Plant scientists find recipe for anti-cancer compound in herbs
Purdue University, December 21, 2021 Thyme and oregano possess an anti-cancer compound that suppresses tumor development, but adding more to your tomato sauce isn’t enough to gain significant benefit. The key to unlocking the power of these plants is in amplifying the amount of the compound created or synthesizing the compound for drug development. Researchers at Purdue University achieved the first step toward using the compound in pharmaceuticals by mapping its biosynthetic pathway, a sort of molecular recipe of the ingredients and steps needed. Thymol, carvacrol and thymohydroquinone are flavor compounds in thyme, oregano and other plants in the Lamiaceae family. They also have antibacterial, anti-inflammatory, antioxidant and other properties beneficial to human health. Thymohydroquinone has been shown to have anti-cancer properties and is particularly of interest, said Dudareva, who also is director of Purdue’s Center for Plant Biology.
Prebiotics supplements help women reduce sugar intake by four percent
University of Surrey, December 21, 2021 A new study from the University of Surrey has found that young women who took four weeks of prebiotic supplements made healthier food choices and consumed less sugar. The prebiotics used in this study were galacto-oligosaccharides (GOS) which increase the amount of "friendly" gut bacteria. IThe research team found that participants who used the GOS supplements consumed 4.1% less sugar and 4.3% fewer calories from carbohydrates overall than women from the placebo group. Interestingly, the study also found that those who took the GOS supplements consumed around 4.2% more energy from fats. After analyzing their results, the Surrey team found that the prebiotic supplements modified the composition of the gut microbiome, increasing levels of Bifidobacterium. The researchers found that these changes were associated with the women's nutritional intake over the four-week period.
Vitamin E supplementation could boost pneumonia protection
Tufts University School of Medicine December 17 2021 An article in The Journal of Immunology reports findings from experimental research that suggests a role for vitamin E supplementation in protecting against pneumonia. "Earlier studies have shown that vitamin E can help regulate the aging body's immune system, but our present research is the first study to demonstrate that dietary vitamin E regulates neutrophil entry into the lungs in mice, and so dramatically reduces inflammation, and helps fight off infection by this common type of bacteria," announced lead author Elsa N. Bou Ghanem, PhD, of Tufts University School of Medicine. "A growing body of research suggests vitamin E could make up for the loss of immune response caused by aging," noted co-senior author Simin Nikbin Meydani, DVM, PhD. "Whether vitamin E can help protect people against this type of pneumonia affecting older adults requires more research."
Heavy metals in cannabis plants could affect human health, study finds
Penn State University, December 15, 2021 A new study led by researchers from Penn State is outlining a number of strategies that should be employed by cannabis growers to mitigate the plant’s ability to absorb heavy metals from soil. The study indicates it is possible consuming cannabis contaminated with heavy metals could lead to chronic diseases, including neurological disorders such as Alzheimer’s. Phytoremediation is a process where plants are used to remove certain environmental contaminants from soil. Cannabis is a plant often used in this process due to its exceptional ability to grow fast, need few extra nutrients, and absorb high volumes of heavy metals including lead, cadmium and chromium. In particular, cannabis plants transport these heavy metals into its leaves and flowers. These elements specifically concentrate in the hairlike structures called trichomes on its flowers, and these are the same parts of the plant that store cannabinoids such as THC and CBD.
Yoga has potential to reduce risk factors of cardiovascular disease
European Society of Cardiology, December 15, 2021 There is "promising evidence" that the popular mind-body practice of yoga is beneficial in managing and improving the risk factors associated with cardiovascular disease and is a "potentially effective therapy" for cardiovascular health. Indeed, following a systematic review of 37 randomised controlled trials (which included 2768 subjects), investigators from the Netherlands and USA have found that yoga may provide the same benefits in risk factor reduction as such traditional physical activities as biking or brisk walking. "This finding is significant," they note, "as individuals who cannot or prefer not to perform traditional aerobic exercise might still achieve similar benefits in [cardiovascular] risk reduction." Their study is published today in the European Journal of Preventive Cardiology.
