These were photographed yesterday afternoon, just moments before I sprayed them with cheap, undiluted, store-brand white vinegar. Here’s what all that greenery looked like this morning:
I’d say those weeds are deader than dead. And that’s why I use vinegar on the gravel paths, brick walk-ways, and blue-stone patio here at A Garden for the House. For me it has proven an effective, eco-friendly answer to Roundup.
And speaking of Roundup, Monsanto, the product’s evil manufacturer, agreed with the New York Attorney General’s office to discontinue their use of the terms “biodegradable” and “environmentally friendly” in ads promoting Roundup. Why? Because these terms were bald-faced lies. Roundup is neither biodegradable nor environmentally friendly.
The next time you want to murder your weeds, why douse them with something that will remain in the soil for who knows how long? Maybe you should reach for vinegar instead. Vinegar is cheap. It’s easy to use. I keep gallons of it in my garden shed.
How to Apply: You can use a watering can, a spray bottle or a pump-sprayer to apply vinegar. I use a pump-sprayer, because it is more efficient. Be sure to rinse your sprayer after use, or metal parts (if any) can corrode.
Make your application on a warm, sunny, calm (not windy) day. Vinegar is not selective; it can potentially harm plants you wish to keep, should you accidentally spray them. As I said earlier, I use vinegar on walkways, where grass and ornamental plants are not an issue.
Will vinegar kill every weed in every garden? That I can not say. I only know that it has kept my pathways free of unwanted growth.
Update: Many of you have asked if I dilute the vinegar with water. No, I do not. I pour it directly from jug to pump-sprayer.
L-theanine, an FDA approved safe food supplement, is isolated from the tea plant or synthesized artificially and sold in a purified form.
L-theanine reduces cortisol levels and increases relaxation associated with recovery from a stressful task. Importantly, it increases activity in alpha brain waves which improves cognition and enhance mental alertness without any drowsiness. Not only does it helps maintain a calm alertness during the day but also results in deeper sleep at night without morning drowsiness or impaired concentration.
Additionally, L-theanine increases dopamine and serotonin production and decreases norepinephrine concentrations (a stress hormone which affects parts of the brain, where attention and responses are controlled).
Stress Buster A 2006 study in the "Journal of Herbal Pharmacotherapy," found increased amount of the inhibitory transmitter GABA present in the brain with the use of L-theanine, and therefore concluded its "calming" effect on the nervous system.
Depression Use A 2009 study in "Amino Acids" found that the amount of dopamine produced by the brain was increased by L-theanine. Dopamine is a major neurotransmitter that affects mood, attention, memory and sleep. Similarly there are numerous other studies that show its potential in depression treatment.
Schizophrenia Use According to a study by M.S. Ritsner et al., at the Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa, Israel published in the January 2011 "Journal of Clinical Psychiatry", l-theanine produced modest to moderate improvements in scores on psychopathology evaluation tests done on schizophrenic patients.
Obsessive Compulsive Disorder (OCD) As obsessive-compulsive disorder often occurs alongside depression or other anxiety disorders which are successfully treated by l-theanine, therefore it has also been used in treating OCD effectively.
Bipolar Use Many studies postulate that theanine modulates the levels of neurotransmitters, ie - if one's dopamine levels are too high, theanine lowers it. If one's serotonin levels are too low - it raises it.
Corrects Adrenal Fatigue With Chronic Stress your adrenal gland can be overworked as it would be producing stress hormones constantly which results in its degradation. The relaxing effect L-theanine has on your body helps to reduce stress levels and restore your adrenal glands to proper function.
High Blood Pressure Department of experimental psychology at the University of Bristol found that L-theanine significantly reduced the blood pressure elevating properties of caffeine when co-administered with 200 mg of L-theanine. Similarly many other studies show its usage in treating Hypertension.
Immune Booster A 2008 study in "Nutrition Reviews" showed enhanced action of the immune system cells gamma-delta-T cells with L-theanine.
Anti-Cancer - An article in the Oct. 1, 2000 issue of "Cancer Letters" explains that l-theanine boosts some chemotherapy drugs' effects. Chemo drugs cause significant decreases in leukocyte white blood cells and bone marrow cells. Theanine significantly reversed these changes, indicating that theanine can selectively moderate chemotherapy toxicity. - A study published in "Bioscience, Biotechnology and Biochemistry" in April 2002, found beneficial effects against liver cancer with the use of dietary powdered green tea and theanine.
Protection from Glutamate Neurotoxicity L-theanine also directly provides neuroprotection against glutamate neurotoxicity through blockade of the N-methyl-d-aspartate (NMDA), and a-amino-3-hydroxy-5-methyl-4-isoxazolepropionic acid (AMPA) receptors.
Safety The Food and Drug Administration classifies L-theanine supplements as "Generally Recognized as Safe" in dosages up to 250mg. But as always, check with your health care provider before consuming any L-theanine supplement. Do not use L-theanine on children, if you are pregnant or breast feeding.
Dosage L-Theanine is used is single doses of 50mg to 200mg.
Interactions Taking theanine along with medications for high blood pressure might cause your blood pressure to go too low. L-theanine may potentiate other sedative, anxiolytic, or tranquilizing drugs. L-theanine may also increase the intoxicating effects of alcohol. There have been no documented interactions of L-theanine with antidepressants, however, you should always consult your health care provider before combining any other drug therapy with L-theanine.
"... He will be wiser but less cocksure, happier but less self-satisfied, humbler in acknowledging his ignorance yet better equipped to understand the relationship of words to things, of systematic reasoning to the unfathomable Mystery which it tries, forever vainly, to comprehend." –Aldous Huxley, ‘The Doors of Perception: Heaven and Hell’
Abuse of power is in order when the growth of certain plants, whose native home was Earth long before the very existence of our species, is made illegal. Plants welcomed mankind on their land upon the dawn of man’s inhabitance but man, a glutton for control, transformed his inhabitance into an invasion. Relentlessly crusading forth in present day, the American government continues to cut down trees and plants to place building blocks on the soil that was rightfully theirs. Man blunders through the forest like a bulldozer, blind to the medicine he is destroying and the disease he is enabling. Due to his inherent nature of greed, man has yet again failed his ecosystem. In his shining irony, his inherent ignorance regarding such matters results in his ability to move forward without acknowledging his destruction and the future consequences to come. Looking only to himself, he has replaced inner peace with inner greed, and missed the bigger picture of it all. When he fails his ecosystem, he ultimately fails himself.
