Nice links for smokers and vapers

Such skill and knowledge in the writings of these two men is worth sharing.

For smokers read this answer I found by Gustavo Guardiola on Quora – it’s great.

How is it fair that during work, smokers get to take a break to smoke but don’t have to make up the time they missed?

For vapers read Clive Bates on The Vaping Epidemic (in young people in the USA) (Long but worth the read)

The great American youth vaping epidemic. Really?

Enjoy

 

Advertisements

Abortion Laws

I’m an abortion in-betweener. I think abortion is good when done very early. 24 weeks which is the current cut off  is too late for me. What is 24 weeks, 6 months? At six months a baby is a person!

But this morning I watched this video of people clapping and cheering as the new law allowing up to birth terminations by any medical staff was signed in New York. As they laughed, I thought of the grief of thousands of mothers aborting thousands of babies who are real people.

To me, late abortions should only be done by proper doctors under exceptional circumstances.

New abortion law signed

 

Monsanto exposed for all the world to see -and about bloody time too!

At last, all our suspicions – well, I have had mine, I don’t know about you, have been confirmed. Monsanto are lying through their teeth. The Roundup they produce is killing us.

Glyphosate-based herbicides are so widely used around the globe (roughly 826 million kg a year) that residues are commonly found in food and water supplies, and in soil and air samples. US scientists have even recorded the weed killer residues in rainfall. Exposure is ubiquitous, virtually inescapable.

This is science for profit. And they have lied about the safety of Glyphosphates for many years telling us ‘scientifically’ they are safe.

Now evidence from their internal files and secret knowledge stores are being perused by lawyers in this case and what they find is not nice!…..

Company’s own records revealed damning truth of glyphosate-based herbicides’ link to cancer

It was a verdict heard around the world. In a stunning blow to one of the world’s largest seed and chemical companies, jurors in San Francisco have told Monsanto it must pay $289m in damages to a man dying of cancer which he claims was caused by exposure to its herbicides.

And this won’t be the end – there are 4000 ‘cases’ in the pipeline.

And about bloody time too!

The BSE saga – poisoning by Government proclamation – what else has it done to us?

We were in Africa when BSE broke out in the UK. We felt ‘safe’ – until I found out that tonnes of infected meat had been shipped to Africa to ‘get rid of it’!

I’m sure many of my readers have never even heard of BSE – or mad cow disease.

BSE
ˌbiːˌɛsˈiː/
noun
  1. bovine spongiform encephalopathy, a disease of cattle which affects the central nervous system, causing agitation and staggering, and is usually fatal. It is believed to be caused by an agent such as a prion or a virino, and to be related to Creutzfeldt–Jakob disease in humans.

It was supposedly caused by feeding scrapie infected meat and bone-feed to cows – fancy that; feeding meat to cows! and eating sick cows gave it to humans. Well that was the theory – it was caused by feeding cows dead animals.

People were terrified of developing CJD, which can take years to show itself.

But, there is another story.

This is the story of the OTHER story.

Organic livestock farmer Mark Purdey was ordered in the 1980’s, along with all cattle and dairy farmers in the UK, to treat his cows with an organophosphate pesticide ‘Phosmet’ manufactured by I.C.I.. Organophosphates are derived from military nerve gas and a systemic treatment (the chemical enters the entire internal system of the cow) would undermine his organic principles so Mark refused to treat. “If Phosmet is proven to have caused BSE, the worldwide use of organophosphates (OPs) could be put into jeopardy, costing the chemical industry billions. The government know more than they’re letting on. They’ve stuck to the scrapie theory to placate people and give the impression they’ve got it under control.” Mark Purdey, Organic Dairy Farmer, Exmoor. “If the government are found liable for BSE – by enforcing organophosphate treatment – the payout could break the economy.” >>>

The British Government “got BSE under control” by ordering the slaughtering of millions of cows – millions. Britain lay under a pall of smoke from the incineration fires as it did during the foot and mouth outbreak in 2001.