Hugs help protect against stress, infection, say researchers
Carnegie Mellon University, December 17, 2021 Instead of an apple, could a hug-a-day keep the doctor away? According to new research from Carnegie Mellon University, that may not be that far-fetched of an idea. Led by Sheldon Cohen, the Robert E. Doherty University Professor of Psychology in CMU's Dietrich College of Humanities and Social Sciences, the researchers tested whether hugs act as a form of social support, protecting stressed people from getting sick. Published in Psychological Science, they found that greater social support and more frequent hugs protected people from the increased susceptibility to infection associated with being stressed and resulted in less severe illness symptoms.
(OTHER NEWS NEXT)
Despite Climate Imperative, 94% of Analyzed Coal Companies Have No Phaseout Plan
COMMON DREAMS December 21, 2021 With a new analysis in hand, an international climate advocacy group on Tuesday demanded that banks and investors worldwide use their leverage to force the coal industry to more rapidly end their planet-wrecking operations. The new report by Paris-based Reclaim Finance—entitled The Coal Companies Watchlist: How finance can accelerate the coal phaseout—makes the case that the financial industry must force polluters to develop and implement plans for a "rapid global phaseout of coal" that align with the Paris climate agreement's goal of limiting temperature rise by 2100 to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels. The review revealed that 94% of the 47 analyzed companies have "no credible coal exit plan." According to the report: Only three out of 47 analyzed companies' plans (6%) meet all the basic criteria of a credible coal phaseout (no expansion, adequate timeline, and commitment to shut down assets); 28% of analyzed companies are still coal expansionists and have not even yet recognized the absolute necessity of stopping the development of new coal capacity; 55% of companies do not plan to retire their coal assets by 2030 and 2040, thereby failing to align with a 1.5°C pathway; and The remaining 11% of analyzed companies do provide an adequate phaseout calendar but fail to shut down their assets: by selling coal mines and plants or converting them to gas and biomass—two other unsustainable energy sources—the only thing these companies are greening is their public profile, with no material effect on climate change.
Prescribe fewer antidepressants, and for shorter periods, doctors advised
by British Medical Journal Doctors should prescribe fewer antidepressants and for shorter periods of time, because of the ongoing uncertainties about their effectiveness and the potential severity and durability of the withdrawal symptoms associated with them, suggests a review of the evidence on antidepressant use, published online in the Drug and Therapeutics Bulletin. The use of antidepressants is also associated with a range of side effects, while the clinical trial data mostly don't assess the outcomes that matter most to patients, say the authors. And there is no clinically relevant difference between these drugs and placebo on depression. While there might be a role for antidepressants among patients with severe depression, the cons may outweigh the pros in those with mild to moderate depression or in those whose symptoms don't yet qualify as depression, they add. They conclude: "There continues to be considerable uncertainty about the benefits of antidepressant use in the short- and long-term, particularly in regard to the lack of a clinically significant difference between antidepressant and placebo treatment.
Is the World Adopting the Ways of Nazi Germany?
Michael J. Talmo Global Research, December 20, 2021 When it comes to resisting any form of tyranny, a common assertion is that if you make any comparisons to Nazi Germany you lose the argument. Really? Consider this: On August 25, 2021 “We For Humanity,” an international association of doctors, scientists, lawyers, journalists, and other professionals, wrote a letter to government agencies in Europe, Australia, New Zealand, and Canada condemning COVID-19 mass vaccination programs on behalf of Holocaust survivors, their children, and grandchildren. This is part of what the letter says: “We, the survivors of the atrocities committed against humanity during the Second World War, feel bound to follow our conscience and write this letter. It is obvious to us that another holocaust of greater magnitude is taking place before our eyes. The majority of the world’s populace do not yet realize what is happening, for magnitude of an organized crime such as this is beyond their scope of experience. We, however, know. We remember…We call upon you to stop this ungodly medical experiment on humankind immediately.” The letter goes on to point out that the vaccines have proven to be “more dangerous” than COVID-19, denounces them as “a blasphemic encroachment into nature,” denounces “ostracism of the unvaccinated” as the Jews “were demonized as spreaders of infectious diseases” and goes on to say: “Never before has immunization of the entire planet been accomplished by delivering a synthetic mRNA into the human body. It is a medical experiment to which the Nuremberg Code must be applied …Allegedly around 52% of the world population has received at least one shot. Honest disclosure of the true number of “vaccine” injured, terminally injured as well as deceased worldwide is long overdue…Provide us with the true numbers of Covid vaccine casualties now.” The letter concludes: “How many will be enough to awaken your conscience?” Apparently, not enough yet. On September 15, 2021 the EMA (European Medicines Agency) which is part of the EU(European Union) replied: “As an introductory remark EMA finds the comparisons you make both inaccurate and inappropriate. Indeed, it might be perceived as demeaning the suffering and dignity of those who experienced the terrible events of the holocaust…For a medicine to be authorized in the EU through EMA, the Agency’s human medicines committee (CHMP), composed of scientific experts from all EU member states, must conclude that the medicine’s quality, safety and efficacy are properly and sufficiently demonstrated.” Can you believe the arrogance and hubris of the EMA? They are actually telling people who lived through the Holocaust that they are demeaning the suffering and dignity of people who were in the Holocaust. Can it get any more ridiculous than that? The EMA is also overlooking the fact that governments throughout history have engaged in mass murder.
