Wednesday, January 27, 2010

Lindsey Nagel-Pharma Corruption-Death And Destruction-House Of Numbers:

If you aren't already familiar with the story of Lindsey Nagel and her family, you may be shocked at what you learn. Please see the following website and watch the 10 min video footage.
It's about time for a RETHINK!

Monday, January 25, 2010

Rethinking AIDS booth promotes TRUTH and "House Of Numbers"

We just returned last night from another show. This show, in particular, we were asked to attend, because the organizers felt that our message was so important that it needed to be heard. For that, we are very thankful to them in supporting us.

We set up our "Rethinking AIDS" booth among the many other vendors who also had wonderful, "think outside the box" health and healing information to share. It became quite obvious to us as the day went on that most of the people in attendance had already had experience with "mainstream medicine", and had adequately been burned.
We spoke to many people who were very interested in the flaws behind the theory that HIV kills t-cells and causes AIDS. We discussed the non-standardization of the tests, we explained many of the numerous conditions that will cause a "positive antibody test" result,  we explained the fact that "HIV" has NEVER been properly isolated and purified, according the the rules of virology, how it fails Koch's Postulates, the huge indiscrepancies between "AIDS" in America and "AIDS" in Africa, the dangers of the highly toxic drugs...and much, much more.

We handed out many flyers promoting the fantastic, thought-provoking new film "House Of Numbers". Our audience was very excited to hear that this film had just made it's theatrical release, and would be on DVD soon. All were looking forward to seeing the movie and what "mainstream doctors, scientists, and researchers" from the past 25 yrs are now saying about HIV and AIDS.
This is surely a NOT TO MISS FILM when it becomes available in your area.
DVD release in May 2010 and Netflix is currently scheduled to carry it also.
For more information, please see:

Always remember, the TRUTH will remain the TRUTH, it doesn't change, just because you don't like it!

Anyway, we are looking forward to a wonderful year of exposure, and plenty more shows with our "Rethinking AIDS" booth. Now is the time for lives to be saved!
Please see pictures from the show here:

Friday, January 22, 2010

"House Of Numbers" ignites controversy

As far as my own personal opinion goes, if I were still "on the other side" of this debate, I'd be losing my mind too.  Once you see this film, and the comments by the top doctors, scientists, and researchers in "HIV science" from the last 25 yrs, you will be shocked at what you THOUGHT you knew about HIV and AIDS too. And you'll come away realizing that there are a lot more questions surrounding this paradigm than answers. If we can't trust these guys, who can we trust?

See the following review written by Jon Rappoport:

JANUARY 20, 2010. 
Brent Leung, a young Canadian filmmaker, has just released House of Numbers, which explores every basic official fact about AIDS—and finds these facts shot through with doubts and holes.

The accuracy of HIV tests; the competing and unclear definitions of AIDS; whether HIV causes AIDS; overblown case numbers; the safety and efficacy of the medicines; the supposed lethality of HIV; all these issues come up for review.

What’s remarkable is that Leung gained access to major AIDS researchers and bureaucrats and put them on camera for interviews: Robert GalloTony Fauci;Robin WeissDavid Baltimore; Luc Montagnier. You’ll see a gallery of officialdom on display.

Predictably, House of Numbers has ignited controversy. It questions authority.

Among its high points—

In 1985, an African definition of AIDS was framed by Western scientists so that, without any defining test, an eyeball diagnosis could be made. The result? Untold numbers of Africans who have exhibited obvious signs of ordinary immune suppression and lives lived in poverty have been arbitrarily called AIDS victims.

For several reasons, the standard blood tests for HIV (Elisa and Western Blot) are unreliable. Worst-case, a person could submit to a test, and merely depending on what country he lived in, he could be diagnosed positive or negative.

The drugs given for AIDS are highly toxic, and can cause death in the short or long term.

In what is perhaps the most shocking moment of the film, Nobel Laureate Luc Montagnier, the co-discoverer of HIV, states that a person with a strong immune system should be able to throw off the effects of the virus.

Coming from anyone else, this remark would be cast off like some piece of nonsense, especially since it torpedoes the whole billion-dollar pharmaceutical assault on AIDS. But Montagnier is one of the brightest stars in the HIV-research firmament.

