Sunday, June 19, 2016

Another Holistic Doctor (MD) Murdered At His Clinic, 2 Doctors in 2 Days


Published on 18 Jun 2016
Yet another holistic doctor is murdered in his office by a man who stormed in and stabbed him to death. yesterday another holistic doctor was killed when a man ran into HIS office and shot him with a gun, then turning it on himself in a murder suicide. See details here:
http://www.healthnutnews.com/another-holistic-doctor-murdered-clinic-2-doctors-2-days/

----------------------------

We have gone way past from suspicious suicides of normally non-suicidal people, to all these bizarre accidents, from mysterious sudden deaths of healthy people to now just violent murder with a deadly weapon.

Okay... Who benefits?  Big freaking pHARMa, that's who! The pHARMaceutical industry has a LONGGGGG history of being cutthroat, so it should come as no surprise, in a culture where PROFIT is God, that some would resolve to "eliminating" the competition.

Our prayers are with all the holistic doctors and their families.  This is an all out war for our health.

Here is the recap on all the murdered holistic doctors...
http://www.healthnutnews.com/recap-on-my-unintended-series-the-holistic-doctor-deaths/


Dr. Tiejun Huang Ph.D./MD R.Ac RMT DTCM

Thursday, June 16, 2016

Jan 23 Guest Speaker: Mr. Tony Pantelleresco : Chemtrails and the Morgel...




Well, the local free range eggs are doable, can get raw goat's cheese locally, and real butter.  OK.

One of the solutions he talked about...

Suggestions to remove Nano from food and Drink

When you are juicing any foods fruit and veggies, they cannot be stripped down anymore due to the embedment of nanotech (especially from chemtrails) and especially if there has been pesticide spraying this would make this synergistic in lethality which would cause an endocrine disruptor as well as tumor promoter and organ damaging.

So with some fruits like the kiwi’s apples and pears and some of the meatier fruits like Chinese pear-quince - pineapple-papaya and citrus will be safer to eat but must all be peeled about 1/8 of an inch others will not be safe due to the level of saturation normal consumption will not be wise due to heavy metal loading

So the next thing would be to juice the fruits and veggies, but if consumed you would wind up with nano poisoning due to the concentration.Now the answer would be to filter out, but how is the question? Oil any cheap oil will do such as peanut oil (personally, I would avoid peanut oil, since most people are allergic to it, thank you vaccines!) or other inexpensive oils since you will be discarding the nano saturated oils. Perhaps olive oil would be more sufficient and safe.

Juice whatever you wish, minus all skins or surface off the fruits,  and then juice. When done take the juice and add to a blender and add approximately 1 oz of the oil

Shut lid and pin and what you will see, is that the nano will collect in the oil and after about 3 minutes, stop blender and pour into a glass bottle and wait for the separation and then remove the oil
You have just filtered out the nano.

http://augmentinforce.50webs.com/index.htm

Birth of a New Earth: USING SACRED FRANKINCENSE ESSENTIAL OIL FOR THE HE...

Birth of a New Earth: USING SACRED FRANKINCENSE ESSENTIAL OIL FOR THE HEALING OF CANCER: Folks - I have just been informed that the blog I wrote about the benefits of Sacred Frankincense oil must be altered in order to meet the bogus "laws" of the criminal FDA. It's freaking outrageous and pisses me off, but I do not want to contribute to getting a company that I respect into trouble. So I have had to alter the blog below to eliminate the name of the very company that can provide you with the product you need to help heal cancer. Here's the new blog:

Dear friends -- I am writing this blog because I want to help set the record straight on the use of frankincense oil for the healing of cancer. Over the past several months, there has been a plethora of misinformation circulating on the internet (including in the latest cancer series called "The Truth About Cancer") by people who are promoting the use of frankincense oil to treat cancer -- but who are not indicating what type of frankincense oil needs to be used for this purpose. Alot of the misinformation is being shared by representatives of a certain multi-level marketing essential oil company that is completely out of integrity on numerous levels and that really needs to be called out for the lies they are promoting....



Chemtrails, Nanoparticles and Smart Dust




Wednesday, June 15, 2016

The New Motto Is...

The new motto is: If it isn't broke, fix it until it is.  Which means let us fuck it up for you and make it totally unusable and stress you out in the process.



New and improved means... "we messed it up royally".  Beware of new and improved anything, ESPECIALLY in the supplement industry. It's bad enough Big pHARMa is poisoning us, but many supplement companies with their added fillers, cheap ingredients, toxic manufacturing, etc...

I am in a fight with a loved one because they refuse to listen and read the proof.  So yes, I am beyond pissed, and I'm also tired of these overpriced MLM companies and their cheap and toxic products. Now some are good products, and I use them. And there are some that have a real good product, then they'll add a new product to their line that is shit.

This is an all out war on our health.  Remember less is more.

Buy in bulk stock  and make it yourself.

Boycott and Avoid anything with:

* Maltodextrin (usually corn, and corn is 99.99% GMO

* Cellulose (also nano cellulose) Used at building blocks in morgellons conditions, biofilm, etc.. Nano tech utilizes the cellulose and turns it into a building block internally and over time you're breaking down at an accelerated rate.

* hydroxypropyl methylcellulose

* microcrystalline cellulose (Microcrystalline Cellulose is a DNA disrupter)

* silicon dioxide

* titanium dioxide

* Nano ANYTHING, but especially metals (use real colloidal minerals)

* fructose

* Anything isolated (isolate), autolyzed, etc...

* Soy is GMO and even bugs, locusts avoid it.

* Canola oil (GMO and industrial oil, causes systemic inflammation).

* Avoid any kind of alge products.

* flavorings aka natural and artifical flavors and flavorings.  Because they never specify exactly WHAT that flavor is.

* B-12 cyanocobalamin (synthetic and made with cyanide). Made some of my hair fall out some years ago. We used a product and it contained the wrong B-12, so we tossed it, and simply switched the brand and replaced it to the same exact type of product with Methylcobalamin B-12. The proper B-12 is METHYLCOBALAMIN!  See my other post HERE about that.

* Rice flour, rice bran (while rice isn't the worse, it's often used as a filler.  Supplements should NEVER have fillers.  Also, alot of this rice is GMO and comes from China. Always that cheap junk from China.

There are more, I'm sure, but the above list are the main ones to look out for.

Buy in bulk the key ingredients to anything and MAKE YOUR OWN!  This is an all out war on our health.

This is a short list, but of the main things at least to watch out for.  A lot of my links are already disappearing.  That's because of companies being bought out by these so called "Board Members", which are really Big pHARMa interests.

Some of my links on here and elsewhere are slowly disappearing as I'm going through companies and products with a fine toothed comb.  One of the companies that we are affiliates of have good products and bad products, so if unsure, leave a comment and ask.

I'm sticking with the bulks and herbals.  So far, I'm still finding the Youngevity Tangy Tangerine is still okay.  It's a basic powdered bulk vitamin and mineral product.

Another liquid vitamin and mineral product (IntraMax by Drucker Labs) was also perfect and then the last year or so, they added the cyanocobalamin B-12. It still contains the Methylcobalamin B-12, but now it has both.  So that means they corrupted it.

