New Research Finds GMO Herbicides Cause Antibiotic Resistance

E_coli_Bacteria_1200x600By GM Watch

Farm workers in rural areas and in children in urban settings who are exposed to herbicides may be at risk if they are also on antibiotics

The active ingredients of the commonly used herbicides, RoundUp, Kamba and 2,4-D (glyphosate, dicamba and 2,4-D, respectively), each alone cause antibiotic resistance at concentrations well below label application rates, a new study led by researchers at the University of Canterbury in New Zealand has found.

Professor Jack Heinemann of the School of Biological Sciences in UC’s College of Science said the key finding of the research was that “bacteria respond to exposure to the herbicides by changing how susceptible they are to antibiotics used in human and animal medicine.”

The herbicides studied are three of the most widely used in the world, Prof Heinemann said. They are also used on crops that have been genetically modified to tolerate them.

The effect was not seen at herbicide concentrations that are presently allowed for food (called Maximum Residue Limits, MRL). However, the effect was seen at concentrations well below those applied to plants (application rates). Therefore, the authors believe, the effect is most likely to arise in farm workers in rural areas and in children in urban settings who are exposed to herbicides, if they are also on antibiotics.

Prof Heinemann said, “They are among the most common manufactured chemical products to which people, pets and livestock in both rural and urban environments are exposed. These products are sold in the local hardware store and may be used without training, and there are no controls that prevent children and pets from being exposed in home gardens or parks. Despite their ubiquitous use, this University of Canterbury research is the first in the world to demonstrate that herbicides may be undermining the use of a fundamental medicine – antibiotics.”

In addition, the new paper finds that added ingredients (surfactants) that are commonly used in some herbicide formulations and processed foods also cause antibiotic resistance. An antibiotic resistance response was caused by both the tested surfactants, Tween80 and CMC. Both are also used as emulsifiers in foods like ice cream and in medicines, and both cause antibiotic resistance at concentrations allowed in food and food-grade products.

Commenting on the regulatory implications of his team’s findings, Prof Heinemann said: “The sub-lethal effects of industrially manufactured chemical products should be considered by regulators when deciding whether the products are safe for their intended use.”

“More emphasis needs to be placed on antibiotic stewardship compared to new antibiotic discovery. Otherwise, new drugs will fail rapidly and be lost to humanity.”

The researchers first observed herbicide-related antibiotic resistance in their paper published in the American Society of Microbiology’s journal mBio in 2015.

After the paper appeared, Monsanto spokesperson Charla Lord commented that it was still not known whether the active ingredients or the added ingredients in the herbicides were responsible. “It is difficult to separate the effect of surfactants, which are known to have an impact on cultured microbes, from the active ingredients,” she said.

The new follow-up study was conducted in order to answer that very question. It found that both the active and the added ingredients were responsible.

Antibiotic resistance is the cause of nearly a million additional deaths worldwide from infectious diseases, Prof Heinemann says.

“The United States, for example, estimates that more than two million people are sickened every year with antibiotic-resistant infections, with at least 23,000 dying as a result. By 2050, resistance is estimated to add 10 million annual deaths globally with a cumulative cost to the world economy of US$100 trillion. In other words, roughly twice the population of New Zealand will be lost annually to antibiotic resistance.”

Whether these herbicides and their added ingredients act as antibiotics at realistic doses in humans and animals remains to be established experimentally.

Learn more: http://gmwatch.org/en/news/latest-news/17978-new-research-finds-gm-crop-related-herbicides-cause-antibiotic-resistance

Android devices secretly funnel your private location data to Google (even if you have that setting turned OFF)

Information has emerged that devices operating with an Android operating system keep track of their locations. A phone’s location data is continuously tracked, even without the presence of a SIM card or apps running, until it connects to the internet where the data gathered is then sent to Google — all without the user being aware that it already happened.

