CDC Whistleblower ~ Vaccine-Autism Fraud Revealed

O Governo dos EUA sempre negou a ligação entre autismo e vacinas. No entanto, o governo americano secretamente recompensou no Juizado Especial da Vacina mais de 83 famílias com crianças autistas, admitindo desta forma a correlação entre autismo vacinas. Aqui está um estudo sobre esta questão.

Por mais de 20 anos, o governo federal negou publicamente uma ligação entre a vacina e o autismo, mas ao mesmo tempo, seu "Programa de Compensação por Lesões Causadas Por Vacinas" (VICP) pagou indenizações por danos de vacinas para crianças com lesão cerebral, convulsão e autismo. Uma nova investigação, com base em dados verificáveis do governo, traz novas informações ao controverso debate sobre a ligação entre as vacinas e o autismo. A investigação revelou que um número substancial de crianças recompensadas por danos da vacina também tinham autismo e que esses casos que já existiam desde 1989, um ano após o VICP ter sido formado.

O Diretor Executivo da SafeMinds, Lyn Redwood, comentou: "Este estudo muda dramaticamente o debate sobre autismo e vacinas. A questão não é mais se é possível que as vacinas causem o autismo? A resposta é clara. Agora, temos de perguntar: Quantos casos de autismo as vacinas causaram e como nós podemos prevenir novos casos?" O governo tem afirmado que "não monitora" a ocorrência de autismo entre aqueles lesados por vacina. O SafeMinds responde que não procurar é a maneira mais fácil de não encontrar coisa alguma. SafeMinds está pedido uma imediata investigação federal nos mecanismos de lesão nestas crianças em um esforço de proteger outras crianças contra futuros danos, e pede também a ação do Congresso para

reformar o VICP.

O estudo peer-reviewed analisou os casos de lesão por vacinas que foram recompensados monetariamente pelo Programa Federal por Danos de Vacinas. O estudo foi publicado duas semanas atrás no jornal acadêmico Pace Environmental Law Review. O estudo investigou aproximadamente 1.300 casos de lesão cerebral infantil como resultado de vacinas em que o Juizado Especial da Vacina deu o ganho de causa para os demandantes, em busca de referências ao autismo, sintomas de autismo ou desordens comumente associadas ao autismo. O estudo mostrou que 21 casos realmente mencionavam "autismo ou os sintomas como os do autismo" nos registros do tribunal. 

Os pesquisadores então identificaram e contataram as mais de 150 famílias recompensadas pelo tribunal para descobrir se as crianças tinham autismo. Eles foram capazes de encontrar um adicional de 62 casos (superior a 40% de sua amostra) totalizando 83 casos de autismo. Em 39 casos (47%) houve confirmação de autismo, além do próprio reporte dos pais.

O governo federal americano tem chamado o autismo de uma "emergência de saúde nacional", que afeta pelo menos 1 em cada 110 crianças e custa ao país bilhões de dólares a cada ano. Se uma parcela destes casos de autismo são induzidas pelas vacinas e houver evidências de que os funcionários fizeram "vista grossa", isto não pode ser tolerado. A recente tentativa do VICP de recusar mais de 5.000 casos do Omnibus Autism Proceedings é suspeito à luz destas novas descobertas com base em seus próprios registros.

Fontes:

* http://maralmeida68.blogspot.pt/

* [ESTUDO] Unanswered Questions from the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program: A Review of Compensated Cases of Vaccine-Induced Brain Injury (PDF)

* Vigilant Citizen: Government Secretly Settled 83 Vaccine-Autism Cases in the Last 20 Years

* Pr News Wire: 83 Cases of Autism Associated with Childhood Vaccine Injury Compensated in Federal Vaccine Court

* Safeminds Press-Release

E se o Ébola fosse uma arma biológica?

O que a seguir se escreve poderá ser considerado especulativo, mas que há coincidências com este vírus, lá isso, há. 

Vejamos:

Alguns acreditam que o Ébola ressurgiu após um acidente numa estação de pesquisas biológicas mantida pelo governo norte-americano em África. Essa base secreta, disfarçada como agência de saúde internacional, realizaria experiências com elementos perigosos para a eventual utilização num palco de guerra biológica. 

Activistas de movimentos pela erradicação de armas dessa natureza acreditam que possa ter havido uma quebra de protocolo de segurança que infectou funcionários dessa estação. Verdade ou mero boato, uma estação de pesquisas privada em Serra Leoa foi recentemente desactivada, contudo a ligação com o governo norte-americano não foi confirmada, será por isso mera especulação?

Poderá ser especulação, mas ainda mais intrigante foi o aparecimento quase que de imediato, de um "antídoto" contra o Ébola de nome "ZMapp" que é um soro que foi administrado de "imediato" a Kent Brantly, um médico norte-americano infectado com Ébola na Libéria, que se encontra numa unidade de isolamento em Atlanta, Estados Unidos. O soro provocou uma notável reversão da doença ao fim de uma hora e o estado de saúde do médico tem melhorado, segundo descreve a CNN.