As if prohibiting medicinally beneficial plants such as cannabis and psychedelic mushrooms was not enough, America ensued a grotesque double standard: Equally vigorous mind altering drugs -each capsule a time bomb, with potential consequences no worse than death itself.
Psychedelic plants have remained vastly developed in tribal societies throughout the globe for centuries. Still, the United States is fighting their use in the medical world and has yet to drop hints of budging. Magic mushrooms pose obvious risks to the American government, medical world, pharmaceutical companies, FDA and CDC. Government officials, who flash their authority to control large scale matters, might find themselves on the other end of the scale if the use of psychedelic mushrooms as medicine swept the nation. With the ability to heal countless disorders as well as provide long lasting positive benefits, it is no secret that Magic Mushrooms are remarkably potent and powerful plants possessing characteristics which could wipe out numerous medical jobs and drug companies. All of this from one plant; one plant who beholds the power to change the lives of millions. This is the very type of power the government grips to – and in this case, it shows its face as the power to create a widespread negative economic impact in their arenas. Power such as this breeds fear, and fear turns men into animals. Could it be that one plant is more powerful, more intelligent and far more evolved than mankind? And could he, a man masked in pride, be smart enough to answer yes?
No. It is highly doubtable the ban on the use of psychedelic drugs for medical reasons is due to government care and concern for the public. More believable is the possibility of a government flooded by the type of fear I just spoke of; stemming in part from the threat of a future with less trees to stuff in their pockets. However, ignoring the fact that psychedelic mushrooms prove beneficial for illnesses does not make the truth go away. Currently it is an empowering time to become educated on the healing role of mushrooms. New research studies using psychedelic mushrooms steadily continue to surface. What does the law think debilitated individuals are to do once they are rightfully informed of a single yet illegal plant with a high success rate of improving the quality of life in individuals such as themselves? How can the government continue to deny a person the right to a full life? Furthermore, how could they possibly stop thousands of patients if they lost control of the situation? Would they arrest them all? Certainly they would try, but that would be the least of their legal worries by the time they finished.
With more individuals learning that psychedelic mushrooms -void of harmful man-made chemicals -offer the healing answer to the problems plaguing them, the number of people in the movement for psychedelic mushrooms in the use of medical conditions will only continue to rise. With new clinical studies on the topic popping up in the media left and right, one cannot help but envision it as a glimmer of hope that a major paradigm shift in society is on the horizon.
** I am in no way attempting to medically advise you to do illegal drugs; rather I am simply speaking from extensive personal experience. I understand there are two opposing sides to this topic, each of which holds strong convictions. Until I experienced significant healing from psychedelic mushrooms, I was on neither, as it would have been ignorant of me to be. After all, how can those who are not sick possibly make the best decision for those who are sick –without feeling their pain first hand?
Source: collective-evolution.com - Author: Shelley White - I am passionate about truth, and love nothing more than to converse with free thinkers. I am a relentless activist for Lyme disease, as well as the medical benefits of marijuana and psychedelic drugs. Studying to be a Master Herbalist and Naturopath. Feel free to contact me.
Over the next 60 years, approximately 50,000 criminals were transported from Great Britain to the "land down under," in one of the strangest episodes in criminal-justice history.
The accepted wisdom of the upper and ruling classes in 18th century England was that criminals were inherently defective. Thus, they could not be rehabilitated and simply required separation from the genetically pure and law-abiding citizens. Accordingly, lawbreakers had to be either killed or exiled, since prisons were too expensive. With the American victory in the Revolutionary War, transgressors could no longer be shipped off across the Atlantic, and the English looked for a colony in the other direction.
Captain Arthur Phillip, a tough but fair career naval officer, was charged with setting up the first penal colony in Australia. The convicts were chained beneath the deck during the entire hellish six-month voyage. The first voyage claimed the lives of nearly 10 percent of the prisoners, which remarkably proved to be a rather good rate. On later trips, up to a third of the unwilling passengers died on the way. These were not hardened criminals by any measure; only a small minority were transported for violent offenses. Among the first group was a 70-year-old woman who had stolen cheese to eat.
Although not confined behind bars, most convicts in Australia had an extremely tough life. The guards who volunteered for duty in Australia seemed to be driven by exceptional sadism. Even small violations of the rules could result in a punishment of 100 lashes by the cat o'nine tails. It was said that blood was usually drawn after five lashes and convicts ended up walking home in boots filled with their own blood--that is, if they were able to walk at all.
Convicts who attempted to escape were sent to tiny Norfolk Island, 600 miles east of Australia, where the conditions were even more inhumane. The only hope of escape from the horror of Norfolk Island was a "game" in which groups of three prisoners drew straws. The short straw was killed as painlessly as possible and a judge was then shipped in to put the other two on trial, one playing the role of killer, the other as witness.
According to researchers, “nepetalactone, the essential oil in catnip (pictured) that gives the plant its characteristic odor, is about ten times more effective at repelling mosquitoes than DEET — the compound used in most commercial insect repellents.” Problem is, catnip and a few other oil listed here are not recommended for pregnant or nursing mamas. For pregnant/nursing friendly options see recipe #2.
4 oz purified water 15 drops lemongrass essential oil (you can also use it to open up sinus and breathing passages, soothe torn or strained ligaments/tendons, heal ringworm, add shine and lustre to damaged hair, and as calming massage oil) 15 drops eucalyptus essential oil (get it for less by buying it with lemongrass, peppermint, orange, lavendar, tea tree) 15 drops lemon essential oil (use as a replacement to hand sanitize or mix with water in a spray bottle for bathroom air freshener. I’ve even heard you can add a couple drops to your dishwasher for spot free dishes) 15 drops citronella essential oil 15 drops catnip essential oils (“The active constituent in catnip, nepetalactone, has been found to be more effective than the insect repellent diethyl-meta-toluamide (DEET)”)
Recipe #2
4 oz purified water 60 drops lemon essential oil (avoid during first three months of pregnancy, fine after that. Also safe for breastfeeding)
This is "Big History": an enlightening, wide-angle look at complexity, life and humanity, set against our slim share of the cosmic timeline.
David Gilbert Christian (born 1946) is an Anglo-American historian and scholar of Russian history notable for creating and spearheading an interdisciplinary approach known as Big History.