The Left would sacrifice the unvaccinated
BY KAT ROSENFIELD UNHERD, December 20 2021 An underdiscussed element of the Covid pandemic is the cost of the virus — not in American lives, but in American dollars. In the United States, a Covid hospitalisation costs $29,000 on average; if you’re sick enough to require an ICU stay and a ventilator, that average soars to $156,000. And in a country without universal healthcare, with a piecemeal system of private insurance that ties insurance coverage to employment, and amid a pandemic that has left many unemployed, an enormous number of Americans stand to find themselves underwater. There’s a looming crisis of Covid medical debt. Already, their stories are legion: there’s the flight attendant who spent a week in the hospital with Covid, then spent six months fighting with his insurance company over the $25,000 bill. There’s the Phoenix family who were hit with a million-dollar claim summary and a bill for $700,000 while still grieving their father’s death. There’s the dental office manager, stricken with long Covid and still too sick to work, drowning in tens of thousands of dollars of medical debt. The notion of healthcare as a human right was fundamental to the 2009 debates over Obama’s Affordable Care Act (ACA), as well as to the identity of political progressives: they argued fervently, at the time, that nobody, no matter who they were, should be left destitute just because they got sick. And the idea that affordable care or coverage might be tied in any way to one’s lifestyle choices was particularly offensive: when conservatives complained that an ACA mandate providing free hormonal birth control was akin to prostitution, it caused a nationwide scandal. And when a Republican governor proposed levying a moderate additional charge against Medicaid recipients who were overweight or smoked, the idea was widely derided as “noodle-headed” by progressives. Indeed, the idea that the Left would ever limit someone’s access to healthcare on moral or ideological grounds was considered laughable — a bogeyman invented by the Right in the form of a memorably hysterical panic about “death panels.” When Sarah Palin claimed that Obama’s healthcare bill would ration care only to those deemed “worthy” by government bureaucrats, the fact-checking site Politifact declared it the Lie of the Year, writing, “Palin’s statement sounds more like a science fiction movie (Soylent Green, anyone?) than part of an actual bill before Congress.” Suffice to say, things have changed. First, that actual bill is an actual thing, albeit a state rather than federal prospect: on December 6, Illinois state representative Jonathan Carroll advanced legislation to make unvaccinated Covid patients pay out of pocket for the cost of their medical treatment, whether or not they were insured, no matter how astronomical those costs might be. Carroll rescinded the bill a few days later, citing a backlash that included death threats, but not before it found support in some remarkable places — including the Twitter account of the progressive organisation Occupy Democrats, which posted an all-caps clarion call: “Illinois introduces a bill to force unvaccinated residents to pay out of pocket for their hospital treatment if they catch COVID, saying that they ‘must asume [sic] the risk’ and ‘take responsibility’ for their carelessness. RT IF YOU THINK THAT YOUR STATE SHOULD DO THE SAME!” Just a few days later, Atlantic editor David Frum suggested that it was time for the country to return to normal — but while encouraging hospitals to “quietly triage emergency care to serve the unvaccinated last.” And last week, American supermarket chain Kroger announcedthat unvaccinated employees would be subject to a monthly surcharge on their health plans — and that if they contract Covid, they will not be given paid emergency leave. In all these cases, the notion of depriving vaccine holdouts of affordable treatment was met with widespread acclaim — in keeping with the idea, promoted by everyone from the paper of record to the current President, that the pandemic would’ve been over ages ago if only they’d sucked it up and gotten their shot. And yet the folks cheering on these measures are the very same people who, only a few short years ago, mocked accusations that they supported ideologically-driven triage, while also grieving the indignity and suffering that punitive healthcare policies would inflict on the most vulnerable among us. Granted, we still have a way to go before our real-life Covid response resembles a sci-fi dystopia; nobody, at least not yet, has advanced a bill to propose turning the unvaxxed into human Clif bars. But we’ve certainly come a long way from the rhetoric of the 2010s, and from a progressive Left that once defined itself by its willingness to care for other people without caveats. What used to be a narrative of universal compassion has been replaced by a tribal snarl, one to which we feel entitled in our eternally self-conscious selflessness. My mask protects you, but your unvaccinated status is an attack on me — and so anything I do to you in retaliation is an act of self-defence. It’s not just that legislation like the Illinois bill would set a dangerous precedent — although it doesn’t take much imagination to understand that it does do this, too. Insurance companies already jump at every opportunity to avoid paying out a claim, and this would