7.14.2016 In Depth Look

"Lsdblotter" by DEA Employee.
“Lsdblotter” by DEA Employee.

A PLETHORA OF PONDERING ABOUT SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY, & SOCIETY

http://www.activistpost.com/2016/07/cdcs-vaers-data-confirm-multiple-vaccines-given-at-same-time-increase-morbidity-and-mortality-in-children.html – A tour today through territory that all too many scrappy scribes and stalwart citizens resist with all their mighty capacity at self-delusion and misdirection, into varied thickets of Science, Technology, & Society(STS)–where lie data and analysis and practice and protocols that are, to say the least, exceedingly discomfiting to dissect and explore–at the outset a posting from the often insistently Libertarian and ‘freedom-loving’ Activist Post, about eminently scientific, peer-reviewed, and technical material that concludes that multiple infant-and-toddler vaccinations are significantly more lethal, as in much more likely to lead to mortality and morbidity, than alternative schedules that mandate fewer inoculation all at once, a deduction that fits perfectly with an earlier-cited Daily Links item from Human & Experimental Toxicology that performed multinational comparisons about similar issues and reached similar conclusions, and that, in one case specifically and in another more generally, also matches a pair  of new pieces from Waking Times, the first a summation of Rob Schneider’s grassroots voice of actual authority about these controversies, the second an overview of fluoridation as a pharmaceutical process inasmuch as adding a viciously poisonous neurotoxin to water required such a rationalization, an explanation of which Americans’ brainwashed states fosters acceptance despite plenty of evidence that at the least ought to lead to skepticism and actual investigation instead of the canard, “I refuse to believe that my government would screw me over for a big payoff to capital;” a process that shows up in analogous fashion in relation to the ramming of genetic modification down people’s throats whether they’re gagging at the prospect or not, as WhoWhatWhy conveys in relation to the Congressional assassination of Vermont’s Genetically Modified Organism labeling law, which was a tame counterpart to what Europe and Russia do in these situations of agribusiness and food supply, a brouhaha that The Conversation examines in a typically disingenuous and masterfully propagandistic way with an essay that suggests a defter and more delicate touch on the part of the powers that be to induce the compliance that corporate profiteers so long to elicit, an apology for the public-relations machinations and substantive agendas of the corporate sector that works in tandem with a new profferal  from Fusion about the dosing of youngsters with pesticides and the known and very likely harms that attend such ‘negligence’ in the name of higher ROI, insight about agribusiness and agriculture that in a subtly different fashion MintPressNews explicates in a briefing about hemp from an advocate for that crop’s resuscitation as a major industry; a second processing of an STS delving that also invites attention along a tangential track, in the event a compilation from Naked Capitalism about the charlatanism and corruption that underlie the death and destruction of the so-called ‘opiate epidemic,’ a dynamic that, on the one hand, a set of reviews from Dazed advances in a slightly different direction, toward a critique of the farcical facade of ‘mental health’ ‘treatment’ and medicine that neither engage or heal, unlike the zines under observation in the article, which provide a real service to people in need, and, on the other hand, an account in High Existence that looks into as a question of therapeutic modalities such substances as ‘magic mushrooms,’ which have long faced demonization and proscription, inasmuch as patent protection would likely be impossible; another arena of process-orientation that finds its own echo in a remarkable appeal  to working class folks from Libertarians, in the form of at least a partial endorsement from David Stockman’s Contra Corner of Gary Johnson for the latter’s telling the truth that the ‘war-on-drugs’ that is actually a targeting of regular people is in a significant way responsible for police violence, a take on things that is perfectly in keeping with a much more acceptable liberal piece of reportage from Pro Publica that points out the hideous stupidity and corruption of relying on ‘roadside drug tests’ that “routinely produce false positives”–the entire aggregate of which is a clarion call to scrappy scribes and stalwart citizens to skill up and learn more about the way that those in charge are plundering and playing the rest of us in the name, God forbid, of science: “Kudos to medical research journalist Neil Z. Miller on the publication of an apparent retrospective analysis of CDC’s V(accine) A(dverse) E(vents) R(eporting) S(ystem) data (in an article) titled ‘Combining Childhood Vaccines at One Visit Is Not Safe,’ published in theJournal of American Physicians & Surgeons, Volume 21, Number 2, Summer 2016.  Miller does an exceptional job of delineating reports of hundreds of thousands of adverse reaction reports, while all the time adhering to zeroing in on certain specifics, i.e., multiple vaccines injected during one session of vaccinations—anywhere from three to eight vaccines at the same time.