He began teaching the first course in 1989 which examined history from the Big Bang to the present using a multidisciplinary approach with assistance from scholars in diverse specializations from the sciences, social sciences, and humanities.
The course frames human history in terms of cosmic, geological, and biological history.
He is credited with coining the term Big History and he serves as president of the International Big History Association.
TEDTalks is a daily video podcast of the best talks and performances from the TED Conference, where the world's leading thinkers and doers give the talk of their lives in 18 minutes. TED stands for Technology, Entertainment, Design, and TEDTalks cover these topics as well as science, business, development and the arts. Closed captions and translated subtitles in a variety of languages are now available.
Chemtrails, Nanoaluminum, and Neurodegenerative and Neurodevelopmental Effects By Russell L. Blaylock, M.D. August 23, 2012
The internet is littered with stories of “chemtrails” and geoengineering to combat “global warming”; and, until recently, I took these stories with a grain of salt. One of the main reasons for my skepticism was that I rarely saw what they were describing in the skies. But over the past several years I have noticed a great number of these trails and I have to admit they are not like the contrails I grew up seeing in the skies. They are extensive, quite broad, are laid in a definite pattern, and slowly evolve into artificial clouds. Of particular concern is that there are now so many – dozens every day are littering the skies.
My major concern is that there is evidence that they are spraying tons of nanosized aluminum compounds. It has been demonstrated in the scientific and medical literature that nanosized particles are infinitely more reactive and induce intense inflammation in a number of tissues. Of special concern is the effect of these nanoparticles on the brain and spinal cord, as a growing list of neurodegenerative diseases, including Alzheimer’s dementia, Parkinson’s disease, and Lou Gehrig’s disease (ALS) are strongly related to exposure to environmental aluminum.
Nanoparticles of aluminum are not only infinitely more inflammatory, they also easily penetrate the brain by a number of routes, including the blood and olfactory nerves (the smell nerves in the nose). Studies have shown that these particles pass along the olfactory neural tracts, which connect directly to the area of the brain that is not only most affected by Alzheimer’s disease, but also the earliest affected in the course of the disease. It also has the highest level of brain aluminum in Alzheimer’s cases.
The intranasal route of exposure makes spraying of massive amounts of nanoaluminum into the skies especially hazardous, as it will be inhaled by people of all ages, including babies and small children for many hours. We know that older people have the greatest reaction to this airborne aluminum. Because of the nanosizing of the aluminum particles being used, home-filtering systems will not remove the aluminum, thus prolonging exposure, even indoors.
In addition to inhaling nanoaluminum, such spraying will saturate the ground, water, and vegetation with high levels of aluminum. Normally, aluminum is poorly absorbed from the GI tract; but nanoaluminum is absorbed in much higher amounts. This absorbed aluminum has been shown to be distributed to a number of organs and tissues including the brain and spinal cord. Inhaling this environmentally suspended nanoaluminum will also produce tremendous inflammatory reaction within the lungs, which will pose a significant hazard to children and adults with asthma and pulmonary diseases.
I pray that the pilots who are spraying this dangerous substance fully understand that they are destroying the lives and health of their families as well. This is also true of our political officials. Once the soil, plants, and water sources are heavily contaminated there will be no way to reverse the damage that has been done.
Steps need to be taken now to prevent an impending health disaster of enormous proportions if this project is not stopped immediately. Otherwise we will see an explosive increase in neurodegenerative diseases occurring in adults and the elderly in unprecedented rates as well as neurodevelopmental disorders in our children. We are already seeing a dramatic increase in these neurological disorders and it is occurring in younger people more than ever before.
________________________________________
Endnotes
1. Win-Shwe T-T, Fujimaki H, “Nanoparticles and Neurotoxicity,” In J Mol Sci 2011;12:6267-6280.
2. Krewski D et al., “The biological effects of nanoparticles. Risk assessment for aluminum, aluminum oxide, and aluminum hydroxide,” J Toxicol Environ Health B Crit Rev 2007;10 (suppl 1): 1-269.
3. Blaylock RL, “Aluminum induced immunoexcitotoxicity in neurodevelopmental and neurodegenerative disorders,” Curr Inorg Chem 2012;2:46-53.
4. Tomljenovic L, “Aluminum and Alzheimer’s disease: after a century, is there a plausible link,” J Alzheimer’s Disease 2011;23:567-598.
5. Perl DP, Good PF, “Aluminum, Alzheimer’s Disease, and the olfactory system,” Ann NY Acad Sci 1991;640:8-13.
6. Shaw CA, Petrik MS, “Aluminum hydroxide injections lead to motor deficits and motor neuron degeneration,” J Inorg Biochem 2009;103:1555-1562.
8. Li XB et al., “Glia activation induced by peripheral administration of aluminum oxide nanoparticles in rat brains,” Nanomedicine 2009;5:473-479.
9. Exley C, House E, “Aluminum in the human brain,” Monatsh Chem 2011;142:357-363.
10.Nayak P, Chatterjee AK, “Effects of aluminum exposure on brain glutamate and GABA system: an experimental study in rats,” Food Chem Toxicol 2001;39:1285-1289.
11. Tsunoda M, Sharma RP, “Modulation of tumor necrosis factor alpha expression in mouse brain after exposure to aluminum in drinking water,” Arch Toxicol 1999;73:419-426.
12. Matyja E, “Aluminum changes glutamate –mediated neurotoxicity in organotypic cultures of rat hippocampus,” Folia Neuropathol 2000;38:47-53.
13. Walton JR, “Aluminum in hippocampal neurons from humans with Alzheimer’s disease,” Neurotoxicology 2006;27:385-394.
14. Walton JR, “An aluminum-based rat model for Alzheimer’s disease exhibits oxidative damage, inhibition of PP2A activity, hyperphosphorylated tau and granulovacuolar degeneration,” J Inorg Biochem 2007;101:1275-1284.
15. Becaria A et al., “Aluminum and copper in drinking water enhance inflammatory or oxidative events specifically in brain,” J Neuroimmunol 2006;176:16-23.
17. Exley C, “The pro-oxidant activity of aluminum,” Free Rad Biol Med 2004;36:380-387.
Recommended Reading
Dr. Blaylock’s brochures Bio Terrorism: How You Can Survive and Nuclear Sunrise.
