|
Post by jeany on Oct 23, 2009 11:08:45 GMT -5
Wasp Stings? I just wanted to note this. I have a big yard that I push mow... and I've had a bad problem with 'Yellow Jackets' stinging me this summer. I have been stung 4 different times this summer. I wasn't aware, until recently, that yellow jackets are in the wasp family. Each time I have been stung, I've had more and more of an allergic reaction. The sting area becomes very red, hot, swollen, a hardness in the skin, more itchy and takes more time to heal with each sting and is very painful and uncomfortable for days afterward. This last sting area on the inside of my thigh was larger than a softball in size and itched within this perimeter. What's kinda' strange is they chose to sting me in the same place on two different occasions, on the left arm right above the elbow. This sting mark is still here after 5 weeks and it has the Morgellons rubber core that goes down into the skin, definitely Morgs-like. I was stung 5 times at once in 1998, prior to showing initial Morgellons symptoms. I was wondering if anyone else was stung by a wasp prior to symptoms? Kammy, I got stung/bitten by horse flies and wasps several times while working outside in the garden. I was 'out there' quite a bit also plucking weeds and got bitten, I think, by a spider the same day. In the evening my right arm started to hurt terribly, was swollen, red and hot. I put my arm under icy cold water to stop the pain. It eventually got better after a while. Anyway...a few weeks later the Morgs symptoms started.. Last summer I got stung by a yellow jacket, which lead to a new outbreak of Morgs, although before that I was symptom free for months! So..yes..an insect bite/sting IS the 'trigger'.. Jeany
|
|
|
Post by kammy on Oct 23, 2009 11:59:57 GMT -5
I'm trying to draw a rough, skeleton outline of what is inside of Morgellons as far as we can tell, to date, it looks something like this, not necessarily in this order: [/img][/center] Anyone want to add anything that I may have forgotten? I'm just trying to get all of these components on one page... in categories, so we can better understand our methods.
|
|
|
Post by kammy on Oct 23, 2009 12:06:23 GMT -5
Wasp Stings? I just wanted to note this. I have a big yard that I push mow... and I've had a bad problem with 'Yellow Jackets' stinging me this summer. I have been stung 4 different times this summer. I wasn't aware, until recently, that yellow jackets are in the wasp family. Each time I have been stung, I've had more and more of an allergic reaction. The sting area becomes very red, hot, swollen, a hardness in the skin, more itchy and takes more time to heal with each sting and is very painful and uncomfortable for days afterward. This last sting area on the inside of my thigh was larger than a softball in size and itched within this perimeter. What's kinda' strange is they chose to sting me in the same place on two different occasions, on the left arm right above the elbow. This sting mark is still here after 5 weeks and it has the Morgellons rubber core that goes down into the skin, definitely Morgs-like. I was stung 5 times at once in 1998, prior to showing initial Morgellons symptoms. I was wondering if anyone else was stung by a wasp prior to symptoms? Kammy, I got stung/bitten by horse flies and wasps several times while working outside in the garden. I was 'out there' quite a bit also plucking weeds and got bitten, I think, by a spider the same day. In the evening my right arm started to hurt terribly, was swollen, red and hot. I put my arm under icy cold water to stop the pain. It eventually got better after a while. Anyway...a few weeks later the Morgs symptoms started.. Last summer I got stung by a yellow jacket, which lead to a new outbreak of Morgs, although before that I was symptom free for months! So..yes..an insect bite/sting IS the 'trigger'.. Jeany Yes, Jeany, I've heard a lot of people say that their Morgellons symptoms started right after an insect bite. One person was bitten by a 'kissing bug', so I don't think it necessarily has to be in the wasp family. From our research we have learned that the wasp picks up and transfers to every other insect it comes into contact with, so theoretically, ANY insect bite can have part of the wasp DNA and pathogens in it.
|
|
|
Post by kammy on Oct 23, 2009 12:29:56 GMT -5
Before we close the page above on the flowchart diagram, I need to introduce one more thing that we haven't researched fully yet that I think might also be a factor in with the Yeast and the Urasil... The Urasil in researcher Baraka's video is a 100% match for Urasil. Urasil is a pesticide mustard also that they are putting on our foods, also known as Bromacil, Terbacil, Butafenacil. I'm also seeing what I believe are Bacteriophages, but am not sure yet. I have seen something that looks just this stock photo: Not so much in this above form... but in this form: This Bacteriophage viral aspect that was allowed to be added to our food several years ago by the FDA may or may not be a Morgellons factor, we need to look at this closer? I remember opening a package of corned beef lunch meat a couple of years ago, by one of the best brand names with a good expiration date, the meat smelled fine, and it was coated with a strange rainbow colored chemical glow... I suspect that if what I was seeing was this bacteriophage, that it might also be rainbow colored? I threw the meat away... but wonder how much of this chemical I had already eaten in previous lunch meats and other products not knowing? Do you think I would have purchased it to begin with if I knew it glowed because it had been soaked in this 'stuff'... no! That's why they don't want to label anything... labeling might make certain sales go down... or non-existant? I can see the warning on the side of the package now...'Warning: This lunch meat could be a glow hazard to your eyes if your refrigerator light goes out!'