(The author found a lockstep correspondence between the number of shots all at once and hospitalization).  ‘The pattern continues: Of 10,114 infants who received five vaccine doses prior to the adverse event, 1,463 of them required hospitalization: 14.5%.  For six doses, 1,365 of 8,454 infants were hospitalized: 16.1%.  For seven doses, 1,051 of 5,489 infants were hospitalized: 19.1%.  And for eight doses, 661 of 2,817 infants were hospitalized: 23.5%.  The hospitalization rate increased linearly from 11.0% for two doses to 23.5% for eight doses.  Linear regression analysis of hospitalization rates as a function of the number of reported vaccine doses yielded a linear relationship, with an R2 of 0.91.
…’
(Most egregious were certain protocols).  Parents and pediatricians/obstetricians must take special note of the disproportionately high rate of hospitalization for infants who received the hepatitis B vaccine administered at birth: a whopping 16.3%!  The Hep B vaccine, more than any vaccine, is the most unnecessary of all vaccines since Hep B is contracted from sexual activity and sharing of drug paraphernalia, etc.—something a newborn can’t be involved with for many years, I’d say.  However, if the pregnant mother had Hep B, there possibly could be a reason for administering that vaccine to the newborn, but many even would question that.

(In relation to incidents of death), ‘(o)ur study also calculated the case fatality ratio (mortality rate) among vaccinated infants, stratified by the number of vaccine doses they received.  Of the 38,801 VAERS reports that we analyzed, 11,927 infants received one, two, three, or four vaccine doses prior to having an adverse event, and 423 of those infants died: a mortality rate of 3.6%.  The remaining 26,874 infants received five, six, seven, or eight vaccine doses prior to the adverse event and 1,458 of them died: 5.4%.  The mortality rate for infants who received five to eight vaccine doses (5.4%) is significantly higher than the mortality rate for infants who received one to four vaccine doses (3.6%), with a rate ratio (RR) of 1.5 (95% CI, 1.4-1.7).  Of infants reported to VAERS, those who had received more vaccines had a statistically significant 50% higher mortality rate compared with those who had received fewer. …
I encourage everyone to read Miller’s reporting about The Age Effect on Hospitalizations and Death.  The percentage rates are overwhelmingly in the double digits for infants under one year of age!  Miller’s Conclusion, pardon my flippancy here, is a ‘no brainer’ regarding giving multiple vaccines at one time to children—or to any human being or pet or veterinary patient!”—Activist Post

By Allan Ajifo
By Allan Ajifo
           “Fluoride is an endocrine-disrupting, neurotoxic, and bone-weakening substance that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) defines as a drug when used to prevent disease, because unlike the minerals we need (e.g. calcium), humans have no known physiological requirement for fluoride.  Sodium fluoride, long known as an effective roach poison, is added to tablets and drops (i.e., ‘fluoride supplements’) for the purpose of preventing tooth decay.  But because of fluoride’s toxicity, you cannot purchase fluoride ‘supplements’ over-the-counter; they can only be dispensed by prescription under the supervision of a doctor.  In short, sodium fluoride is not a nutritional ‘supplement;’ it is a prescription drug, and a dangerous one.