Dr. Blaylock, an NHF member, is a World-renowned neurosurgeon who retired from Neurosurgery to devote his full attention to nutritional studies and research.
An in-demand guest for radio and TV programs, he lectures extensively to both lay audiences and physicians on nutrition-related subjects. He is the 2004 recipient of the Integrity in Science Award granted by the Weston A. Price Foundation and serves on the editorial staff of the Journal of the American Nutraceutical Association and is a member of the editorial board of the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons, the official publication of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons. See http://www.blaylockwellnesscenter.com
This may sound somewhat obvious, but I would argue that this is a fundamental sticking-point when discussing such matters, as it is difficult to link individuals to the antisocial and unethical actions they perpetrate [1:2] without a historically accurate point of reference.
For example, when discussing matters such as the proposal that 9/11 may have been initiated by our ‘leaders’ [3], I find that people quite often respond with the simple question ‘why?’, as it seems absurd to think that our ‘leaders’ would do something quite so inhuman and immoral for some sort of political gain. I will not attempt here to go into what their motives were, but rather into why it is that we, the general public, rarely remember the lessons of the past and continue to be misled about the circumstances leading to each and every conflict.
At this juncture I would suggest that the reader check out an article by John Pilger entitled ‘Our children are learning lies’ in which he clearly sets out several examples of how we are taught about an historic event at school and how this information will in turn have a direct effect on the formation of our future perceptions of the world [4]
Unfortunately, this information can all too often bear little or no relation to the actual event (Pilger uses Vietnam as a prime illustration of this), because the language and information used to teach us essentially pre-programs our comprehension of future warfare, automatically predisposing us to whichever side has been identified as the ‘goodies’ while creating a vested dislike or even hatred of the ‘baddies’.
Perhaps ‘baddie’ should be rephrased in Orwellian terms as ‘a figure of hate’. From what I remember of my own learning on Vietnam, I recall thinking that the Americans became involved in order to help protect the ‘Democratic South’ against the ‘Communist North’ — this is probably what most people believe. According to Pilger, this analysis of the Vietnam conflict is far from the truth; in fact, almost completely contrary to the reality of the situation. The excerpt below comes from his article referring to a school textbook written on the subject:
It says that under the 1954 Geneva Accord: ‘Vietnam was partitioned into communist north and democratic south.’ In one sentence, truth is dispatched. The final declaration of the Geneva conference divided Vietnam ‘temporarily’ until free national elections were held on 26 July 1956. There was little doubt that Ho Chi Minh would win and form Vietnam’s first democratically elected government. Certainly, President Eisenhower was in no doubt of this. ‘I have never talked with a person knowledgeable in Indo-Chinese affairs,’ he wrote, ‘who did not agree that . . . 80 per cent of the population would have voted for the communist Ho Chi Minh as their leader.’
Not only did the United States refuse to allow the UN to administer the agreed elections two years later, but the ‘democratic’ regime in the south was an invention. One of the inventors, the CIA official Ralph McGehee, describes in his masterly book Deadly Deceits how a brutal expatriate mandarin, Ngo Dinh Diem, was imported from New Jersey to be ‘president’ and a fake government was put in place. ‘The CIA,’ he wrote, ‘was ordered to sustain that illusion through propaganda [placed in the media].’
Phony elections were arranged, hailed in the west as ‘free and fair’, with American officials fabricating ‘an 83 per cent turnout despite Vietcong terror’. The GCSE guide alludes to none of this, nor that ‘the terrorists’, whom the Americans called the Vietcong, were also southern Vietnamese defending their homeland against the American invasion and whose resistance was popular. For Vietnam, read Iraq. –Extract from ‘Our children are learning lies’ by John Pilger [5]
What this essentially tells us is that, for all the democratic ideals that America and the West claims to espouse, as soon as someone who does not agree with their viewpoint is voted in they will do anything in their power to subvert and undermine them. This is rephrased and then becomes the ‘official’ history of events, finding its way into everything from textbooks to documentaries – George Orwell and 1984, eat your heart out!
You don’t have to look far to find similar examples of this subversive reinvention of recent history – simply look at how Hamas has been marginalized despite winning a clear majority in the Palestinian legislative election of 2006. [6]
Hamas was not ‘permitted’ to govern, despite winning the overall support of the Palestinian people, due to their not having the same agenda as the policy makers in Washington. That is not to say that we should agree with all Hamas policies (or anyone else’s, for that matter), but that we should at least respect the fact that the Palestinian people, through seemingly fair elections, have chosen their own government. The Americans evidently did not: they swiftly imposed sanctions and withheld aid from the Palestinian Authority in protest at the audacity of the Palestinians voting for an anti-American party [7]. The power sharing deal between Hamas and Fatah hammered out afterward under American influence is the equivalent of the Conservative Party in Britain winning over 50% of the seats in a general election and then being forced to govern in coalition with the previous losing Labour Administration — a ridiculous prospect but arguably a comparable scenario. [8]
According to the words of former Republican Presidential hopeful, Newt Gingrich, the Palestinians are an “invented people” and are merely part of the larger Arab community, despite the fact that each Middle Eastern country has its own form of Arabic language and customs [9].
It could be argued that these types of statement serve to de-legitimize any section of society. Looking at history, this stratagem has been used as an excuse for ethnic cleansing, whether it be the United States in their treatment of Native Americans in the 19th Century; or 1930s Germany rounding up of the mentally ill, homosexuals, Jews and any other so-called undesirables; or the genocides in Bosnia or Rwanda in the 1990s – all the way through to Australia’s expunging of aboriginal culture during the first half of the 20th Century.
To say that Palestinians are not a people is evidently to completely ignore the reality of their current political situation. Very few countries have the same boundaries as they did 200 years ago, so it can be reasonably argued that the Palestinians who reside in the “occupied territories” are on the land of their forefathers and have every right to be there. Claiming that they are part of the larger Arab community and not a people is to imply that no Arab country is sovereign unto itself; something that would certainly be disputed on talking to most Moroccans, Saudis or Jordanians.
Let us not forget that although the Israeli nation is intrinsically a modern construct, this doesn’t mean that the Israeli people don’t have a sense of nationhood or national culture; they evidently do. Are Walloon-Belgians to be considered as ‘French’ simply because they have the same language as France? Is Scotland, Wales or the United States to be classified as ‘English’ simply because they share similar customs? Unfortunately, this type of rhetoric is all too often put forward; and even if the effect is not immediate, it is likely to influence the thinking of a significant number of people over time as the corporate media repeatedly relays these words to the wider population.
