modified seeds are the way forward. Yes they are if you are the pesticide corporation and have the technology to make a seed resistant to your pesticide, even if that means crossing genes in nature that would never naturally be crossed.
Creating a GM seed gives the corporation the right to patent it. Nature provided seeds for free and in abundance, she did so that food was there for everyone. Even William the Conqueror ensured everyone had a strip of land to grow their own food on. If the likes of Monsanto and Bayer and Syngenta have their way, there will only be their sterile seeds, you won't be able to save them, you will need to buy more and more each year.
It is so well documented just what that has meant to the farmers in India with the BT cotton. Sold by Monsanto as the seed that will yield more and pest resistant - well if only that was true. Farmers went from growing crops that reproduced themselves to a sterile seed that yields less and needs buying again every year.
Like the over use of antibiotics, we have viruses that are resistant to anything we can medically throw at them, so man has done the same to pests. The over use of pesticides has created resistance to them in the pest. Nature will keep evolving to ensure survival, be it pest or predator.
The long term effects on the livelihoods of farmers has been devastating in India, with nearly 300, 000 taking their own lives as they can not meet the rising cost of Monsanto's products and the yield is less.
We might think that we kicked Monsanto out of Europe, but GM is in the food chain. One of these monoculture GM crops is corn....despite the fact that cows are designed to eat grass not grain, Cattle is so often grain fed and that is where the GM enters the food chain. Buy organic grass fed beef and meats!
But it means we are not free of GM. Imported goods, especially from the US. We need to know what is in our food, what is the food chain.
It is important we don't lose the rights over nature that were given to us all. Nature is about abundance and not about profit and creating shortage.
The GM argument is that with rising populations we need GM food. How will producing sterile seeds help in the 'abundance of food' we need to feed the rising population. Nature has it covered. From one plant, thousands of seeds come and from that thousands more. The shortage argument is redundant then.
The London march was impressively organised and good humoured. We held up the traffic on the Embankment, up to and around Trafalgar Square, onto the green outside Westminster where we treated to a host of great speakers and of course Vandana Shiva,
How come this global event has not been covered by the news?
Click on the first link to see a message from Vandana and on the 2nd link to see some great videos, pictures and comments on the forum. You can see Vandana's whole address to the crowd on there also.
http://www.march-against-monsanto.com/
https://www.facebook.com/events/619805734707148/?notif_t=plan_user_joined
How many people out there still don't know who Monsanto are and why those of us that marched feel so moved to do so?
Monsanto are one of the main players behind the GM seed. In the thousands of years that we have been farming on this planet, these farmers have never needed genetically modified seed.It has never been about a monoculture system of farming. When I was at school in the 70's, we learnt the importance of crop rotation and why it was important to do this to allow the land to recover and not to replant the same crop in the same place year in and year out. Farmers for thousands of years have been following these rules and working in harmony with nature. But now we are the age of the monoculture, and so we have had to become the age of the nutrient depleted food - the land does not recover, it does not support more than one crop - it is stripped of its nutrients and destroyed with stronger and stronger pesticides.
Our health suffers as a result of that nutrient depletion. Iodine is scarce in soil these days - is this a factor in the rising number of under active thyroid cases in people and all the knock on effects in the body that brings?
For the last 20 years or so, we have had to contend with the idea that genetically modified seeds are the way forward. Yes they are if you are the pesticide corporation and have the technology to make a seed resistant to your pesticide, even if that means crossing genes in nature that would never naturally be crossed.
Creating a GM seed gives the corporation the right to patent it. Nature provided seeds for free and in abundance, she did so that food was there for everyone. Even William the Conqueror ensured everyone had a strip of land to grow their own food on. If the likes of Monsanto and Bayer and Syngenta have their way, there will only be their sterile seeds, you won't be able to save them, you will need to buy more and more each year.
It is so well documented just what that has meant to the farmers in India with the BT cotton. Sold by Monsanto as the seed that will yield more and pest resistant - well if only that was true. Farmers went from growing crops that reproduced themselves to a sterile seed that yields less and needs buying again every year.
Like the over use of antibiotics, we have viruses that are resistant to anything we can medically throw at them, so man has done the same to pests. The over use of pesticides has created resistance to them in the pest. Nature will keep evolving to ensure survival, be it pest or predator.
The long term effects on the livelihoods of farmers has been devastating in India, with nearly 300, 000 taking their own lives as they can not meet the rising cost of Monsanto's products and the yield is less.
We might think that we kicked Monsanto out of Europe, but GM is in the food chain. One of these monoculture GM crops is corn....despite the fact that cows are designed to eat grass not grain, Cattle is so often grain fed and that is where the GM enters the food chain. Buy organic grass fed beef and meats!
But it means we are not free of GM. Imported goods, especially from the US. We need to know what is in our food, what is the food chain.
It is important we don't lose the rights over nature that were given to us all. Nature is about abundance and not about profit and creating shortage.