Remember "new and improved" really means "they corrupted it", and to more than likely save money with cheap ass shortcuts.

OLD SCHOOL is still the best. This is a basic Chemistry 101 lesson,so to speak.

Examples of bulk I like:

* Monosodium phosphate crystals (ala Gerard Judd to rebuild the teeth)
* Sulfur crystals (sourced from the Cellular Matrix Study)
* Bulk Vitamin C ascorbic acids, add baking soda to it and make fresh sodium ascorbate (als Gerard Judd)
* Bulk Amino Acids in powder form, and put into gelatin caps.  So far, I bought the NAC is bulk.
* Liquid Chlorophyll (and especially because it saved my daughter's cat's life)
* I like the spray on magnesium
* Usage of essential oils
* Make your own colloidal silver and copper)
* Make your own mouth rinse - Making a mouth Rinse Using ethanol ( vodka –rum-gin—etc) clear based –and adding 10 drops of Peppermint-Thyme-Cinnamon-Clove—and equal parts of water to the alcohol and eithr blend or shake vigourously will make this—you can use any one of the essential oils or a combination if making combination then utilize them where if you are adding 10 drops then for 2 essential oils add 5 of each—3 essential oils 3 of each and 4 essential oils 2 of each and if you make it so you have 10 oz then 5 oz of alcohol and 5 of water and then go up higher on the essential oils this will give you added potency. (from... http://health-axis.com/tony-pantalleresco-radio-show-notes-remedy-we-5th-jan-2014/ )
* Using Miracle II soap and add either Thieves essential oil, or peppermint/spearming drops on toothbrush to brush teeth with.  It's been over 10 years since I used any kind of toothpaste, including the fluoride-free ones, SLS-free ones, etc.. They all use glycerin which coats the teeth and trap acids in, according to Gerard Judd, author of Good Teeth: Birth To Death.
* John Sanders' Pesticide Cleanse (is a good clean bulk product)
* The LL's Magnetic Clay Baths are still good for soaking, since it's volcanic clay and is magnetised. Magnetic as in magnet disabling of nano-tech, nannites, etc...





Tuesday, June 14, 2016

Tony Pantalleresco The Dangers Of Nano Particles To Your Health!

We are becoming seriously unglued, and I mean in the physical sense.  And we are being deceived.

As a result of these contaminants-one must think that you have several things ongoing here-nanoprogramming-nano poisoning- saturation of cells-and a stripping away of the bodies resources--so all of these have to be dealt with --shutting down the program is priority-eliminating the left over -and minimizing the up take of metals or "other polymers" that are small enough to saturate the cells and destroy through oxidation the life of the ATP and mitochondria.

No wonder I have a HUGE bug up my ass and became so anal about companies. It's because of their tampering around with stuff in order to "make it better". We already have it in the processed food, vaccines, chemtrails, GMOs, glycophates, and the "added" and extra UNNEEDED ingredients, EVEN in supplements  (See earlier posts). And people wonder why I'm so cynical about things because of my severe lack of trust in companies, people, etc... ALWAYS man and the ego thinking that God can be outdone. What Does the Bible Say About Trusting Man? When I say "man", I mean humanity as a whole (men and women) as opposed to gender, btw.

Here is a page full of scriptures talking about trusting man.
https://www.openbible.info/topics/trusting_man

I'll be taking notes on everything later and add below the video.




Notes:

Creatine in coffee
Iodine (Lugols, Nascent, Atomodine, etc...)  He has recommended in other videos to use a 5% Lugols solution.  Both need selenium and L-Tyrosine for the T4 production and conversion to T3.

I do disagree with some things that he says.

Regarding ingredients besides nano and cellulose, etc... here's a list of hidden MSG.
http://www.truthinlabeling.org/hiddensources.html



Nanocellulose- a new ageless bionanomaterial

Nanocellulose- a new ageless bionanomaterial [.html] - read online

Nanocellulose- a new ageless bionanomaterial [.doc] - download

Alain Dufresne

Grenoble Institute of Technology (Grenoble INP) ­ The International School of Paper, Print Media and Biomaterials (Pagora), CS10065, ` 38402 Saint Martin d'Heres Cedex, France

Owing to the hierarchical structure of cellulose, nanoparticles can be extracted from this naturally occurring polymer. Multiple mechanical shearing actions allow the release of more or fewer individual microfibrils. Longitudinal cutting of these microfibrils can be achieved by a strong acid hydrolysis treatment, allowing dissolution of amorphous domains. The impressive mechanical properties, reinforcing capabilities, abundance, low density, and biodegradability of these nanoparticles make them ideal candidates for the processing of polymer nanocomposites. With a Young's modulus in the range 100­130 GPa and a surface area of several hundred m2 gÀ1, new promising properties can be considered for cellulose.

Introduction
Wood and plants are cellular hierarchical biocomposites produced by nature, and are essentially semicrystalline cellulose microfibrilreinforced amorphous matrices made of hemicellulose, lignin, waxes, extractive and trace elements [1]. Lignocellulosic fibers consist therefore of a cemented microfibril aggregate. As a consequence, the structure of plants spans many length scales, to provide maximum strength with a minimum of material. Wood, which is approximately 40­50 wt% cellulose (half in nanocrystalline form and half in amorphous form), provides an example (Fig. 1). While the whole tree is on the scale of meters, centimeters describe structures within the cross-section, millimeters describe growth rings, tens of micrometers describe the cellular anatomy, micrometers describe the layer structure within cell walls, tens of nanometers describe the configuration of cellulose fibrils in a matrix mainly composed of hemicellulose and lignin, and nanometers describe the molecular structures of cellulose, hemicellulose, and lignin and their chemical interactions [2]. In creation, cellulose is a ubiquitous structural polymer that confers its mechanical properties to higher plant cells. The hierarchical structure of natural fibers, based on their elementary nanofibrilar components, leads to the unique strength and high performance properties of different species of plants. Indeed, the most important attributes of wood and other lignocellulosic materials are their mechanical properties, in particular their unusual ability to provide high mechanical strength and high strength-to weight ratio while allowing for flexibility to counter large dimensional changes due to swelling and shrinking. In all terrestrial and aquatic plant species, the primary cell wall is a dynamic structure and its constituent material must be synthesized in a form that can undergo extension. There is an increasing demand for products made from renewable and sustainable non-petroleum based resources. Cellulose, the most abundant polymer on Earth, is renewable, biodegradable, as well as non-toxic. Purification of cellulose from plant fibers involves chemical treatments consisting of alkali extraction and bleaching. Owing to its hierarchical structure and semicrystalline nature, nanoparticles can be extracted from this naturally occurring polymer using a top-down mechanically or chemically induced deconstructing strategy. The potential of cellulosic nanoparticles or nanocellulose has been demonstrated for special functional nanomaterials [3] but it is as a biobased reinforcing nanofiller that such nanomaterials have attracted significant interest over the past 20 years [4­7]. However, the main challenge with nanoparticles is related to their homogeneous dispersion within a polymeric matrix. Moreover, cellulose nanoparticles have a strong tendency for self-association because of the omnipresence of interacting surface hydroxyl groups. This property, which is the basis of the strength of paper sheets, is a desirable feature for the formation of load-bearing percolating architectures within the host polymer matrix. However, these inter-particle interactions can cause aggregation during the preparation of the nanocomposite and limit the potential of mechanical reinforcement. This phenomenon is magnified when the size of the particle decreases.