|
|
|
Post by jeany on Oct 23, 2009 13:18:43 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by jeany on Oct 23, 2009 13:29:59 GMT -5
Uracil mustard - Identification, toxicity, use, water pollution potential, ecological toxicity and regulatory informationwww.pesticideinfo.org/Detail_Chemical.jsp?Rec_Id=PC42274#ChemIDPAN Bad Actor Chemical 1 Carcinogen Developmental or Reproductive Toxin Description: Pesticide Action Network (PAN) Bad Actor Pesticides In order to identify a "most toxic" set of pesticides, Pesticide Action Network (PAN) and Californians for Pesticide Reform (CPR) created the term PAN Bad Actor pesticides. These pesticides are at least one of the following: Known or probable carcinogens, as designated by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), U.S. EPA, U.S. National Toxicology Program, and the state of California's Proposition 65 list. Reproductive or developmental toxicants, as designated by the state of California's Proposition 65 list. Neurotoxic cholinesterase inhibitors, as designated by California Department of Pesticide Regulation, the Materials Safety Data Sheet for the particular chemical, or PAN staff evaluation of chemical structure (for organophosphorus compounds). Known groundwater contaminants, as designated by the state of California (for actively registered pesticides) or from historic groundwater monitoring records (for banned pesticides). Pesticides with high acute toxicity, as designated by the World Health Organization (WHO), the U.S. EPA, or the U.S. National Toxicology Program. Developmental or Reproductive ToxinCalifornia Proposition 65 List Pesticides determined by the state of California to cause reproductive and developmental harm, e.g., birth defects, infertility, sterility and impairment of normal growth and development. A list of chemicals "known to the State to cause reproductive and developmental toxicity" is maintained by the State of California under the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986 (Proposition 65). The absence of a chemical on this list does not necessarily mean it is not a reproductive or developmental toxicant. It may mean that it has not yet been evaluated by the agencies responsible. More detail is given in the "About the Data" section. Jeany
|
|
|
Post by kammy on Oct 23, 2009 14:21:12 GMT -5
We are probably going to be surprised at the number of foods that have Saccharomyces Cerevisiae in them, when we go to look? I'm thinking that an Allergist might be able to find this fungus for us, one that specializes in food allergies? There's only been 4 instances of SC as a systemic infection in the past found in commercial bread-making strains: tinyurl.com/yh666yj"We report four cases of blood cultures testing positive for yeast strains belonging to the species Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Using molecular techniques, RFLP of mtDNA and δ-PCR amplification, we show the association of two of the isolates with non-clinical strains. Specifically, with two commercial bread-making strains and the therapeutic S. boulardii strain. The association of S. boulardii with cases of fungemia has been reported previously. Nevertheless, this is the first time that a baker's yeast has been isolated from blood."
|
|
|
Post by camv35s on Oct 23, 2009 20:34:23 GMT -5
hi kammy whats a few hundred thousand viruses choose one, best regards camv GM Vaccines Recombine into Unpredictable Hybrid
Genetically engineered pox viruses in cell cultures recombined with natural viruses to create new viruses with unpredictable and potentially dangerous characteristics.
In what may be the first experiment of its kind, scientists infected cell cultures with two related viruses. One was a genetically engineered poxvirus, (vaccinia virus (VIC) with a transgene from the influenza virus). The other was a naturally occurring relative of the first virus, isolated from Norwegian wildlife. Both were orthopoxviruses. The two viruses interacted and created many new hybrid viruses by recombination. The characteristics of some of the new viruses included traits not expressed in either parent virus. Some viruses, for example, spread faster than either parent, while others produced different, more serious cell culture changes. A single virus multiplied into hundreds of thousands of viruses in a few hours, with unpredictable consequences. Since the marker gene in the transgenic virus was not present in some of the newly formed hybrid viruses, it would not be possible to track transgenic viruses as the origin of the hybrids, if they were found in the wild.
In a second series of experiments, various mammalian cell lines were infected with avipoxviruses. In some cell lines, the avipoxviruses were able to perform full multiplication. This was previously considered to be impossible. The assumption that avipoxviruses were incapable of full multiplication was used as a basis for safety claims of vaccines using avipoxviruses.
Implications for human health
Orthoviruses are used for vaccinations of humans and domestic animals, as non-target vaccinations for wildlife reservoirs of human diseases (such as rabies in the wild), and for sterilization of mammals. In 1999, for example, an orthopoxvirus engineered as a vaccine to combat rabies was inoculated into chicken remnants (heads) and spread as bait throughout the border between France and Belgium. Local mammals, including the target animal, the red fox, then ate the chicken parts. Based on the findings above, it is theoretically possible that if natural viruses similar to the rabies vaccine also infected those mammals, they may have become hosts to new transgenic hybrids. The hybrids might possibly threaten mammals, humans, and the ecosystem.