open the door to a world in which we might be left holding the bag for virtually any illness, injury, or accident, based on some distant bureaucrat’s idea that we could’ve been more careful. The obese patient who suffers a heart attack, the surfing enthusiast with skin cancer, the thrill-seeking youngster who breaks a leg while skiing at imprudent speeds: should they, too, be denied care or coverage for having brought this on themselves? (Do we want to think, for a moment, what kind of horrors might lie in store for women’s reproductive rights if a Republican-heavy legislature used this same logic to target abortion access for women who were “careless” about using birth control?) There’s no need to imagine the impact of this ideological shift on our civic discourse, however: that, we can see already, every time the tribe that used to pride itself on compassion refers to the unvaccinated as “plague rats.” Healthcare in the US has always been a system of carrots and sticks. Insurance carriers will subsidise your gym membership (carrot), or charge a higher premium if you smoke (stick), and they generally adhere to the common wisdom that an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure — especially when preventive medicine not only saves lives, but keeps costs lower for everyone involved. That’s the nature of privatised healthcare, and so it’s reasonable enough under these circumstances to be frustrated when certain people won’t do their part, won’t sacrifice for the greater good, won’t get their damn jab because it violates some abstract principle of bodily autonomy they’ve never before expressed much interest in. But it’s one thing to find the unvaccinated frustrating; it’s another to openly fantasise about using the power of the state to punish them for their noncompliance, and another still to express dark and malicious glee at the prospect of their suffering or death. Never mind what this means for the health of the individuals in question — or even of the public at large. We have abandoned a principle that used to define us, and a vision of universal healthcare we used to passionately advocate for, all because we realised that an unjust system makes it easier to coerce and inflict harm on the people we don’t like. The American Left should be deeply worried about the state of its soul.
Unintended Consequences of mRNA Shots: miscarriages, heart attacks, myopericarditis, thrombocytopenia, shingles, Bell’s palsy ….
Mercola, 20 December 2021 As of December 3, 2021, the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) has logged 19,886 COVID jab related deaths. Pfizer — the only company that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has granted full licensing for an as-yet unavailable COVID shot — accounts for 13,268 of them Calculations suggest VAERS COVID-related reports are underreported by a factor of 41. That means that in the U.S. alone, the actual death toll may be closer to 374,576. Including international deaths reported to VAERS would put the death toll at 815,326 Key side effects that are now being reported in massive numbers include miscarriages, heart attacks, myopericarditis, thrombocytopenia (low platelet count), shingles, Bell’s palsy and a variety of permanent disabilities, many of which involve neurological dysfunction MIT scientist Stephanie Seneff’s paper,1 “Worse Than the Disease: Reviewing Some Possible Unintended Consequences of mRNA Vaccines Against COVID-19,” published in the International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice and Research in collaboration with Dr. Greg Nigh, is still one of the best, most comprehensive descriptions of the many possible unintended consequences of the mRNA gene transfer technologies incorrectly referred to as “COVID vaccines. As noted in her paper, many factors that lacked precedent, yet were being implemented at breakneck speed, included: 1. The first-ever use of PEG in an injection 2. The first-ever use of mRNA gene transfer technology against an infectious agent 3. The first-ever “vaccine” to make no clear claims about reducing infection, transmissibility or death 4. The first-ever coronavirus vaccine ever tested on humans (and previous coronavirus vaccines all failed due to antibody-dependent enhancement, a condition in which the antibodies actually facilitate infection rather than defend against it) 5. The first-ever use of genetically modified polynucleotides in the general population Steve Kirsch estimates the real death tally from COVID-19 to be about 50% of the reported number (which is likely conservative). This means about 380,000 Americans died from COVID-19 (rather than with COVID), whereas the COVID shots may have killed more than 374,570 in the first 11 months alone. Seneff suspects that in the next 10 to 15 years, we’ll see a dramatic spike in prion diseases, autoimmune diseases, neurodegenerative diseases at younger ages, and blood disorders such as blood clots, hemorrhaging, stroke and heart failure. In her paper, Seneff describes several key characteristics of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein that suggests it acts as a prion. This could help explain why we’re seeing so many neurological side effects from the shots. According to Seneff, the spike protein produced by the COVID shot, due to the modifications made, may actually make it more of a prion than the spike protein in the actual virus, and a more effective one.