Mechanically induced destructuring strategy

Multiple mechanical shearing actions applied to cellulosic fibers release more or fewer individual microfibrils. This material is usually called microfibrillated cellulose (MFC). Different mechanical treatment procedures have been reported to prepare MFC. They mainly consist of high-pressure homogenization and/or grinding [7]. However, this production route is normally associated with high energy consumption for fiber delamination [8­ 10]. Therefore, different pretreatments have been proposed to facilitate this process, for example, mechanical cutting [11], acid hydrolysis [12], enzymatic pretreatment [13,14], and the introduction of charged groups through carboxymethylation [15] or 2,2,6,6-tetramethylpiperidine-1-oxyl (TEMPO)-mediated oxidation [16]. After disintegration, MFC is typically obtained as a suspension in liquid, usually water. During homogenization, the suspension changes from a low viscosity to a high viscosity medium. Normally a 2 wt% fiber suspension is used for the preparation of MFC. At higher concentrations, the increased viscosity during processing becomes too high, such that the suspension cannot be moved forward by the pumping system. The MFC aqueous suspensions display a gel-like behavior as shown in Fig. 2. The production of MFC from wood pulp and various non-wood sources has been reported in the literature. The morphology of constitutive nanoparticles is generally characterized using microscopic techniques. Fig. 3 shows MFC obtained from Opuntia ficusindica. MFC consists of both individual and aggregated nanofibrils made of alternating crystalline and amorphous cellulose domains. Although image analysis can provide information on fibril width, it is more difficult to determine the length because of entanglement and difficulties in identifying both ends of individual nanoparticles. Indeed, the observation scale for length and diameter is quite different. The width is generally in the range 3­100 nm depending on the source of cellulose, defibrillation process and pretreatment and the length is considered to be higher than 1 mm [7].

Chemically induced destructuring strategy

A controlled strong acid hydrolysis treatment can be applied to cellulosic fibers allowing dissolution of amorphous domains and therefore longitudinal cutting of the microfibrils. The ensuing nanoparticles are generally called cellulose nanocrystals (CNCs) and are obtained as an aqueous suspension. When observed between crossed-Nicols the CNC dispersion shows the formation of birefringent domains (Fig. 4). During the acid hydrolysis process, the hydronium ions penetrate the cellulose chains in the amorphous regions promoting the hydrolytic cleavage of the glycosidic bonds and releasing individual crystallites after mechanical treatment (sonication). Different strong acids have been shown to successfully degrade cellulose fibers, but hydrochloric and sulfuric acids have been extensively used. However, phosphoric [20], hydrobromic [21,22] and nitric acids [23] have also been reported for the preparation of crystalline cellulosic nanoparticles. One of the main reasons for using sulfuric acid as hydrolyzing agent is its reaction with the surface hydroxyl groups via an esterification process allowing the grafting of anionic sulfate ester groups. The presence of these negatively charged groups induces the formation of a negative electrostatic layer covering the nanocrystals and promotes their dispersion in water. However, it compromises the thermostability of the nanoparticles [24]. To increase the thermal stability of H2SO4-prepared nanocrystals, neutralization of the nanoparticles by sodium hydroxide (NaOH) can be carried out [25]. These nanoparticles occur as high aspect ratio rod-like nanocrystals, or whiskers. Their geometrical dimensions depend on the origin of the cellulose substrate and hydrolysis conditions. Fig. 5 shows CNCs obtained from two different cellulosic sources. Each rod can be considered as a cellulose crystal with no apparent defect. CNCs generally present a relatively broad distribution in length because of the diffusion-controlled nature of the acid hydrolysis. The average length is generally of the order of a few hundreds nanometers and the width is of the order of a few nanometers [6]. An important parameter for CNCs is the aspect ratio, which is defined as the ratio of the length to the width. It varies between 10 for cotton [27] and 67 for tunicin [26] or capim dourado (golden grass) [19]. Acid hydrolysis is the classical way of preparing CNCs. However, other processes allowing the release of crystalline domains from cellulosic fibers have more recently been reported, including enzymatic hydrolysis treatment [28], TEMPO oxidation [29], hydrolysis with gaseous acid [30], and treatment with ionic liquids [31].

Mechanical properties of cellulose nanoparticles

Cellulose has been used by our society as an engineering material for thousands of years. However, even if cellulose confers its mechanical properties to higher plant cells, the mechanical properties of natural fibers are strongly influenced by many factors, particularly chemical composition and location in plants. Other factors that may affect the fiber properties are maturity, separating processes, microscopic and molecular defects such as pits and nods, type of soil and weather conditions under which they were grown. Further improved fibers and composites can be obtained by disintegrating the natural grown fibers, and separating the almost defect free highly crystalline fibrils. The mechanical properties of cellulose microfibrils should be higher and less dispersed than those of lignocellulosic fibers from which they are released from because of a more homogeneous nature. Different strategies, both theoretical and experimental, have been used to determine the longitudinal modulus of cellulose microfibrils (or bundles)

