It is no surprise to this writer that Youtube’s recent censorship clampdown on material THEY don’t agree with was going to stir people, some vehemently.
We see it all around the internet how angry content creators and video bloggers are with #youtube. They are especially angry about the heavy handed, dictatorial and absolute manner in which youtube has simply cut their income potential to pennies and effectively leaving many of them destitute simply by demonetising their channels or even permanently deleting them.
While youtube may argue that those actions were initiated in response to complaints about someone breaching community standards appears to have some merit, on the surface anyway. But once you realise that any mean and angry troll can lodge a complaint with youtube and that most of youtube employed ‘moderators’ have been selected also on the basis of their political leanings and you realise what a seriously dangerous situation youtube has created for itself.
In addition, youtube further fuels the anger of people by NOT providing reasonable and timely dispute resolution options to the affected parties. You can count yourself lucky if you get an email reply at all from this technocracy behemoth.
So it comes as no surprise that someone would decide to retaliate. Of course many have, through blog posts and vlogs on other platforms and with the help af sympathetic website editors.
Most would have expected that such extreme retaliation would in the first instance come from some gun toting, extreme right wing nationalist but hey, it appears the left also has its own extreme activists. That such would be a pro vegan, animal rights activist is a real pity until we realise that some of those are just as extreme as their right wing pro hunting comrades for example.
So it saddens me that the very first of Google’s chickens to come home to roost was in fact a vegan animal and fitness activist, who also happens to be a national of a country that is on the US’ official ‘candidates for regime change’ list. The plot thickens.
But before we stray too far of the topic here, lets have a look at the article penned by well known colleague warrior Mike Adams, although I must stress here that all opinions expressed are Mike’s alone and do not necessarily reflect the opinions and values of this warrior editor.
(Natural News) Everyone may have heard, at some point, a friendly suggestion to “eat your vegetables.” It turns out, that is actually sound advice, when it is part of the Mediterranean Diet (MD), according to research. In a study that appears in Current Nutrition Reports, authors used available information from various studies to provide an overview of the link between MD and cancer formation.
The study offered a glimpse of two operational definitions of MD. The first one, the Mediterranean Dietary Score, assigns a value for each component of MD. Beneficial components are factored in the score, which includes the increased intake of vegetables, fruits and nuts, legumes, unprocessed cereals, fish, and a high ratio of monounsaturated fatty acids to saturated fatty acids. In addition, the dietary score also identifies components that are harmful, such as meat and meat products – including poultry – and certain dairy products.
The second one is a derivative of the dietary score, with some modification on food items and scoring. Some important differences include the following:
Removing potatoes from the vegetable group
Splitting fruits and vegetables into two groups
Excluding the dairy group
Adding whole-grain products in a separate category
Including red and processed meat only in the meat group
The authors also looked at randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and prospective cohorts studies on the effects of MD. The first RCT that showed the relationship between MD and ischemic heart disease was the Lyon Diet Heart study, which revealed that MD has a protective effect against cancer development. The cohort studies, meanwhile, indicated that MD could lessen the risk of overall cancer mortality by 13 percent.
The effects of MD on certain types of cancer were also reviewed in this study. The authors found the diet can reduce the likelihood of breast cancer in postmenopausal women. In other forms of cancer, researchers noted that the diet reduced it by the following percentages: 17 percent for colorectal cancer, 4 percent for prostate cancer, 27 for gastric cancer, 42 percent for liver cancer, 44 percent for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma, and 40 percent for head and neck cancer.
“The Mediterranean Diet’s ability to help prevent cancer stems from the natural anti-cancer phytonutrients found in the food components of the diet,” explained Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, author of Food Forensics. “Stunningly, there are a few doctors and health practitioners still living today who believe there’s no such thing as an anti-cancer nutrient in natural foods. This is the scientific equivalent of believing in the Flat Earth theory, or the cultural equivalent of believing that women shouldn’t vote or that whites and blacks should drink from different water fountains,” Adams explained. “Every informed nutritionist, doctor and scientist knows that many natural foods contain potent anti-cancer compounds. Anyone who denies that is either scientifically illiterate or self-deluded,” Adams added.