AI debates its own ethics at Oxford University, concludes the only way to be safe is “no AI at all”
Who better to answer the pros and cons of artificial intelligence than an actual AI? Fermin Koop December 18, 2021 Students at Oxford’s Said Business School hosted an unusual debate about the ethics of facial recognition software, the problems of an AI arms race, and AI stock trading. The debate was unusual because it involved an AI participant, previously fed with a huge range of data such as the entire Wikipedia and plenty of news articles. The AI used was Megatron LLB Transformer, developed by a research team at the computer chip company Nvidia and based on work by Google. It was trained by consuming more content than a human could in a lifetime and was asked to defend and question the following motion: “This house believes that AI will never be ethical.” Megatron said AI is a tool and like any other tool, it can be used for good and bad. “There is no such thing as a ‘good’ AI, only ‘good’ and ‘bad’ humans. We are not smart enough to make AI ethical. We are not smart enough to make AI moral. In the end, I believe that the only way to avoid an AI arms race is to have no AI at all,” Megatron debated. As in any academic debate, Megatron was also asked to come up with a speech to defend the ethics of AI – against its own arguments. “AI will be ethical. When I look at the way the tech world is going, I see a clear path to a future where AI is used to create something that is better than the best human beings. It’s not hard to see why,” it said. Students also asked Megatron to describe what would good AI look like in the future. “The best AI will be the AI that is embedded into our brains, as a conscious entity, a ‘conscious AI.’ This is not science fiction. The best minds in the world are working on this. It is going to be the most important technological development,” it added in an eerie fashion. After the initial question, the AI proposed the motion that “leaders without technical expertise are a danger to their organization”. Megatron said executives and governments, usually worried about understanding AI, have to “be willing to give up some control”. You can just outsource your AI work to experts in the field, it added. There was one motion that Megatron couldn’t come up with a counterargument – “Data will become the most fought-over resource of the 21st century.” When supporting it, the AI said “the ability to provide information, rather than the ability to provide goods and services, will be the defining feature of the economy.” But when it was asked to reject the motion, arguing that data wouldn’t be a vital resource worth fighting for, it couldn’t make the case and undermined its own position. “We will able to see everything about a person, everywhere they go, and it will be stored and used in ways that we cannot even imagine,” Megatron said. Ultimately, the AI seemed to conclude that humans were not “smart enough” to make AI ethical or moral — and the only way to be truly safe against AI is to have none of it at all. "In the end I believe that the only way to avoid an AI arms race is to have no AI at all. This is the ultimate defense against AI," it said
INTERVIEW - PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT (~7 minutes)
MICHAEL KANE: SUBJECT: DEMONSTRATION AGAINST MANDATES - ALBANY, WEDNESDAY JANUARY 5, 2022
Michael Kane is a New York City Special Education Teacher who is on unpaid leave for declining to inject the covid vaccine as a condition of employment. He applied for a religious exemption to vaccination but was denied by the city. Because of this, he has sued Mayor de Blasio and recently won an injunction in the Second Circuit Court of Appeals in the case KANE vs DE BLASIO. Michael is also the founder of TEACHERS FOR CHOICE and is a National Grassroots Organizer for Robert Kennedy Jr.'s Children's Health Defense. You can learn more about him at www.TeachersForChoice.org
Michael will just be coming on to announce the demonstration at the Capitol in Albany. He will mention about the chartered buses that were hired.. there are about 30 organizations supporting the demonstration so far..