RESEARCH

Processing of polymer nanocomposites

Cellulose nanoparticles have a strong tendency for self-association because of the omnipresence of interacting surface hydroxyl groups. This property, which is the basis of the strength of paper sheets, is a desirable feature for the formation of load-bearing percolating architectures within the host polymer matrix. However, these inter-particle interactions can cause aggregation during the preparation of the nanocomposite thus inducing the loss of the nanoscale and limit the potential of mechanical reinforcement. This aggregation phenomenon is magnified when the specific surface area increases and then when the size of the particle decreases. Different strategies have been reported in the literature to homogeneously mix cellulose nanoparticles with a polymeric matrix. These different strategies are summarized in Fig. 6 and detailed information can be found elsewhere [35]. Because of the good dispersion level of cellulose nanoparticles in water, it is obviously the most suitable processing medium. Both water-soluble polymers and polymer aqueous dispersions (latex) can be used. After mixing the cellulose nanoparticle dispersion with the polymer solution/dispersion, a solid nanocomposite film can be obtained by simple casting and water evaporation. This mode of processing allows the preservation of the individualization state reported. However, the average value is around 100 GPa, that is, much higher than for cellulose fibers. The modulus of cellulose microfibrils is expected to result from a mixing rule between the modulus of the crystalline domains and the amorphous fraction. Therefore, it should be higher for more The different strategies applied for the processing of nanocellulose reinforced polymer nanocomposites crystalline CNCs. Again a broad range of values was reported [7]. However, the average value is around 130 GPa, that is, much higher than for cellulose microfibrils as expected. These impressive mechanical properties make cellulose nanoparticles ideal candidates for the processing of reinforced polymer composites. The Young's modulus of nanocellulose with a density for crystalline cellulose of around 1.5­1.6 g cmÀ3 is much higher than the one of glass fibers, around 70 GPa [32] with a density around 2.6 g cmÀ3, which are classically used in composite applications. It is similar to Kevlar (60­125 GPa, density around 1.45 g cmÀ3) [33] and potentially stronger than steel (200­ 220 GPa, density around 8 g cmÀ3) [34]. Indeed, the specific Young's modulus, which is the ratio between the Young's modulus and the density, of nanocellulose is around 65 J gÀ1 for microfibrils and 85 J gÀ1 for nanocrystals whereas it is around 25 J gÀ1 for steel of the nanoparticles resulting from their colloidal dispersion in water. A copolymer of styrene and butyl acrylate (poly(S-co-BuA)) in latex form and tunicin nanocrystals were used in the pioneering work [36]. Water has been extensively used as a processing medium but stable suspensions of CNCs with negatively charged surface groups, commonly produced by hydrolysis of the native cellulose with sulfuric acid, can be obtained in various polar liquid media. For instance, stable CNC suspensions have been prepared in N,Ndimethyl sulfoxide (DMF) [37], dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO), Nmethyl pyrrolidine (NMP), formic acid and m-cresol [38]. Casting from a mixture of solvents can also be used to prepare nanocellulose-reinforced nanocomposites. By this method, the aqueous suspension of nanoparticles is mixed with a polymer solution involving a solvent miscible with water, for example, tetrahydrofuran (THF) [39]. A solvent exchange procedure can be applied to suspend cellulosic nanoparticles in the proper liquid medium for further surface chemical modification, or mixing with a polymer solution or monomer for subsequent in situ polymerization [40]. The aqueous suspension is progressively solvent exchanged in liquids of decreasing polarity by several successive centrifugation and redispersion operations, using sonication after each solvent exchange step to avoid aggregation. Acetone is routinely used for the first solvent exchange step. Stable cellulose nanoparticle dispersions in apolar or low polarity solvent can be obtained by physically coating the surface with a surfactant [41,42] or chemically grafting apolar moieties onto the surface. Both methods allow the tuning of the surface and a decrease of the surface energy of the nanoparticle. The surface chemical modification of cellulose nanoparticles obviously involves the ample surface hydroxyl groups resulting from their nanoscale dimensions and ensuing high surface area. Experimental conditions should avoid swelling media and the peeling effect of surface-grafted chains inducing their dissolution in the reaction medium. Therefore, the chemical grafting process has to be mild to preserve the integrity of the nanoparticle. The most common surface chemical modifications of CNCs are summarized in Fig. 7. They can be categorized into three distinctive groups, namely (1) substitution of hydroxyl groups with small molecules (as indicated with red arrows in Fig. 7), (2) polymer grafting based on the `grafting onto' strategy with different coupling agents (as indicated with blue arrows in Fig. 7), and (3) polymer grafting based on the `grafting from' approach with a radical polymerization involving ring opening polymerization (ROP), atom transfer radical polymerization (ATRP) and single-electron transfer living radical polymerization (SET-LP) (as indicated with yellow arrows in Fig. 7). The chemically modified nanoparticles can be dispersed in organic liquids of low polarity and mixed with a polymer solution or eventually directly added into the polymer melt after drying. However, two conflicting effects arise from this procedure. On the one hand, it allows an improvement in the dispersion of the modified nanoparticles in the continuous apolar medium which is beneficial to optimize the mechanical properties of the ensuing nanocomposite. On the other hand, it restricts the interactions between nanoparticles through hydrogen-bonding which is the basis of the outstanding mechanical properties of nanocellulose based nanocomposites. The previous processing techniques used mainly a liquid as the processing medium and are mainly restricted to wet processing methods such as casting/evaporation, which has been extensively used. The main advantage of this strategy relies in the fact that it allows preserving the dispersion state of the nanoparticles in the liquid. However, it limits the number of polymer matrices that can be used in association with cellulose nanoparticles. Moreover, this procedure is both non-industrial and non-economic. It should be used for niche applications. Several organizations have announced nanocellulose demonstration plants [7]. Therefore, more industrial nanocomposite processing techniques should be developed. Melt-compounding techniques, such as extrusion or injection molding, are commonly used to process thermoplastic polymers. They are `green' (solvent-free), and industrially and economically viable. However, these conventional processing techniques are infrequently employed for the preparation of cellulose nanoparticle reinforced polymer nanocomposites. This is ascribed to inherent incompatibility and thermal stability issues. The hydrophilic nature of cellulose causes irreversible agglomeration during drying and aggregation in non-polar matrices because of the formation of additional hydrogen bonds between nanoparticles. Few solutions have been proposed to address this challenge. A glance at the literature shows the different strategies [38].

Optical properties of nanocellulose films

The optical properties of nanocellulose films can be investigated by determining the regular light transmittance with a UV-visible spectrometer. Measurements are performed in the wavelength range 200­1000 nm. The regular light transmittance at 600 nm wavelength, which is in the middle of the visible wavelength range, is generally reported [47]. Films made only from MFC can be optically transparent if the cellulose nanofibers are densely packed, and the interstices between the fibers are small enough to avoid light scattering [48]. However, it was shown that mechanical compression performed on freeze-dried MFC did not result in transparency (Fig. 8). It was suggested that the nanofibers were deformed under load but recovered after unloading, and the spaces created resulted in light scattering. Films prepared by slow filtration, drying and compression were much more densely packed, and were not optically transparent but translucent (Fig. 8), probably because of surface light scattering. The films formed by filtration, presented a high transparency thanks to a polishing step with emery paper. The transparency of the MFC sheet (thickness 55 mm) reached 71.6% at a wavelength of 600 nm (Fig. 8). The transmittance at 600 nm of softwood and hardwood TEMPO-oxidized MFC films was found to be around 90% and 78%, respectively [49]. The lower light transmittance of hardwood cellulose was ascribed to the presence of xylan that was supposed to interfere in part with complete dispersion of the nanofibrils in water. Owing to their anisotropic rod-like morphology, CNCs display a specific property. In suspension, these nanoparticles have a