This information, which was part of an in-depth report for Quartz, reveals that since the beginning of 2017, mobile phones have been collecting addresses of mobile transmitter towers near their area. The addresses are then included in the information sent to the company to manage push notifications and messages. This means that your phone keeps tabs of where you’ve been as long as you’re near a mobile transmitter, and that this information is sent to Google without you even knowing.

A representative for the company confirmed this, stating that the information gathered was part of Google’s efforts to improve message delivery. According to the DailyMail, the representative said that Cell ID codes were never incorporated into the network sync system, so that data was immediately discarded. Currently, Cell ID codes are no longer sent back to Google.

The practice has raised concerns over privacy. Users cannot disable the location-sharing activity of the devices, even after turning off or disabling the phone’s location settings. The practice is not limited to a specific model or brand of phone as well. This means a person who does not want to be located will have no option to assert his privacy.

In addition to this, sending Cell ID codes provides an accurate location of a person at any given time. While the location sent to one cell tower may be insufficient to determine where a phone is exactly, triangulating data gathered from multiple cell towers may be used to pinpoint a mobile phone, or the person using it. This becomes even more accurate in cities, where cell towers are positioned closer to each other. Google has previously admitted to collecting details of people’s Wi-Fi networks in 2010.

The report also comes at the heels of the Supreme Court arguments regarding law enforcement officials’ capability to use location data in tracking people. The case, which will be heard on November 29, will center on the case of Timothy Carpenter, who was convicted based on mobile data gathered from wireless carriers that indicate him to be at the vicinity of two robberies. Outside location service data, the results of the case can have a far-reaching impact to other devices that transmit data to the internet like virtual assistants, or internet of things (IoT) devices such as security systems, to even fitness trackers.

The report notes that while Google does not collect using this practice, advertisers can use location data to target customers. This way, companies can aim specific products to people who are in a specific area. In addition to this, the report also stated that location was still transmitted to Google even if the phone was reset to factory default settings.

https://www.naturalnews.com/2017-11-27-android-devices-secretly-funnel-your-private-location-data-to-google-even-if-you-have-that-setting-turned-off.html

Retired Medical Doctor Exposes Deceptive Statistics Used to Justify Billion Dollar Flu Vaccine and Drug Market

Life scientist researching in laboratory. Life sciences study living organisms on the level of microorganisms, viruses, human, animal and plant cells, genes, DNA...

By Gary G. Kohls, MD

Flu Shots, Fosamax and Pharmaceutical Fakery: The Common Use of Deceptive Statistics in the Vaccine and Pharmaceutical Literature.

A few years ago, there was a temporary media buzz generated by an article in The Lancet Infectious Disease journal. That highly respected medical journal is, as is true of most such journals, a pro-vaccine, pro-pharmaceutical medical industry publication that is published in London.

The article’s principle author was Michael Osterholm, PhD, MPH, a widely published infectious disease researcher who, prior to his current faculty position at the University of Minnesota, had served in various capacities with the CDC and the Minnesota Department of Health (MDH), including a high-profile role as the MDH’s Chief of the Acute Disease Epidemiology Section. For 15 years of that association with the MDH he served as Minnesota state epidemiologist. Dr Osterholm, who is not a physician, has published over 300 articles and is highly respected in his field.

The article showed that flu vaccinations were far less effective than had been previously believed. In fact, that particular study suggested that the trivalent flu vaccine currently being pushed at that time approached worthlessness.

Learn more: http://healthimpactnews.com/2017/retired-medical-doctor-exposes-deceptive-statistics-used-to-justify-billion-dollar-flu-vaccine-and-drug-market/

16 Health Problems That Improved in Patients Who Switched From GMO to Organic Diets

syringe_tomato_genetically_modified_gmo_gloves_1000x523By Jeffrey M. Smith

A new study reveals the harsh reality of a diet filled with genetically modified foods.

 

Peer-reviewed article released Tuesday in the International Journal of Human Nutrition and Functional Medicine and conducted by the Institute for Responsible Technology revealed that the health of all of the participants improved after switching to a non-GMO diet or simply reducing the amount of GMO foods they ate.