When advance clips of the film were released, Montagnier’s statement caused a firestorm, and charges were leveled that Leung had edited that remark to twist its meaning and context. Leung then posted footage (cut out of the final edit ofHouse of Numbers) that showed Montagnier had gone even further in his assessment that HIV was not a lethal virus.

Another Nobel Laureate, Kary Mulllis (1993, Chemistry), appears on camera attacking the HIV=AIDS formulation. He also observes that, before AIDS surfaced in the early 1980s, the CDC was a fading institution, and was in danger of losing most or all of its funding—and desperately needed a new epidemic to bring it back into the spotlight. Mullis implies that the CDC was consciously and desperately casting about for a novel germ it could tie to a health threat, and was proceeding beyond the bounds of rigorous science to get there.

Audiences unfamiliar with AIDS controversies that have been brewing for 20 years under the radar will be thrown back in their chairs. They will come away from the film with a slew of doubts about the pronouncements of official AIDS science.

As for “the AIDS professionals,” who make their living building on shaky foundations, they are, of course, livid about the film—as are some AIDS activists.

However, after reading criticisms of House of Numbers, I see no willingness to take up Leung’s many points through honest and complete debate. Instead, as usual, there is name calling and denial.

This is par for the course. Since 1984, when the so-called cause of AIDS was announced on national television, at a press conference—without strong published confirming studies—the AIDS establishment has been tap dancing their way through history.

The fact that people have been dying, and that a better understanding of the causes could have resulted in saved lives, seems to have made no dent in the establishment’s armor.

But that, too, is par for the course.

House of Numbers illustrates an all-too-familiar pattern of modern science in action: a hypothesis is floated by a few researchers; it gains traction and funding; the wagons are circled and the hypothesis is called indisputable; funding ceases for all other possibilities and alternatives; critics are viciously attacked; the original hypothesis is never confirmed by truly independent research.

In this turgid atmosphere, it’s left to outsiders to examine the flawed science. This is what Leung has done. He’s done his job well. A new generation will now have a chance to consider the explosive issues surrounding AIDS.

For dates and locations of theatrical screenings, video on demand, and DVD sales, visit

Jon Rappoport has worked as an independent investigative reporter since 1982.The LA Weekly nominated him for a Pulitzer Prize, for an interview he did with the president of El Salvador University, where the military had taken over the campus and was disappearing students and burning books. He has written for In These TinesVillage VoiceLA WeeklySpin MagazineCBS HealthwatchStern. He is the author of AIDS INC., The Secret Behind Secret Societies, and The Ownership of All Life. His work can be found at 

Thursday, January 21, 2010

SHOCKING a very valid question.

Thank you to a couple of friends who posted this elsewhere.

The following are answers by a mainstream HIV "scientist". Apparently, this is as "scientific" as he gets: 

Johan Beaurain kindly shared a link to an interview with John Lauritsen. In this interview Lauritsen discusses 57 topics. Here I will investigate (or so) only one of them:

12. Have the HIV testing devices ever been validated against isolation of an actual virus?

Well ... err ... let's put it this way ... you know ... this isn't a question for the general public ... they are too stupid to understand ... well ... of course ... the matter is under investigation now ... err ... please listen ... this isn't easy for us! ... it isn't!! ... you should understand this ... please! ... do not draw any premature conclusions! ... don't!! ... are you listening to me?! ... you don't! ... you liar!! ... fuck!!! ... you know what?! ... you're going to be destroyed! ... WE WILL CRUSH YOU!!! ... because of your ... yes!! ... your!!! ... "behind the scenes activities" ... "i.e., some form of conspiracy" ... think we haven't noticed it?! ... see!! ... you moron!!! ... your question is ... "inaccurate and, frankly, rather foolish"!! ... we are "Calling for an investigation" now! ... calling for an investigation "is not the same as demanding the 'destruction'"!! ... see how foolish you are?! ... you should become aware of your foolishness immediately! ... i.e. right now!!! ... for you (!!) ... there is ... "no role to play in the dissemination of scientific and medical information to the public"!! ... got it?!?!!! ... NO ROLE!!! ... wanna know why?! ... HELL!! ... you stupid moron!!! ... you ... you ... you ... QUACK!!! ... listen!!! ... here's why! ... :! ... "Many articles in that journal simply make fools of our profession"!! ... got it?! ... fools!!! ... of our profession!!! ... we were "shocked"!! ... "and acted"!!! ... so don't you ever complain! ... and ... "and rightly so"!!! ... got it?! ... you DENIALIST! ... "I do not know this as a fact"!!! ... so do never bother me again with your foolish questions! ... never again!!! ... got it?! ... your persistence on this question is "remarkably arrogant"!! ... above all your foolish and arrogant questions are "so fatally flawed"!! ... you "do not have the right to disseminate inaccurate and self-serving information to the public"! ... so stop asking these utterly stupid questions about the "isolation of an actual virus"!! ... STOP IT!! ... WE DO NOT DEBATE WITH DENIALISTS!!! ... I'm serious now! ... listen!! ... listen carefully!!! ... we will no longer tolerate any more of your "bombastic and apocalyptic threats"!! ... this is because of your "frenzied, manic style"!!! ... see?! ... it's your own fault! ... you are well known as one of the "long standing AIDS denialists whose views should be ignored by any rational individuals" ... your being "laughable and hypocritical" is obvious ... as are your "inaccurate and false analyses that attempt to contradict the work of legitimate scientists on totally spurious grounds"!! ... "and rightly so"!!! ... this all smells to me like a "kettle of fish"!!! ... whatever you think you might have achieved was just "a rambling, sarcastic criticism of perceived aspects" ... it was ... "too silly to merit my further attention" ... that's why "This is the last time I will access this thread"!!! ... above all ... !!! ... I will not tolerate this any longer!!! ... !!! ... YOU HAVE QUOTED ME OUT OF CONTEXT!!!!! ... !!! ... !!!!!

Times Higher Education will provide you with the context.

Sunday, January 10, 2010


For those of you that are not familiar, "House Of Numbers" is an in-depth, thought provoking film by  young Canadian filmmaker Brent Leung, coming to a theater near you.
It is about to have its theatrical release, as well as a DVD release. (check your Netflix queue as well as
This film follows the history of the HIV theory over the past 25 yrs. Mr Leung interviews the top names in HIV "science" while he asks many questions about the problems, inconsistencies, and discrepancies surrounding the unproven theory that HIV is the sole cause of AIDS.
Unfortunately, he leaves with many more unanswered questions than he came with.
Please watch the trailer to this film and try to catch it on the "big screen". It will leave you wondering "What if everything I thought I knew about HIV and AIDS was wrong?"

The following is a very fair, unbiased, and well written review of the movie
Please read Dr Charles Geshketer's thoughts on the film: 

Please see my personal journey 'through the AIDS Machine' here:

Saturday, January 9, 2010

How's Your Immunity?

Your Immune System.
It's an important topic. One everybody seems to be talking about these days.
Is it strong? Is it weak? Are you one of those people that "gets everything that comes down the pike?"
Let me start off by saying that this will not be a post about the unproven HIV=AIDS dogma/theory/religion in relation to low immunity. I know many people who are "HIV negative" (and I use that term loosely) who have low immunity and seem to get sick all the time. Every year, at "flu season", I hear from them. They are usually the ones that are running to get their flu shots.
I also know many people that have been labeled as "HIV positive" (and I use THAT term even more loosely) who hardly ever get sick. Maybe the run of the mill head/sinus congestion once a year, and that's about it.
So........on we go.

There are many ways to tear down your immune system, see the previous post for just a few.
This will be a discussion on how to build it up. In this day and age of our very toxic, chemically-filled, environmentally polluted world, one needs all the help they can get in building immunity. An Immune System that will be strong, healthy, and last you a lifetime.

Love it? Hate it? Can I see a show of hands?
One of the major components to good, strong immune function is daily exercise/activity. Crucial to staying healthy is a great workout of your cardiovascular system. I'm talking about deep breathing, stretching, strengthening, moving, walking, jogging, yoga, tai chi, bootcamp, biking, dancing, gardening........whatever floats your boat.
Like sports? Excellent! Pick one. Do something. Anything. And do it regularly. Physical activity stimulates the flow of lymphatic fluid. The lymphatic system is a series of vessels and glands that transports immune cells and collects waste products throughout the body. Because the lymphatic system has no pump, it relies on muscular contractions to keep things flowing. Yoga, with its inversions that help lymph travel from the extremities, may be an especially effective immune-system booster.
A highly oxygenated body will contribute to being a healthy body.
Bottom line: GET MOVING