The story continues in more detail – but the final outcome in my comment under this quote might have given Mark Purdy some comfort. He wrote a book, but died before he completed it. It is heroes like Mark Purdy that REALLY change the world.

Mark Purdy, had a different theory about the cause of BSE.

 One that the authorities and the pesticide producers have gone to great to lengths to silence. Between the late 70’s and 1982 British farmers were forced by law to treat their cows for warble fly with a pour on organophosphate called phosmet – organophosphates are derived from nerve gas formulated by nazi chemists during World War II. Big business soon realised its profit potential and, post war, it was exclusively marketed as an agricultural pesticide by ICI, and later their cunningly renamed subdivision Zeneca. Seeing how his own organically reared cows never developed BSE, but phosmet-treated cattle brought onto the farm did, Somerset dairy farmer Mark Purdey refused to treat his herd. In 1984 MAFF took him to the High Court, but lost. “Before 1982 farmers could treat warbles with an organic ground-up root compound called Derris. This was outlawed, so they could sell more organophosphates,” said Purdey. Organophosphates, used to treat headlice in school children, have been implicated as a potential cause of Gulf War Syndrome. Purdey managed to alleviate symptoms in a BSE infected cow by injecting oxime, an antidote to pesticide poisoning. The cure was never completed as MAFF turned up and destroyed the cow. Unconvinced by the accepted cause of BSE and CJD, Purdey set about studying how disease clusters reflected OP usage. He found Britain, the only country enforcing phosmet use, to have the highest rate of disease. Ireland had some BSE, but OP use was voluntary, and given at a lower dose. Brittany (France) began to develop BSE following an enforced phosmet trial, and human new variant CJD was clustered in Kent’s Wield Valley, where hop and top fruit growth gets saturated with organophosphates. Agitated by Purdey’s discoveries, the pesticide industry hit back. The dubiously named National Office of Animal Health (NOAH), a lobby group representing the UK animal medicine industry, whose membership reads like a Downing St dinner party invite list of extremely dodgy chemical interests – including Bayer, Monsanto, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Schering-Plough etc – published documents discrediting Purdey’s work. NOAH produced an independent expert, Dr David Ray, for the BSE Inquiry, who turned out to be receiving funding from Zeneca for his Medical Research Council toxicology unit. “I don’t think this affected my judgement,” Ray told SchNEWS. “You may not believe it, but I didn’t realise Zeneca produced phosmet at the time.” Hmmm. In March 1996 – one week before the UK government admitted to a link between BSE and new variant CJD – Zeneca sold the phosmet patent to a PO Box company in the Arizona desert. As Ray said: “Zeneca are not keen to be sued.

Interestingly – and VERY STRANGE! is that the British Government, in it’s final analysis ” took the view the cause was not scrapie, as had originally been postulated, but was some event in the 1970s that was not possible to identify.” My bold. Link Wikipedia

Here is Mark Purdy telling his story in 2001. In today’s glitzie video line up, it might seem dull, but it is well worth watching and reveals his courage in the face of persecution. Unfortunately, Organophosphates are still used in some countries – as herbicides and pesticide – ‘Its use is banned or restricted in 23 countries and its import is illegal in a total of 50 countries.’ and they have been mostly abandoned for use on animals.

Here is Mark

 

Oh rubbish – how CAN you know, Melanie Klein

I get videos from the School of Life – I like many of them. But recently I received this one to which I took exception. It speaks of Melanie Klein’s theories about babies. Babies “hate”. Babies HATE? How can anyone ever know what babies feel?

That charged my interest in Melanie Klein – and other psychoanalysts in the fifties and sixties. Gosh, they were a mixed up lot! Squabbling, nit picking and pouring venom on each other big time. I don’t like Psychoanalysis myself. There is something, mmmm,  something in it, that gives me the creeps. What it is, I cannot quite say – possibly I feel it’s all just someone’s IDEA of something – THEIR interpretation.  And psychoanalysts in the Klein days belonged to a closed, elite group where everyone analysed everyone else and regurgitated their favourite “ideas”.