CC BY-NC-ND by Ben Kraal

Although fluoride drugs have been prescribed for over 50 years, the FDA recently announced that marketing fluoride drops and tablets for cavity prevention violates federal law, because FDA has never approved these products as either safe or effective.  FDA made this stunning declaration in a Warning Letter, in which the Agency called on a manufacturer to immediately cease selling fluoride drops and tablets.  Removing harmful fluoride drugs from the market will protect the health of millions of children, but we also need to address the big elephant in the room: water fluoridation.


On January 13, 2016, the FDA sent a ‘Warning Letter’ to Kirkman Laboratories, Inc., demanding that the manufacturer immediately discontinue the marketing of its fluoride drops and tablets.  The FDA’s Warning Letter clearly states that fluoride drops and tablets are ‘unapproved new drugs’ because: (1) they are not generally recognized as safe and effective for caries prevention purposes, and (2) no manufacturer has ever provided FDA with adequate studies to demonstrate the drugs’ safety and effectiveness.  This isn’t the first time FDA has stated that fluoride drops and tablets are unapproved drugs; FDA first grudgingly admittedthis bewildering fact in the 1990s in response to a dogged investigation by the late New Jersey Assemblyman John Kelly.

(Nevertheless), (t)hree of the largest companies making fluoride drops/tablets today are Libertas Pharma Inc., Sancilio & Company, Inc., and Qualitest and so far, FDA has not taken any action against these companies.  For this reason, the Fluoride Action Network (FAN) and International Academy of Oral Medicine & Toxicology (IAOMT) have filed a Citizens Petitionwith the FDA that calls upon the agency to take enforcement action against all companies, not just Kirkman, that continue to produce unapproved fluoride drugs.  The petition asks that these unsafe and ineffective drugs be removed from the market entirely.

CC BY-NC-ND by Carnicula

Fluoride drops and tablets were introduced in the 1950s and ’60s on the now universally discredited premise that fluoride’s predominant benefit to teeth comes from ingesting fluoride while the teeth are still forming.  As explained in the Journal of the American Dental Association, ‘fluoride incorporated during tooth development is insufficient to play a significant role in cavity protection.’  Both the Centers for Disease Control and National Research Council have confirmed this, declaring, respectively, that ‘fluoride’s predominant effect is posteruptive and topical,’ and ‘the major anticaries benefit of fluoride is topical and not systemic.’  In other words, fluoride works when it is applied directly to the outside of teeth (i.e. topical), not when swallowed (i.e. systemic).


(Moreover, Fluorine causes hosts of other problems).  Fluoride exposure can … negatively impact brain development, resulting in both learning and behavioral disorders.  Fifty studies of human populations have linked fluoride exposure with reduced IQ scores, while over 30 laboratory experiments have confirmed (under carefully controlled conditions) that fluoride exposure can impair learning and memory capacity in rats and mice.  The evidence of fluoride’s interference with brain development is now sufficiently advanced that a recent review in Lancet Neurology classified fluoride as 1 of only 11 chemicals ‘known to cause developmental neurotoxicity in human beings.’  Fluoride has also been classified by the prestigious National Research Council (NRC) as an ‘endocrine disruptor’ due, in large part, to its documented capacity to interfere with thyroid function and glucose metabolism.  In fact, they were previously used by doctors as a medication to reduce thyroid function among hyperthyroid patients, and recent research has linked fluoridated drinking water to elevated rates of hypothyroidism (under-active thyroid).  Further, fluoride’s ability to disrupt insulin production and glucose metabolism has been established in multiple studies, at strikingly low levels.”—Waking Times
 kale vegetable food
           “The growing calls by consumer rights groups and concerned citizens for clearly labeling foods produced with genetically modified ingredients suffered a major — potentially grievous — setback Thursday when the Senate passed a so-called compromise bill.  Critics say the compromise legislation, originally passed by the House last summer and then tweaked in the Senate, is actually a giant favor to the deep-pocketed pro-GMO-food lobby.  In stark contrast to a robust bill enacted in Vermont on July 1st, which stipulated that genetically-modified foods must be labeled in clear language, the federal law will allow food companies to present the same information in much less accessible forms: on their website, or via a 1-800 phone number, or embedded in a so-called QR Code, basically a barcode that a curious consumer will have to access through a specially designed smart-phone app.