Fonte: http://portugalglorioso.blogspot.pt

A perturbadora verdade por trás do surto de Ebola na África

Após décadas de uso de armas químicas e biológicas em guerras e experimentos, os governos ocidentais e suas organizações “internacionais” de saúde já deram razões de sobra para serem vistos com desconfiança e medo pelos países do Oeste africano

Original em New Eastern Outlook, tradução por Vinicius Gomes – da Fórum Semanal 143

No artigo do The Guardian, “Pânico com o vírus mortal do Ebola se espalha pelo oeste da África”, lia-se:

“Desde o surto na Guiné do mortal Ebola Zaire, em fevereiro, cerca de 90 pessoas morreram, na medida em que o vírus se propagou para países vizinhos, como Serra Leoa, Libéria e Mali. O surto lançou ondas de choque pelas comunidades que sabem pouco sobre a doença ou sobre como ela é transmitida. Os casos no Mali aumentaram o temor de que esteja se espalhando pelo Oeste da África.”

O jornal também relatou que os Médicos Sem Fronteiras (MSF) estabeleceram centros de tratamento na Guiné, e um deles chegou a sofrer um ataque dos locais, que acusaram o grupo de assistência de ter levado a doença ao país. Também é alvo de críticas o governo de Guiné, que se mostrou incapaz de lidar com a crise.

Esse ultimo surto, que ainda precisa ser contido e está sendo considerado pelo MSF como uma “epidemia sem precedentes”, ilustra diversas verdades inconvenientes a respeito do tratamento médico global, da resposta emergencial a surtos e da percepção que muitos têm de que o Ocidente está submetendo o mundo em desenvolvimento a uma “tirania médica”.

A Falha na preparação

Em 2012, quando os MSF concluíram sua resposta a um surto de Ebola em Uganda, escreveram: “A resposta de emergência dos Médicos Sem Fronteiras a um surto de Ebola em Uganda chegou ao final. A equipe médica entregou ao Ministério da Saúde de Uganda o centro de tratamento que havia montado no distrito de Kibaale.”

Lia-se também no texto: “Como parte de um plano de preparação para futuros surtos, os MSF também restauraram uma unidade de tratamento no hospital de Mulago, localizado na capital Kampala. ‘Uganda desenvolveu a capacidade de responder a crises de Ebola’, disse a coordenadora da MSF, Olímpia de la Rosa. ‘Nós podemos confiar na capacidade da equipe do Ministério da Saúde em assumir e gerenciar casos de Ebola, com todas as garantias de segurança.’”

Se os MSF e outras organizações internacionais podem treinar uma equipe médica ugandense e entregar ao governo de Uganda a responsabilidade de prevenir futuros surtos, por que não houve ações similares em países como Guiné, Libéria, Mali e Serra Leoa? De acordo com a Organização Mundial da Saúde (OMS), surtos de Ebola ocorrem “primeiramente em vilas remotas no centro e no oeste da África, próximos a florestas tropicais”. Por que, então, os países nessas regiões da África não foram preparados para tais surtos – principalmente pelo fato de que muitos dos países que financiam os MSF já estão fortemente envolvidos com os assuntos internos de seus assuntos internos?

Apenas a França tem gasto centenas de milhões de euros em suas operações militares no Mali – em 2013 foram quase 2,7 milhões de euros ao dia. O dinheiro investido em operações militares designadas para promover a hegemonia ocidental por todo norte e oeste da África – uma extensão da intervenção ocidental na Líbia – faria qualquer um acreditar que tais fundos deveriam também ser direcionadas para prevenir “epidemias sem precedentes” de doenças mortais como o Ebola, mas aparentemente as mesmas preparações feitas na Uganda foram negligenciadas em Mali (ocupada pela França), assim como em outros países tendentes aos surtos de Ebola.

Além de Guiné, os países mais afetados pelo surto do vírus mortal foram Libéria, Serra Leoa e Mali (Divulgação)

Enquanto o Ocidente posa como um chefe arbitrário da humanidade através de suas organizações internacionais, intervindo em crises pontuais, sua falha em preparar outras nações vulneráveis ao surto de Ebola usando a mesma fórmula de Uganda, no mínimo, abala a confiança pública. Esta é ainda mais enfraquecida quando o Ocidente intervém nesses mesmos países por ambições geopolíticas, sob a justificativa de “democracia”, “desenvolvimento” e “direitos humanos” e, em seguida, falha terrivelmente em atender a necessidades desesperadoras, como prevenção de epidemias, das mesmas populações.