In addition, the components of the MD were also individually reviewed to understand their health benefits.
Fruits and vegetables: Researchers believe that the protective property of fruits and vegetables is due to the presence of flavonoids. In particular, flavonoids possess antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, anti-mutagenic, and anti-proliferative properties. (Related: Mediterranean diet slows cellular aging, study shows.)
Fish: Eating copious amounts of fish means that the body has access to n-3 fatty acids, the authors wrote. The fatty acids are anti-inflammatory and may inhibit the development of cancers.
Whole grains: The fiber content of whole grains directly affect a person’s chances of developing colorectal cancer, with increased consumption having positive health outcomes. Reviewed studies also indicated that whole grains are also linked to a reduction of insulin resistance – which greatly benefits those with Type 2 diabetes.
Olive oil: The authors noted that consuming olive oil has decreased the likelihood of breast cancer for women, as well as cancers of the digestive system and the development of neoplasms in the respiratory system. Olive oil also contains polyphenols which target specific cells that may cause cancer.
Alcohol and red wine in moderation: Researchers define “moderate” in the study to less than 30 grams a day for men and 20 g/day for women. A separate study has shown that drinking less than 12.5 grams of ethanol (a component of alcoholic beverages) a day can decrease the risk of dying from cancer.
Red and processed meat: Red and processed meat in MD is not widely consumed and is considered to be unfavorable. One study showed that the consumption of red meat is linked to the development of colorectal tumors.
Dairy products: There are differing results of studies on the effects of milk and dairy products when it comes to cancer development.
Researchers concluded that the Mediterranean diet, characterized by food rich in vegetables, fruits, nuts, legumes, cereals, and fish, lowers the incidence and the development of cancer; thus, reducing the number of deaths associated with the illness.
(Natural News) One of the greatest scams of the 21st century started with former vice president Al Gore, who influentially introduced the concept of “global warming” to the world. Now, the truth about Gore’s “global warming” scam is documented in a new book by Marc Morano, titled, The Politically Incorrect Guide to Climate Change, available at Barnes and Noble.
At the turn of the century, Al Gore’s assets totaled between $780,000 and $1.9 million. After years of scaring the public with “threat of global warming” and convincing legislators to invest taxpayer money into climate change initiatives, Gore’s wealth multiplied. By 2007, Gore’s net worth was “well in excess” of $100 million. Gore had successfully used a climate panic to sway the government to invest in the economic sectors he was poised and ready to profit from. Under the Obama administration, taxpayer money flooded Gore’s investments, with energy stimulus packages awarding Gore’s tremendous hoodwink on the public.
Al Gore, the world’s first “carbon billionaire”
MIT scientist Richard Lindzen called Gore out for wanting to become the first “carbon billionaire.” By 2008, Gore put $300 million into a campaign to promote climate fears while offering carbon reduction solutions that benefited the firms he was invested in. In fact, when the Obama Administration introduced a “renewable energy” solution for the economy, fourteen of the tech firms Gore was invested in had received and/or benefited from over $2.5 billion in loans, grants, and tax breaks. Indeed, Gore had become the first “carbon billionaire.”
Congressman Fred Upton from Michigan called out Gore for using his circle of influence within the investment world and in Washington to profit off taxpayer funds. “Global warming” had done nothing but make Al Gore and his friends rich, while siphoning off billions of dollars from the taxpayers of the U.S. (For more on this topic, visit ClimateScienceNews.com.)
(Natural News) In recent weeks independent and alternative media outlets and their content creators have been sounding the alarm over censorship actions undertaken by Left-leaning social media giants like Facebook, YouTube, Google, Twitter, and others. In many instances, the social media sites weren’t just censoring content, they were taking down entire channels and with them removing complete video and content libraries that often contained hundreds or thousands of programs — all under the guise of ‘combating hate speech’ and ‘fake news.’
Targets of this censorship included Natural News Network founder/editor Mike Adams, whose Health Ranger channel on YouTube has been completely eradicated. Also included was Alex Jones, creator of InfoWars.com.