These ideas were sold to Governments! Seems a bit tricky to me, to know what is a true idea and what is rubbish.

Back to the video. Here it is. The bit that really impressed me as jumping to conclusions was that babies HATE. If you check out Melanie Klein, you will see that she probably jumped to that conclusion because of her own rather miserable life.

How can we possibly KNOW what babies feel? We can assume they feel hungry, frightened, wet, uncomfortable, tired, in pain with the gripes, when they yell, but hate? I don’t know about that…..

I am one of the lucky breastscreening escapees!

I am one of those whose breast screening letter never came. This is a story making nice dramatic headlines in the UK .

I feel lucky I never got my letter. The benefits of screening  for breast cancer have always been questionable. But I found this excellent article in The New Scientist, that suggests the cock-up with the letters might have actually saved lives.

How lucky are we?

Why breast screening error stories are getting death stats wrong

It was announced this week that, between 2009 and 2018, a computer error meant that 450,000 women aged around 70 in the UK were not sent their final breast screening appointment letter. These women were mistakenly not offered screening that may have picked up a cancer that had developed since their last check three years before. Secretary of State for Health Jeremy Hunt announced in Parliament that “there may be between 135 and 270 women who had their lives shortened”. This has been reported as “up to 270 women died”.

>>>

But the third issue is that, contrary to popular belief, screening also does harm . The current NHS leaflet states that, for every 200 women attending screening between the ages of 50 and 70, we would expect one to have her early death from breast cancer prevented, but three to be unnecessarily treated for a harmless cancer that would not have troubled them. It might be worth pointing out that these women (or their doctors) would never know this – they would forever be grateful, thinking that their lives had been saved by the harrowing treatment process. So, it is an invisible harm, difficult to quantify or take into consideration.

But it means that up to 800 women may have been saved from harm by not sending them their final screening appointment letter, as they avoided possible reduction in their life expectancy through unnecessary treatment.

 

More on the carefully staged ‘nerve agent’ drama – questions from Craig Murray

You might be watching the new drama unfolding in the UK, carefully scripted by the UK Government, and be cringing in shame at our foolishness like I am.

We are making total arseholes of ourselves!

Here is an excellent post on the situation as it now is, and how questions should be asked by intelligent people of the UK Government.

Knobs and Knockers

What is left of the government’s definitive identification of Russia as the culprit in the Salisbury attack?

>>>

Motorola sales agent Gary Aitkenhead – inexplicably since January, Chief Executive of Porton Down chemical weapons establishment – said in his Sky interview that “probably” only a state actor could create the nerve agent. That is to admit the possibility that a non state actor could.

David Collum, Professor of Organo-Chemistry at Cornell University, infinitely more qualified than a Motorola salesman, has stated that his senior students could do it.

>>>

So given that the weapon itself is not firm evidence it was Russia that did it, what is Boris Johnson’s evidence? It turns out that the British government’s evidence is no more than the technique of smearing nerve agent on the door handle. All of the UK media have been briefed by “security sources” that the UK has a copy of a secret Russian assassin training manual detailing how to put nerve agent on door handles, and that given the nerve agent was found on the Skripals door handle, this is the clinching evidence which convinced NATO allies of Russia’s guilt.

>>>

Two questions arise. How credible is the British government’s possession of a Russian secret training manual for using novichok agents, and how credible is it that the Skripals were poisoned by their doorknob.

To take the second question first, I see major problems with the notion that the Skripals were poisoned by their doorknob.

>>>

Suspect locations were hosed down by the fire brigade.

But if the substance was in a form that could be washed away, why was it placed on an external door knob? It was in point of fact raining heavily in Salisbury that day, and indeed had been for some time.

>>>

The second problem is that the Novichok family of nerve agents are instant acting. There is no such thing as a delayed reaction nerve agent. Remember we have been specifically told by Theresa May that this nerve agent is up to ten times more powerful than VX, the Porton Down developed nerve agent that killed Kim’s brother in 15 minutes.

