Consensus Trance Read online

  Interference with the alpha wave of brain activity is threatened by the U.S. Defense Department’s High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program (HAARP), a gigantic electromagnetic frequency generator in Alaska:

  The alpha-wave frequency of the human brain is known to be between eight and twelve Hertz… The ionospheric wave-guide oscillates at eight Hertz, making it a good harmonic carrier of low-frequency sound (LFS) waves. In the June 17, 1976, issue of New Scientist, Dr. Frank Barnaby, Director of the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, warned that if methods could be devised to produce greater field strengths of such low-frequency oscillations, either by natural or artificial means, then it might become possible to impair performance of a large group of people in selected regions over extended periods.[62]

  Equivalent projects are the European Incoherent Scatter Radar site (EISCAT) in Tromsoe, Norway, and SURA in Nizhny Novgorod, Russia.

  Junk Food

  The Western diet is a “slow kill” which largely goes undetected. Three major components—sugar, caffeine, and hydrogenated vegetable oils—open the door for every type of disease by playing havoc with the body’s metabolism and immune system. On top of this are the neurotoxic and cancer-causing flavor enhancers which are added to the majority of processed foods and soft drinks, especially in the U.S. A report Adolescent Health[63] published by the British Medical Association in December 2003 stated that the present generation of children and teenagers will turn into the most obese and infertile adults in the history of mankind.[64]

  Sugar

  Refined sugar is extremely immune-suppressing and is the first item that should be cut out of the diet of anyone suffering from chronic illness or wanting to avoid it. A suppressed immune system opens the door to every serious disease, including cancer. Caffeine exacerbates this effect.[65]

  Hydrogenated Vegetable Oil

  For decades, the public health authorities persuaded the public that animal fats were bad and that they should consume healthier polyunsaturated fats found in vegetable oils. The current hysteria regarding cholesterol stems from research done during the 1940s and 1950s by the manufacturers of the new margarines and “healthy” fats made with hydrogenated vegetable oils. The suggestion was that cholesterol (specifically, LDL cholesterol) was responsible for heart disease, which was even then beginning to increase due to the relatively high-fat diet enjoyed by most westerners. This is not borne out by the facts. Western diets had always contained a relatively high proportion of red meat. In 1978, Dr. Mary Enig also proved that cancer rates were directly related to consumption of vegetable oils (including hydrogenated vegetable oils) and total fat intake, but not related to animal fat consumption. This research is often ignored by the cholesterol lobby despite the fact that it has been confirmed by other researchers. When food manufacturers heat vegetable oil at very high temperatures (250–400°c), and usually in the presence of catalysts, they undergo hydrogenation which turns them into saturated fats. The melting point of the oil is raised, turning many previously liquid oils into solids. Shelf life is increased as the resulting oil is less susceptible to degrading over time. All nutritional value in the original oil is lost. The texture of the resultant solid can be made to resemble that of natural animal fats. However, during this process, trans fats are formed, which are found to cause significant increases in blood cholesterol. Most processed foods in supermarkets that contain fat will therefore be laden with these potentially lethal trans fats.[66]

  Ischaemic heart disease (IHD) was virtually unknown until the 1940s, when hydrogenated vegetable oils were introduced. Now it is one of the biggest killers in the Western world. The dangers of trans fats were recognized as long ago as 1958, but the vegetable oil industry continues to badmouth safer natural animal fats.

  Excitotoxins

  There are a growing number of clinicians and scientists who are convinced that a group of compounds called excitotoxins play a critical role in the development of several neurological disorders. Excitotoxins: The Taste That Kills, by neurosurgeon Dr. Russell Blaylock,[67] describes how the common flavor enhancers monosodium glutamate, hydrolyzed vegetable protein, and aspartame/NutraSweet are extremely neurotoxic. They literally put holes in the brain and cause neurological diseases and cancer, as proven in an enormous body of scientific research. Brain tumors grow rapidly in the presence of the concentration of glutamic acid. Fully aware of these facts, the public health regulators have allowed hundreds of millions of people to consume excitotoxins for over fifty years.