The results, from over 3,250 people, mostly in the United States, closely matched reports by physicians around the nation who have seen similar results when their patients change to largely non-GMO and organic diets.

Participants reported improvements in 28 conditions; digestive problems was the most often cited at 85.2 percent. The vast majority said their conditions were significantly improved, nearly gone or completely recovered.

Health problems that improved include:

1. Digestive: 85.2%
2. Fatigue, low energy: 60.4%
3. Overweight or obesity: 54.6%
4. Clouding of consciousness, “brain fog”: 51.7%
5. Food allergies or sensitivities: 50.2%
6. Mood problems, such as anxiety or depression: 51.1%
7. Memory, concentration: 48.1%
8. Joint pain: 47.5%
9. Seasonal allergies: 46.6%
10. Gluten sensitivities: 42.2%
11. Insomnia: 33.2%
12. Other skin conditions (not eczema): 30.9%
13. Hormonal problems: 30.4%
14. Musculoskeletal pain: 25.2%
15. Autoimmune disease: 21.4%
16. Eczema: 20.8%
17. Cardiovascular problems, including high blood pressure: 19.8%

This confirms the reports from hundreds of healthcare practitioners and thousands of individuals. When people from all walks of life eat less GMO foods, a significant percentage get better quickly.

https://www.organicconsumers.org/news/16-health-problems-improved-patients-who-switched-gmo-organic-diets

Also see: Survey Reports Improved Health After Avoiding Genetically Modified Foods

https://responsibletechnology.org/irtnew/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/Improved-Health-by-Avoiding-GMOs-by-Jeffrey-Smith.pdf

Now or never: Time to reclaim our food independence

While most of us are proud of our country’s pioneer roots and awed by the strength and resilience of the early homesteaders, few of us would choose to live the way they did. Providing for themselves and their families meant that the frontier men and women worked hard every day from sunup to sundown. What we may not realize though, is that those men and women were free in a way that most of us have never been.

Standing in the checkout line at the supermarket after a hard day’s work we might feel blessed to have modern conveniences, but in truth we are nothing more than slaves to a system we have little to no control over.

Even just a few decades ago, many families were proud of their ability to provide their own fresh fruit, veggies, meat, fish, preserves and nuts. While it took hard work and cooperation from the entire family, these people were truly free; they were independently able to meet all their own needs when it came to their food.

Modern society tends to look down on people who try to take care of themselves. We love the ability to run to the nearest store when we need bread or milk, and even those of us who try to make wise food choices are more likely to head for the nearest Whole Foods than to try to grow our own organic produce.

Consciously or subconsciously, many of us view self-sufficiency as being beneath our dignity.

As noted by the American Farm Bureau Federation (AFBF):

Most Americans believe they have outgrown farm work, which is reflected in their unwillingness to take farm jobs, even temporarily.

The Texas Pioneer Woman, writing for Grit notes:

Providing for your family’s need was a source of pride and accomplishment. Today when I tell others that our family works together to grow and raise our food, I get strange looks and a lot of complaints of that is too hard of work and too time consuming. I am seen as an oddity.

The fact is, taking the time and making the effort to reclaim your family’s food independence will mean better quality, non-GMO, pesticide-free fruits and veggies for your family; it will mean you can enjoy hormone and antibiotic-free, grass-fed meat and chicken; and it will mean delicious, wholesome eggs from organic, free-range chickens.

Working together as a family in this way also provides wholesome association, enjoyable exercise, and increased absorption of vitamin D from exposure to more sunlight. It will provide an opportunity to teach little ones about how things grow, the value of hard work, and the importance of caring for animals in a kind and humane way.

And reclaiming your food freedom will also mean more money left over at the end of the month to spend on other things.

The following tips can help you loosen the ties that bind your family to reliance on commercially produced food:

  • Start your own organic garden.
  • Stop purchasing manufactured, processed foods — avoid anything that comes in a box and has more than one ingredient.
  • Cook and prepare your own food at home.
  • Keep chickens at home and start harvesting their delicious, fresh eggs.
  • If you’re feeling more adventurous (and if your council allows it), invest in a cow so that you can have fresh, raw milk.