‘This is blatantly not a labeling law,’ Patty Lovera, assistant director of DC based NGO Food & Water Watch, told WhoWhatWhy.  ‘It’s a poor substitute for actual words on a label, which is what Vermont does.’  Indeed, it was designed to block the Vermont initiative, she adds.  ‘It’s also very elitist, you have to have a smartphone, you have to have an app, you have to have a signal in the grocery store, you have to know how to use it,’ she said, joking that a consumer would need another hand to shop, perhaps hold on to their child, while moving down the aisle checking QR codes on a to-be-designed app. …
(Despite polls that indicate ninety percent or more approval for clear GMO labeling), Lovera said ‘quite a few bad guys’ worked against the popular will in this instance, but points especially to Agricultural Committee chairman Pat Roberts, a Republican from Kansas, and his ally, Michigan’s Debbie Stabenow, a Democrat.  Chemical and seed giant Monsanto and the anti-labeling Grocery Manufacturer’s Association were allowed to drive the debate in the committee.  Their most consistent gripe, purportedly accepted as fact by Roberts and Stabenow, is that a patchwork of state-by-state regulation would have been economically unsustainable.  ‘There’s tremendous pressure from these industries; they don’t want to comply with the Vermont law,’ Lovera told WhoWhatWhy, raising her tone for emphasis.  ‘They want this taken care of.’

The pro-business Senate vote surprised even some hardened anti-GMO activists.  ‘I can’t say I am shocked, but I am — shocked!  It seemed as if they had finally given up and little Vermont had won,’ Bob Klein of Safe & Healthy School Food Coalition told WhoWhatWhy.  He explained that there is just too much money globally at stake to let the people in a small state beat US agribusiness.
rect3336 space
If the House of Representatives follows suit, as expected, the bill will go to the White House for President Obama’s signature. Anti-GMO advocates aren’t optimistic that the president will veto such obviously pro-business legislation.”—Who What Why?cow farm meat
           “Let’s start by looking at the briefly famous Case-Deaton study, and its study of mortality in the white working class, taking education levels as a proxy for class.  (…[One can examine] NCs late 2015 discussion of the Case-Deaton study, with an embedded copy of the study itself, … and … a follow-up from Barbara Ehrenreich. …) From WaPo, on the study and its interpretation: ‘The research showed that the mortality rate for whites between the ages of 45 and 54 with a high school education or less rose dramatically between 1999 and 2013, after falling even more sharply for two decades before that.trailer: Sarasota, Florida poor white proletariat
That reversal, almost unknown for any large demographic group in an advanced nation, has not been seen in blacks or Hispanics or among Europeans, government data show.  The report points to a surge in overdoses from opioid medication and heroin, liver disease and other problems that stem from alcohol abuse, and suicides. …
(In relation to opiates particularly, Kevin Drum notes), (o)n a related note, the famous Case/Deaton paper showing a rise in white mortality since 2000 breaks out three categories of death: suicides, liver disease (a proxy for alcohol abuse), and drug poisoning.  All three have gone up, but poisoning has gone up far, far more than the others.  The first two have increased about 50 percent since 2000.  Poisoning has increased about 1,500 percent.  This coincides with the period when Oxy became popular, and probably accounts for a big part of the difference between increased white mortality in America vs. other countries.  Oxy is a famously white drug, and may also account for the fact that mortality has increased among whites but not blacks or Hispanics.drugs medication pills
The New Yorker is more circumspect: ‘Based purely on timing, it seems likely that developments in the medical and pharmaceutical industries played a significant role in setting off the epidemic of drug poisonings, which increased more than sixfold in the white-middle-aged demographic between 1999 and 2013, and which played an important role in raising its over-all mortality rate.  By many accounts, the widespread misuse of prescription drugs, particularly opioid painkillers, such as OxyContin, began in the late nineties and rapidly became a chronic problem.
…’
(According to reportage from The New York Times, we might get to the bottom of several queries).  (For instance), why the white working class?  OxyContin and opiod prescription patterns by doctors: ‘There is, however, something that does make white men and women in the U.S. unique compared with other demographics around the world: their consumption of prescription opioids.  Although the U.S. constitutes only 4.6 percent of the world’s population, Americans use 80 percent of the world’s opioids.  As Skinner and Meara point out in their study, a disproportionate amount of these opioid users are white, and past studies have shown that doctors are much more willing to treat pain in white patients than in blacks.’  Putting a new spin on the word ‘privilege,’ eh?”—Naked Capitalism
 drug drugs banner acid cocaine speed lsd ecstasy mind consciousness psychedelics
            “The primary lesson I have gained through my work with Psilocybin is that integration of the dark, unaddressed, or shadow aspects of oneself are essential for psychospiritual development and general health.  Without the direct experience of Shadow emotions from a place of surrender and acknowledgement, those aspects of us are likely to be inappropriately stored, repressed, in the deep psyche.  This creates blockages for the flow of life within us and new, detrimental behavioral pathways are created to maintain these blockages, to maintain the repression or evasion of undesired emotional content.