For further examples of this duplicity, we could briefly consider the undermining of Daniel Ortega as leader of Nicaragua, and the deposition of Mohammad Mosaddegh as Prime Minister of Iran. Ortega led a movement to oust the previous brutal U.S.-backed regime under Somoza and had put in place massive public programs to increase the living standards of his countrymen [10: 11]. Despite being lauded as the most free elections ever conducted in Nicaragua’s history, the Western establishment media was falling over itself to imply they were in fact rigged. [12]. The illegal methods used by the U.S. and its agencies included the funding of an armed insurgency, later became known as the Iran-Contra affair – a huge topic in itself, well worth reading about as an illustration of the extent to which those in power will go in order to destabilize governments that do not agree with their policies. [13]
Democratically elected Mosaddegh had instituted changes to transfer control of Iranian oil from Anglo-American interests to Iran. This resulted in a U.S.-sponsored regime change which saw the brutal Shah being imposed on Iran for the next 25 years, until his overthrow by the Islamic revolution of 1979 [14]. This fact is little known or cared about by Western observers, but it is widely known and taught throughout Iran. As Robert Fisk mentioned in a recent article in The Independent, ‘It is a weird irony that Iranians know the history of Anglo-Persian relations better than the Brits’ [15] This is something worth thinking about when looking at current Western-Iranian relations.
My point here is that these three events (and there are many more), although in the public domain are not widely known about or understood by the general population. Moreover, I would argue that discussion of these events is actively suppressed by the Western-controlled media, as this in itself would show the collusion of Western agencies in these events.
However, it is my belief that the situation is more dangerous than this, as noted at the start of this article. It is precisely this lack of information that prevents the general public from making informed decisions on a whole range of current areas of controversy — be it Iran, Syria, Libya or Sudan. We are presented with dubious information from a young age through to adulthood via the public-education system and the corporate-owned media, and it is hard to filter it out and be objective. Grant Allen may have been onto something when he wrote that “No schooling was allowed to interfere with my education.” [16]
There is much that could be said on this topic, but my main point is that it is absolutely vital for those who have an interest in these matters to critically appreciate and understand the history of how public opinion has been manipulated, how perceptions have been altered, and how half-truths have been purposely put forward by the media. It can be argued that in this way the media support the “Military Industrial Complex’s” agenda [17].
George Santayana wrote ‘Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it’ [18]. If it is true that we are being deliberately misinformed and poorly educated about still-relevant historical events, shouldn’t we begin to at least question why this is the case? Might there be something more sinister at work in the world today?
All the information is still freely available and out there on the Web or in books for anyone who cares to know. It’s up to each one of us to find out everything we can so that we can understand the realities behind global and national policy making, thus enabling us to make informed and rational commentary and contributions to society.
This is where a revolution in thinking should start. This is where the morally “repugnant” elite control structure should end. [19]
Author: Andrew Fell lives in the Czech Republic and is a lecturer of English at a Social Work College in Prague. He has a keen interest in geo-politics, ethics, history, cooking and playing music. He can usually be found armed with a smile, sipping a cup of tea at a èajovna in Prague.
If you put a plaster cast on a broken arm the skin starves for Vitamin D, the muscles weaken due to strangled range of motion, the nerve synapses depress to a whimper of their former joy. Twenty-first century hominids? We shroud our entire skin palette except for face, neck and hands - we obliterate symbiosis with the planet.
We hide in cocoons, when we could be free as butterflies.
History reveals many cultures that were not clothes-minded. Spartans were basically bare and their victories in pan-Hellenic sports competitions enticed all neighboring Greeks to exercise nude, creating the word “gymnasium” (Greek gymnos = naked). Romans mingled in magnificent bathhouses, enjoying dense communal nudity as they drank, dined, defecated, bathed, read books, argued politics, and watched theater. Adamists — naked heretics — performed stripped-down church services in North Africa, Bohemia, the Netherlands, and England. Pre-Hitler Germans were avid adherents of Freikorperkultur (“Free Body Culture”) with 70,000 attending co-ed Nacktkultur schools.
There’s naked Japanese in hot springs, naked Finns in saunas, “sky-clad” Jain monks in India, plus millions of nudists worldwide going to “Nakation” camps, beaches, and resorts. They’re still sporty as Spartans, eager to hike naked (“free bush rambling”), canoe naked (“canuding”), bicycle naked, ride horses naked, run naked, play volleyball, badminton, ping-pong and chess naked, swim naked, dance naked, do Naked Yoga, Naked Tai Chi, Naked Gardening, Naked Bowling, and of course, many of us, perhaps you and I, dear readers, are NIFOC — Naked In Front of Computers.
Many famous figures were bare-all aficionados; too many politicians to name, so I’ll just list sci-fi and scientists: Leonard Nimoy, Alexander Graham Bell, Robert Heinlein, and seismologist Charles Richter. Nudism is prominent in Philip Jose Farmer’s Riverworld books and John Varley’s Steel Beach. Celebrities? Many movie stars skinny-dip at the French Riviera, trying to elude paparazzi seeking pix of Bruce WIllis’ willy or Natalie Portman’s port side.
Here’s evidence suggesting that skin-only can be superior:
Born Free. Pediatricians agree that infants thrive with a daily dose of “naked time” because the unhampered range of motion aids brain development, stimulating neuron growth. Recent discoveries reveal that the “plastic” brain changes and develops throughout our entire lives. Neuroplasticity pioneer Michael M. Merzenich believes, “Everything that you can see happen in a young brain can happen in an older brain.” Doesn’t this imply that “naked time” is equally valuable for humans of any age, especially the elderly?
Weakened Bodies. A 2003 University of Reading study entitled “A Naked Ape Would Have Fewer Parasites” posits that “humans evolved hairlessness to reduce parasite loads, especially ectoparasites that may carry disease.” Unfortunately, the garments we wear can be a breeding ground for filthy fungi and bad bacterium, causing yeast infections, urinary tract infections, rotting toenails. Lyme Disease deer ticks can grab onto our sweaters and sea lice can sneak into our bathing suit crotches. Cinched-up belts, ties, and clothes impede breathing. Men’s snug pants raise testicle temperature, lowering sperm count and fertility.
