Pediatricians Now Advised ‘It’s Dangerous to Call Breastfeeding Natural’

Authors Jessica Martucci, Ph.D., and Anne Barnhill, Ph.D., published a short essay3 in the journal Pediatrics, in which they discuss the use of the word “natural” to describe breastfeeding. Their argument is against using the word and built on a previous publication from the Nuffield Council on Bioethics.4

The 109-page Nuffield Council report attempts to classify and understand how the term “natural” may affect an individual’s process in making decisions about health care. They stated:5

“Commending, praising or [favoring] something on the basis of its being natural, or [criticizing], condemning or disapproving of something on the grounds that it is unnatural connects the notion of what is natural with value.”

Using this as a basis for their argument, the authors proceed to recommend the term “natural” not be used as pediatricians encourage new mothers to breastfeed. It is almost opposite of published breastfeeding initiatives from the American Academy of Pediatrics,6 which state:7

“Breastfeeding and human milk are the normative standards for infant feeding and nutrition. Given the documented short- and long-term medical and neurodevelopmental advantages of breastfeeding, infant nutrition should be considered a public health issue and not only a lifestyle choice.”

It appears the authors’ underlying assumption is that public health initiatives must be built based on the hypothesis individuals cannot differentiate between what is natural or normal and what is healthy. The authors propose:8

“Promoting breastfeeding as “natural” may be ethically problematic and, even more troublingly, it may bolster this belief that “natural” approaches are presumptively healthier. This may ultimately challenge public health’s aims in other contexts, particularly childhood vaccination.”…

It’s perfectly UN-natural for profit-motivated, severely indebted and brainwashed strangers to insinuate themselves between children and parents.  To go beyond this and caution against natural parent-child behaviors which have been practiced and honed over millennia is downright pathological.

“Glyphosate-free Roundup” for Sale in Austria is Vinegar

Vinegar bottle and Roundup container

The active ingredient of Scotts’ herbicidal product is vinegar

A new type of Roundup is on sale in Austrian garden centres. It’s the same old bottle with the same familiar brand name and is marketed by Scotts, under licence from Monsanto. The only difference compared with the old-style Roundup is that the new one has a prominent label on the front saying it’s formulated “without glyphosate” (“ohne Glyphosat” in German).

On the back, on the ingredients label, the “active substance” is defined as none other than vinegar (“Essigsäure”).

Roundup 3L container label details - German

The time for glyphosate-based herbicides is over

With the question of the endocrine-disrupting potential of Roundup at real-world doses still unsolved and glyphosate classified as a probable carcinogen, it’s time to restrict or ban glyphosate herbicides, writes Dr Ramon Seidler, PhD

In February last year a group of international scientists published a consensus statement drawing attention to the risks posed by rising levels of exposure to glyphosate-based herbicides (GBHs), especially in the light of glyphosate’s classification by the World Health Organization’s cancer agency IARC as a probable carcinogen. The scientists noted endocrine (hormone) disrupting effects of glyphosate herbicides in test-tube experiments and called for more studies to clarify whether levels present in foods and the environment can cause such effects in living humans.

Endocrine disruptors (EDs) have harmful effects on experimental mammals that are widely used as human surrogates at concentrations as low as parts per billion (ppb) and below.

Later in the year, the New York Times reported that GM glyphosate-tolerant crops have significantly increased the use of glyphosate-based herbicides in the US. This news was closely followed by the publication of a report by Food Democracy Now and the Detox Project showing high levels of glyphosate residues in popular foods and drinks.

Regulatory inaction

Given the increasing risk to people posed by EDs, you’d expect regulators to be eager to take action. But sadly the opposite is true. The European Commission has been so tardy in regulating them that the European Court of Justice has declared that it has “unlawfully refrained from laying down rules”.

This issue of GBH exposures has gained urgency from a new study in rats, which showed that Roundup caused fatty liver disease at the minute concentration of 0.1 ppb given in drinking water over a long-term period. The glyphosate daily intake level from this dose was 4 nanograms per kilogram of bodyweight per day, which is 75,000 times below EU and 437,500 times below US permitted levels. The concentration of glyphosate in the drinking water (50 parts per trillion) was 14,000 times less than the concentration allowed in US drinking water (700 ppb).