(In similar fashion as a dam harms a forest ecosystem by blockading drainage and such), the repression of dark emotions—sadness, loneliness, inadequacy, hopelessness, etc.—can flood and wreak havoc to one’s inner-landscape.  Yet the uncomfortable emotions we are trying to keep at bay can never be truly contained.  They will eventually escape and lash out, causing harm to one’s self and their larger social ecosystem as soon as an opportunity arises.

We have repressed, unaddressed emotional content … so far back in ourselves that we don’t even have explicit memories attached to it.  So far back that it exists beyond the thinking mind’s capacity to reach, such as the potentially devastating moment for an infant when its mother turns her head away slightly while its smiling.  Or for a toddler at an age when most parents are ignorant in their belief that ‘the child doesn’t understand,’ and they fight aggressively with each other; meanwhile all the emotions associated to that conflict are being internalized by the child as their fault that mommy and daddy are angry so [insert deleterious self-deprecating identity structures here].   Emotions from this time in our lives are still with us, unaddressed because they were dealt with according to the strategies of a child.

As we grow and mature into our eldership over the years, if given proper opportunity, we should be able to learn emotional intelligence and discover an openness to ourselves and to the world, which may eventually free us from our old defenses.  However, for many of us, the detrimental patterns of repression that manifest from the behavioral conditioning of an emotionally adolescent society passed down through generations of trauma create more dysfunction on a regular basis than we are able to sort through.  Two steps forward, three steps back, and we end up falling into vortices of self-detrimental behavior.

(As noted elsewhere in my thinking about these matters), my work with psilocybin mushrooms has been the primary spiritual therapeutic practice I have held to create a container to release, acknowledge, and integrate repressed emotional content and clear the backlog of personal trauma I, as an adult, all of a sudden woke up to find having proliferated my life.  Psilocybin has helped me greatly in this journey.  Unfortunately, information on building a mature spiritual practice with psilocybin is rare to find in the modern Western world, as much of its cultural usage exists within a more adolescent mentality: play, fun, recreation, tripping out.  I have no problem with this mentality, as there is no set prescription as to how one chooses their personal relationship to visionary plants and fungi.  But there are risks involved with unconscious or uninformed use.  Also, the tendency towards positive, lifelong transformation and healing is less and less likely as the mentality of recreation or superficially is more dominant.  This essay is part of a journey I have been on to share and co-create an accessible model for working with psilocybin for personal growth, presented in my two books and various lectures.”—High Existence