Barefoot Medicine. Going shoeless is now recognized as an anti-Alzheimer’s, brain-boosting activity because the sole sensation entices your brain into growing extra, efficient neuron connections. Dr. Norman Doidge (author of The Brain That Changes Itself) believes skipping shoes increases brain flexibility and youthfulness, and many podiatrists now advise going barefoot as much as possible. Bare feet are today’s prescription. Will tomorrow’s elixir take the next step: Bare Body?
Superior Socialization. Self-actualization proponent Abraham Maslow believed “Nudism… is itself a kind of therapy.” Health benefits of social nudity include stress reduction, satiation of curiosity about the human body, reduction of porn addiction, a sense of full-body integration and developing a wholesome attitude about the opposite gender. Research at the University of Northern Iowa discovered that nudists have significantly higher body self-acceptance. Another study concluded that teens at a New York nudist camp were “extraordinarily well-adjusted, happy, and thoughtful.” It’s also excellent for children to grow up free of shame about the human body.
Tolerant Views. A University of Central Florida 2008 study of 384 participants concluded that pro-nudity students “were significantly more accepting of other religious groups and gays and lesbians” when compared to the anti-nudity students. They were also “less prejudiced towards ethnically dissimilar others.”
Soothe Away Your Crazies. Massage is recognized as a therapeutic treatment for mental health issues like depression, anxiety, schizophrenia, bipolarism, borderline personality disorder, learning difficulties, and low self-esteem. The skin stimulation of massage — improving blood flow and detoxifying the lymph system — is duplicated by the warmth, freedom, and improved circulation generated in nakedness.
Soak Up The Rays. Vitamin D deficiency is currently soaring, with up to 75% of USA teens and adults receiving insufficient amounts of the “sunshine vitamin.” Lack of this essential health aid is a factor in numerous ailments, including cancer, heart disease, osteoporosis and diabetes. Anyone who bares all outside as a “naturist” harvests larger amounts of Vitamin D in a quicker time span.
Financial Liberation. Clothes are a huge money and time-suck with shopping, laundry, closets, dressers, and gazillions of hours wasted wondering what so-and-so looks like with their garments removed. The global markets for swimsuits alone is expected to reach $17.6 billion annually by 2015; our carbon footprint would shrink like a wool sweater if fabric was no longer manufactured.
Longevity (just joking!). Have you noticed that the furry Norway Rat only lives 2-3 years, while the Naked Mole Rat survives to be 28?
So… is the future going to be full frontal? Will the post-Singularity planet be stripped? Will everyone in a climate-controlled tomorrow choose to be nude, strutting around like the Nuba dancers and boxers of Leni Reifenstahl?
Trends point to an era where there won’t be a stitch to worry about. Many resort areas are are now offering nudism to increase tourism, and American naturist clubs claim their enrollment is growing 20% annually. The German airline OssiUrlaub.de offered nude chartered flights to a Baltic sea resort, and today’s lengthy luggage searches at airports are steering travelers to destinations where they only need carry-on towels and sunblock. Twenty million Europeans already go to nude beaches and spas.
Well put. And quite accurate too. People have been misled into having a narrowly focused opinion as a measure of control over their behaviour and thoughts.
If the general public were given the truth about the effects, society would be quite different, and the control structures governing your behaviour would topple.
Saying drugs are responsible for societies ills and crime and misfortune is like saying the knife was responsible for its victims death instead of the person who thrust it into them.
Personal responsibility is everything and many people demonstrate a complete lack of it. The people who suffer negative effects of drugs are people who don't exercise caution, don't bother to research the pros and cons, don't think about what the ramifications may be, or let others pressure them into it and so on.
The folk who discover/ed many of these substances and their effects were or are most often scientists who in many cases test it carefully themselves. Alexander Shulgin is a prime example.
More to say in my next article on Turismo Associati blog. Danger
What many Americans, including many scientists, think they know about drugs is turning out to be totally wrong. For decades, drug war propaganda has brainwashed Americans into blaming drugs for problems ranging from crime to economic deprivation. In his new book High Price: A Neuroscientist's Journey of Self-Discovery That Challenges Everything You Know About Drugs and Society, Carl Hart blows apart the most common myths about drugs and their impact on society, drawing in part on his personal experience growing up in an impoverished Miami neighborhood. Hart has used marijuana and cocaine, carried guns, sold drugs, and participated in other petty crime, like shoplifting. A combination of what he calls choice and chance brought him to the Air Force and college, and finally made him the first black, tenured professor of sciences at Columbia University.
Intertwined with his story about the struggles of families and communities stressed by lack of capital and power over their surroundings is striking new research on substance use. Hart uses his life and work to reveal that drugs are not nearly as harmful as many think. For example, most people who use the most “addicting” drugs do not develop a problem. Rather, Hart says, drugs are scapegoated for problems related to poverty. The policies that result from this misconception are catastrophically misguided. AlterNet spoke with Hart about his life and research.
Kristen Gynne: What are some of the false conclusions about drugs you are challenging?
Carl Hart: There are multiple false conclusions. There is a belief, for example, that crack cocaine is so addictive it only took one hit to get hooked, and that it is impossible to use heroin without becoming addicted. There was another belief that methamphetamine users are cognitively impaired. All of these are myths that have been perpetuated primarily by law enforcement, and law enforcement deals with a limited, select group of people—people who are, in many cases, behaving badly. But to generalize that to all drug users is not only shortsighted and naive, it’s also irresponsible. The impact of that irresponsible behavior has been borne primarily by black communities. Nobody really cares about black communities, and that's why this irresponsible behavior has been allowed to continue.
It's also true that we've missed critical opportunities to challenge our basic assumptions about drugs. If drugs really were as damaging as we are led to believe, a respectable society should do something to address that problem. But the thing is, the very assumptions driving our drug policy are wrong, and must be questioned.
KG:How does the lack of people of color in academia or research affect our understanding of drugs?
CH: I'd just like to be clear, I don't say people of color, I say black people, because people of color can mean a number of other [races]. I'm talking about black people who, like me, when we go back to our communities and we ask about people who we grew up with, the response is, "Well, they got caught up with a drug charge, they're upstate. They're doing some time” or, “Oh, he's doing better now that he got out of jail. He can't really find a good job, but he's doing his best.”
It would be nice if we had black scientists, more black people in science, to incorporate these kinds of experiences as they think about the questions they investigate. The problem is it’s so homogenous that critical questions about our community are ignored because they're not seen as being important.