Colabore com a mídia independente e tenha acesso liberado ao conteúdo da Fórum Semanal, que vai ao ar toda sexta-feira. Assine aqui

Desconfiança gera suspeita

Enquanto os MSF e o governo de Guiné alegam que as pessoas que atacaram os médicos estavam apenas em pânico, existem verdades perturbadoras a respeito do Ocidente e seu uso de agentes químicos e biológicos tanto para experimentos como parte do avanço de suas ambições geopolíticas – que resultou na genuína suspeita dos locais de que o surto de Ebola foi intencional.

A devastação deixada na esteira do uso de Agente Laranja na guerra do Vietnã e na contínua tragédia resultante do uso de urânio empobrecido no Iraque são dois exemplos extremos de como o Ocidente submeteu populações inteiras a agentes mutagênicos que irão ecoar nas gerações ainda por vir. Mais perturbador ainda é o papel que agências internacionais, supostamente neutras, tiveram ao encobrir tais atrocidades.

O artigo do Guardian, “Como a OMS encobriu o pesadelo nuclear do Iraque”, mostra como as conclusões da organização foram manipuladas por uma ciência politizada. Além do Agente Laranja e urânio empobrecido, a ONU e os EUA são acusados de ter participação em centenas de milhares de casos de esterilizações forçadas no Peru entre 1995 e 1997. Houve também uma matéria da NBC, intitulada “EUA pede desculpas à Guatemala pelos experimentos com DST”, onde lia-se:

“Os pesquisadores da área de medicina do governo dos EUA infectaram propositalmente com gonorréia e sífilis centenas de pessoas na Guatemala, incluindo pacientes mentais institucionalizados, sem o conhecimento ou permissão deles, há mais de 60 anos.

Muitos desses infectados eram encorajados a passar a doença para outros, como parte do estudo. Cerca de um terço dessas pessoas nunca conseguiram tratamento adequado”.

Mais perturbadoras ainda são as palavras dos políticos e lobistas do Ocidente: a ideia de usar armas biológicas em alvos geneticamente escolhidos foi mencionada no Projeto Neoconservador para um Novo Século (PNAC, sigla em inglês) de 2000: “Remontando as Defesas da América”, no qual lia-se em algumas partes:

“A proliferação de mísseis balísticos e veículos aéreos não-tripulados tornarão muito mais fácil projetar um poder militar ao redor do mundo. As próprias munições estão ficando cada vez mais precisas, enquanto novos métodos de ataque – eletrônicos, não-letais, biológicos – estarão amplamente mais disponíveis.

Como a conclusão do processo de transformação pode levar décadas, a arte de se guerrear no ar, na terra e no mar estará muito diferente do que é hoje e o ‘combate’ provavelmente se dará em novas dimensões: no espaço, no ‘cyber-espaço’ e talvez no mundo dos micróbios. 

E formas avançadas de tecnologia de guerra biológica que podem ‘alvejar’ genótipos específicos podem transformar o arsenal biológico do reino do terror em uma ferramenta politicamente útil.”

Helicóptero dos EUA espalhando o “Agente Laranja”, durante a Guerra do Vietnã, As consequências dessa arma química são sentidas até hoje pela população vietinamita (Wikimedia Commons)

Quando lobistas dão declarações dizendo “formas de guerra biológica que podem ‘alvejar’ genótipos específicos” como “ferramentas politicamente úteis”, frente a seu comprovado histórico de utilização de agentes químicos e biológicos em outras populações, percebe-se que não foi mero “pânico” o que levou à violência contra os trabalhadores dos MSF em Guiné.

Se o último surto de Ebola é parte de alguma conspiração ou não, talvez nunca se saiba. A questão central é a falta de confiança que se tem nas agências ocidentais quando eles tentam responder a uma crise. Desconfiança baseada não em medos irracionais, mas em de décadas de abusos, atrocidades, exploração e, principalmente, na contraprodutividade do que o Ocidente faz além de suas fronteiras.

E se o Ocidente falha em sua função como único árbitro da humanidade, o que deveriam fazer os outros países do mundo? A resposta é bem simples: devem construir um mundo multipolar com agências multipolares que colaborem entre si em vez de depender constantemente do Ocidente e de suas organizações “internacionais”. As nações do Norte e Oeste da África que enfrentam potenciais surtos de Ebola – ou então as nações por toda a Ásia que encaram temores similares quanto à Síndrome Aguda de Respiração Severa (SARS) – , precisam, elas próprias, encontrar parceiros internacionais. A estes não devem recorrer apenas em tempos de crise, mas para treinar e preparar seus profissionais de saúde para que sejam autossuficientes e capazes de lidar com surtos antes que eles ocorram.