Tests have shown that most Americans have glyphosate in their urine at ppb levels, suggesting a daily intake of around 1000-fold above the level that caused fatty liver disease in the rats. However, further research needs to be done to establish the glyphosate levels present in various body tissues, especially within endocrine organs like the pancreas.

It’s not certain that the fatty liver disease reported in the Roundup-fed rats was caused by the mechanism of endocrine disruption. But given the extremely low dose of Roundup that caused the effect and the known association between EDCs in general and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, endocrine disruption is one plausible mechanism. These observations call for urgent further research to be conducted to confirm Roundup/glyphosate-induced organ toxicity at real world levels of ingestion, and to provide insight into the mechanisms of toxicity, including ED effects.

Glyphosate herbicides and endocrine disruption

In 2009, the International Endocrine Society issued its first warning about the dangers associated with chemicals that interact with, take the place of, or inhibit or stimulate the action of natural human hormones (EDs). Today, based upon highly credible research published in peer-reviewed journals by scientists around the world, there is little doubt that GBHs are endocrine disruptors at the relatively high doses tested thus far. Their endocrine activity at low, realistic doses is still uncertain and requires further research.

According to the International Endocrine Society, there is strong mechanistic and epidemiological evidence that endocrine disruption plays a role in a wide range of maladies, including obesity, non-alcoholic fatty liver disease associated with diabetes, female and male reproduction abnormalities (abnormal sperm and reduced fertility), hormone-sensitive cancers in females, prostate cancer, thyroid diseases, and neurodevelopment diseases (IQ loss and hyperactive behaviour). ….

Hillary Clinton’s Top 100 Most Damaging Wikileaks Stories

About wikileaks

General FAQ

1. What is WikiLeaks?

          WikiLeaks is a non-profit organization created to protect whistleblowers and journalists who have sensitive materials to communicate to the public. They believe that transparent governments leads to better governments and less corruption. Led by Australian, Julian Assange, WikiLeaks was started 10 years ago with the goal of “opening governments” to help prevent criminal corruption. No information is leaked that could harm innocent civilians or those not involved in corruption.

2. Can we believe WikiLeaks?

          In short, yes. In its 10 year history, not one single leak has ever proven to be false, something WikiLeaks prides itself on. If the leaks were false, everyone implicated in them would have immediately and aggressively denied their claims rather than simply change the subject in speculating if Russia did it. For more hard proof within the emails, read this source.

3. Is WikiLeaks related to Wikipedia?

          No. Wikipedia can be edited by anyone, WikiLeaks cannot. The only thing they share in common are their first 4 letters. According to their website, “WikiLeaks combines the protection and anonymity of cutting-edge cryptographic technologies with the comfortable presentation style of Wikipedia, although the two are not otherwise related.”

4. Why are they only going after Hillary Clinton?

       10 years ago, WikiLeaks became famous for exposing elements of the Bush administration and the Iraq wars, and quickly became heroes to the left. This year, Hillary Clinton is being exposed because of the unprecedented levels of corruption throughout her history. Julian Assange, who is not necessarily pro-Trump, has stated that if any controversial Trump material is found, it will be published. However, everything controversial they have has already been said by Trump himself, according to Assange.

5. Why is the media barely covering them?

       Because almost 100% of mainstream media sources, as well as several prominent publishing news sources are implicated in the leaks in colluding with the Clinton campaign. These “news” sources (as you will find in the leaks below) have conspired to get Hillary elected, by only reporting anti-Trump smear pieces, manufacturing or exaggerating scandals, and hiding anything damaging to Hillary. Most are even donating big money to the Clinton campaign in order to keep the globalist status-quo. These revelations are the stories journalists dream of, but CNN, ABC, NBC, MSNBC, New York Times, Washington Post, Politico, Huffington Post, AP, and several more are all implicated in the leaks. This is why the media has been so one sided this election season, and why only 6% of people trust the mainstream media. Trump hasn’t helped with some past comments, but asCNN said here, the media is doing everything they can to help Hillary and give her a free ride.