  The sweetener aspartame would never have been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in 1981 without lobbying by G. D. Searle & Co. (since bought out by Monsanto), headed by Donald Rumsfeld. The FDA regulators who approved aspartame went on to take jobs in the multibillion dollar aspartame industry. In addition to the FDA Commissioner who left to take up a job with G. D. Searle, four other FDA officials connected with the approval of aspartame took positions connected with the aspartame industry between 1979 and 1982: the Deputy FDA Commissioner, the Special Assistant to the FDA Commissioner, the Associate Director of the Bureau of Foods and Toxicology, and the attorney involved with the Public Board of Inquiry.[68]

  The FDA once listed 92 adverse reactions from 10,000 consumer complaints and would send the list to all inquirers. In 1996, the FDA stopped taking complaints and now denies existence of the report.

  Worse still, regulations allow food manufacturers to label their foods “contains no flavor enhancers” if the MSG content is less than 99% pure. MSG can be described as anything the food companies like, such as “spice extracts” or “natural flavorings.”[69] Most savoury processed foods purchased in supermarkets contain either MSG or hydrolyzed vegetable protein.

  Soy

  In 1924, soybean production in the U.S. was only at 1.8 million acres harvested. Today, the soybean is America’s third largest crop (harvesting 72 million acres in 1998), supplying more than 50% of the world’s soybean demand. Most of these beans are made into animal feed and are manufactured into soy oil for use as vegetable oil, margarine, and shortening. For more than 20 years now, the soy industry has concentrated on finding alternative uses and new markets for soybeans and soy byproducts. It can now be found disguised as everything from soy cheese, milk, burgers, and hot dogs, to ice cream, yogurt, vegetable oil, baby formula, and flour. These are often marketed as low-fat, dairy-free, or as a high-protein meat substitute for vegetarians. But soy isn’t always mentioned on food labels. Today, 60% of the food on America’s supermarket shelves contain soy derivatives (i.e., soy flour, textured vegetable protein, partially hydrogenated soy bean oil, soy protein isolate).[70]

  All soybean producers pay a mandatory assessment of one-half to one percent of the net market price of soybeans. The total—something like $80 million annually—supports United Soybean’s program to strengthen the position of soybeans in the marketplace. Public relations firms help convert research projects into newspaper articles and advertising copy, and law firms lobby for favorable government regulations. imf money funds soy processing plants in foreign countries, and free trade policies keep soybean abundance flowing to overseas destinations. The push for more soy consumption has been relentless and global in its reach.[71]

  In October 1999, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration decided to allow a health claim for products “low in saturated fat and cholesterol” that contain 6.25 grams of soy protein per serving. The best marketing strategy for a product that is inherently unhealthy is, of course, a health claim.

  Two senior U.S. government scientists, Drs. Daniel Doerge and Daniel Sheehan of the National Center for Toxicological Research, broke ranks with the FDA, claiming that soy could increase the risk of breast cancer in women, cause brain damage and thyroid disorders, and cause sexual abnormalities in infants. They wrote an internal protest letter warning of 28 studies revealing toxic effects of soy, mostly focusing on chemicals in soy known as isoflavones which have effects similar to the female hormone oestrogen
.[72] They pointed to a major study of 3,734 Japanese-American men, which found that soy consumption was associated with increased brain shrinkage in middle age, increased cognitive impairment and Alzheimer’s disease.[73] Soy has the highest level of glutamic acid of any plant food, therefore, it has an excitotoxic effect on the brain.[74] In May 2003, the U.K. Government’s Committee on Toxicity of Chemicals in Food, Consumer Products and the Environment issued a report on phytoestrogens and health. It concluded:

  After reviewing the data and conclusions in the report relating to soy-based infant formula, SACN [Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition] considered that there is cause for concern about the use of soy-based infant formula. Additionally, there is neither substantive medical need for nor health benefit arising from the use of soy-based infant formulae.