Parte do que muitos chamam de “tirania médica” do Ocidente é a criação de circunstâncias nas quais os países da “periferia” dependem constantemente deles para ajuda, expertise e assistência. Tal dependência é contrária ao conceito de soberania nacional e ameaça a liberdade e segurança de indivíduos dentro da nação. Em Guiné, a inabilidade do governo em lidar com a crise permitiu que ela ganhasse proporções perigosas, enquanto as pessoas necessitavam da ajuda de agências estrangeiras nas quais simplesmente não confiavam.

Os países precisam chamar a responsabilidade para eles ao terem de lidar com surtos e nações parceiras deveriam guiá-los nessa tarefa, em vez de “segurar sua mão” a cada crise que surge. O último surto no Oeste africano ilustra o quão mal preparadas estão essas agências “internacionais” do Ocidente para proteger a população global, e como essa mesma população global estaria melhor assistida se procurasse meios de se proteger sozinha.

http://www.revistaforum.com.br/

Can GMOs Help Feed the World?

The claims about genetically engineered foods have been quite lofty. Monsanto and other proponents of biotechnology are fond of saying that genetic engineering is necessary if the world's food supply is to keep up with seven billion people and counting. They claim GE crops produce higher yields, solve pest and weed problems, are safe for humans and the environment, and are the cure for world hunger.

As John Robbins writes, if Monsanto's true goal is addressing hunger, then their seeds would be designed to fix the core problems that underlie the hunger issue, such as:[1]

Able to grow on substandard or marginal soils

Able to produce more high-quality protein with increased per-acre yield, without the need for expensive machinery, chemicals, fertilizers or water

Engineered to favor small farms over larger farms

Cheap and freely available without restrictive licensing

Designed for crops that feed people, not livestock

If GE foods were really a viable way to eliminate world hunger, then meeting these challenges would be a powerful argument in their favor, would it not? So, what does the science say?

Monsanto gets a failing grade across the board.

With nearly 100 million acres of GE food now planted worldwide, Monsanto's crops have yet to do one thing to alleviate hunger, particularly for the world's less fortunate. In fact, most of that acreage is devoted to growing corn and transgenic soybeans for livestock feed.

GE Crops Produce a Higher Yield ... Right?

No—their yield is actually lower. Overall, research has shown a 5 to 10 percent reduction in yield for GE soybeans versus the conventional variety. Other GE crops are performing equally poorly.[2]These plants are weak, malnourished and fail with the slightest environmental stress or drought. Agronomists and plant scientists have made far greater advances in yields with conventional breeding methods than with GE crops.

The yields of GE cotton have been particularly abysmal. Scientists have determined that growing GE cotton in the US can result in a 40 percent drop in income. In India, the situation is much worse with up to 100 percent failure rates for Bt cotton, leaving farmers in total financial ruin. According to the National Crime Records Bureau of India, more than 182,900 Indian farmers took their own lives between 1997 and 2007 as a result of GE crop failures—a staggering 46 farmer suicides each and every day.[3]

GE Crops Require Fewer Chemicals ... Don't They?

It turns out that GE crops fail miserably in this respect too. GE crops actually need more toxic chemicals, not less. Eighty-five percent of all GE seeds are engineered for herbicide tolerance—specifically, Monsanto's "Roundup Ready" cotton, corn, soy, and canola seeds. As a result, pesticide use has increased dramatically. Since the introduction of GE crops, more than 120 million pounds of additional pesticides have been used in the US.[4]

Sixty percent of GE crops are resistant to weed killers, fueling a dramatic rise in herbicide use—especially Monsanto's Roundup, which contains the extremely toxic chemical glyphosate. Roundup is now used in more than 80 percent of all GE crops worldwide, and the only one who benefits from THIS is Monsanto. They produce the seeds that require a massive application of an herbicide that they just happen to produce. How convenient for them!

Not only are these toxic chemicals being used far too heavily, but they are killing our bees and butterflies, polluting our waterways, destroying our soil, and creating resistant superweeds and mutant pesticide-resistant insects that we have no way to control.[5]

Mother Nature Hates Monocultures

Studies comparing large mechanized farms to small farms have shown that small farms doing multiple and succession plantings are significantly more productive than the monoculture plantings used in large mechanized farms. A report compiled by about 400 of the world's top scientists concluded our current agricultural system is unsustainable. We need farming methods that rebuild our ecological systems rather than demolish them. Organic farms consistently produce 80 to 90 percent higher yields than monoculture operations.[6] Genetic "bio-invasion" is the biggest risk organic farmers face today.[7]

Biodiversity is key to a healthy ecosystem—and therefore a healthy food supply. In a diverse population, some plants will have natural resistance and will fare better than others, saving the group as a whole from catastrophe. Poor soil quality is a serious problem for farmers across the globe. Our soil is depleting at more than 13 percent the rate it can be replaced due to our chemical-based agriculture system. Massive monoculture has also resulted in the extinction of 75 percent of the world's crop varieties over the last century.[8]

It can be safely said, then, that GE crops were not developed for the purpose of solving world hunger, but to ensure that everything we eat is owned by them. Their goal is maximum profit.