Of course, it isn’t necessary to start slaughtering your own meat and to never set foot in a store again. But, every small change you implement will make you freer, until eventually you are no longer enslaved to or reliant on others for your next meal.

https://www.naturalnews.com/2017-11-20-now-or-never-time-to-reclaim-our-food-independence.html

Space Fence: Connecting the Surveillance and Transhumanist Agendas

Space-FenceBy Makia Freeman

The Space Fence is a massive, planetary-wide, space surveillance system currently being constructed that aims to monitor you all the way down to your DNA. Officially, the Space Fence is a 2nd generation space surveillance system being built (started in 2014) by the US Air Force and Lockheed Martin to track artificial satellites and space debris. Its budget is US$1.594 billion, it’s expected to be operational in 2019 and the Space Fence facility will be located in the Marshall Islands along with an option for another radar site in Western Australia.

The Space Fence is a resurrection of a program started by Reagan in the 1980s called SDI (Strategic Defense Initiative), commonly known by its nickname “Star Wars.” However, like many exotic weapons of the New World Order, it has a cover purpose and a real purpose. This article exposes the grander implications of the Space Fence – and how it connects to other technology that could be used to enslave you.

What is the Space Fence?

Although the USAF and Lockheed Martin tell us that the purpose of the Space Fence is to detect, track and catalog space debris, we must acknowledge that the MIC (Military Intelligence Complex) is at the helm of the New World Order and is routinely engaged in psychological operations against the rest of the population. The Space Fence is the answer to the prayers of a control-freak conspiratorial class. It will have the capacity to surveil everything on Earth. Like Skynet in the fictional Terminator films, it could become surveillance beyond comprehension. How? The Space Fence is designed to operate in LEO (Low Earth Orbit). It is designed to be one big interconnected machine, run by AI and joined to current (weaponized) technology by interacting with cell phone towers, Gwen TowersNexrad Towers, metal particulates and more to create a giant wireless network that manipulates us through the ionization of our atmosphere.

According to Elena Freeland, author of Chemtrails, HAARP, and the Full Spectrum Dominance of Planet Earth who is soon to release a book on the topic, the Space Fence will eventually develop into a conductive Saturnian ring around the Earth’s equator. From there, it could be used to facilitate a complete lockdown on planetary communications (including our DNA communications, since we are electrical creatures), in line with the MIC’s C4 objectives (Command, Control, Communications and Computers). Freeland states that the Space Fence will have the power to totally transform the entire environment of the planet. It thus is a tool of the AI/Transhumanist agenda to merge man into machine.

Learn more about:

Space Fence: Ionization and Conductivity

Our Ionized Atmosphere: Plasma, the 4th State of Matter

Space Fence Delivery Systems: Chemtrails, GMOs, Vaccines

Ultimate Aim of the Space Fence

http://www.wakingtimes.com/2017/11/08/space-fence-connecting-surveillance-transhumanist-agendas/?utm

Avoid Flu Shots: They Are Not Proven To Actually Work

It’s that time of year again where the weather cools down and doctors, nurses, and pharmacies inject the fear of the flu into your mind so you will drive directly down to your local clinic and willingly let them inject you with the flu.

Sounds kind of silly when you think about it. By getting the flu shot you have essentially agreed to have a strain of the very virus you are trying to avoid, injected directly into your body.

What makes this even more of an exercise of cognitive dissonance, is that these flu shots contain adjuvants that facilitate the development of not just the flu, but several other disease processes. You are aware that toxins, no matter the amount, are partly responsible for virtually all the diseases experienced today, right? So, if you put your thinking hat on, it makes sense to avoid them at all costs, at least what you can see and know about, right?

If you’re nodding your head yes, I’m glad we are on the same page. Let’s now move on to more stunning evidence on why you should avoid the flu shot, and what you should do instead to protect yourself.