  The Committee also noted that exposure to oestrogen in infants can lead to menstrual problems in females and low sperm count in males. “The amount of phytoestrogens that are in a day’s worth of soy infant formula equals 5 birth control pills,” says Mary G. Enig, phd, president of the Maryland Nutritionists Association. She and other nutrition experts believe that infant exposure to high amounts of phytoestrogens is associated with early puberty in girls and retarded physical maturation in boys. A study published in The Lancet in July 1997, by Dr. K. Setchell et al, found that concentrations of soy isoflavones in the blood of infants tested were 13,000–22,000 times higher than natural oestrogen concentrations in early life.[75]

  A study of babies born to vegetarian mothers, published in the British Journal of Urology in January 2000, indicated just what those changes in baby’s development might be. Mothers who ate a vegetarian diet during pregnancy had a fivefold greater risk of delivering a boy with hypospadias, a birth defect of the penis. The authors of the study suggested that the cause was greater exposure to phytoestrogens in soy foods popular with vegetarians.[76] Early maturation in girls is frequently a harbinger for problems with the reproductive system later in life, including failure to menstruate, infertility, and breast cancer.[77]

  In short, soy is certainly nature’s contraceptive and may also be affecting the sexual characteristics and sexual orientation of future generations. It is recognized that transsexuality is a medical condition caused by the effect of hormonal aberrations on the brain of the developing foetus. On 20 January 2005, the U.K. Civil Service website on Diversity reported:

  Estimates vary on the number of transvestite men in the population, owing to the lack of any research data whatsoever. Informed guesses have been as high as 1 in 20 adult males. Certainly, estimates between 1/100 and 1/200 would not be outrageous if judged only by the commercial success of businesses catering for the interests of those people. … Depending where you draw the line in what to count, between 1 in 200 and 1 in 1000 children are born with a visible or concealed ambiguity in their genitals, gonads and/or chromosomes which qualify them as intersex.

  Soy is not the only substance linked to sexual changes in humans. The National Geographic magazine reported that scientists are warning that chemicals in pesticides, plastics and other products are “endocrine disrupters,” which are having a serious gender-altering impact on both animals and humans.[78]

  Fluoride

  Water fluoridation has been rejected by most Western European nations, but the U.K. currently fluoridates 11% of its water supply, and the U.S. around 60%. The 2003 Water Act requires British water companies to fluoridate the water supply if requested to do so by the local Strategic Health Authorities. However, any decision by health authorities must follow public consultation at the local level.[79]

  A by-product of the nuclear power, fertilizer and other heavy industries, fluoride is more toxic than lead and only marginally less toxic than arsenic. Dr. R. Swinburne Clymer tried to expose the purpose of water fluoridation in his book, The Age of Treason (1957). He wrote:

  Charles Eliot Perkins, a research worker in chemistry, biochemistry, physiology and pathology … was sent by the United States Government to help take charge of the IG Farben chemical plants in Germany at the end of the Second World War. What follows are statements from a letter which Mr. Perkins wrote the Lee Foundation for Nutritional Research…

  “… In the 1930s, Hitler and the German Nazis envisioned a world to be dominated and controlled by the Nazi philosophy of pan-Germanism. … The German chemists worked out a very ingenious and far-reaching plan of mass control which was submitted to and adopted by the German General Staff. This plan was to control the population in any given area through mass medication of drinking water supplies. By this method, they could control the population of whole areas, reduce population by water medication that would produce sterility in the women, and so on. In this scheme of mass control, sodium fluoride occupied a prominent place.

  We are told by the ideologists who are advocating the fluoridation of water supplies in this country that their purpose is to reduce the incidence of tooth decay in children… The real reason behind fluorination is not to benefit children’s teeth. The real purpose behind water fluorination is to reduce the resistance of the masses to domination and control and loss of liberty. … There is a small area of brain tissue that is responsible for the individual’s power to resist domination. Repeated doses of infinitesimal amounts of fluorine will in time gradually reduce the individual’s power to resist domination by slowly poisoning and narcotizing this area of brain tissue and make him submissive to the will of those who wish to govern him.

  … Any person who drinks artificially fluorinated water for a period of one year or more will never again be the same person, mentally or physically.”[80] [Emphases added.]