History has proven that artificially inserted genes can have unintended and disastrous consequences. The reality is that GE farming practices are not the solution to world hunger, but rather the very heart of the problem, virtually guaranteeing future crop collapses and subsequent famine. Sustainable, biodynamic agriculture is the real solution!

To learn more about GMOs visit the Greenmedinfo.com GMO research guide.

[1] Earth Island Journal, Book Excerpt: The Food Revolution by John Robbins

[2] Union of Concerned Scientists: Failure to Yield April 2009

[3] Infochange India 2008

[4] Mercola.com 2009

[5] Mercola.com 2011

[6] Agriculture at a Crossroads: Synthesis Report 2009

[7] Organic Consumers Association

[8] Growing Change (documentary, Simon Cunich) 2012

Source: http://www.greenmedinfo.com

14 year old Rachel Parent debates Kevin O'Leary on the issue of Genetically Modified Food

New study in the Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health: Five portions of fruit and veg a day are enough

A new study published on thebmj.com states that five portions of fruits and vegetables a day is optimum for lowering the risk of death from any cause, including cardiovascular disease. Contrary to another recent study, any portions beyond the initial five appear to have no further impact on mortality.

It has been established that the consumption of fruits and vegetables is important in reducing the risk of mortality from illnesses such as cardiovascular disease, but results between different studies have lacked consistency when it comes to the ideal amount to be consumed.

Different countries recommend different amounts to be consumed by the public. For example, while the US government have advocated consuming five portions of fruits and vegetables every day, the Australian government recommend eating five portions of vegetables and two portions of fruits.

A study that was published in the Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health earlier in the year suggested that people should be eating seven portions of fruits and vegetables every day. These findings conflict with new research, however, conducted by a team of researchers based in China and the US.

The American Cancer Society recommend including fruits and vegetables in every meal and for snacks.

Five portions or seven?

The team performed a meta-analysis of 16 cohort studies, examining the data of 833,234 participants - which included 56,423 deaths - and adjusted the findings to take into account differences in study design and data quality.

After bias was minimized in this manner, the researchers found that a higher consumption of fruits and vegetables was associated with a significantly lower risk of death from all causes, and in particular cardiovascular disease.

There was a 5% average reduction in the risk of death from all causes and a 4% reduction in the risk of death from cardiovascular disease for each additional daily portion of fruit and vegetables that was consumed.

In contrast with the study published in the Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, however, the researchers noted that after five servings of fruits and vegetables, additional portions did not affect the risk of death in any significant way.

The authors also did not see higher consumption of fruits and vegetables having much of an effect on reducing the risk of cancer. The authors say that, in light of this, "the adverse effects of obesity, physical inactivity, smoking, and high alcohol intakes on cancer mortality should be further emphasized."

Results 'support current recommendations'

The authors say that further studies will need to look more closely at specific types of cancer and the role of different groups of fruits and vegetables in affecting mortality for different causes. They also write that further studies are needed to confirm their finding of a five-a-day threshold in reducing mortality.

This is in part due to limitations in their analysis. Their findings may have been influenced by imprecise measuring of consumption due to reliance on food frequency questionnaires in most of the studies utilized.

As well as this, the cohort studies did not take into account other dietary factors such as the consumption of saturated fat or processed meat, which may have also had an impact on mortality rates.

At present, the American Cancer Society (ACS) recommend that adults eat at least 2.5 cups (5 portions) of fruits and vegetables every day, placing an emphasis on variety and the importance of whole fruits and vegetables, such as drinking pure fruit juice rather than drinks from concentrate.

The ideal amount of fruits and vegetables to be consumed daily may still be very much up for debate, but, according to the authors, "the results support current recommendations to increase consumption of fruits and vegetables to promote health and longevity."

Recently, Medical News Today reported on a study that suggested a vegan, low-carbohydrate diet could reduce the risk of heart disease

Source: http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/
http://www.bmj.com/content/bmj/349/bmj.g4490.full.pdf

.

Childhood obesity: is it being taken seriously?

Childhood obesity is not a cosmetic issue or something the child will just grow out of. Obese children tend to become obese adults, and there are many medical issues associated with obesity. Children are now taking the same type of medications as their parents to manage blood pressure, diabetes and cholesterol. This is frightening but true," Dr. Rani Whitfield, a spokesperson for the American Heart Association, told Medical News Today.

Over the past 30 years, the rate of childhood obesity has more than doubled in children and quadrupled in adolescents.

Unfortunately, what Dr. Whitfield says is no exaggeration. Over the past 30 years, the rate of childhood obesity has more than doubled in children and quadrupled in adolescents.