KG:And the result is that they don't comprehend environment, or the other variables that are affecting someone's decisions or behavior, and miss the mark?
CH: That's exactly right. It's that if you don't contextualize what is happening with drugs in the country you might get the impression that drugs are so bad they're causing all these people to go to jail: “Let's find out how drugs are exerting these awful effects.” Now, you have just completely disregarded context in which all of these things occur, and that is what has happened in science. If you don't fully appreciate the context, and you think that drug users are awful, then you don't think about how a person takes care of their kid, takes care of their family, goes to work, but they also use drugs. If you don't think about all of those contextual factors, you limit the picture and that's what we've done.
It's not that science lies. Science doesn't lie. But when you look at your research with a limited view, you may erroneously draw conclusions about drugs, when in fact other variables you might not understand are what's really at play.
KG:You talk about how people are always blaming problems on drugs, when those issues really spring from the stress of poverty. What are some examples?
CH: I think crack cocaine is the easiest example In the 1980s, as I was coming of age in my teens and my early 20s, people—black people, white folks, a number of people in the country—said crack was so awful it was causing women to give up their babies and neglect their children such that grandmothers had to raise another generation of children.
Now, if you look at the history in poor communities—my community, my family—long before crack ever hit the scene, that sort of thing happened in my house. We were raised by my grandmother. My mother went away because she and my father split up. She went away in search of better jobs and left the state, but it wasn't just her. This sort of thing, this pathology that is attributed to drugs, happened to immigrant communities like the Eastern European Jews when they came to the Lower East SIde, but people simply blamed crack in the 1980s and the 1990s.
Another example is that, since the crack era, multiple studies have found that the effects of crack cocaine use during pregnancy do not create an epidemic of doomed black "crack babies." Instead, crack-exposed children are growing up to lead normal lives, and studies have repeatedly found that the diferences between them and babies who were not exposed cannot be isolated from the health effects of growing up poor, without a stable, safe environment or access to healthcare.
KG:What about the idea that drugs can turn people into criminals?
CH: The pharmalogical effects of drugs rarely lead to crime, but the public conflates these issues regardless. If we were going to look at how pharmalogical drugs influence crime, we should probably look at alcohol. We know sometimes people get unruly when they drink, but the vast majority of people don't. Certainly, we have given thousands of doses of crack cocaine and methamphetamine to people in our lab, and never had any problems with violence or anything like that. That tells you it's not the pharmacology of the drug, but some interaction with the environment or environmental conditions, that would probably happen without the drug. Sure, new markets of illegal activity are often or sometimes associated with increased violence, or some other illegal activity, but it is not specific to drugs like people try to make it out to be.
Other than crime, you have myths that drugs cause cognitive impairment, make people unable to be productive members of society, or tear families apart. If the vast majority of people are using these drugs without problems—and a smaller proportion of users do have problems—what that tells you if you're thinking critically is it can't be only the drug, or mainly the drug. It tells you it is something about the individual situations, environmental conditions, a wide range of factors.
KG:What about addiction? Won't some people who use drugs inevitably become dependent on drugs?
CH: Given the large percentage of people who are not addicted and try these drugs, it's something other than the pharmacology of the drugs that's causing addiction. We find that 85% of the people, for example, who use cocaine are not addicted, even though they use the same cosmetological substance as those who are. Somebody could say there may be something biologically predisposing people who get addicted, but there is no evidence to support that position. Certainly, that idea should be investigated, but there is far more evidence to support the view that there are other things going in the lives of people who are predisposed to addiction, that can predict their addiction as well as other problems.
KG:What kinds of environmental factors matter?
CH: Well, let's think about drug use. Drug effects are predictable, and some drugs are really good at increasing euphoria and feelings of positive reinforcement. Now, if you don't have anything competing with drugs for pleasure and happiness, all you have is deprivation. Why wouldn't you get high?
If you have competing reinforcers or alternatives, like the ability to earn income, learn a skill, or receive some respect based on your performance in some sort of way, those things compete with potentially destructive behavior. And so as a psychologist, you just want to make sure people have a variety of potential reinforcers. If you don't have that, you increase the likelihood of people engaging in behaviors that society does not condone.
Skills that are employable or marketable, education, having a stake or meaningful role in society, not being marginalized—all of those things are very important. Instead of ensuring that all of our members have these things, our society has blamed drugs, said drugs are the reasons that people don't have a stake in society, and that's simply not true.
KG:So if drugs aren't the problem, why do we say they are?
CH: They’re just an easy scapegoat. You can imagine if so few people have engaged in an activity, you can make up some incredible stories about that activity, and be believed. And that's what's happened with drugs. Note that you can't make up those incredible stories about marijuana today, but there was a time when we could: the 1930s. That has passed because more people have tried marijuana, but you can make up those incredible stories about methamphetamine because so few people have used methamphetamine.
Well, I should say so few people actually know that they use methamphetamine. All those people who use Adderall and those kinds of drugs, they are using methamphetamine, basically. It is the amphetamine, not the "D" [like Adderall] or "meth" in front of it, that creates the effects.
KG:What is actually responsible for problems often linked to drugs?
CH: Poverty. And there are policies that have played a role, too. Policies like placing a large percentage of our law enforcment resources in those communities, so that when people get charged with some petty crime, they have a blemish on their record that further decreases their ability to join mainstream, get a job that's meaningful, and that sort of thing.
The policy decisions that we make play a far bigger role than the drugs themselves. When I turned 14, for example, there was a federal government program that, in order to keep kids like me out of the streets, gave us jobs. Under these federal government programs, we had money for the summer, for clothing—it was great. When we cut these types of programs and kids have nowhere to go what do you expect to happen? It doesn't take rocket scientists to figure this out.
Now, I have an 18-year-old who, this summer, won't have anything to do. I'm trying to find him some sort of work. Having a federal government program for underpriveleged children, that was great. That let kids know that the society might care about you. We teach them work skills, we teach them something about responsibility, we make sure they have money in their pockets. Now, you take away all of this, and you miss the chance to teach them about responsibility. You miss the opportunity to help them put food on the table, to put clothes on their backs.
KG:In your acknowledgements, you thank Aid to Families with Dependent Children, which you call "welfare as we once knew it."
