Archive | August 11, 2016

Dentists Warn Don’t Dispose a Baby Tooth! It can Save Your Child’s Life!*

Dentists Warn Don’t Dispose a Baby Tooth! It can Save Your Child’s Life!*

Genuine laughterSome parents are familiar with the concept of banking their baby’s cord blood for the benefit of the amazing stem cells contained in it, but if you didn’t do that, there’s still a chance to access stem cells from your child in a painless way.

Study Confirms

A recent study, conducted by the famous expert and Dr. Songtao Shi and his colleagues, at the National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research, has discovered that baby teeth actually contain one to two dozen valuable stem cells, which can be used later on in life to treat a variety of diseases. And, for a long time now, many experts have been studying how stem cells can be used in the brain, pancreas, heart and other organs to repair damage caused by different diseases. Shi and fellow researchers uncovered that one type of stem cells lives inside adult teeth. After studying newly shed baby teeth from seven- and eight-year-old children, they tapped into stem cells completely different than what they found in adult teeth.
And, now you probably ask yourself – how this works? Well, to be honest with you, that’s easy to answer! Here’s what you need to know – the stem cells are found inside the dental pulp within a tooth that regenerate into neurons, bone and cartilage–even cardiac cells. In fact, this concept has been crowned an effective treatment for Type 1 diabetes, because dental pulp stem cells can be differentiated into pancreatic-type cells to produce insulin.

The experts say that preserving stem cells is a delicate process in that the cells must be alive to be useful. The dental pulp has to have had an adequate blood supply within at least 48 hours of being frozen; any less time and the cells will die. Dr. Peter Murray, director of Dental Regenerative Laboratory, thinks that both teeth and oral tissue can be generated from stem cells contained in tooth buds, baby teeth, third molars, periodontal tissues and induced pluripotent cells.

Note: there are several services available that will store baby teeth for a fee and these service providers recommend that dentists professionally remove baby teeth that are not dangling, because they may not have had the adequate blood supply necessary for storage. And, there are some services that will provide parents with all the packaging and shipping supplies needed, so they can store their children’s life-saving baby teeth themselves. Most companies provide a storage container and the preservation solution required for the at-home collection process. Don’t forget to take a look at the video below! In this video, a dentist discusses why he encourages parents to save baby teeth. Thanks for reading and don’t forget to share this article with your friends and family. Thank You and have a good one!

 

Source*

Tooth extractions / pulling teeth: potential health risks and dangers

Cavitations, fatal dental infections, permanent nerve injury, bone fractures and more

Apart from the generally arguable usefulness of pulling teeth, here are a number of complications that can arise subsequent to dental extractions, incl. death of the patient (listing not necessarily complete).

Special note: The following information based on real-life cases is not published here to create fear but to help erode the unconscionable carelessness with which major irreversible intervention into the body’s integrity as practised by conventional dentistry is generally taken for granted (and in this sense, this page continues on from How drilling and filling can damage teeth).

Potential complications from dental tooth extractions

1 A cavitation infection can – and very commonly does – form around the tooth extraction site with possibly far-reaching detrimental effects on health and wellbeing1. According to dentists Drs Munro-Hall, most extractions in adults lead to cavitation infections to some degree, with certain authors estimating that 90% of adult extractions become cavitation infections.

2 Acute infections can arise which require hospitalization with sometimes fatal outcome.*

3 The lingual or inferior alveolar nerve can be severed leading to permanent injury.

4 A sinus can be perforated.

5 The mandible (lower jaw) can be fractured.

6 The temporal mandibular joint (TMJ) can be injured.

7 The “wrong” tooth may be extracted.

8 Once a tooth has been removed, its surrounding bone disappears.

Incredible as it may sound, all of the above damages may remain unnoticed by the dentist.

9 Wisdom tooth extractions: In addition to the foregoing, according to a 2007 report (published in the American Journal of Public Health), “routine” wisdom tooth surgery is known for a number of potential “complications” including tooth and jaw fractures, brain tissue infection, life-threatening bleeding and hypoxia, with the foremost risk (concerning more than 11,000 people annually) consisting in permanent nerve damage with numbness of lips, tongue or cheeks.

10 Osteonecrosis of the jaw: In cancer patients undergoing conventional treatment such as radiation to the head/neck area, chemotherapy, and intravenous bisphosphonates, tooth extractions (or other surgery in the jaw area) can trigger osteonecrosis of the jaw.

11 “Anecdotal deaths”: one recently recorded death after undergoing “routine” dental surgery to remove wisdom teeth involves a 24 year old US-American who died on March 24, 2013 (see http://www.dentistrytoday.info/content/25-year-old-dies-due-complications-during-third-molar-surgery – he was 24, not 25 as the article says). Apparently he was administered six sedatives or more and possibly died due to “way too much anesthesia”.