Love them? Hate them? Can I get a show of hands? Vegetables, fruits.
Add color to your plate. Because plants can't run away from invaders, they have had to develop their own rich immune systems, which are made up primarily of the phytochemicals that give fruits and vegetables their rich color. The more colors you eat, the more broad spectrum your immunity boost will be.
The REDS: tomatoes, watermelon, and pink grapefruit
The RED-PURPLES: grapes, pomegranates, and blueberries
The ORANGES: carrots, squash, and sweet potatoes
The ORANGE-YELLOWS: oranges, papaya, and nectarines
The YELLOW-GREENS: lettuces, peas, and avocados
The GREENS: kale, broccoli, and cabbage
The WHITE-GREENS: celery, pears, and endive
Not only will a wide variety of veggies and fruits in your diet boost immunity, it will also ward off obesity and combat a variety of chronic diseases and cancers.
Bottom line: Listen to your mother....EAT YOUR VEGGIES!

Love it? Love it? Who doesn't love sleep? Nothing beats a great nap in the middle of the day. I grabbed one earlier while snuggling by the fire. (Wow, 32 degrees in Florida today)
Prioritize your sleep. Sleeping is particularly important to immunity because during the nightly downtime, the body is devoted to detox, repair, and healing. It has been shown that people who sleep less than seven hours a night were nearly three times more likely to get sick after being exposed to pathogens than those who slept eight hours or more. Another important component to the immunity puzzle.
Bottom line: Make sure to get your proper rest.

Love it? Well, who doesn't love this mental/emotional state of mind and being. Good, strong immunity isn't just about organs and cells--it has a strong mental component, too. The ability of stress and depression to lower immunity is so well known that it has spawned a new medical field called "psychoneuroimmunology", to study the relationship between the mind and the immune system.
Practice devoting time to pursuits that bring you inner joy, make you feel calm, fulfilled, and at your best. Things such as a strong spiritual life, rewarding hobby, socializing with family and friends who love and accept you, or a contemplative practice that helps you to unwind and reflect.
Bottom line: Strive for peace and inner joy.

Love them? I know I do. I even make my own herbal tinctures.
According to Traditional Chinese Medicine, aromatic herbs--such as garlic, ginger, and scallions--are all warming and help stimulate the body's energy, or qi  (pronounced "chee"). When these particular herbs are used, they will open up the sinuses and the chest, causing a light perspiration, which if you do "catch a cold",  will help your body to "sweat it out". A great, natural form of detox.
You can also use remedies such as echinacea, elder flower, licorice root, astragalus, and many others to boost immunity or speed in healing.
Bottom line: Use natural products that have been long proven effective for many thousands of years before running to the doctor for an antibiotic.

Your immune system is only as strong as you are.

Friday, January 8, 2010

Little Blue Boxes

And so it is, another recycling day in our neighborhood. It comes around every week, once a week. Always on Fridays. I notice recycling day each Friday, not only because my husband puts out our little blue box at the curb, but also because I (try to) go out for my morning jog every day. So there they are, little blue boxes, all over the neighborhood, sitting at everybody's curb.

Now, please forgive me if I sound judgmental. I'm not. I'm really not at all. It's just that, well, here's the thing that, for some strange reason, REALLY bugs me on recycling day.

All the CRAP I see in people's little blue boxes.

You know, all the things that are being passed off as "food". I call them "foodstuffs". Things that come in boxes, cardboard, plastics, things with straws attached, packaging with cartoon characters and brightly colored wrapping. The little blue boxes are literally overflowing with a mountain of toxic, man-made items. All things that these unsuspecting homeowners have consumed, taken in to their bodies, and used as "nourishment".
When I pass by the little blue boxes, it looks like they have vomited up a chemical soup. As I glance over at each one, just out of sheer curiosity,  I expect to see the blue box vomit, bubble, if the box itself is trying to get rid of the poison that has been thrust upon it.
I don't think the little blue boxes knew what they were getting themselves in to when they signed up for the job.
The ad probably read something like this:  Eco-friendly job, help save the environment, work in a nice neighborhood....etc
I sometimes wonder if they knew what they were signing on for.

I also wonder if the homeowners knew what they "signed on for" when consuming all of the "foodstuffs" in their chemical soup that's sitting out at the curb. I wonder, I really and truly do wonder. I am of the opinion that surely, certainly, everyone MUST know by now the consequences of  a diet and lifestyle filled with garbage. Toxins, chemicals, poisons...all man-made in laboratories. Things that have long since been proven to be dangerous to the body, to cause cancers, to make people sick.