Transgenic avipoxviruses are used as vaccines. Several studies on avipoxviruses declare them safe, claiming that they do not multiply in mammalian cells. This new finding contradicts that claim and calls into question the safety of using these viruses in humans and other mammals.
|
|
|
Post by camv35s on Oct 23, 2009 21:05:37 GMT -5
hi kammy regarding the bacteriophage added to our hot dogs and lunch meats, you can bet this company paid a lot of money to someone at the fda now a health food advocates want them to put a label on hot dogs saying they may cause cancer . insane . mindless idiots at the fda. Eat To Live: Hot Dog With Virus, Please! Posted on: Wednesday, 30 August 2006, 15:00 CDT
By JULIA WATSON
You might feel relieved, when packing your schoolchild off with a boxed lunch of baloney sandwich, to know that it could be served with a dose of virus on the side -- courtesy of the Food and Drug Administration.
On Aug. 18, for the first time ever, the FDA approved viruses as a useful food additive. Not just for ready-to-eat meats but for poultry, too. Before you recoil in fear at the chicken breast you have poised at the end of your fork, viruses, like certain fats, can be good.
On the other hand, you might feel horrified. Is this taking the description food additive in a far-reaching direction that could all too easily run out of control?
The concoction that has just been approved has a job to do. It is a cocktail of six different good viruses designed to kill off strains of Listeria monocytogenes bacterium, which just love cold cuts and poultry as much as we do. It will be sprayed on packaged processed meats.
Unlike other additives, however, whose ranks the virus cocktail will now officially join, it will not be listed on the labels. So you won't know it's there.
Last year 500 Americans died from eating Listeria-contaminated ready-to-eat meats and poultry products. Around 2,500 more became seriously ill.
This remarkable FDA approval of a virus for food safety use is a subject, you won't be surprised to hear, that has had Internet bloggers in a frenzy. A sample or two from digg.com:
How about when the bacteria evolve to be immune to the viruses ...
Another problem I see, as some have mentioned is the viruses attacking our natural bacteria flora in our gut. If the virus can sometime down the road attack a friendly bacteria species such as e. coli (yea it's good) or lactobacillus acidofilus then this could be harmful or at least uncomfortable.
... a certain bacteriophage turns a certain strain of bacteria into the one that cause Cholera. Another one does Diphtheria.
The coffers-filling possibilities for Intralytix, the firm that came up with the stuff, is another red rag to the bulls. The company has already licensed its spray to a multinational corporation for global use -- but, with unusual caution, refuses to name which one. And it's now angling for FDA approval for viral sprays to treat E. coli- and Salmonella-contaminated foods.
The Office of Food Additive Safety at the FDA promises we won't be aware through a change in taste of which meats have been treated with these blights in shiny armor.
But perhaps we should be. Perhaps the issue, as the bloggers have it, has nothing to do with taste concerns.
These bacteriophages (from the Greek meaning bacteria eater) are not unfamiliar to us. They appear in our digestive tracts, as well as in the environment, food and water, doing what they can to keep us healthy by fighting harmful bacteria.
But Byron J. Richards, a certified clinical nutritionist, is particularly vexed over the FDA's approval. Writing on NewsWithView.com on Aug. 24 he denounces the foods due for treatment as the first virally contaminated foods entering our food supply with the blessings of the FDA. Strong stuff.
The FDA, he suggests, cannot possibly be certain the viruses will not attack the friendly bacteria that make up the lining of your digestive tract.
It is true that the viruses, at least at this time, cannot recognize human cells. However, the virus can potentially recognize normal bacterial cells in the human digestive tract and may be able to adapt to infect one or more of these friendly bacteria.
He continues, Additionally, the human immune system reacts directly to viral phages. Thus, a person who eats a lot of processed deli meat is certain to evoke an immune reaction to the viruses. What will this reaction be? Allergy? Asthma? Autoimmunity? Cancer? How can the FDA approve a food additive that it knows can induce a variety of human immune responses?
Whether this is all terror-mongering or not, there must be a real concern that introducing bacteriophage viruses into food may be to our long-term detriment. Listeria may develop a resistance to them.
Given that what we are looking to protect here is a very small percentage of the population annually who have adversely suffered from eating contaminated ready-to-eat meats and poultry, would it not be wiser in the long run to put a warning label on these foods?
It would advise those people most commonly ill-affected -- the elderly, the very young, and pregnant women -- to steer clear of them. And the FDA would impose stricter health protocols upon suppliers and at those plants that produce these foods, severely penalizing those whose safety controls are not up to standard.
-- For a delicious cold cut without a viral spray, marinate a flank steak in 3 tablespoons soy sauce, 1 tablespoon olive oil, 1 heaped teaspoon mustard powder, 1 finely minced peeled garlic clove, 1 finely minced small onion for 3 hours.
-- Wipe dry, press both sides into a plate of a handful of crushed black peppercorns and lay into a very, very hot, dry large frying pan. It will smoke, so turn on the fan.
-- Sear 2 minutes one side, then turn and cook 3 the other -- or less if you prefer your meat pink.
-- Take off heat, lay a plate with a weight on it and leave to get cold, then slice very thinly and place between two slices of lightly buttered bread with a scrape of hot mustard or horseradish and a handful of cleaned watercress.
-- Sprinkle with rock salt and eat.