But if it was on the doorknob, the last contact they could possibly have had with the nerve agent was a full three hours before it took effect.

>>>

This narrative simply is not remotely credible. Nerve agents – above all “military grade nerve agents” – were designed as battlefield weapons. They do not leave opponents fighting fit for hours.

>>>

The second part of the extraordinarily happy coincidence of the nerve agent being on the door handle, and the British government having a Russian manual on applying nerve agent to door handles, is whether the manual is real. It strikes me this is improbable – it rings far too much of the kind of intel they had on Iraqi WMD.

>>>

These are some of the problems I have with the official account of events. Boris lied about the certainty of the provenance of the nerve agent, and his fall back evidence is at present highly unconvincing. None of which proves it was not the Russian state that was responsible. But there is no convincing proof that it was, and there are several other possibilities. Eventually the glaring problems with the official narrative might be resolved, but what is plain is that Johnson and May have been premature and grossly irresponsible.

Please read the whole post from Craig Murray – it contains much more than simply this!

Is it time we stop eating meat to save our lives?

Recently, there has been a new surge of people becoming vegan – not eating animal products. Many people do it out of consideration for the animals.

But perhaps we should consider ourselves – and our own future.

We are reaping the Karma of our selfish greed for meat, meat, meat and more meat – and perhaps it IS time to indicate en mass, that the way we treat and eat animals, is not an option anymore.

Infections that were once easy to quash now threaten our lives. Doctors warn that routine procedures, such as caesareans, hip replacements and chemotherapy, could one day become impossible, due to the risk of exposing patients to deadly infection. Already, in the European Union alone, 25,000 people a year are killed by antibiotic-resistant bacteria.

Yet our last defences – the rare drugs to which bacteria have not yet become immune – are being squandered with wild abandon. While most doctors seek to use them precisely and parsimoniously, some livestock farms literally slosh them around. They add them to the feed and water supplied to entire herds of cattle, pigs or poultry: not to treat illness, but to prevent it.

Or not even that. In the 1950s, farmers discovered that small quantities of antibiotics added to feed make animals grow faster. Using antibiotics as growth promoters – low doses routinely applied – is a perfect formula for generating bacterial resistance. Yet many countries continue to permit this reckless practice. The US Food and Drug Administration asks drug companies voluntarily to refrain from labelling antibiotics as growth promoters. But with a nod and a wink, it suggests they be rebranded for “new therapeutic indications”. Around 75% of the antibiotics used in the US are fed to farm animals. Our city is under siege, and we are knocking down our own defences.

The EU and the UK are no paragons. The Guardian has revealed that both pork and chicken sold here are infected with resistant superbugs. Outrageously, it is still legal in the UK to dose chickens with fluoroquinolones, powerful antibiotics that save many human lives: a practice even the US has banned.

But in other respects, the US, whose corporate livestock production looks more like HG Wells’s The Island of Doctor Moreau than anything you’d recognise as farming, makes our methods seem virtuous. Last week, the Alliance to Save Our Antibiotics revealed that the US uses on average roughly five times as many antibiotics per animal as the UK does.

Why? Because the stack ‘em high, sell ‘em low model of farming there, in which vast numbers of animals are reared in appalling conditions in megafarms, cannot be sustained without mass medication. The animals are weaned so young, are so debilitated and so crowded that extreme methods are required to keep them alive and growing. The impacts are not confined to the US: when America sneezes, the world catches antibiotic-resistant Salmonella.

There’s an urgent need for a global ban on the mass treatment of livestock with antibiotics, and on any use of the antibiotics of last resort in farming. Tough as this is for the economics of megafarms, human life is more important. But the opposite is happening. The US government hopes to use trade treaties to break down the resistance of other nations to its farming practices. And the UK is at the top of its list.

LINK 

But besides a ban on the mass treatment of animals with antibiotics, there is another way.

If we don’t buy, they can’t sell!

What about THAT?

Post Materialist Science

I have followed the life and ideas of Rupert Sheldrake since I read his first book.

He has been very badly treated by other scientists!