By the "puke-in-the-box", it's quite obvious which of these houses contain children. The helpless. The ones that don't get to choose. Then I really begin to wonder. Is it actually possible that these humans have no idea what they are doing to their children, let alone themselves? Is that really possible, in this day and age?

And then I feel a sense of sadness. And I think about all of the unnecessary suffering that takes place due to ignorance or choice.
And I want to SHOUT IT to the world, "Hey, don't you know what you're doing to yourself?"  "Don't you realize all of the undue pain and suffering you will most likely go through because of the choices you are making today?".
I realize that most of these decisions are made purely out of convenience. Sometimes out of choice. Sometimes out of just plain, good 'ole  ignorance. Sometimes just because people are unwilling to change.

That's a tough one for most. It usually comes down to a life or death situation to prompt change. Even then, I have met people that are still unwilling. Even after understanding the consequences.

Have you experienced anything lately that has caused you to "change", for the better?

In my next post, I will be discussing a little bit about what you can do to build your immunity and keep yourself healthy, to the best of your ability, in a very toxic world.

Thursday, January 7, 2010

The Big Lie

"The Big Lie" is a propaganda technique. The expression was coined by Adolf Hitler in his 1925 autobiography
Mein Kampf for a lie so "colossal" that no one would believe that someone "could have the impudence to distort 
the truth so famously."

Joseph Goebbels, a German politician in charge of putting out propaganda for Hitler, asserted some years 
later, a slightly different theory which became more commonly associated with the big lie expression:

"That is of course rather painful for those involved. One should not as a rule reveal one's secrets, since one does not know if and when one may need them again. The essential English leadership secret does not depend on particular intelligence. Rather, it depends on a remarkably stupid thick-headedness. The English follow the principle that when one lies, one should lie big, and stick to it. They keep up their lies, even at the risk of looking ridiculous."

In 2010, we find ourselves steadily entrenched in a number of other "lies", that being propagated by time and use of other well-known fallacies,  have become absolute truths to our society.
One of the great deceptions that has been put forth for the past 25 years surrounds HIV science.  The large majority of the world has been told exactly the opposite of what HIV has ever been proven to be.  Challenges surrounding the isolation and purification techniques of HIV have been debated since the beginning of the so-called "epidemic". The tests, which include the ELISA, The Western Blot, and the Viral Load (PCR) have also been called in to question, even by the orthodoxy themselves.  And the fact that HIV was proven  NOT to be a sexually transmitted virus is still unknown to most of the world.
The latest blow to HIV junkscience is the upcoming theatrical and DVD release of the new movie "House Of Numbers", currently being screened at film festivals worldwide.  It is the journey of a young filmmaker, Brent Leung, and his quest to find answers to his questions about everything he  thought he knew about HIV and AIDS.  The film has captured scientists from both sides of the debate, those that hold fast to the traditional points of HIV, and those that have dissented from the orthodoxy and demanded answers and evidence on a number of the unproven assertions.
And for the official website for "House Of Numbers" and information regarding the film, please see here:

Mike Adams of Natural News has, once again, written and reviewed this film and the controversy surrounding it.  See his latest article here:

 Stay tuned, there is many hours of unreleased film footage yet to come, that should shock the world into finally questioning this unproven theory and the diagnosis and treatment surrounding it.

Please see my experience with the AIDS machine here:

Wednesday, January 6, 2010

You Can Not Clean The Vaccine

Many thanks to my friend Laura for posting this very important information on her site. It believe it is so valuable, I'm borrowing it for my blog :

We have been taught that vaccines are weak solutions of virus, alive or dead, that are injected to invoke an immune response to that particular virus so that our bodies can make antibodies against it.
We assume it is a clean solution without contamination. This is not the case.

We are never told that the vaccine cannot be separated from cell debris of the live cells on which it is grown. Viruses are not independant living organisms. They cannot be multiplied outside a living cell. Sometimes eggs are used, sometimes monkey kidney tissue, sometimes cancer cells. Cancer cells? Surely not. Yes, indeed, cancer cells divide and grow forever, which is what makes them cancerous. It also makes them useful for growing industrial quantities of vaccine.