(Natural News) President Trump announced last year that the opioid epidemic was a “public health emergency” and called for the medical community to look for alternative therapies to battle the growing crisis. The President cited the most recent Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) statistics which places drug overdose as the leading cause of injury death in the United States, outnumbering both gun-related deaths and traffic crashes. It is estimated that 175 people die each day in our country because of a drug overdose.
The class of drugs most commonly being abused is painkillers or opioid analgesics prescribed to treat chronic pain. Of those who are given these drugs, medical professionals have stated that the elderly (or those 65-years-old and older) are the most at risk of overdosing. Doctors have warned that while older Americans represent only 14 percent of the total population, they comprise 30 percent of all those who use opioids.
This has prompted several health institutions to look for better and more natural ways to treat chronic pain.
A new study conducted by researchers from the Ben-Gurion University of the Negev(BGU) and the Cannabis Clinical Research Institute at Soroka University Medical Center concluded that medical cannabis could be the answer. Authors of the study observed around 3,000 elderly patients suffering from chronic pain brought about by various conditions including cancer, Parkinson’s disease, and multiple sclerosis, among other things. More than 60 percent of patients were prescribed medical cannabis to alleviate their pain.
The researchers saw that in only six months, 93 percent of patients reported a significant reduction in the amount of pain they felt. Moreover, 60 percent of the participants claimed that their quality of life was raised from “bad” or “very bad” to “good” or “very good” within the same time period. Seventy percent likewise reported moderate improvement in their condition.
More importantly, 18 percent of all participants lessened, or completely stopped, their prescription to their opioid analgesics.
(Natural News) “If pesticides are so dangerous, why are they allowed to be sold and used?” If you’ve ever tried to convince someone how important it is to buy organic produce, you might have heard this line. Answering honestly can get you labeled a conspiracy theorist pretty quickly, but according to one NGO, nine out of ten EU tests determining pesticide safety come from the industry itself.
That answers the question nicely, but there’s more to the story than that. The EU is known for having some of the strictest pesticide laws on the planet. In many other systems, regulators have to prove that they are harmful to get a ban or restriction; in the EU, on the other hand, the burden is on pesticide makers to prove they are safe before they can be sold.
You would think this would give Europeans an unparalleled level of protection, but the reality is far different. A report from the Pesticide Action Network has found that 90 percent of the tests for authorizing pesticides carried out by the EU have been designed by the pesticide industry or are tests that the pesticide industry advocated for – and we can all imagine why they would favor certain tests over others.
In addition, more than two thirds of these tests use methods that come from the U.S., where pesticide regulations are notoriously lax.
Who regulates EU pesticides?
The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) has the job of regulating pesticides in Europe. They use 12 methods for assessing pesticide risk to determine if each substance should be allowed to be used within the European Union, but 11 of these were promoted by the pesticide industry or developed by them directly. That leaves just one test that can really be trusted.
According to the Pesticide Action Network’s Hans Muilerman, this allows the dangerous effects seen in animal safety studies to essentially be “swept under the carpet.” The methods deem the tumors seen in test animals irrelevant in humans, for example, and consider pesticide residues in groundwater to be acceptable.
Muilerman said: “The methods are designed to prevent a ban of harmful pesticides and result in lowering of the protection of the public and the environment.”
(Natural News) It is likely that you come across many different sources of bacteria as you go about your life every single day. Fortunately, your immune system is working hard in the background to prevent you from catching most diseases caused by bacteria and viruses. Doctors, nurses, and other medical professionals face the exact same problems that you do in this regard, only they are exposed to even more bacteria sources than you.
As a possible solution, a team of researchers have devised a method of coating hospital clothing with a layer of material that possesses antibacterial properties, which can offer further protection. A report on the method states that it could be a practical solution to the problem of infection outbreaks at hospitals all over the world.
The special coating that can be applied to hospital clothing was developed by material scientists working at the University of Manchester, in collaboration with universities in China, who aimed to create a “durable and washable, concrete-like” composite material that can be applied to normal uniforms. The composite material is made from antibacterial copper nanoparticles, which is where the antibacterial properties come from. The researchers managed to make them work with cotton and polyester, a feat that used to be considered near impossible in the past.