Source: United Press International
More News in this Category
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Related Articles FDA Approves Second West Nile Virus Test FDA OKs Automated West Nile Virus Test Research and Markets: Nipon Meat Packers, Inc., Daito Gyorui Company Limited and Itoham Foods Are Some of the Leading Companies Operating in Japan's Packaged Foods & Meats Industry Spot Future Trends and Developments of the Packaged Foods & Meats Industry in China Research and Markets: Tyson Foods, Inc., Kraft Foods, Inc. And Farmland Foods Are Some of the Leading Companies Inside the Global Packaged Foods & Meats Industry Research and Markets: Barilla Holding Societa Per Azioni, Bahlsen Gmbh & Co and Unilever UK Foods Are Some of the Leading Companies Inside the Packaged Foods & Meats in Europe Industry Our Packaged Foods & Meats in France Industry Profile is an Essential Resource for Top-Level Data and Analysis Covering the Packaged Foods & Meats Industry FDA Says Viruses Safe for Treating Meat BioPen Will Demonstrate a ''Pen'' for the Detection of Toxins, Virus and Bacteria in Fluids at ''BioMed 2006'' FDA Bans Use of Bayer Antibiotic in Poultry
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
Post by kammy on Oct 24, 2009 18:59:05 GMT -5
Hi Cam... yes, I agree that some sort of pox virus is involved. I did a mini poll on another site and 9 out of 10 "M" sufferers have white pox-like marks/scars on our skins. Jeany reported in a blog entry that she thinks it is the Entomopoxvirus Virus. Of course, several of the pox viruses could be involved... we just have to get more test results back with conclusive evidence in the future, to know for sure.
I believe they are putting our various viruses inside these spheres we are seeing.
And, I definitely don't like the idea of a bacteriophage being in my meats nor foods...
|
|
|
Post by kammy on Oct 30, 2009 2:03:01 GMT -5
Baculovirus In Our Vaccines They have successfully experimented with putting the baculovirus in the flu vaccines in the recent past: "In the study conducted by Treanor, together with colleagues at Cincinnati Children’s Hospital and the University of Virginia, scientists tested a vaccine called FluBlOk that is made by Protein Sciences Corp. of Meriden, Ct. FluBlOk relies on a virus known as baculovirus, which normally infects insects, to churn out the key components of the flu virus in a cell line drawn from caterpillars." "Bypassing Eggs, Flu Vaccine Grown in Insect Cells Shows Promise April 10, 2007An experimental flu vaccine made in insect cells – not in eggs, where flu vaccines currently available in the United States are grown – is safe and as effective as conventional vaccines in protecting people against the flu, according to results published in the April 11 issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association." [1] We have seen that they already are putting fullerenes (carbon balls that are in the Squalene) in vaccines… and now baculovirus… our latest vaccine that costs us $25 apiece @125 million produced… let’s see… that’s $3,125,000,000 (billion dollars) in sales versus a few thousand people that could be having some sort of "skin reaction" to something that might be in the vaccines? The Baculovirus may be a wonderful thing in today’s vaccines however my complaint, and it should be yours too, is that at some time – someone was experimenting with the baculovirus and fullerenes and made a mistake. We have these very foreign particles inside of us, in our blood, in our organs, evidently ravishing our digestive systems with some… and we want all aspects of these particle pathogens removed out of our systems, we want to be somewhat normal human beings again. How can you make something in a lab, put it in our food/water supply that might infect a person, and not have an antidote? No, a better question is; How can you be allowed to put the Morgellons pathogens into our food/water/air/insect supply in the first place and turn it loose for us to unknowingly eat, drink, breathe and come into contact with? If we smoke cigarettes, we might get cancer and have many adverse health problems associated with it – we know this… so, we can make the choice to smoke or not. And… if we come down with lung cancer later in life, we can’t complain too much and especially say, ‘I didn’t know, if I had known, I would have made better choices…’. With Morgellons it appears that all you have to do is eat certain foods, drink your tap water, get stung or bitten by an insect that some student, soon-to-be future scientist, has modified at a near-by university and set loose… or go outside after a chemtrail emission… basic things that we have to do in order to survive has put our entire future good health at risk. We have to eat, drink water, breathe the air and be able to go outside without our good health being constantly compromised, we have no choices in these basic living matters. That is the difference in smoking and Morgellons, we don’t have a single clue that certain things are in our environments that might be wrong for us to choose to avoid. Give us some warnings, like on the side of cigarette packettes, let us know that this product contains fullerenes, micelles, nano, baculovirus, etc. so that we can have some control over our health, let us know that it’s a heavy chemtrail spray day so that we can make choices to stay inside or to keep our car windows rolled up, and don’t we have a right to know what’s in these emissions? We are being adversely blind sighted from too many directions in a seeming fear of transparency on their part, why all the secrecy if there’s nothing to hide? The cigarette manufacturers had to start putting warning labels on the product when it was proven that cigarettes caused certain diseases and they were sued because people said they didn’t have any warning. What’s the difference in today’s foods and what’s in them and how they falsely advertise and promote them as being something good for you without listing a single caution, just like they did with early cigarette ad campaigns? Most of us have been to our doctors many times to complain about our disease, and with most