Mechanical properties of polymer nanocomposites

Outstanding mechanical properties can be obtained by blending nanocellulose and a polymer matrix even at low filler loading [7,36]. Such properties originate from the high stiffness of crystalline cellulose that provides the strength to higher plants, the nanoscale dimensions and high aspect ratio of the nanoparticles, and the high reactivity of cellulose. In suitable conditions, a mechanically percolating stiff network of nanoparticles can form within the polymer matrix that supports the mechanical solicitation. The formation of this network is conditioned by the homogeneous dispersion of the filler, the percolation threshold that depends on the aspect ratio of the nanoparticles, and the strength of the filler/filler interactions. This mechanical percolation phenomenon has been extensively reported in the literature [46­48]. The stiffness of the percolating CNC was found to increase with the aspect ratio of the nanocrystals [46]. It therefore means that the use of higher aspect ratio CNC is more interesting from a mechanical point of view because it first induces a decrease of the critical percolation threshold and also stiffens the formed continuous network. In these conditions, the host polymeric matrix does not play any role in the mechanical stiffness of the material. It corresponds to the highest mechanical reinforcement effect that can be obtained from these nanoparticles. However, many parameters can affect this phenomenon [44]. When the formation of this percolating nanoparticle network is inhibited, only the high stiffness of crystalline cellulose, nanoscale dimensions, high aspect ratio and dispersion of the nanoparticles, and filler/matrix interactions are involved in the reinforcing phenomenon. Cellulose nanocrystal films produced from suspensions treated with increasing applied ultrasonic energy (0, 250, 700, 1800, and 7200 J gÀ1 of CNC) from left to right. Viewing is normal to the film surface under diffuse lighting. Scale marker 1 cm. Samples of CNC suspension were sonicated using a Sonics vibra-cell 130 W 20 kHz ultrasonic processor with a 6 mm diameter probe: typically, 15 mL of a 2­3 wt% CNC suspension was placed in a 50 mL plastic tube and sonicated at 60% of the maximum power. Prolonged sonication (to an energy input of over 3600 J/g CNC) was performed in an ice bath to prevent desulfation caused by heating of the suspension. lyotropic liquid crystalline behavior, that is, a phase transition from an isotropic liquid to an ordered liquid crystal when changing the concentration [50­52]. Indeed, above a given concentration, a chiral nematic phase forms. Under certain conditions, the suspension may be slowly evaporated to obtain semi-translucent films that maintain the chiral nematic liquid crystal order formed in the suspension. These films exhibit iridescence reflecting polarized light in a narrow wavelength range determined by the chiral nematic pitch and the refractive index of the film. These optical properties are likely to generate new applications for CNC films. Ultrasound treatment was found to increase the chiral nematic pitch in suspension and red-shift the reflection wavelength of CNC films as the applied energy increased [53]. Fig. 9 shows solid films cast from aliquots of 2.8 wt% CNC suspensions prepared by sulfuric acid hydrolysis from bleached softwood kraft pulp and sonicated with increasing (left to right) energy inputs. The energy was measured in J gÀ1 of CNC. The films exhibit reflected iridescence with colors ranging from blue-violet to red. By combining sonication and electrolyte addition the reflective properties of the film can be predictably tuned. The effects of sonicating a CNC suspension were shown to be cumulative and permanent. Moreover, suspensions sonicated with different energy inputs can be mixed to prepare films having a reflection band intermediate between those obtained from the individual suspensions. It was suggested that the ultrasound-induced red-shift is electrostatic in nature.

Barrier properties of nanocellulose films

There is an increasing interest in the barrier properties of nanocellulose films or related nanocomposites due to increased tortuosity provided by nanoparticles. Indeed, because of their small size, the surface-to-volume ratio of the nanoparticles is significantly greater than that for microparticles [17]. Most materials used for food packaging are practically non-degradable petrochemical based polymers, representing a serious environmental problem. The main reason for their use is due to their easiness of processability, low cost and excellent barrier properties. Barrier properties using bio-based materials are becoming increasingly desirable in our society to develop environmentally friendly efficient materials in different applications. Moreover, the low permeability of cellulose can be enhanced by the highly crystalline nature of cellulose nanoparticles and their ability to form a dense percolating network. Provided that strong particle-polymer molecular interactions exist, the smaller particles have a greater ability to bond to the surrounding polymer material, thereby reducing the chain segmental mobility and thus the penetrant diffusivity. Cellulose is a hydrophilic polymer and it obviously absorbs water when immersed in liquid water or conditioned in moist atmosphere. However, the water vapor permeability is decreased when the cellulose fibers are disintegrated to the nanoscale level [55]. Moreover, the sensitivity to moisture of the nanoparticles can be tuned via pre-treatment before homogenization [55,56] or post treatment (polymer impregnation [54,57], or chemical grafting [58,59]). The gas permeability is also reduced in dry atmospheres when decreasing the size of the cellulosic particles because of the crystalline and dense structure of the nanoparticle film [60,61]. However, this property is lost in moist atmosphere [62]. To improve the gas barrier properties of nanocellulose films at high relative humidity (RH) level, hybrid clay-MFC films can be prepared [63,64] or chemical modification of the nanoparticles can be performed [59]. Coating of polymer films with MFC layers has also been investigated as a new way to produce good barrier materials and as possible solution to retain the advantages of both cellulosic nanoparticles and polymers [49,65]. Whatever the treatment or the experimental conditions used to produce nanocellulose, it is seen as a new biomaterial for the creation of a good barrier for food packaging. Nanocomposite films extend food shelf-life, and also improve food quality as they can serve as carriers for active substances such as antioxidants and antimicrobials [66].

Conclusion

There has been an explosion of interest in the use of biomass as a source of renewable energy and materials. Despite being the most available natural polymer on earth, it is only quite recently that cellulose has gained prominence as a nanostructured material, in the form of nanocellulose. This term covers the range of materials derived from cellulose with at least one dimension in the nanometer range. It mainly consists of chemically (cellulose nanocrystals ­ CNCs) or mechanically extracted nanoparticles (microfibrillated cellulose ­ MFC). After intensive research, several initiatives have emerged in the perspective of producing nanocellulose on a large scale. Nanocellulose-based materials are carbonneutral, sustainable, recyclable and non-toxic. They thus have the potential to be truly green nanomaterials, with many useful and unexpected properties.

Materials Today  Volume 16, Number 6  June 2013

RESEARCH

References

[1] D. Fengel, G. Wegener, Wood: Chemistry, Ultrastructure, Reactions, Walter de Gruyter, 1984.

[2] R.J. Moon, McGraw-Hill Yearbook in Science & Technology, McGraw-Hill, 2008, pp. 225­228.

[3] N. Lin, J. Huang, A. Dufresne, Nanoscale 4 (2012) 3274­3294.

[4] M.A.S. Azizi Samir, F. Alloin, A. Dufresne, Biomacromolecules 6 (2005) 612­626.

[5] S.J. Eichhorn, et al. J. Mater. Sci. 45 (2010) 1­33.

[6] R.J. Moon, et al. Chem. Soc. Rev. 40 (2011) 3941­3994.

[7] A. Dufresne, Nanocellulose: From Nature to High Performance Tailored Materials, Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co. KG, 2012.

[8] A.N. Nakagaito, H. Yano, Appl. Phys. A: Mater. Sci. Process. 78 (2004) 547­552.

[9] Ø. Eriksen, K. Syverud, Ø. Gregersen, Nord. Pulp Paper Res. 23 (2008) 299­304.

[10] T. Zimmermann, N. Bordeanu, E. Strub, Carbohydr. Polym. 79 (2010) 1086­1093.

[11] F.W. Herrick, et al. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. Polym. Symp. 37 (1983) 797­813.

[12] A. Boldizar, et al. Int. J. Polym. Mater. 11 (1987) 229­262.

[13] M. Henriksson, et al. Eur. Polym. J. 43 (2007) 3434­3441.

[14] M. Paakko, et al. Biomacromolecules 8 (2007) 1934­1941.

[15] L. Wagberg, et al. Langmuir 24 (2008) 784­795.

[16] A. Isogai, T. Saito, H. Fukuzumi, Nanoscale 3 (2011) 71­85.

[17] N. Lavoine, et al. Carbohydr. Polym. 90 (2012) 735­764.

[18] M. Malainine, et al. Carbohydr. Polym. 51 (2003) 77­83.

[19] G. Siqueira, et al. Cellulose 17 (2010) 289­298.