The prevalence of obesity in children aged 6-11 years increased from 7% in 1980 to 18% in 2012, while the percentage of obese adolescents aged 12-19 years soared from 5% to 21% in the same period.

These significant increases have led to a rise in obesity-related health conditions among children and adolescents. A 2007 population-based survey of 5-17-year-olds revealed that around 70% of obese children and adolescents have at least one risk factor for cardiovascular disease, and it has been well established that the condition can increase the risk of musculoskeletal diseases, diabetes and cancer.

The effects of childhood obesity can persist well into adulthood, and there is global concern that if rates of childhood obesity continue to rise, so will the prevalence of related medical conditions. This will not only put the health of future generations at risk, but it will also put an enormous strain on the economy.

Such concerns have led to the launch of public health campaigns in an attempt to tackle childhood obesity, such as the Let's Move initiative launched by First Lady Michelle Obama in 2010.

But how have rates of childhood obesity reached such a high? Is enough being done to tackle the problem? And are we taking childhood obesity as seriously as we should? Medical News Today investigates.

Why have we seen such an increase in childhood obesity?

Weight status in children is determined by body mass index (BMI)-for-age percentiles. This calculates a child's weight category based on their age and BMI. A child is deemed overweight if their BMI-for-age percentile is over 85% and deemed obese if it is over 95%.

There is no doubt that the main causes of childhood obesity are an unhealthy diet and lack of physical activity.

Amanda Staiano, PhD, co-chair of the Public Affairs Committee at The Obesity Society - the leading organization dedicated to the study of obesity - told Medical News Today:

"The availability of liquid calories and empty calories, combined with a deluge of fast food and junk food advertisements, have changed the way children eat. The majority of children fail to meet the recommended 60 minutes of daily physical activity and spend a huge amount of time sitting. The way we've structured our daily lives makes it hard for children to live healthily."

It is clear that lifestyle changes have had a significant impact on childhood obesity over the past 30 years. Children used to consume one snack a day, while 1 in 5 school-age children now eats up to six snacks a day.

Food and drink portion sizes are also bigger than they were 30 years ago. In the mid-1970s, a standard sugar-sweetened drink was 13.6 ounces, while it stands at 20 ounces today.

Furthermore, the Harvard School of Public Health in Boston, MA, state a child's daily calorie intake from sugary beverages rose by 60% between 1989-2008.

Although availability of junk food and drink has decreased in schools, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) state that more than half of middle and high schools in the US still offer them for purchase.

And the advertising industry, health care professionals believe, has not helped rates of childhood obesity, with past studies suggesting that children exposed to junk food commercials are more likely to become obese.

Levels of physical activity have also reduced over the past 3 decades. The CDC state that last year, only 29% of high school students participated in the recommended 60 minutes of exercise a day.

The CDC state that last year, only 29% of high school students participated in the recommended 60 minutes of exercise a day.

Gone are the days when children would run around and play for hours after school. Now, they are more likely to engage in sedentary behaviors, such as watching TV, playing computer games or using social media. Children now spend an average of 7.5 hours a day using entertainment media.

There are other factors that have been associated with the development of childhood obesity. Genetic disposition is one.

A 2012 study reported by Medical News Todaydiscovered two gene variants that researchers claimincrease the risk of childhood obesity. A more recent study by researchers from the University of Cambridge in the UK revealed that a gene mutation called KSR2 may cause obesity by causing continued hunger pangs.

But health care experts believe it is primarily unhealthy diets and lack of exercise that have caused rates of childhood obesity to soar. "Although heredity may explain some of the obesity epidemic, it does not justify the explosion we've had over the last 30 years," Dr. Whitfield told us.

Parents not taking childhood obesity seriously

It seems encouraging children to eat a healthy diet and exercise more is the route to success against childhood obesity. The aforementioned Let's Move initiative is focused on doing just that. But is childhood obesity taken seriously enough for such campaigns to work?

A recent report from the CDC found that 30.2% of children and adolescents in the US misperceive their weight status. Around 48% of obese boys and 36% of obese girls consider their weight to be normal, according to the report.

A 2013 study published in the journal Maternal & Child Nutrition found that 62% of parents of obese children perceive their child as being of a healthy weight.

Dr. Eliana Perrin, associate professor of pediatrics at North Carolina Children's Hospital, told Medical News Today:

"[Parents] often do not recognize when their children are becoming overweight. Because young children at a healthy weight look skinny and because children who are overweight are becoming the norm, parents often do not realize when their children are not on a healthy track. I think they only start to worry when obesity affects their day-to-day lives."

Dr. Perrin is the lead author of a study we reported on earlier this year that claimed many parents adoptinfant and feeding practices that increase a child's risk of obesity later in life.