Now that the method is out, exactly how effective is it? It’s extremely effective, said the researchers, and can be improved even further by reducing the costs and making the process behind its application even simpler.
(Natural News) By now toxic microplastics are everywhere. Their victims include seabirds, aquatic mammals, and mega-fauna. Now, they’re also in three out of every four mesopelagic fish caught in the Northwest Atlantic, warned a Science Daily article. The 73 percent contamination rate is one of the highest levels in the world. The unique feeding behavior of mesopelagic fish means they could drag surface microplastics down to the deeper levels of the marine ecosystem.Furthermore, mesopelagic fish are preyed upon by other fish that are in turn caught and consumed by humans. Given the longevity of microplastics, their associated toxins will contaminate our food supply.
“The high ingestion rate of microplastics by mesopelagic fish that we observed has important consequences for the health of marine ecosystems and biogeochemical cycling in general,” said Alina Wieczorek, a researcher from the National University of Ireland, Galway(NUIG.)
As their name denotes, microplastics are tiny fragments of plastic pollutants that have accrued in the ocean over the decades. If ingested by marine organisms, they can cause inflammation, loss of weight, and prevent proper feeding.
Their negative effects are not just limited to the animal that ate them. Microplastics can combine with chemical pollutants in the water. When a contaminated prey animal is eaten by a predator, the toxins will build up in the latter’s bodies.
(Natural News) The collapse of cryptocurrency is continuing apace, and yet there are still far too many people who continue to believe it really has a future. In recent days the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission made a major move against cryptocurrency firms, issuing dozens of subpoenas — perhaps topping 100, some groups estimate — to companies that either conducted or advised on initial coin offerings, or ICOs, according to Simon Black for Sovereign Man.He added that readers of his are not surprised by that because, as he’s “long warned,” the ICO market is a scam and one of the largest bubbles he has ever seen.
He notes further:
A lot of people view ICOs as an asset class like stocks, bonds or real estate. But that couldn’t be further from the truth.
Initial coin offerings are simply a funding scheme.Companies looking to raise money will post a white paper on a website, post some pictures of their “C-suite executives,” and set up a Twitter account… that’s basically it.
The goal is to raise funds by issuing “tokens.” These tokens typically serve as pre-paid credits that can be used within the ecosystem of the company raising the funds. In other words, you’re not actually getting equity in the company… you’re buying a gift card.
“Think of it like the in-game credits you would buy (with real money) to get ahead in the old Facebook game Farmville. Outside of Farmville, those credits are worthless,” he added.
Black said that in the ICO markets investors are expected to pony up with almost no information and obvious, inherent risks to buying a prepaid service, often without fully evaluating whether there exists a legitimate secondary market for the purchased tokens.
(Natural News) Fast food is unhealthy; it’s loaded with salt, sugar and fat — and a whole lot of calories. It’s often pretty low in essential nutrients, as well. It’s well documented that fast food should be consumed in moderation, if at all. Indeed, most people know that takeaway meals aren’t ideal, but a recent study has shed light on just how bad going to the drive-thru really is for your health.
As it turns out, fast food doesn’t just contribute to inflammation and disease: It can actually provoke lasting (and damaging) changes to your immune system. Eating a diet laden with refined sugars, saturated fat and salt actually promotes the immune system to act as if there is an infection somewhere in the body, according to lead researcher Dr. Eicke Latz. Dr. Latz is the Director of the Institute for Innate Immunity of the University of Bonn.
To conduct their research, Latz and his team fed a group of mice a simulated “Western diet” for a whole month. This means the mice were fed food loaded with sugar, salt and fat — and were given very little fruits or vegetables.
Annette Christ, another study author, commented on their findings. She explained, “The unhealthy diet led to an unexpected increase in the number of certain immune cells in the blood of the mice, especially granulocytes and monocytes.”
“This was an indication for an involvement of immune cell progenitors in the bone marrow,” Christ added.