CH: All of my childhood, we were on welfare. My mom received aid for families with dependent children—welfare. Without that, we wouldn't have had subsidized housing. Most of my childhood we had a two-bedroom apartment, but eventually we got into the projects, where we had four bedrooms. That was great.
We got food stamps that helped make sure we had something to eat, even though it was little. Without that program, I wouldn't have developed physically. There would have been a lot more stress in the household.
Now, the interesting thing about it is that all of my sibling were all on that program because of my mom, and all of my siblings now have jobs and they're responsible, taxpaying citizens. That's the typical story on that program, but the conservatives, under Reagan, they began to perpetuate this narrative of the welfare queen, when in fact, we know who the biggest welfare kings are: the people on Wall Street. The federal government gives far money to them than to poor families, but welfare became so villified that we essentially got rid of it.
KG:How does institutional racism affect policy? In your book, you talk about how crack, which is pharmacologically almost identical to cocaine, is punished with an 18-1 (and once 100-1) sentencing disparity because of racially coded language linking the "crack scourge" to bad behavior in poor, black communities. There was also a recent ACLU report, which found that blacks are an average of four times more likely to be arrested for pot than whites.
CH: I often testify as an expert witness to help women who have used marijuana while pregnant to keep their children. Case after case is a black woman. Security in the court is all black; the judges are all white; and the lawyers are young and white, building careers. It's just slavery all over again.
When you have a group that’s already identified as an “other,” or a villified group that is a minority, it's easier to associate a behavior with them. But people don't see black people as being fully human. That’s what happens in the US, although people won't tell you that.
Because when we think about Trayvon Martin, when we think about Ramarley Graham, Sean Bell, these black kids who were killed at the hands of some security or law enforcement person—that almost never happens with white kids. If it did, it would be a national crises. But it's not a national crises because we really don't value black men and boys in the same way we value white boys and men. We don't see them as being equal.
I look at how people behave, and it's clear. As long as you view this group that way, you can continue to put large percentage of law enforcement resources in those communities, but not so much to make them better. If you want to make it better, you give people jobs. Instead, we put police in those communities to pretend that they care, to pretend that you're doing something. But that's not helping.
Whereas drug reactions are predictable, interactions with police are not and too often become deadly. As a parent of a black youth, I'd much rather my kids interact with drugs than law enforcement. White people don't need to think about that. Police officers too often see young, black boys as less than human. It creates a mentality where black kids are supposed to "know your place," and it affects your psyche. Indignities become part of who you are.
KG:How is meth changing this conversation?
CH: Meth is the new crack. It is the same thing as Adderall, but we are told it causes people's faces and teeth to decay. There is no evidence to suggest meth alone, versus poor hygiene, makes people look ugly. At the same time, because most people who use or arrested for meth are white people—poor of course, people we don't like—it creates an opportunity to say the drug war is not racist.
In Montana, they have invested in sentencing alternatives, like a maximum one-year sentence and treatment, for meth users. Could you imagine that happening with crack cocaine? Hell no. It's interesting because, with meth, we are doing our job, trying to seek alternatives to help people. Still, in some places, like Oklahoma, they're still locking white people up.
KG:In your book, it seems as though you feel some guilt for being successful, as if you have abandoned your community. How has your life changed?
CH: In terms of where I'm at now, I have money and I don't have to worry about where my next meal is coming from, so that's a really good thing. Whereas, when I was an adolescent, it was a good day if I ate two meals. Now, I expect to eat three meals, and that sort of thing. But, on the other hand, when I think about family, friends andthat sort of thing, it was a lot better where I was previously because you knew where everyone stood, you knew everyone had your back, you didn't have to worry about people backstabbing you or trying to go after you for a variety of reasons. Mainly, you were just being who you are—that's one of the things I bring with me from the past.
Whether I am there or here, I have this sense of community responsibility and I hope that will always be with with me. When it's no longer with me, perhaps it's time to die.
KG:How do you navigate two different cultures?
CH: That's very difficult, because I deal in mainstream and my family, they don't as much. Not only do I deal in mainstream society, I deal in mainstream as a fucking professor at Columbia. Now, when I take that mask off to go home, and it takes me a few days to acclimate, to be like OK, I'm no longer in the shark pit, I can relax, and relax my vernacular. And then I have to leave again.
So, my family might see this Columbia personality, and they may take it as a personal affront. I feel like a fraud, oftentimes, at home, but it has nothing to do with how I feel about my family. It's just that I'm catching hell in the mainstream. In the mainstream, I’m suspect because I’m black, I have dreadlocks, I have a goatee. I mean, I'm just suspect. In my classroom and at Columbia, I'm not as suspect because it's clear I know what I'm doing, but I am still suspect. And people are curious; they don’t know that I have the same dreams and aspirations as they do. They think that I may be different somehow.
This sort of issue would be a fascinating topic for research, particularly when we think about physical health or mental health, and how it manifests. But that will never be approved by National Institute of Health, because it's not of interest to white researchers. These are just things that I have to live my life with.
KG:How does this book adress your experience in academia and black America?
CH: I speak the language of both. And as a result, I think it speaks to both. And I’m hoping in the process, maybe along the way, the people who are back home, whose stories I'm trying to share, will see themselves in my story. And the people in my mainstream—I'm trying to help them see themselves in my story.
At some point, I just hope that it merges, that they see we're not that different. We have the same hopes and dreams and aspirations. The expression of those hopes and dreams may be slightly different but we are very similar. That's what I'm hoping.
KG:What would policy that reflects reality look like, and how do we get there?
CH: That is complex, but quite simple to start. The first thing is we decriminalize all drugs. More than 80% of people arrested for drugs are arrested for simple possession. Wen you decriminalize, now you have that huge number of people—we're talking 1.5 million people arrested every year—that no longer have that blemish on their record. That increases the likelihood that they can get jobs, participate in the mainstream.
Number two is dramatically increase realistic education about drugs—none of this "this is your brain on drugs" stuff, but real education, which looks like making sure people understand effects of drugs they're using, particularly potentially medical affects. Don't use heroin with another sedative because it increases the likelihood of respiratory depression. Realistic education, telling people what to do, how to prevent negative effects associated with drugs. We do it with alcohol—you shouldn't binge drink, don't drink on an empty stomach—and could do it with other drugs.
(p)Link
Commenti
Storico
Stampa
Feed RSS 0.91
Feed Atom 0.3