She told us that parents need support to ensure their children adopt healthier lifestyles - something that is echoed by Staiano:

"Parents should be talking with their child's pediatrician about how to attain a healthy weight and make healthier choices with their child - even if the pediatrician doesn't bring it up. Parents are the best advocates for their children," she said, adding:

"Parents can play a role by speaking up at PTA meetings and parent-teacher conferences, advocating for healthier meals in daycares and schools, and demanding that the places children visit, such as schools and parks, are promoting healthy eating and physical activity."

Could schools do more to help tackle childhood obesity?

There is certainly an onus on schools to do more to encourage children to adopt healthy behaviors.

In the US, around 32 million students eat school meals every day, and for many of these children, school meals account for up to 50% of their daily energy intake.

Schools have already been subject to new guidelines for school meals, developed by the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) in 2012.

"Schools have a responsibility to create a safe, supportive place where the healthy choice is the easy choice," according to Staiano.

These guidelines require schools to have a higher offering of whole-grain rich foods, offer only fat-free or low-fat milk products, offer fruits and vegetables to all students every day of the week, limit calories based on the age of the student to ensure they receive the correct portion size, and increase focus on lowering the amount of saturated trans fat and salt in foods.

Earlier this year, we reported on a study led by the Harvard School of Public Health, revealing that since these guidelines have been launched, students now eat more fruits and vegetables.

But schools need to do more than just offer healthy foods, according to Dr. Whitfield:

"Schools play a very critical role in encouraging healthy behaviors in children. Many children spend a significant amount of time at school where both good and bad habits can develop. Physical activity and health education should be mandatory for those in kindergarten through high school."

Staiano noted that schools are under a lot of pressure to teach core subjects but agrees that healthy living is something they should be educated about. "Schools have a responsibility to create a safe, supportive place where the healthy choice is the easy choice," she said.

But she added that encouraging children to adopt healthier lifestyles should not stop at school. Staiano noted that during school breaks, some communities offer structured summer programs that offer physical activity and healthy snacks to children.

"Neighborhood soccer and softball leagues can encourage healthy competition and physical activity as well as positive social interaction," she added. "Attractive parks with equipment catered to a variety of age ranges can provide family-friendly activity to get parents moving, too."

Fight against childhood obesity remains 'an uphill battle'

Overall, it seems childhood obesity is receiving much more attention, and health care professionals are in agreement that obesity campaigns - such as the Let's Move initiative - have helped raise awareness of the issue.

Some US states have even seen a reduction in rates of childhood obesity. A report from the CDC revealed that between 2008-11, Florida, Georgia, Missouri, New Jersey, South Dakota, and the US Virgin Islands showed a minimum decrease of 1% in their childhood obesity rates.

But although such figures show we are heading in the right direction, Staiano told us there is still a lot more work to be done.

"Childhood obesity remains at a historical high," she said. "These declines are still within the margin of error, and it is important to continue following trends to see if the trends plateau or continue to go up."

"We are certainly making some progress," added Dr. Perrin, "but given the abundance of marketing to children of unhealthy foods, the lack of easy ways to incorporate healthy activity into children's usual days, and the simultaneous unfairness of obesity stigma, it's an uphill battle."

But it seems Michelle Obama, for one, is not giving up the fight anytime soon:

"In the end, as First Lady, this isn't just a policy issue for me. This is a passion. This is my mission. I am determined to work with folks across this country to change the way a generation of kids thinks about food and nutrition."

Source: http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/

Hira Ratan Manek: The man who proved that we humans can also carry out photosynthesis (441 days without eating)

About Hira Ratan Manek Hira Ratan Manek was born on 12th of September 1937 in Bodhavad, India, was raised in Calicut, Kerala, India, where he had his Mechanical Engineering degree from the University of Kerala. After graduation, he joined the family shipping and spice trading business and continued working there until he retired in 1992.

After he retired, he began to research and study the ancient practice of sun gazing in which he had been interested in since his childhood. This method was an old but forgotten method, which had been practiced, in the ancient times in many different parts of the world. (see Sun Gazing - History)

After working on this method for 3 years, he was able to re-discover the secrets of sun gazing. During his study, he was mainly inspired from the teachings of Lord Mahavir of Jains, who was also practicing this method two thousand and six hundred years ago. Other inspirations for sungazing came from ancient Egyptians, Greeks, and Native Americans.

Since June 18th, 1995, HRM has and continues to live only on sun energy and water. Occasionally, for hospitality and social purposes, he drinks tea, coffee and buttermilk. Until now, he had three strict fastings, during which he had just sun energy and only water and was under the control and observation of various science and medical teams.

The first of these fasting lasted for 211 days during 1995-96 in Calicut, India directed by Dr. C.K. Ramachandran, a medical expert on allopathy and ayurvedic medicine.