of us – we have been to see many different doctors… and with no to a minimal response from them, only because it seems they fear being sued for total malpractice. They don’t appear to have any interest in looking to see what’s wrong with us, when did this non-caring mindset amongst our doctors come about? Why do they have this attitude? Possibly because they know or suspect that the vaccines that they have been handing out are possibly one the culprits in our disease, that if they look closer – it might slow down the current vaccine nanotechnology? That if they start uncovering, this might lead to looking closer at the FDA… DOA… EPA… CDC… NIH… why, we might even have to label our foods? I suspect the way things work is that the vaccine makers can say… ‘well, they’ve been using fullerenes and baculovirus in our foods and water for years now and there doesn’t seem to be any adverse reactions… if there were adverse reactions – people would have reported it to their doctors and we’d know about it.’ Ha! What a joke we’re in the middle of! Doctors are known to be slightly above average in intelligence, we have to start appealing to this and their non-action and how it’s leading to the entire world’s future ill health. It’s perpetuating because they are refusing to listen and take us seriously as the first stop gap measure, when the doctors stop listening or caring about patients – our health system has failed. We have put our trust in our doctors and they are violating their oaths, for whatever occult reasons. This avoidance to look at us is allowing whomever a green light to contaminate more and further, ‘it’s proven to be ok in our food and water, therefore should be ok in vaccines’… If we have fullerenes, micelles, baculovirus inside of us as I am seeing, what does this mean to the Morgellons sufferer when more are added with the addition of a vaccination or eating heavy-laden foods with them in it, or drinking our unfiltered tap water? And, why the baculovirus, and not a hydrogel sphere? They are speaking of the ACNPV (Autographia California Nuclear Polyhedron Virus) baculovirus in the article above, the shell of the sphere is made from the Autographia California moth or caterpillar. If doctors or someone doesn’t step up to defend us soon… baculovirus will be in more consumables – what’s next, baculovirus and/or fullerenes in your baby’s formula? I’m almost afraid to look. [1]. www.urmc.rochester.edu/news/story/index.cfm?id=1431
|
|
|
Post by kammy on Oct 30, 2009 9:01:22 GMT -5
www.azonano.com/news.asp?NewsID=13217New Composite Materials Containing Silk and Metallic Nanoparticles Georgia Tech researcher Eugenia Kharlampieva studies the properties of composite materials containing silk and metallic nanoparticles. Credit: Georgia Tech Photo: Gary Meek "Using thin films of silk as templates, researchers have incorporated inorganic nanoparticles that join with the silk to form strong and flexible composite structures that have unusual optical and mechanical properties. This bio-enabled, surface-mediated formation approach mimics the growth and assembly processes of natural materials, taking advantage of the ability of biomolecules to chemically reduce metal ions to produce nanoparticles without harsh processing conditions. Sponsored by the Air Force Office for Scientific Research and the Air Force Research Laboratory, the research is scheduled to be described August 19th at the Fall 2009 National Meeting of the American Chemical Society in Washington, D.C. Fabrication of the nanocomposites begins by dissolving silk cocoons and making the resulting fibroin water soluble. The silk is then placed onto a silicon substrate using a spin-coating technique that produces multiple layers of thin film that is then patterned into a template using a nanolithography technique. Next, the silk template is covered with a solution containing ions of gold, silver, or other metal. Over a period of time ranging from hours to days, the nanoparticles form within the template. The relatively long growth time, which operates at room temperature and neutral pH in a water-based environment, allows precise control of the particle size and spacing, Tsukruk noted. "Silk is almost as strong as Kevlar, but it can be deformed by 30 percent without breaking," said Tsukruk. "The silk film is very robust, with a complicated structure that you don't find in synthetic materials." The researchers also hope to find additional applications for the films in such areas as photovoltaics, medical technology, and anti-microbial films that utilize the properties of silver nanoparticles. "Nanomaterials grown under environmentally friendly conditions can be as good as synthetic materials that are produced under harsh conditions," Tsukruk added. "This technique allows us to grow very useful materials under natural conditions."
|
|
|
Post by kammy on Oct 30, 2009 9:19:36 GMT -5
www.azonano.com/news.asp?NewsID=14121Advanced Nanoparticle Antimicrobial Coating Safely Kills Viruses and Bacteria on Treated Surfaces Virus (bacteriophage) attacking a bacterium. (Lee.D.Simon) EcoActive Surfaces, Inc., announced today the results of independent laboratory testing that demonstrate dramatic killing of viruses on surfaces treated with the advanced antimicrobial surface coating OxiTitan VLR. www.oxititan.com/The basis for the technology of OxiTitan VLR is a proprietary nanoscale zinc/titanium dioxide sol that can be easily applied to a wide variety of surfaces and textiles. The EcoActive Surfaces cleantech innovation provides a virtually invisible, durable coating with broad spectrum antimicrobial effects based on strong initial binding and subsequent photocatalysed oxidative inactivation under ordinary interior lighting conditions. The transparent coating creates free oxygen radicals that chemically inactivate essential components of viruses and bacteria to kill them, and also destroy volatile organic compounds. Powered only by the energy of visible light, OxiTitan VLR contains tiny particles of the same minerals used in the safest sunscreens, has no poisons or toxins, and is benign in the environment." Wonder what's in our sun screens?