So how do they separate the virus for the vaccine from the rest of the living tissue? Well, they can push it through an ultra-fine filter that only allows the tiny viruses through. All the big bits and regular bacteria which might be contaminating the 'soup' should be excluded. All the small bits like the virus, any other contaminating viruses from the cells, nanobacteria, mycoplasmas and cell debris including broken bits of cell wall, DNA, whatever, pass through the filter. So how are those separated?

Uhm, they aren't. They get injected.

The following extracts are from the book Fear of the Invisible
by Janine Roberts

“All ways of making vaccines have their dangers. Dr Hayflick, a well-reputed scientist involved for many years with vaccines, described how the ‘Primary Culture' method of taking cells from ‘sacrificed animals' or bird embryos ran into problems when ‘it became apparent that these cells contained many unwanted viruses, some of which were lethal to humans.' He noted: ‘Latent viruses were such a problem with primary monkey kidney cells that a worldwide moratorium on the licensing of all polio virus vaccines was called in 1967 because of death and illnesses that occurred in monkey kidney workers and vaccine manufacturing facilities'. The contaminating virus then blamed was the deadly Ebola. This was most serious, but again I could find no record of the public being informed about this suspension or the Ebola. "

"Dr Heyrick told of how the eminent Dr Maurice Hilleman, the scientist I had earlier interviewed about the MMRvaccine, had used what he thought was an ‘intestine-based cell line' to make an adenovirusvaccine, only to discover to his horror that his cell line had been invaded and taken over by the aggressive cervical cancer virus known as HeLa.

I also learnt that DNAfragments contaminating vaccinelots might be from dead cells but nevertheless remained extremely active and dangerous. Dr Golding feared they might combine with other genetic codes contaminating the vaccine lots - and thus create a mutant viral strain that could even get in the individual doses of vaccine.

The removal of this contaminating DNA has proved impossible. The US government in 1986 recommended a weight limit for contaminating DNAof 100 picograms per vaccine dose. But the manufacturers could not meet this safety recommendation, as was explained at this Workshop. Their failure again led the government to relax its standards, applying the 100 picograms limit solely to vaccines produced from cancerous cells, and allowing one hundred times as much contaminating DNA(10 nanograms) in vaccinesproduced on other types of cells. But the meeting was told that vaccine manufacturers now admitted they could not meet even this lower standard of ‘purity.' Thus high levels of hazardous DNA pollution remain in many vaccines.”

So, you must be wondering why you haven't been told about this before.
How do you feel about going for a booster vaccine right now? An annual flu shot?

Okay friends... thoughts, comments? How many of you out there have had vaccines? All of them? Some of them? Knowing what you know now, would you do it again, even if you haven't experienced any undue harm from them? Do you believe they've "helped" you? "Protected" you?  Have you vaccinated your children? If so, would you do it again?
Do you think that vaccines are really that important against the spread of disease? Would the large majority of us do well without being vaccinated?
Yes, no, why, why not? 

Monday, January 4, 2010

When you tell a lie long enough.....  --check out this brilliant cartoon by Liam Scheff.  ---then check out some "living proof". Make sure to click on each picture for the dates and comments.  ---then go here to read my story in full.