  On 29th June 2000, Dr. William J. Hirzy testified before the U.S. Senate Subcommittee on WiLDLife, Fisheries and Drinking Water.[81] He represented the labour union of the professional toxicologists, biologists, chemists, engineers and lawyers working at the headquarters of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The union voted to oppose water fluoridation in 1997. These are some of the points Dr. Hirzy made to the committee:

  According to a study by the National Institute of Dental Research, 66% of American children in fluoridated communities show the visible sign of overexposure and fluoride toxicity, dental fluorosis.

  In 1998, the results of a fifty-year fluoridation experiment involving Kingston, NY (non-fluoridated), and Newburg, NY (fluoridated), were published. In summary, there is no overall significant difference in rates of dental decay in children in the two cities, but children in the fluoridated city show significantly higher rates of dental fluorosis than children in the non-fluoridated city.

  There is epidemiological evidence of elevated bone cancer in young men related to consumption of fluoridated drinking water.

  In 1990, the results of the National Toxicology Program (NTP) cancer bioassay on sodium fluoride were published, the initial findings of which would have ended fluoridation. But a special commission was hastily convened to review the findings, resulting in the salvation of fluoridation through systematic downgrading of the evidence of carcinogenicity. The final, published version of the NTP report says that there is “equivocal evidence of carcinogenicity in male rats,” changed from “clear evidence of carcinogenicity in male rats.” The change prompted Dr. William Marcus, who was then Senior Science Adviser and Toxicologist in the Office of Drinking Water, to blow the whistle about the issue, which led to his firing by EPA. Dr. Marcus sued EPA, won his case, and was reinstated with back pay, benefits and compensatory damages.

  Since 1994 there have been six publications that link fluoride exposure to direct adverse effects on the brain. Two epidemiology studies from China indicate depression of IQ in children. A 1998 paper shows brain and kidney damage in animals given the “optimal” dosage of fluoride, viz. one part per million. Another publication links fluoride dosing to adverse effects on the brains pineal gland and premature onset of sexual maturity in animals.

  In three landmark cases adjudicated since 1978 in Pennsylva
nia, Illinois and Texas, judges with no interest except finding fact and administering justice, heard prolonged testimony from proponents and opponents of fluoridation. None of them could find evidence supporting fluoridation but all were convinced of its toxicity. Judge Anthony Farris in Texas found that “the artificial fluoridation of public water supplies, such as contemplated by [Houston] City ordinance No. 80-2530, may cause or contribute to the cause of cancer, genetic damage, intolerant reactions, and chronic toxicity, including dental mottling, in man; that the said artificial fluoridation may aggravate malnutrition and existing illness in man; and that the value of said artificial fluoridation is in some doubt as to reduction of tooth decay in man.

  In recent years, two prominent dental researchers who were leaders of the pro-fluoridation movement announced reversals of their former positions because they concluded that water fluoridation is not an effective means of reducing dental caries and that it poses serious risks to human health. The late Dr. John Colquhoun was Principal Dental Officer of Aukland, New Zealand, and he published his reasons for changing sides in 1997. In 1999, Dr. Hardy Limeback, Head of Preventive Dentistry, University of Toronto, announced his change of views, then published a statement dated April 2000.

  The scientific literature is full of studies that support Dr. Hirzy’s testimony. Animal studies show decreased fertility and higher rates of miscarriage in animals that drank fluoridated water. Fluoridation leads to osteoporosis and increased fractures. Regions with high levels of fluoride in the drinking water have 220% more fractures. Fluoride accumulates in the thyroid gland and produces hypothyroidism. Communities with fluoridated water have higher rates of cancer than non-fluoridated communities. The incidence of osteogenic sarcoma in males is 70% higher in fluoridated regions. Phyllis Mullenix showed the disastrous effect of water fluoridation on the brains of unborn and newborn animals, and numerous studies show a reduction of iq in humans. Fluoride is the active ingredient in Prozac, Paxil, and several other widely used psychotrophic medications.[82]