[20] T. Okano, et al. Nisshin Oil Mills Ltd. Patent JP 98/151052.

[21] S.Y. Lee, et al. Fibers Polym. 10 (2009) 77­82.

[22] I. Filpponen, D.S. Argyropoulos, Biomacromolecules 11 (2010) 1060­1066.

[23] D. Liu, et al. Bioresource Technol. 101 (2010) 2529­2536. [24] M. Roman, W.T. Winter, Biomacromolecules 5 (2004) 1671­1677.

[25] Y. Habibi, et al. J. Mater. Chem. 18 (2008) 5002­5010.

[26] M.N. Angles, A. Dufresne, Macromolecules 33 (2000) 8344­8353.

[27] T. Ebeling, et al. Langmuir 15 (1999) 6123­6126.

[28] G. Siqueira, et al. Cellulose 17 (2010) 1147­1158.

[29] M. Hirota, et al. Cellulose 17 (2010) 279­288.

[30] E. Kontturi, UPM-Kymmene Corporation. Patent WO2011/114005.

[31] Z. Man, et al. J. Polym. Environ. 19 (2011) 726­731.

[32] F.T. Wallengberg, J.C. Watson, H. Li, ASM Handbook, Vol. 21: Composites, 2001, 27­34.

[33] W.Y. Yeh, R.J. Young, Polymer 40 (1999) 857­870.

[34] J. Lemaitre, et al., Mecanique des Materiaux, 3rd ed., Dunod, 2009.

[35] A. Dufresne, Int. Polym. Proc. 27 (2012) 557­564. [36] V. Favier, et al. Polym. Adv. Technol. 6 (1995) 351­355.

[37] M.A.S. Azizi Samir, et al. Macromolecules 37 (2004) 1386­1393.

[38] O. Vand den Berg, J.R. Capadona, C. Weder, Biomacromolecules 8 (2007) 1353­1357.

[39] M. Schroers, A. Kokil, C. Weder, J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 93 (2004) 2883­2888.

[40] G. Siqueira, J. Bras, A. Dufresne, Biomacromolecules 10 (2009) 425­432.

[41] L. Heux, G. Chauve, C. Bonini, Langmuir 16 (2000) 8210­8212.

[42] I. Kvien, B.S. Tanem, K. Oksman, Biomacromolecules 6 (2005) 3160­3165.

[44] A. Dufresne, J. Nanosci. Nanotechnol. 6 (2006) 322­330.

[46] J. Bras, et al. Carbohydr. Polym. 84 (2011) 211­215.

[47] S. Iwamoto, A.N. Nakagaito, H. Yano, Appl. Phys. A: Mater. Sci. Process. 89 (2007) 461­466.

[48] M. Nogi, et al. Adv. Mater. 21 (2009) 1595­1598.

[49] H. Fukuzumi, et al. Biomacromolecules 10 (2009) 162­165. [50] R.H. Marchessault, F.F. Morehead, N.M. Walter, Nature 184 (1959) 632­633.

[51] J.F. Revol, et al. Liq. Cryst. 16 (1994) 127­134. [52] X.M. Dong, et al. Langmuir 12 (1996) 2076­2082.

[53] S. Beck, J. Bouchard, R. Berry, Biomacromolecules 12 (2011) 167­172.

[54] K. Spence, et al. Cellulose 17 (2010) 835­848.

[55] M. MInelli, et al. J. Membr. Sci. 358 (2010) 67­75.

[56] K. Spence, et al. Cellulose 18 (2011) 1097­1111.

[57] K. Spence, et al. Bioresources 6 (2011) 4370­4388.

[58] G. Rodionova, et al. Cellulose 18 (2011) 127­134.

[59] L.C. Tome, et al. Cellulose 17 (2010) 1203­1211.

[60] K. Syverud, P. Stenius, Cellulose 16 (2009) 75­85.

[61] S. Belbekhouche, et al. Carbohydr. Polym. 83 (2011) 1740­1748.

[62] C. Aulin, M. Gallstedt, T. Lindstrom, Cellulose 17 (2010) 559­574.

[63] A. Liu, et al. Biomacromolecules 12 (2011) 633­641.

[64] A. Liu, L.A. Berglund, Carbohydr. Polym. 87 (2012) 53­60.

[65] S. Fujisawa, et al. Carbohydr. Polym. 84 (2011) 579­583. [66] M. Andresen, et al. Biomacromolecules 8 (2007) 2149­2155.

************************************************************************

More study needed to clarify impact of cellulose nanocrystals on health

By roy | 10 maart 2015
0 Comment 

Are cellulose nanocrystals harmful to human health? The answer might depend on the route of exposure, according to a review of the literature by a Virginia Tech scientist, but there have been few studies and numerous questions remain.

Writing in the journal Industrial Biotechnology, Maren Roman, associate professor of sustainable biomaterials in the College of Natural Resources and Environment, pointed out discrepancies in studies of whether cellulose nanocrystals are toxic when inhaled or to particular cells in the body. She said more studies are needed to support research results that the nanocrystals are nontoxic to the skin or when swallowed.

Cellulose nanocrystals are produced from renewable materials, such as wood pulp. Biocompatible and biodegradable, the low-cost, high-value material is being studied for use in high-performance composites and optical films, as a thickening agent, and to deliver medicine in pills or by injection. But before a material can be commercialized, its impact on the environment and human health must be determined.

Roman, also associated with the Macromolecules and Interfaces Institute at Virginia Tech, reviewed published studies about the effects of cellulose nanocrystals on the respiratory system, gastrointestinal system, skin, and cells.

In the respiratory system, the body can clear particles from the throat and nasal areas by moving them toward the mouth. Particles are removed from the lungs through engulfment and degradation or movement upwards, depending on particle size and surface charge.

Early studies found tissue damage and inflammation depended on dose and specimen form — – dry powder versus suspension in a carrier liquid. A later animal study showed no ill effects from inhaled particles, but Roman pointed out that the size, shape, and surface charge of the particles were unknown.

Most studies of nanoparticles’ effect on the gastrointestinal tract — mouth, esophagus, stomach, and intestines — have shown that the particles pass through and are eliminated, Roman reported. However, some studies demonstrated that nano- and microparticles can penetrate the protective barrier of the intestine and reach the bloodstream.

Roman described the cellulose nanocrystals properties — size, electrostatic properties, molecular structure, and pH — that make their penetration unlikely but noted that there have only been two studies published on oral toxicity specifically of cellulose nanocrystals.

Most studies of nanoparticle skin exposure reported no unintentional permeation of nanoparticles through the outer layer of skin. The three published studies of cellulose nanocrystal toxicity upon skin exposure showed cellulose nanocrystals not to cause any skin sensitization skin tissue damage.

What if a nanoparticle reaches the cells, such as in the brain? Most studies also showed that cellulose nanocrystals are not toxic to cells, depending on the dose. The most serious impact was a 20 percent loss in viability of liver cells in rainbow trout.

Studies also looked at cells from humans, such as from the brain, throat, and eye, and from other animals. “The discrepancies in the results are not surprising,” said Roman, “considering that the studies all used different cell lines, cellulose sources, preparation procedures, and post-processing or sample preparation methods.”