6. Is Russia behind the leaks?

       Despite Hillary stating at the third debate that 17 intelligence agencies have said Russia is behind it, there is no proof that Russia is responsible for these leaks against her and the DNC. In fact, even Politico (who has been implicated in these leaks several times with Glenn Thrush) gave her claim a negative fact-check. There is no definitive proof, even from Hillary, only theories that it “could” be Russia. The reason for this constant claim by the media (as if it is 100% truth) is to pivot away from what is actually in the damning leaks and get your attention onto “evil” Russia. This immature approach by Hillary and the media, in conjunction with other recent foreign policy blunders, has led to extremely increased levels of tension with Russia, not seen since the Cold War. Julian Assange has strongly indicated that insiders in the DNC and US government are responsible for the leaks, including hinting at one DNC insider who was killed shortly after the DNC leaks. Regardless of who the hacker is, it does not take away from the validity of what is actually in the leaks.

The Top 100 Most Damaging Wikileaks (so far)

This list contains titles, links of proof, quotes from the links, and commentary from Reddit.

These are just SOME of the thousands of leaks exposing Hillary Clinton’s corruption, and mainly comprise of the Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta’s emails, as well as a few other sources (FBI docs, DNC leaks, audio leaks, etc.)

[following are only the titles of the leaks.  Go to the site for documentation -rw]

1. Obama lied: he knew about Hillary’s secret server and wrote to her using a pseudonym, cover-up happened (intent to destroy evidence)
2. Hillary Clinton dreams of completely “open borders”
3. Hillary Clinton received money from and supported nations that she KNEW funded ISIS and terrorists
4. Hillary has public positions on policy and her private ones
5. Paying people to incite violence and unrest at Trump rallies
6. Hillary’s campaign wants “unaware” and “compliant” citizens
7. Top Hillary aides mock Catholics for their faith
8. Hillary deleted her incriminating emails. State covered it up. Asked about using White House executive privilege to hide from Congress.
9. Bribery: King of Morocco gave Clinton Foundation $12 million for a meeting with Hillary, 6 months later Morocco gets weapons
10. “Spirit Cooking” (Warning: satanic/extremely graphic)
11. State Department tried to bribe FBI to un-classify Clinton emails (FBI docs)
12. Hillary caught on tape about rigging the Palestine election (audio)
13. Latinos are “needy”. Latino outreach is “taco bowl engagement”
14. Clinton campaign was in direct communication with DOJ regarding Hillary’s investigation
15. Bill Clinton receives $1 million “birthday gift” from ISIS-funding Qatar while Hillary was SoS, Qatar receives arms flow increases of 1,482%
16. Hillary cheated in debates: DNC head Donna Brazile caught giving MULTIPLE debate questions to Hillary
17. Hillary campaign prays for shooters in news stories to be white
18. Rigging the primaries against Bernie Sanders (DNC favored Hillary)
19. Rigging the primaries against Bernie Sanders (Hillary’s team)
20. Hillary was hateful, neglectful, above the law, “contemptuous” to her security detail, and “blatantly disregarded” security, (FBI docs)
21. Clinton Foundation schemed with Big Pharma: keep the price of AIDS drugs high in America and NO to cheaper generic versions
22. Democrats created fake Trump “grope under the meeting table” Craigslist employment ad in May 2016
23. Hillary’s camp excited about a black teen’s murder (to help her agenda)
24. Rigging media polls through oversampling
25. “Bill Clinton Inc.” How millions of dollars were raised for the Clintons. Blurred lines between personal and Foundation money
26. Hillary sold 20% of America’s uranium to Russia as SoS, Clinton camp worried that the deal is being investigated
27. Hillary is still privately against gay marriage
28. Acknowledging radical Islam is a real threat and a “serious problem for our future”
29. Admitting terrorists will infiltrate the Syrian refugee program
30. Hillary’s poor health (collapsing, memory loss, drug research)
31. Hillary took money from foreigners for campaign (illegal)
32. Hillary says climate change activists should “get a life”
33. Hillary is pro-fracking, calls it “a gift”, despite what she publicly says
34. Referring to a “Shadow Government” that protects Hillary (FBI docs)
35. List of reporters that Hillary wined and dined, including biggest journalists and pundits of CNN, ABC, NBC, MSNBC, NY Times, and
64. Entire “interview” with MSNBC’s Chris Hayes is staged, reading word-for-word
65. Hillary Clinton stole furniture from the State Department (FBI docs)
66. Hillary told Tim Kaine back in July 2015 he would be VP
67. Hillary tweaks her policies based on donors’ wants
68. “…go through all the emails and pull the official ones”
69. Hillary sends U.S. intelligence and war plans to Podesta’s hacked email
70. Hillary’s team admits to knowing of classified material in emails
71. NBC colluded with the Clinton campaign
72. Avoiding the press because of tough questions
73. Clinton Foundation did not pay for the services they received
74. Illegally coordinating with Priorities USA, a SuperPAC funded by George Soros
75. Conflict of interest: Bill was personally paid and received gifts from CGI sponsors
76. Man who ran ‘Bill Clinton Inc.’: “I’m also starting to worry that if this story gets out, we are screwed”
77. Podesta illegally has access to top secret information
78. Podesta connects to unsecure network where anyone could access
79. Hillary’s speechwriters: “I don’t mind the ‘backs of dead Americans’ because we need a bit of moral outrage.” (Benghazi)
80. Admitting Hillary failed foreign policy
81. The AP colluding with the Hillary campaign
82. Hillary camp using “propaganda”
83. Hillary’s camp says she has a “character problem” and is “arrogant”
84. Staging fake anti-Trump protest, conspiring with Univision CEO
85. Meeting to go over Cheryl Mills’ testimony to FBI/Congress
86. Journalist talks strategy with Clinton staff and asks for permission to write article
87. Violating campaign finance law
88. Proof that ‘Correct the Record’ (SuperPAC) is directly coordinating with the Hillary campaign against federal campaign law
89. Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg in direct contact with the Hillary campaign
90. Hillary’s team working with hundreds of MSM news pundits
91. Admitting Obamacare isn’t working
92. Hillary tries to hide her tiny rallies
93. Hillary had a mole working on Biden’s team
94. John Oliver caught colluding with Hillary’s campaign
95. Politico’s Glenn Thrush colluding with Hillary’s campaign, admits to being a “hack”
96. “We are finishing up the next round of TV scripts”
97. ‘The Huffington Post’ colluded with Hillary
98. Clinton campaign memorized their email cover-up script
99. Heavy press collusion over Cuba and Hillary’s health
100. Obama picked people in his administration from the suggestion list of CiTi bank advisor/Wall St shill