Flu shots are not proven to actually work

Flu shots are not proven to actually work

Flu shots contain toxic adjuvants, including arguably the most toxic substance to humans on the planet

Flu shots have toxic side effects

The flu shot was also proven to be the most dangerous vaccine of them all when it was reported in June of 2014, that 70 percent of all vaccine injury cases (55 of 78) were settled for the flu shot, including one death.

What works better for building the immune system?

Learn more: https://www.naturalnews.com/2017-11-09-4-rational-reasons-to-avoid-the-flu-shot-and-what-to-do-instead.html

Children are Being Educated in School to Obey the Government’s Vaccination Agenda

vaccine-agenda-907x510-700x394By Christina England

Our children are being indoctrinated and prevented from being able to think for themselves. This mind-controlling technique is called neuro-linguistic programming (NLP) and it is often used in an educational setting to influence the way children think.

Children around the world are being taught in school from an early age to believe that vaccines are safe and effective as part of their education. Not only is there evidence to support this fact, but there is also evidence that many children are being regularly brainwashed to believe that if they do not receive their vaccinations, they could get ill and die from vaccine-preventable diseases.

The Learning Network, which works in conjunction with The New York Times, lays out a series of lesson plans for teachers in the US, including a lesson titled Fighting Disease: Researching the History and Biology of Vaccines. This lesson in particular should interest the many parents who are unaware that their children are being brainwashed to think in a particular way when they send them to school. [1]

Overall, there are a total of six different quizzes covering various topics, including the following: the immune system, vaccines today, vaccine safety and vaccines in history.

In quiz number one, the students were asked to evaluate the following six statements to determine whether or not they believe them to be true or false:

  1. Vaccines often cause serious illness and death.
  2.  Vaccine-preventable diseases like measles and chicken pox cause only mild illness, so there is no real benefit to vaccination.
  3.  Vaccinating a large group of people helps keep those who haven’t yet been vaccinated, like young infants, healthy.
  4. It’s better to catch a disease like the measles than to receive a vaccine for it.
  5. Vaccine-preventable diseases are now so rare, there’s no longer a need to vaccinate against them.
  6. Research has shown a clear and consistent link between vaccines and autism.

The quiz was presented to the students electronically, and after they had provided a true or false answer, they were given a score with the correct answer along with an explanation. The answers to the above questions were as follows:

  1. False. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, serious side effects or complications from vaccines are exceedingly rare; most vaccines cause only mild side effects like soreness at the injection site.
  2. False. Diseases like measles and chicken pox not only cause discomfort during the illness, but also can have complications like pneumonia or other bacterial infections.
  3. True. Vaccinating large numbers of people against diseases keeps the number of infections in a community low, reducing the risk of infection for others, like young babies who are not yet old enough to receive certain vaccines. This concept is called community immunity.
  4. False. Catching a vaccine-preventable disease not only makes you likely to spread it throughout the community, but there is also the risk of developing rare and serious complications.
  5. False. While many vaccine-preventable diseases are rare in the United States, travelers to other countries may be exposed and bring the disease home. There have also been outbreaks of diseases like measles and whooping cough in the United States in recent years. Public health authorities say one possible reason is a growing number of people refusing to receive vaccines.
  6. False. In fact, the medical study that purported to link vaccines to autism was retracted after its author, whose medical license was revoked, was found to have altered patient data. More information is available from the Institute for Vaccine Safety.

Learn more:https://www.naturalblaze.com/2017/11/children-educated-school-obey-governments-vaccination-agenda.html?

GE Technology Goes Wrong For ‘Golden Rice”

Perspective-Rice-Agricultural-Agriculture-Asia-Asian-BackgroundGenetically engineered “golden rice” suffers “metabolic meltdown” and devastating yield plunge as GE technology goes horribly wrong

Supporters of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) have long claimed that Golden Rice is key in alleviating vitamin A deficiency, but it turns out that’s not at all the case.

According to a new report by Indian researchers, the genes necessary to produce Golden Rice cause unintended side effects, Independent Science News reported recently.