She was also critical of much of the research for overlooking chemicals that could be present in cellulose nanocrystals from prior processing.

“Only by careful particle characterization and exclusion of interfering factors will we be able to develop a detailed understanding of the potential side health effects of cellulose nanocrystals,” Roman concluded.

Story Source:

The above story is based on materials provided by Virginia Tech. Note: Materials could be edited for content and length.

____________________

 [F1] How they are made with shredding and acid
 [F2] In a scientific sense amorphous means lacking a crystalline structure, something without solid form. In a broader sense, the word describes anything that lacks a distinct shape or organizing theme
 [F3] HCL and Sulphuric acid Break down  cellulose fibres
 [F4] Would seem to be one way to take this out or to negate this
 [F5] This would appear to cause a huge disruptions
 [F6] And this can be in people as well with the early development comes sloppy handling due to new ideas and not enough on them to dispose properly
 [F7] 1. The quality or condition of being tortuous; twistedness or crookedness.  2. A bent or twisted part, passage, or thing.

 [F8] These would carry a nanocontaminant since nanos can collect in the body and is showing to collect in some important areas where those areas can be the operating system of the body


See Also:

Toxicity of Cellulose Nanocrystals: A Review [HTML]  (shorter version)
Toxicity of Cellulose Nanocrystals: A Review [PDF] (detailed version)
Toxicity of Cellulose Nanocrystals [DOC] (detailed version)

Pages To Read (with downloadable documents):

Nano Mark Assimilation
NANOCOMPONENTS AND EFFECTS ON LIFE AND ASSEMBLING
Nano Poisoning/Morgellons Disease


MY Note:  The last sentence in the section called "Optical properties of nanocellulose films", is cut off in both the .html and .doc version.




Sunday, June 12, 2016

[Vaccination-Liberation] Religious Exemptions from vaccination requirements

As knowledgeable 'vaccine-aware' Californians learned last year, the religious exemption is being eliminated. Increasingly we are seeing parents who are protecting their children from toxic vaccines being villainized.
This move is well funded and the groundwork has been put in place to convince legislators that they have the legal authority to eliminate religious exemptions.
Before anyone pursues legal action based on Constitutional rights (or pays any lawyer), please review what the CDC is telling its employees as well as state legislators:

From CDC Chapter 13 (pg 273)
Vaccination Mandates: The Public Health Imperative and Individual Rights
KEVIN M. MALONE AND ALAN R. HINMAN
LEGAL AUTHORITIES—CONSTITUTIONAL BASIS OF MANDATORY VACCINATION
Parens Patriae
Further authority to compel vaccination of children comes under the doctrine of parens patriae in which the state asserts authority over child welfare. In the 1944 case of Prince v. Massachusetts, which involved child labor under an asserted right of religious freedom, the U.S. Supreme Court summarized the doctrine, noting that:”Neither rights of religion nor rights of parenthood are beyond limitation. Acting to guard the general interest in youth’s well being, the state as parens patriae may restrict the parent’s control by requiring school attendance, regulating or prohibiting the child’s labor, and in many other ways. Its authority is not nullified merely because the parent grounds his claim to control the child’s course of conduct on religion or conscience.
Thus, he cannot claim freedom from compulsory vaccination for the child more than for himself on religious  grounds. The right to practice religion freely does not include liberty to expose the community or the child to communicable disease or the latter to ill health or death. (321 U.S. at 166–7, 64 S.Ct. at 442)”

We are going to have to move away from the religious "choice" debate. It is going to become a losing argument - as it has in California. . .
It is hard to understand why there are attorneys who don't acknowledge the Prince vs Massachusetts Supreme Court decision of 1944.
It is hard to understand why there are attorneys who don't acknowledge the fact that the Supreme Court has refused to revisit this issue.

Before signing a contract with a BAR attorney (or giving him or her any money) to "defend your religious or parental rights not to vaccinate", ask him or her how he or she plans to overcome the Supreme Court's position. Unless he or she is willing to give you a money back guarantee, it would be wise to reconsider hiring him or her.
Before our corrupt 'agencies' embark on new policies, they usually lay the groundwork years in advance. In 2009 I discovered when and how they established new 'pandemic' public health policies in Ohio (and other states). As is most often the case, there was a federal grant involved and it all took place without the knowledge or consent of the general public.
During my pandemic research, I also discovered that before instituting new policies - that might be met with resistance - 'agencies' hire attorneys to review and define the "legal authority" needed to implement their programs. See: Limitation of Movement - Legal
Generally speaking by the time new policies are inflicted on us, the groundwork needed to enforce them has been in place for years.Much goes on behind the scenes that the public (including attorneys) are completely unaware of.

If we are to protect our children (and/or ourselves) from the vaccination agenda, we are going to have to look beyond the current constraints of our embedded medical and legal systems and start thinking 'out of the BAR box'!.

Best,

AL Whitney

Retired Registered Respiratory Therapist
Former Court Appointed Special Advocate for children
Wife of a retired Family Practitioner
People for Safe Technologies







Are You Eating This Substance That Lines Food Industry Pockets?

Cellulose... This damn crap that is rampant and put in all of our supplements too.  Mostly in those veggie caps, which is now WHY I buy in bulk and put in the old fashioned gelatin caps.

Supplement companies do it to cut corners, just like they do when they add all the fake B-12 cyanocobalamin, instead of doing the right thing and using the pre-methylated form of METHYLCOBALAMIN.

If you have supplements in callulose capsules, empty them out into GELATIN capsules and then switch to a company that never uses cellulose.

Remember this post where I was bitching about the Platinum Plus Amino Acids being ruined by this shit.
http://messiahmews.blogspot.com/2016/05/i-am-disappoint.html

It's also why some supplements never seem to work.





Cellulose (a.k.a. Wood Pulp) 101

* Cellulose can be called by these different names on the ingredients label: Carboxymethyl cellulose, Microcrystalline Cellulose, or MCC, and Cellulose Gum.
* Cellulose is much cheaper to obtain from wood, than real food ingredients and is manipulated in a laboratory to form different structures (liquid, powder, etc) depending upon the food product it is used in.
* The most economical choice for cellulose comes from wood by-products, however cellulose can also come from vegetables, but will be listed on the label as such.
* The cellulose wood pulp industry is at it’s all time high (up 8% from 2009-2011).
Humans cannot digest cellulose. It has no caloric value. The food industry tricks consumers who eat foods with a high cellulose content to feel full physically and psychologically without having consumed many calories.
* According to the FDA: “In humans, virtually 100 percent of orally ingested cellulose can be recovered in the feces within four days, indicating that absorption does not occur.” This substance just passes through your body, while lining food industry pockets. Nice!
* The FDA sets no limit on cellulose content in processed food, however sets a limit for meat products at 3.5%.
* Cellulose can by used as a supplement to bulk up foods with fake fiber. Next time you see “added fiber” on the label, take a look at the ingredients, it usually contains cellulose.
* The gelling action of cellulose when combined with water creates an emulsion, suspending ingredients, making processed food products creamier and thicker than they would be otherwise.
* Cellulose can absorb water and is used as an “anti-caking” agent in shredded and grated cheeses, spice mixes, and powdered drink mixes.