This was followed by a 411 day fast from 2000-2001 in Ahmedabad, India directed by an International team of 21 medical doctors and scientists led by Dr. Sudhir Shah (Dr. Shah's synopsis report) and Dr. K. K. Shah, the acting President of Indian Medical Association at that time. Dr. Maurie D. Pressman, MD also describes his experience with HRM in an article he wrote and later joined the team for the next observation on HRM.

After the excitement of the findings at Ahmadabad, HRM was invited to Thomas Jefferson University and University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia where he underwent a 130 day observation period. This Science/Medical Team wanted to observe and examine his retina, pineal gland and brain, therefore this observation team was led by Dr. Andrew B. Newberg, a leading authority on the brain and also featured in the recent movie "What the Bleep Do We Know", and by Dr. George C. Brenard, the leading authority on the pineal gland. Initial results found that the gray cells in HRM's brain are regenerating. 700 photographs have been taken where the neurons were reported to be active and not dying. Furthermore, the pineal gland was expanding and not shrinking which is typically what happens after mid fifties and its maximum average size is about 6 x 6 mm, however for HRM, it has been measured to be at 8 x 11 mm.

There have been many other sungazers who have achieved similar results and have volunteered to be tested, however due to lack of funding and other lifestyle restrictions the results have not been documented. The uniqueness of HRM is that he has surrendered his living body for observation and experiments to the scientific firmament for several extended periods of time. Although scientists and doctors have agreed that hunger is being reduced if not eliminated, due to the complexity of the various brain functions, they have not been able to explain how sungazing has such positive effects on the human mind or body, however more research is underway.

From 2002 HRM has been traveling all over the world to preach about the practice of sungazing so that humanity can heal their problems without any cost or guru. In 2009 HRM traveled to 80 countries in 210 days preaching and teaching this ancient solar methodology. Each year for the last last few years, HRM gives on average approximately 300 lectures on sungazing in different languages. Several interviews have appeared in leading media and TV all over the world including the BBC World Services and there are several documentaries on the HRM method of sungazing exhibited on different worldwide channels to encourage the the people's practice of sungazing. Additionally, many videos can be found on youtube as well as numerous links to Sungazing websites and blogs via google - in different languages such as French, Spanish, English, Hindi, etc. Many of them are listed in the Solar Links section of this site already for your perusal.

There are now Solar Healing Centers coming up all over the world and facilitating a global group of HRM Phenomenon practitioners. For those who are interested in learning more about the sun energy is an effective healing source, HRM recommends these books: - "Light, Medicine of the Future", by Jacob Lieberman - "The Healing Sun: Sunlight and Health in the 21st Century", by Richard Hobday.

Sun Gazing Process

We have a super computer in our bodies given to us by the nature, which is our brain. HRM (Hira Ratan Manek) calls it the “brainutor”. The brain is more powerful than the most advanced super computer. Each and every human being is gifted with innumerable talents, and infinite inherent powers by nature. Individuals should never underestimate themselves. Everyone is gifted. If we make use of these powers we can take ourselves to great levels. Unfortunately, these infinite inherent powers are programmed in that part of the brain that is largely dormant and goes unused. Even medical science agrees we hardly make use of the brain but about 5-7% – the most brilliant of humans like Albert Einstein is reported to have used only about 32% of their brains.

If we can activate the human brain and awaken these infinite powers inherent in ourselves then we can raise ourselves to higher levels. We can achieve any results we want. In order to operate the brain effectively, it needs to be activated. Being a holistic entity it needs a holistic power supply. Sun energy is the source that powers the brain, which can enter and leave the human body or the brain only through one organ that is the human eye. Eyes are the Sun Energy’s entry door to the human brain. 

They are also known as the windows of the soul. Recent research has found out that the eye has many functions other than vision. And more information is continuing to be revealed about the functions of the eye. The eyes are complex organs and they have 5 billion parts much more than a spacecraft that has about 6-7 million parts. By this, you can see the immense capacity of the human eye.

HRM asserts that the rainbow is in the eye not in the sky. The seven colors of the sun is only the reflection of what is in the eye. We can create a rainbow anytime we want – go to the garden, just observe below a source of flowing water as the sun moves above. There you will see the rainbow. Eye can receive the entire spectrum of the sunlight. It’s like having a glass window. Eye is the perfect instrument to receive all the colors of the rainbow. Since eyes are delicate parts of the body, we have to use them in such a way that they serve our purposes without getting damaged. 

Present day teachings and ideas such as don’t look at the sunlight at all --you will damage your eyesight; never go out in the sun as you will get cancer, are causing needless hysteria and paranoia. The more you are away from the nature, the more there is a cause for illness and you will automatically support global corporations. There are definite foolproof ways of getting the benefits of the nature without exposing ourselves to its adverse effects. It is also as intuitive as when the clouds gather we become gloomy. When we see the sun, we feel energetic. 

Source: http://solarhealing.com