He is part of the growing group of Post Materialist Scientists.

The religion of science has been like the witch in Narnia, freezing the earth in it’s barren, cold ideology. We are in a winter.

We don’t need a new religion – we need a reformed science! Spring would follow…

Here is my stuff archived here…

Rupert Sheldake https://youtu.be/9UbFa2SylqU 45min

Banned Ted Talk https://youtu.be/1TerTgDEgUE

Russell Brand interview https://youtu.be/dAS-QzWvj8g

The 18 point Post Materialist Sciences Manifesto is below this video…..

The Post Materialist Sciences Manifesto

1. The modern scientific worldview is predominantly predicated on assumptions that are closely associated with classical physics. Materialism—the idea that matter is the only reality—is one of these assumptions. A related assumption is reductionism, the notion that complex things can be understood by reducing them to the interactions of their parts, or to simpler or more fundamental things such as tiny material particles.
2. During the 19th century, these assumptions narrowed, turned into dogmas, and coalesced into an ideological belief system that came to be known as “scientific materialism.” This belief system implies that the mind is nothing but the physical activity of the brain, and that our thoughts cannot have any effect upon our brains and bodies, our actions, and the physical world.
3. The ideology of scientific materialism became dominant in academia during the 20th century. So dominant that a majority of scientists started to believe that it was based on established empirical evidence, and represented the only rational view of the world.
4. Scientific methods based upon materialistic philosophy have been highly successful in not only increasing our understanding of nature but also in bringing greater control and freedom through advances in technology.
5. However, the nearly absolute dominance of materialism in the academic world has seriously constricted the sciences and hampered the development of the scientific study of mind and spirituality. Faith in this ideology, as an exclusive explanatory framework for reality, has compelled scientists to neglect the subjective dimension of human experience. This has led to a severely distorted and impoverished understanding of ourselves and our place in nature.
6. Science is first and foremost a non-dogmatic, open-minded method of acquiring knowledge about nature through the observation, experimental investigation, and theoretical explanation of phenomena. Its methodology is not synonymous with materialism and should not be committed to any particular beliefs, dogmas, or ideologies.
7. At the end of the nineteenth century, physicists discovered empirical phenomena that could not be explained by classical physics. This led to the development, during the 1920s and early 1930s, of a revolutionary new branch of physics called quantum mechanics (QM). QM has questioned the material foundations of the world by showing that atoms and subatomic particles are not really solid objects—they do not exist with certainty at definite spatial locations and definite times. Most importantly, QM explicitly introduced the mind into its basic conceptual structure since it was found that particles being observed and the observer—the physicist and the method used for observation—are linked. According to one interpretation of QM, this phenomenon implies that the consciousness of the observer is vital to the existence of the physical events being observed, and that mental events can affect the physical world. The results of recent experiments support this interpretation. These results suggest that the physical world is no longer the primary or sole component of reality, and that it cannot be fully understood without making reference to the mind.
8. Psychological studies have shown that conscious mental activity can causally influence behavior, and that the explanatory and predictive value of agentic factors (e.g. beliefs, goals, desires and expectations) is very high. Moreover, research in psychoneuroimmunology indicates that our thoughts and emotions can markedly affect the activity of the physiological systems (e.g., immune, endocrine, cardiovascular) connected to the brain. In other respects, neuroimaging studies of emotional self-regulation, psychotherapy, and the placebo effect demonstrate that mental events significantly influence the activity of the brain.
9. Studies of the so-called “psi phenomena” indicate that we can sometimes receive meaningful information without the use of ordinary senses, and in ways that transcend the habitual space and time constraints. Furthermore, psi research demonstrates that we can mentally influence—at a distance—physical devices and living organisms (including other human beings). Psi research also shows that distant minds may behave in ways that are nonlocally correlated, i.e. the correlations between distant minds are hypothesized to be unmediated (they are not linked to any known energetic signal), unmitigated (they do not degrade with increasing distance), and immediate (they appear to be simultaneous). These events are so common that they cannot be viewed as anomalous nor as exceptions to natural laws, but as indications of the need for a broader explanatory framework that cannot be predicated exclusively on materialism.
10. Conscious mental activity can be experienced in clinical death during a cardiac arrest (this is what has been called a “near-death experience” [NDE]). Some near-death experiencers (NDErs) have reported veridical out-of-body perceptions (i.e. perceptions that can be proven to coincide with reality) that occurred during cardiac arrest. NDErs also report profound spiritual experiences during NDEs triggered by cardiac arrest. It is noteworthy that the electrical activity of the brain ceases within a few seconds following a cardiac arrest.
11. Controlled laboratory experiments have documented that skilled research mediums (people who claim that they can communicate with the minds of people who have physically died) can sometimes obtain highly accurate information about deceased individuals. This further supports the conclusion that mind can exist separate from the brain.
12. Some materialistically inclined scientists and philosophers refuse to acknowledge these phenomena because they are not consistent with their exclusive conception of the world. Rejection of post-materialist investigation of nature or refusal to publish strong science findings supporting a post-materialist framework are antithetical to the true spirit of scientific inquiry, which is that empirical data must always be adequately dealt with. Data which do not fit favored theories and beliefs cannot be dismissed a priori. Such dismissal is the realm of ideology, not science.
13. It is important to realize that psi phenomena, NDEs in cardiac arrest, and replicable evidence from credible research mediums, appear anomalous only when seen through the lens of materialism.
14. Moreover, materialist theories fail to elucidate how brain could generate the mind, and they are unable to account for the empirical evidence alluded to in this manifesto. This failure tells us that it is now time to free ourselves from the shackles and blinders of the old materialist ideology, to enlarge our concept of the natural world, and to embrace a post-materialist paradigm.
15. According to the post-materialist paradigm:

a) Mind represents an aspect of reality as primordial as the physical world. Mind is fundamental in the universe, i.e. it cannot be derived from matter and reduced to anything more basic.

b) There is a deep interconnectedness between mind and the physical world.

c) Mind (will/intention) can influence the state of the physical world, and operate in a nonlocal (or extended) fashion, i.e. it is not confined to specific points in space, such as brains and bodies, nor to specific points in time, such as the present. Since the mind may nonlocally influence the physical world, the intentions, emotions, and desires of an experimenter may not be completely isolated from experimental outcomes, even in controlled and blinded experimental designs.

d) Minds are apparently unbounded, and may unite in ways suggesting a unitary, One Mind that includes all individual, single minds.

e) NDEs in cardiac arrest suggest that the brain acts as a transceiver of mental activity, i.e. the mind can work through the brain, but is not produced by it. NDEs occurring in cardiac arrest, coupled with evidence from research mediums, further suggest the survival of consciousness, following bodily death, and the existence of other levels of reality that are non-physical.

f) Scientists should not be afraid to investigate spirituality and spiritual experiences since they represent a central aspect of human existence.

16. Post-materialist science does not reject the empirical observations and great value of scientific achievements realized up until now. It seeks to expand the human capacity to better understand the wonders of nature, and in the process rediscover the importance of mind and spirit as being part of the core fabric of the universe. Post-materialism is inclusive of matter, which is seen as a basic constituent of the universe.

17. The post-materialist paradigm has far-reaching implications. It fundamentally alters the vision we have of ourselves, giving us back our dignity and power, as humans and as scientists. This paradigm fosters positive values such as compassion, respect, and peace. By emphasizing a deep connection between ourselves and nature at large, the post-materialist paradigm also promotes environmental awareness and the preservation of our biosphere. In addition, it is not new, but only forgotten for four hundred years, that a lived transmaterial understanding may be the cornerstone of health and wellness, as it has been held and preserved in ancient mind-body-spirit practices, religious traditions, and contemplative approaches.

18. The shift from materialist science to post-materialist science may be of vital importance to the evolution of the human civilization. It may be even more pivotal than the transition from geocentrism to heliocentrism.

http://opensciences.org/about/manifesto-for-a-post-materialist-science