|
|
|
Post by kammy on Oct 30, 2009 9:48:26 GMT -5
Are nano-materials in sunscreens worth the risk? www.earthsky.org/blogpost/water/are-nano-materials-in-sunscreens-worth-the-riskLet the buyer beware. If your sunscreen goes on clear, it contains manufactured nano-particles.Nano-particles are not found in nature. They’re manufactured by scientists. And I’m not saying they’re dangerous. When I told my colleague Jorge Salazar I was writing this post, he scoffed, saying, “Titanium oxide is pretty benign stuff.” Manufactured nanomaterials are being used in sunscreens to make sun-blocking ingredients like titanium dioxide and zinc oxide rub on clear instead of white. I don’t know if these particles are dangerous, but it’s not knowing that scares me. The Consumers Union tests of nano-sunscreens found no correlation between nanomaterial content and sun protection. Adding nano-particles to your sunscreen is for cosmetic purposes only. No more unsightly white noses around the pool. I do know that nanomaterials have not been around very long, so they have not been tested as thoroughly as one could wish. How could they be? When I was a kid hanging out at the pool at the local YMCA, nano-particles didn’t exist and some people proudly sported white, sun-screened noses. Some available data show the small size of nano-particles makes them more able to enter lungs, pass through cell membranes, and possibly penetrate damaged or sun-burned skin. Other studies have suggested there may be environmental impacts stemming from the release of nanomaterials into broader ecosystems, like the natural-springs pool where I swim each summer now, or like the creek that pool spills into. According to Friends of the Earth, a 2006 study “demonstrated that some forms of titanium dioxide nanoparticles (popular ingredients in nano-sunscreens) are toxic to algae and water fleas, especially after exposure to UV light. Algae and water fleas are a vital part of marine ecosystems.” Jorge says don’t worry. He says the biggest risk from nano-particles is to workers who produce nano-containing products. In the U.S. and elsewhere, there are currently no established safe levels of exposure to nanomaterials and no reliable systems and equipment to protect workers from harmful levels of exposure. A recent report from China indicates a link between exposure to nanoparticles and severe illnesses suffered by seven factory workers. One of the workers died. According to Friends of the Earth: “Consumers need to know that manufactured nanoscale zinc and titanium oxides are not necessarily the most effective or safest choice for effective sun protection. They are also not the only option. Besides several different carbon-based active ingredients, consumers can also look for larger-scale, more opaque metal-oxide based sunscreens (e.g. titanium dioxide or zinc oxide which are ‘inorganic’ and do not contain carbon atoms), although without mandatory labeling these may be very hard to find (at least in the U.S.).” Doing a search on sunscreens with carbon atoms, I get this patent: www.patentstorm.us/patents/5160731/claims.htmlwww.faqs.org/patents/app/20090028913The water-in-oil type emulsion sunscreen cosmetic in the present invention is characterized by comprising (a) 0.2 to 14% by mass of methoxycinnamate ester, (b) 0.02 to 14% by mass of octocrylene, (c) 0.2 to 14% by mass of dimethylpolysiloxane, (d) 0.02 to 14% by mass of monoester oil represented by the formula: R1COOR2 wherein R1 represents an alkyl group having 5 to 11 carbon atoms and R2 represents an alkyl group having 3 to 11 carbon atoms, and (e) 0.02 to 6% by mass of silicone-chain branched-type alkyl/polyoxyethylene-modified silicone. **I think we should be aware of not using sunscreens until we know more, to use common sense and not spend long amounts of time in direct sunlight, if we can help it.
|
|
|
Post by kammy on Oct 30, 2009 10:07:24 GMT -5
The latest in vaccine technology: Nanoemulsion-based Vaccine to Combat a Wide Variety of Antigens www.azonano.com/news.asp?NewsID=14142"NanoBio's nanoemulsion-based vaccine adjuvant platform has consistently demonstrated the ability to elicit robust systemic, cellular and mucosal immunity, based on studies we've conducted in numerous diseases using various antigen types," commented David Peralta, NanoBio's CFO and COO. NanoBio announced earlier in 2009 that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved the company's Investigational New Drug (IND) application for the Phase 1 clinical study of NB-1008, a seasonal influenza vaccine administered via a nasal dropper. The Phase 1 study is currently ongoing. The underlying technology is NanoBio's NanoStat platform, which employs a nanoemulsion that is created through a proprietary manufacturing process. The nanoemulsion is uniquely capable of permeating the nasal mucosa, where it can load vaccine antigen into immune-presenting cells. These cells then carry the antigen to areas of the body that initiate an immune response, including the lymph nodes, thymus and spleen. "Our unique approach to inducing immunity leverages nasal immune elements to produce a level of protective immunity not seen with currently available vaccines," added Mr. Peralta. "This funding will enable NanoBio to make tremendous advances in terms of mucosal vaccination, which could provide significant advantages with respect to disease protection worldwide." The company's headquarters and laboratory facilities are located in Ann Arbor, Michigan. NanoBio is a spin-off from the University of Michigan and holds the exclusive global license to the nanoemulsion platform technology. Posted on October 14th, 2009
|
|
|
Post by kammy on Oct 30, 2009 10:18:52 GMT -5
Report Examines Nanobiotechnology Applications, Markets and Companies www.azonano.com/news.asp?NewsID=14066"Some of nanostructures such as fullerenes are themselves drug candidates as they allow precise grafting of active chemical groups in three-dimensional orientations. The most important pharmaceutical applications are in drug delivery. Apart from offering a solution to solubility problems, nanobiotechnology provides and intracellular delivery possibilities. Skin penetration is improved in transdermal drug delivery. A particularly effective application is as nonviral gene therapy vectors. Nanotechnology has the potential to provide controlled release devices with autonomous operation guided by the needs. There is some concern about the safety of nanoparticles introduced in the human body and released into the environment. Research is underway to address these issues. As yet there are no FDA directives to regulate nanobiotechnology but as products are ready to enter market, these are expected to be in place." Fullerenes are nanotechnology. Fullerenes are in our vaccines. What kind of sense does it make to introduce something into the human body that they know little about, we see where they are PLANNING ON addressing the issue of nanotech in the human body and environment. Isn't this putting the cart before the horse?