When scientists introduced the genetically-engineered DNA “their high-yielding and agronomically superior Indian rice variety became pale and stunted, flowering was delayed and the roots grew abnormally,” the site reported.

Also, crop yields were so dramatically scaled back that they were not even suitable for cultivation, scientists noted.

While rice is a great nutritional source, it does lack vitamin A and in some parts of the world, there are dramatic deficiencies in vitamin A. That’s important because these regions depend heavily on rice for their diets.

Big Ag and GMO pushers like Syngenta and Monsanto claim that vitamin A can be enhanced through the introduction of GMOs. And for years, that scientific dogma has been accepted as fact.

But it isn’t true, and continuing research is proving that. In 2016, Washington University in St. Louis noted that the promise of GMO-laden Golden Rice was not living up to the hype. He also said that researchers did not blame “GMO opponents” for that, either.

“Golden Rice is still not ready for the market, but we find little support for the common claim that environmental activists are responsible for stalling its introduction. GMO opponents have not been the problem,” said lead author Glenn Stone, professor of anthropology and environmental studies in Arts & Sciences.

Learn more: https://www.naturalnews.com/2017-11-07-genetically-engineered-golden-rice-suffers-metabolic-meltdown-and-devastating-yield-plunge-as-ge-technology-goes-horribly-wrong.html

One Giant Lie for Mankind – Amazing NASA Confession

Capricorn-One-1-1024x576By Bart Sibrel

Has there ever been a milestone accomplishment of mankind, whether it be the four minute mile, or climbing Mount Everest, or breaking the sound barrier, that once achieved, no one from any nation on earth was able to repeat the same accomplishment for seventy years?  Of course not . . . except . . . man allegedly walking on the moon in 1969 (as twenty years from now is the earliest projected “repeat” of the event, though fifty years ago it allegedly only took eight years to develop the technology to do so).

Funny, that with one millionth the computing power in all of 1960’s NASA than a modern day cell phone, they claimed to have traveled one thousand times farther than an astronaut can travel today, and that on the very first attempt. Even here on earth, the summit of Mount Everest and the South Pole were first met with death, failure, and numerous attempts before success was finally achieved, as was the case with the Wright Brothers repeated efforts before getting a mere twenty feet off the ground.

Another strange anomaly, according to NASA astronaut Don Pettit, is that NASA “deliberately destroyed the technology” which they painstakingly designed and created to go to the moon in the 1960’s, at a modern day cost of ONE HUNDRED FIFTY BILLION DOLLARS . . . Wait a second . . . Imagine Bill Gates spending 150 Billion Dollars to build the first computer, and then once successfully completing it, throwing the computer with its blueprints into a furnace . . . Would anyone EVER – EVER – EVER do such a crazy thing??????? . . . Of course not . . . yet . . . this IS what NASA did with the technology which they claimed could reach the moon in the 1960’s.

This is proof itself that the “moon missions” were fraudulent .

If you really went to the moon and spent 150 BILLION Dollars to do so, you would NEVER – EVER – EVER deliberately throw away such precious hard earned technology . . . NEVER!!!!!!!  Has anyone ever deliberately thrown away breakthrough technology in the entire history of the world? . . . Of course not.

On the other hand, if NASA faked going to the moon, and a detailed analysis of the engineering specifications could prove mathematically that the rocket did not have enough fuel to reach its destination and return, or that the onboard computers were not fast enough to process the complicated trajectories in real time as the mission required, or that the power in the lunar module batteries was not sufficient to supply the air conditioning to combat exterior temperatures of 252 degrees Fahrenheit (122 Celsius) for three days without cooking alive the crew inside, THEN yes indeed NASA would definitely destroy any and all proof of their deception, which is exactly what they did.

 Again, if NASA really went to the moon, they would NEVER – EVER destroy that important technology. If, on the other hand, NASA faked going to the moon, then they would most definitely destroy the blueprints that would prove it a technological impossibility.  Thusly, the fact that NASA DID destroy the technological blueprints is CONCRETE PROOF that THEY DID NOT GO TO THE MOON.  End of story.