Saturday, January 2, 2010

Playing Biological Roulette

   "Mixing synthetic chemicals in our bodies has become tantamount to playing with a chemistry set without an instruction manual. During a speech before the 1994 conference of the American College for the Advancement of Medicine, an internationally recognized expert in toxicology, Samuel Epstein, predicted that one-third of us will get cancer in our lifetimes as a result of this chemical experiment. A decade later other cancer researchers increased the odds to one out of every two of us being diagnosed with cancer at some point in our lives.
   A cancer study compiled in 2005 by three medical science researchers at the University of Massachusetts provided a half century of data showing the pattern of connections between synthetic chemical production and higher rates of cancer. From 1950 to 2001 the incidence for all types of cancer in the United States increased by 85%, and that was the age-adjusted rate, which means the increase has nothing to do with people living longer. The fastest-growing rate of cancer for any age group over the past two decades has been among children, who cannot be accused of having smoked or partied or worked or stressed themselves into a diseased state.
   Since 1950,  the explosive growth in certain types of cancer has become mind-numbing. Skin melanoma cases are up 690%. Prostate cancer up 286%. Thyroid cancer up 258%. Non-Hodgkin's lymphoma up 249%. Liver and intrahepatic cancer up 234%. Kidney and renal pelvis cancers up 182%, and the list goes on. What triggered this huge explosion in cases of cancer?
   In his speech Dr. Epstein laid the blame squarely on the synthetics chemical revolution. He described how in 1940, by using new technology, synthetic chemicals were created that had never existed before. With the advent of thermal and catalytic cracking, it became possible to take petroleum and isolate particular chemicals and then, with a process of molecular splicing and recombination to produce andy chemical you wanted to produce.
   "In 1940, we produced about one billion pounds of new synthetic chemicals. By 1950, the figure had reached fifty billion pounds, and by the late 1980's, it became 500 billion pounds, including a wide range of toxic, carcinogenic, neurotoxic and other chemicals. Most of these chemicals have never been tested for toxic, carcinogenic or environmental effects."
   The National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, a branch of the federal government's National Institues of Health, has posted a fact sheet on its Web site that makes a rather remarkable admission. It is a direct challenge to the synthetic belief system's assurances that having these chemicals in our bodies and in the environment is normal and a benign additive to nature, and to our own nature: (italics mine)
   "We're stuggling to look at where genetics and the environment interact in the human cell, causing a molecule to change that starts a kind of chain reaction leading to disease. Scientists liken the changes to a cascade---a series of ever-larger waterfalls of cellular changes---that may lead to cancer. Parkinson's, arthritis, heart disease, or other diseases. Though we still do not understand the root causes of many of these serious chronic diseases, we suspect they can be caused or triggered by chemicals and other environmental exposures from years before."
   Within the collection of essays that form the book Ecological Medicine, published in 2004, is this forthright and brilliant summary by Kenny Ausubel of the dilemma that challenges all of us: "For decades, the scientific and medical community has accepted that a certain amount of pollution and disease s just the price we have to pay for modern life. This is called the 'risk paradigm,' and it essentially means that it is society's burden to prove that new technologies and industrial processes are harmful, usually one chemical or technology at a time. The risk paradigm assumes that there are 'acceptable' levels of contamination the earth and our bodies undistracted by the 'irrational' fears and demads of the public. The 'science' behind it is driven by large commercial interests and can hardly be considered impartial or in the public interest. Viewed with any distance at all, the risk paradigm is at best a high-stakes game of biological roulette with all the cambers loaded."
   We are confronted every day of our lives by chemical toxins with the potential to harm us. It seems as if there is no escape. So let's be honest with each other. By willingly participating in the risky synthetics paradigm we have implicitly agreed to a social contract in which we are each playing the role of guinea pig in a continuing chemical and genetic experiment.
   Some of us will sicken or die during this experiment. A few of us might mutate and evolve effective immune system defenses. Others of us will decide to not longer play this deadly game. Once the genie of awareness is set loose, once denial is penetrated and the truth is spoken, none of us have an excuse to play the innocent victim anymore."

Excerpt from "The Hundred Year Lie" by Randall Fitzgerald

So I ask you today, just exactly how many chemicals do you allow to be put in to and on your body? Think about all of your personal care products; shampoo, lotions, toothpaste, cleaning products, laundry and washing soaps, synthetics, pharmaceuticals, fluoride and chlorine in your water, herbicides/pesticides/fungicides and other chemicals in your food, hormones/steroids/antibiotics in your food  supply, chemicals for your yard or inside your home, air fresheners in your car, dry cleaning chemicals, drugs, alcohol.......and the list goes on.
We choose to consume products called "food", that are nothing of the sort. 'Foodstuffs' in boxes that can sit on shelves for decades, things in plastics, or cans, filled with BPA's and other chemicals. And don't get me started on "fastfood".

We wonder why we get sick? We wonder why our immunity is low? Why do some people experience what has been classified as "AIDS", which is basically just low immunity. Why the explosion of cancers since the early 1900's, when most of the chemicals and poisons did not exist?
Beauchamp had it right,  "The primary cause of disease is in us, always in us."
And Pasteur's dying words, "Beauchamp is right, the germ is nothing, and the terrain is everything."

I'm asking all of my readers to start the new year off right. Evaluate your terrain. Evaluate your kitchen cupboards, refrigerators, medicine cabinets, homes, diets, and lifestyles.
See what you can do this year to clean up your "living home", your terrain, your inner ecosystem. Your body, and your health, will thank you for it.