|
|
|
Post by kammy on Oct 30, 2009 10:35:13 GMT -5
Going Hi-Tech is Highly Toxic www.greenpeace.org/usa/campaigns/toxics/hi-tech-highly-toxic"Electronic trash, or e-waste, contains toxic chemicals and heavy metals that cannot be disposed of or recycled safely. These pollutants end up in our water and the air we breathe. As consumers, we need your help to pull the plug on toxic technology. Urge leading electronic companies to clean up their act. Every year, hundreds of thousands of old computers and cell phones are dumped in landfills or burned in smelters. Thousands more are exported, often illegally, to Asia, where workers at scrap yards, often children, are exposed to a cocktail of toxic chemicals and poisons. The rate at which these mountains of obsolete electronic products are growing will reach crisis proportions unless electronics corporations that profit from making and selling these devices face up to their responsibilities. It is possible to make clean, durable products that can be upgraded, recycled, or disposed of safely and don't end up as hazardous waste in someone's backyard." www.greenpeace.org/usa/campaigns/toxics/hi-tech-highly-toxic/e-wasteThe amount of electronic products discarded globally has skyrocketed recently, with 20-50 million tons generated every year. If such a huge figure is hard to imagine, think of it like this - if the estimated amount of e-waste generated every year would be put into containers on a train it would go once around the world! Electronic waste (e-waste) now makes up five percent of all municipal solid waste worldwide, nearly the same amount as all plastic packaging, but it is much more hazardous. Not only developed countries generate e-waste; Asia discards an estimated 12 million tons each year. E-waste is now the fastest growing component of the municipal solid waste stream because people are upgrading their mobile phones, computers, televisions, audio equipment and printers more frequently than ever before. Mobile phones and computers are causing the biggest problem because they are replaced most often." Did you know? The average lifespan of computers in developed countries has dropped from six years in 1997 to just two years in 2005. Mobile phones have a lifecycle of less than two years in developed countries. 183 million computers were sold worldwide in 2004 - 11.6 percent more than in 2003. 674 million mobile phones were sold worldwide in 2004 - 30 percent more than in 2003. By 2010, there will be 716 million new computers in use. There will be 178 million new computer users in China, 80 million new users in India.
|
|
|
Post by kammy on Oct 30, 2009 11:43:24 GMT -5
A Micro Moth? I was just in my kitchen and noticed a small, flying, adult insect, approximately 3 mm and thought it was initially a GMFG, but upon closer examination think that it was a micro moth of some sort? It had a stubbier body and its wings were fuller and wider than the gnats and much slower moving. Well... I swatted it and I don't know where its remains ended up... have they created a micro moth? Be on the look out for them and the next one I see, I will capture and photograph.
|
|
|
Post by kammy on Oct 30, 2009 23:44:22 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by kammy on Oct 31, 2009 1:57:15 GMT -5
There is probably a vaccine thread somewhere, feel free to cut and paste this and take it to wherever it is needed:
Get your Doctor to Sign This If you have to get ANY SHOT!