Important: How to Use this Site

Many of the articles here are linked to as footnotes for other articles, creating a branched tree-like network of nodes of information.    HTML links are one-way of course, in general  you can’t easily navigate backwards up the tree to find the most relevant articles that link to a given page without resorting to opening up another tab or window and using a search engine, a fairly laborious process that most people don’t bother with.

For instance if A links to B to support some point made in A, but you only stumble onto B, you  might not know anything about A but it might have valuable information that ties B into a larger web of knowledge and understanding.

With wordpress it’s easy to navigate backwards up the tree.   At the bottom of each article is a comments section which contains “pingback” links to the articles that link to it.  Very powerful.  Check it out.

(note: it seems this doesn’t always work, apparently a bug in WP.  But it works often enough to be useful)

I oftentimes revisit old articles to add new footnotes (pingbacks) which will appear in the comments rss feed which is linkable on the bottom right.   This feed is a convenient way to keep abreast of such edits.

Also of course the title bar lists the main sections such as the global site index (chronologically ordered), the references (links to enduringly important information, needs updating I know!  Use the contact form if you have suggestions) and the podcasts from the old radio show.

Finally, due to the dynamic nature of the internet, you’ll probably find that some of the older links and videos no longer work.   Many old pages can be found among the backups at (use the “wayback machine”).   The videos tend to be more problematic but two strategies for locating other copies is to search for the youtube hash (the gibberish at the end of the URL) or the video title.   You may find that someone has reposted the video elsewhere.   If you find a broken link and (more importantly) a backup for a broken link, please let us know via the contact form.