The GM argument is that with rising populations we need GM food. How will producing sterile seeds help in the 'abundance of food' we need to feed the rising population. Nature has it covered. From one plant, thousands of seeds come and from that thousands more. The shortage argument is redundant then.
The London march was impressively organised and good humoured. We held up the traffic on the Embankment, up to and around Trafalgar Square, onto the green outside Westminster where we treated to a host of great speakers and of course Vandana Shiva,
How come this global event has not been covered by the news?
Click on the first link to see a message from Vandana and on the 2nd link to see some great videos, pictures and comments on the forum. You can see Vandana's whole address to the crowd on there also.
http://www.march-against-monsanto.com/
https://www.facebook.com/events/619805734707148/?notif_t=plan_user_joined
Saturday, 21 September 2013
First Do No Harm....
Having risked a look at the BBC news website, I read it for the propaganda don't you know!, I see the main headline on the health section is that of the HPV vaccine, that which is supposed to cut the deaths and occurrences from and of, cervical cancer, is being considered for boys!!
This is not the first time this has been mooted and the justifications for it....well nothing that sex education couldn't address. At one time, smoking was said to be the main cause of mouth or throat cancer, now it is being suggested that it is oral sex. It could seem that the cause much depends on what you want to promote as a cure.
Whatever the question of cause, is vaccination the answer?
This Gardasil vaccine is not without it's problems and proven complications, although the term 'proven complications' is hardly adequate when that has meant the deaths of many young girls (and one is enough if it is your daughter!) and the huge impact on the health of many others.
According to the published VAERS report on the HPV vaccine up to March 2013
The number....
Disabled = 935
Deaths = 133
Did not recover = 5,875
Had Abnormal PAP smears = 519
Cervical Cancer developed = 62
Cervical Dysplaysia = 209
Life Threatening = 551
Emergency room admissions = 10,335
Hospitalised = 2,954
Extended hospital stays = 227
Serious = 3,963
Adverse events = 29,362
Given that it is also accepted that resulting conditions are massively under reported - these figures could be way higher.
But here we are blindly going down this track.
If the death of a young man or woman occurs as a result of taking an illegal substance, it hits the headlines big time, but if that death occurs as a result of a vaccination, then that's a coincidence and no one hears about it. Not that i'm advocating the taking of illegal substances, just the recognition of 'agenda' when reporting.
So there will be many here in the UK facing the dilemma of do they or don't they have the vaccine, and we are all brought up believing the 'white coat'. These 'white coats' can only tell you what the drug company tells them.
Interestingly on page 7 of the Guardian yesterday, our government has had to take a U-turn on the link between the swine flu jab and narcolepsy. What it describes as 'fresh evidence' is the proven link between the GSK Pandemrix vaccine and this condition developing.. Yet i'm sure this vaccine was 'sold as safe' 1 in 55.000 jabs has caused a problem, 900 people and that is only those that get reported all the way along the line. It is recognised that symptoms as a result of medication taking or jabs etc are under reported. Often only 10%.
So this vaccine was not completely safe and those effected are going to be asked to apply for compensation from the government within 3 weeks of the announcement.
If you read the above carefully, you will see that GSK made the vaccine but we the tax payers are footing the compensation bill (governments don't have their own money - they play about with ours)
So why are they doing this? Is GSK a struggling drug company that the government has got to bail out...well hardly!
It turns out, like many vaccines, GSK had an indemnity clause written into the contract when providing the drug for the government. This means the government is ultimately responsible for picking up the bill.
This little snippet, gets a mention in the Guardian, but surely this is a story in itself.
If these vaccines are so safe, why doesn't the drug company back its own products?
Does Russell Hobbs get the government to underwrite all the kettles they sell in case they blow up when the public use them?
Could GSK not get an insurer to take their money? - that all most seems impossible to believe.
What could possibly be wrong or go wrong with an extensively tested drug that has been deemed fit for purpose to be used on the public?
Not sure it fills me with confidence that the developer of the drug, won't or can't back it financially if it goes wrong.
This was a page 7 article not a headline grabbing one yet when we had the measles furore, this made front page news as the drive was to scare people into getting their children vaccinated. The effect of vaccines when they cause a problem gets buried on page 7 or as on the BBC website, one of those 'click on to reveal more' stories. Not exactly lead story, yet it could end up costing the tax payer a lot of money.
The story of a young man's death at the time attributed to measles, also hit the main headlines, despite the inquest showing this not to be the cause. Again, it fitted with the agenda
Right now, that lead story on the BBC is the HPV for boys. I wonder if the complications that might arise will take the same prominent position?
When those that are responsible for developing drugs, testing them and then present them as safe, are one and the same, where are the safe guards for the public?
Now given that articles that discuss vaccinations are being monitored, perhaps those that call for openness and that doctors get given all the facts, not just the cherry picked studies the drug companies want to present, this can be seen that these matters need addressing and the 'truth' in medicine be restored. After all, Dr's take an oath that says, first do no harm - may be we should get the drug companies to sign up for that one also!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)