Physician's Warranty of Vaccine Safety
I (Physician's name, degree)_________________________, _____ am a physician licensed to practice medicine in the State of ________________. My State license number is _______________ , and my DEA number is _______________. My medical specialty is ________________________
I have a thorough understanding of the risks and benefits of all the medications that I prescribe for or administer to my patients. In the case of (Patient's name) ___________________________ , age _________ , whom I have examined, I find that certain risk factors exist that justify the recommended vaccinations. The following is a list of said risk factors and the vaccinations that will protect against them: Risk Factor ____________________________________________ Vaccination ___________________________________________ Risk Factor ____________________________________________ Vaccination ___________________________________________ Risk Factor ____________________________________________ Vaccination ___________________________________________ Risk Factor ____________________________________________ Vaccination ___________________________________________ Risk Factor ____________________________________________ Vaccination ___________________________________________ Risk Factor ____________________________________________ Vaccination ___________________________________________
I am aware that vaccines typically contain many of the following fillers:
* aluminum hydroxide * aluminum phosphate * ammonium sulfate * amphotericin B * animal tissues: pig blood, horse blood, rabbit brain, * dog kidney, monkey kidney, * chick embryo, chicken egg, duck egg * calf (bovine) serum * betapropiolactone * fetal bovine serum * formaldehyde * formalin * gelatin * glycerol * human diploid cells (originating from human aborted fetal tissue) * hydrolized gelatin * mercury thimerosol (thimerosal, Merthiolate(r)) * monosodium glutamate (MSG) * neomycin * neomycin sulfate * phenol red indicator * phenoxyethanol (antifreeze) * potassium diphosphate * potassium monophosphate * polymyxin B * polysorbate 20 * polysorbate 80 * porcine (pig) pancreatic hydrolysate of casein * residual MRC5 proteins * sorbitol * tributylphosphate, * VERO cells, a continuous line of monkey kidney cells, and * washed sheep red blood
and, hereby, warrant that these ingredients are safe for injection into the body of my patient. I have researched reports to the contrary, such as reports that mercury thimerosol causes severe neurological and immunological damage, and find that they are not credible.
I am aware that some vaccines have been found to have been contaminated with Simian Virus 40 (SV 40) and that SV 40 is causally linked by some researchers to non-Hodgkin's lymphoma and mesotheliomas in humans as well as in experimental animals. I hereby warrant that the vaccines I employ in my practice do not contain SV 40 or any other live viruses. (Alternately, I hereby warrant that said SV-40 virus or other viruses pose no substantive risk to my patient.)
I hereby warrant that the vaccines I am recommending for the care of (Patient's name) _______________ _______________________ do not contain any tissue from aborted human babies (also known as "fetuses").
In order to protect my patient's well being, I have taken the following steps to guarantee that the vaccines I will use will contain no damaging contaminants.
STEPS TAKEN: __________________________________________________ ____ __________________________________________________ __________________ __________________________________________________ __________________ __________________________________________________ __________________
I have personally investigated the reports made to the VAERS (Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System) and state that it is my professional opinion that the vaccines I am recommending are safe for administration to a child under the age of 5 years.
The bases for my opinion are itemized on Exhibit A, attached hereto, -- "Physician's Bases for Professional Opinion of Vaccine Safety." (Please itemize each recommended vaccine separately along with the bases for arriving at the conclusion that the vaccine is safe for administration to a child under the age of 5 years.)
The professional journal articles I have relied upon in the issuance of this Physician's Warranty of Vaccine Safety are itemized on Exhibit B , attached hereto, -- "Scientific Articles in Support of Physician's Warranty of Vaccine Safety."
The professional journal articles that I have read which contain opinions adverse to my opinion are itemized on Exhibit C , attached hereto, -- "Scientific Articles Contrary to Physician's Opinion of Vaccine Safety"
The reasons for my determining that the articles in Exhibit C were invalid are delineated in Attachment D , attached hereto, -- "Physician's Reasons for Determining the Invalidity of Adverse Scientific Opinions."
Hepatitis B
I understand that 60 percent of patients who are vaccinated for Hepatitis B will lose detectable antibodies to Hepatitis B within 12 years. I understand that in 1996 only 54 cases of Hepatitis B were reported to the CDC in the 0-1 year age group. I understand that in the VAERS, there were 1,080 total reports of adverse reactions from Hepatitis B vaccine in 1996 in the 0-1 year age group, with 47 deaths reported.
I understand that 50 percent of patients who contract Hepatitis B develop no symptoms after exposure. I understand that 30 percent will develop only flu-like symptoms and will have lifetime immunity. I understand that 20 percent will develop the symptoms of the disease, but that 95 percent will fully recover and have lifetime immunity.
I understand that 5 percent of the patients who are exposed to Hepatitis B will become chronic carriers of the disease. I understand that 75 percent of the chronic carriers will live with an asymptomatic infection and that only 25 percent of the chronic carriers will develop chronic liver disease or liver cancer, 10-30 years after the acute infection. The following scientific studies have been performed to demonstrate the safety of the Hepatitis B vaccine in children under the age of 5 years. __________________________________________________ _____________________ __________________________________________________ _____________________ __________________________________________________ _____________________
In addition to the recommended vaccinations as protections against the above cited risk factors, I have recommended other non-vaccine measures to protect the health of my patient and have enumerated said non-vaccine measures on Exhibit D , attached hereto, "Non-vaccine Measures to Protect Against Risk Factors" I am issuing this Physician's Warranty of Vaccine Safety in my professional capacity as the attending physician to (Patient's name) ________________________________. Regardless of the legal entity under which I normally practice medicine, I am issuing this statement in both my business and individual capacities and hereby waive any statutory, Common Law, Constitutional, UCC, international treaty, and any other legal immunities from liability lawsuits in the instant case. I issue this document of my own free will after consultation with competent legal counsel whose name is _____________________________, an attorney admitted to the Bar in the State of __________________ . __________________________________ (Name of Attending Physician) __________________________________ L.S. (Signature of Attending Physician) Signed on this _______ day of ______________ A.D. ________ Witness: _______________________________ Date: _____________________ Notary Public: ___________________________Date: ____________ __________________
|
|