Never let the food industry trick you with this cheap and harmful substance. Next time you see your family or friends eating the popular products discussed in this video – ask them:

“Do You Eat Wood?”
Remember to always check the ingredients list before buying anything at the grocery store – even organic products for cellulose and other emulsifiers like Polysorbate 80. Shred your own cheese, buy 100% maple syrup and forget fast food. 

Remember... They have to get this shit into us to use as building blocks for the nano-tech, biofilm, and Morgellon's conditions.



Start boycotting any and all companies that use this.


Wednesday, June 8, 2016

Store - Vaxxed

Store - Vaxxed T-Shirts

Bahahaha!  We are so getting these!  To help support the vaccine deception awareness movement...

Vaxxed Tee Shirts for both Men & Women

And this one (on a different site)....





Tuesday, June 7, 2016

National Geographic's Mick Dodge and 15 Experts Share Secrets of Self-Reliance!

With all of the pollution, social and economic collapse, government corruption, excessive technological progression, growing disease, and civic unrest often makes us feel afraid, vulnerable, and hopeless...

...but I want you to know that you don't have to be afraid and that there are real solutions available right now to help each of us live more sustainably building skills of self-reliance and community interdependence which ultimately will help us to build a brighter future.

And the empowering messages and skillsets for building the new world are available to learn at no charge from world experts such as National Geographic's Mick Dodge and many others during the 2nd annual Self Reliance Summit.

This empowering online global summit showcases 16 new video interviews with leading experts on self-reliance and sustainable living from June 13th-20th.

You can register free at this link to watch all sessions during the broadcast period: https://su208.isrefer.com/go/selfreliancesummit/MessiahMews

During this series 16 visionaries share practical how-to information discussing real solutions for living more self-reliant, inspired, and prepared for co-creating the new world of sustainable living.

Video Sessions Include:
* Mick Dodge - The Art of Dodging and the Secret of IT
* Laurie Neverman - The Permaculture Revolution

* Maryam Henein - Secret Life of Bees/ CCD Then And Now

* Brad DeRosia - From Rockstar to Bee Keeper, Our Homestead Journey

* Marjory Wildcraft - Interview With The Most Dangerous Woman In America

* Paul Wheaton - Hugelkultur and Permaculture Food Systems

* Gabriel Cousens - Peace With the Ecology

* Shayna Gladstone - Realizing our Oneness with Nature; Aligning with Your Life's Passion and Purpose
* Sacha Stone - How to Become Politically and Socially Free

* Paul Lenda - Creating a Localized & Regenerative Society
* Jason Matyas - Understanding the Modern Grid System and What to Do About It
* Sam Coffman - Sustainable Medicine and the Human Community

* Justin Rhodes - The 20 hour business to fund your farm

* Mike Adams - BREAKTHROUGH-How to grow your own tax-free food and medicine without using electricity or soil

* Rachel Morrison - Interdependence and Self Reliance; Living in Sustainable Community
* Steven Harris - Self Reliance Preparedness; Everything You Need to Know About Batters and More
All this and more will be shared with you online at no cost during this internationally broadcasted video summit.

Attend at no charge here.

As you can tell, I’m very excited about this and I know you’ll benefit greatly by all the empowering information, funny stories, and practical methods shared during the 2nd Annual Self Reliance Summit.





Sunday, June 5, 2016

How One Mother Educated Herself About Vaccines

I did alot of the reading of the ingredients, the package inserts, etc...

From Charlene Stoudt

"I wasn't a big proponent of one side or the other. This whole Vaxer, non vaxer thing (people who are pro or anti-vaccine) wasn't on my radar. 
I used to get the flu shot - it was free and recommended - until (after never having had the flu my whole life) I got the worst flu I had even known after being vaccinated. That's was when I was told by my doctor that the vaccine I received wouldn't protect me from all flus, just the particular strain that vaccine was made for and that there were many strains of flu. I then asked myself what many would - why get the shot every year if it doesn't really protect you? And since they give you a live strian of virus I had to also wonder - if I got the flu within 1-2 weeks of the vaccine, why was the vaccine virus discounted as the possible cause? It's not like they tested to see if I caught the strain I was supposedly protected from. That was just the assumption. So I stopped accepting the flu shot - free or not. I haven't had the flu since and that's the last I thought terribly intensely about shots in general.
Then I got pregnant with my first child.
We want to do everything healthy and good for our children that we can and I knew vaccination was supposed to be a part of that good thing. My experience with the flu shot made me curious though, so off to the CDC I went.
I won't lie, I was initially taken aback by the sheer magnitude of the vaccine schedule. But I figured there must be good reason so I stayed on the site and kept checking out the what and why of it all.
Now, I'm not talking conspiracy theorists or crazy people ideas, because I know there are plenty of those - I'm talking information off the CDC website - the people recommending this schedule. They provide access to PDF forms of the package inserts - which I thought was great and still do. They tell you what's in each kind of vaccine, adverse reactions, adjuvents, safety tesing...
And to be honest, that's when I changed my mind from - Well, this (vaccination) is certainly going to be something that will be part of my child's upbringing - to - Wait a minute, this looks really risky and I think I'd rather wait until better safety testing is created before I agree to all of this - and what the heck are mercury, aluminum, formaldehyde, aborted fetal tissue and animal tissues (monkey, dogs, bovine, chicken...) doing in these. What purpose do they serve and how do they work in the vaccine and of course - are they SAFE?
And so my new search to understand what was in vaccines and how they worked began. 
The studies and peer reviewed publications are at our fingertips online today. The history of vaccinations, the good the bad and the ugly - all available for review. I won't tell you what to believe, because we're all ultimately responsible for our own choices. But I will tell you to take some responsibility to do the research for yourself - for the sake of your own health and the health of your children, if you have any.
Just for starters, learning about the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program was a real eye opener. It sounds great until you realize the ominous side. That vaccines are "unavoidably unsafe" and that companies that created vaccines were being driven out of business because they were being sued for vaccine caused injuries. The government stepped in back in the 1980s and created the NVICP. Now if you or someone you love is injured or dies because of a vaccination, you cannot sue the doctor who gives you the vaccination or the company that created the vaccine - you may, however, submit a petition with the US court of Federal Claims and follow their due process. They have paid out BILLIONS to vaccine injured families. And that is just the tip of the iceberg.
No medication is safe for everyone, the same way, all the time. Vaccines are no different. You owe yourself and your families a good hard look at the evidence so that you can make the most informed decision you can about this. You can always wait to vaccinate - but once you vaccinate, you cannot un-vaccinate. Just make sure you're making the best possible choice that you can for yourself and your loved ones. That's all any of us can really do.
As an aside - when our children go in for their well visits and receive multiple vaccinations at once - there have been NO safety studies for multiple vaccinations given together in this manner and there is no way to put your finger on which vaccine your child is having a reaction to. Go to the CDC. Read the package inserts. Learn about the ingredients and adjuvents. Learn about the NVICP. Get informed FIRST, and then decide for yourself.
God bless you all and all the little children, everywhere "
~Charlene Stoudt

"I like to show the actual legal language when mentioned." ~Sandra Ganey





Saturday, June 4, 2016