Other recent cases include 17-year-old Jenny Olenick who died in April 2011 during wisdom tooth surgery, 14-year-old Ben Ellis of Gilmer County, Ga., who died the day after undergoing the same operation, and most recently 17-year-old Sydney Galleger who during wisdom tooth surgery went into cardiac arrest and in spite of intense efforts at saving her life (both medical and spiritual) died several days later in June 2015.

These deaths of teenagers or people in their twenties following dental extractions – at a time where most people’s health and resilience is at its best – seem to make it particularly clear what kind of a strain such surgery is for the entire body.

* It’s also possible that there already was an infection at the former tooth site. This can be the case eg with an impacted wisdom tooth (which became impacted in the bone due to lack of proper development of the jaw bone not allowing room for the wisdom teeth to erupt). Such impacted wisdom teeth may have a reduced blood supply so the inner nerve (pulp) will die with infection setting in. Extracting such a tooth can allow the infection to drain – the body’s way of cleansing itself which can be supported for instance with various disinfecting and detoxifying rinses. Once the process is complete, discomfort should be gone. To help extraction sites heal, also see below at “Tooth extraction after-treatments”.

Potential complications from orthodontic tooth extractions

To make room in an “overcrowded” mouth, frequently several (typically two to four) permanent teeth are extracted prior to orthodontic treatment. In addition to the risks noted above, removal of teeth can result in

  • unbalancing the facial profile because the upper and lower jaw including the palate and tongue recede
  • obstruction of airways with subsequent breathing difficulties, exhaustion and fatigue
  • jaw pain
  • headaches and migraines
  • ringing in the ears
  • postural problems (pain in the neck, shoulders and back)

In their book “Toxic Dentistry Exposed“, holistic dentists Drs. Munro-Hall go into some more detail:

“Orthodontic treatment that extracts teeth can lead to what dentists call collapsed arches. This means that although the teeth may be straight to look at, the fit of the upper teeth against the lower teeth is not in harmony with the shape of the jaw joints and position of the muscles controlling the jaw. The following things can happen.

  • Jaw joint trouble (TMD) later on in life.
  • Appearance is altered – instead of a wide, pleasing arch form of the mouth, the arches are narrow producing a ‘rosebud-shaped’ mouth with a weak chin that emphasises the size of the nose.
  • Impacted wisdom teeth – lack of development of the jaw bones does not allow room for the wisdom teeth to erupt and they become impacted in the bone. This is why we have far more wisdom teeth being removed now than ever before.” (end of quote)2

To extract or not extract a “rotten” tooth? That is the question…

Not for most all dentists, of course, even those considered holistic may typically advocate the extraction of teeth with far advanced tooth decay. Personally, rightly or wrongly, when it comes to teeth as in other areas, I don’t believe in physical violence including that inflicted for therapeutic purposes. For more arguments compare What happens if cavities are left untreated? On the “dangers” of tooth decay and dental infections not treated by a dentist.

When all is said and done, this is a personal decision, weighing the risks of constant bacterial dissemination (which of course can and frequently does occur from other parts of the body as well, particularly the intestines) against the multiple risks involved in extractions as explained above. (Make sure to read the following important additions…)

If an extraction is considered necessary…

There ARE a number of dramatic healings of various ailments attributed to the extraction of seriously infected teeth (particularly root-canaled teeth) or simply (neurally) “interfering” teeth. Extractions have sometimes saved people from the most serious and even life-threatening diseases, see e.g. the numerous examples featured under Dental interference fields and focal infections.

Whether an extraction turns out to be helpful or the opposite may frequently boil down to a simple question of proper surgical technique including pre- and post-surgery treatment. As eminent dentist Dr Adler and toxicologist Dr. Max Daunderer write, dentists in general don’t observe some of the basic hygienic rules imposed on all other (bone) surgeons both with respect to sterility and (obligatory for bone surgeons) post-treatment of the surgery wound.

Done and followed-up properly, dental extractions might rarely have negative consequences at all.

Drs. Munro-Hall give helpful instructions how to extract a tooth without having a cavitation infection form afterwards in their book “Toxic Dentistry Exposed“. In his book Root Canal Cover-Up, Dr. George E. Meinig details a similar protocol for removing root-filled teeth (see chapter 24: “Extraction Protocol”). Dr. Adler does the same in his book5, using his own technique.

Related Topics:

Science Finally Agrees our Meridians Exist*

Scientists Discover That Fasting Triggers Stem Cell Regeneration and Fights Cancer*

Social Engineering and an Inconvenient Tooth

U.K. to Put Fluoride in Milk for School Children*

Massive Protests Erupt Around Brazil as Impeachment of President Dilma Rousseff Looms*

Massive Protests Erupt Around Brazil as Impeachment of President Dilma Rousseff Looms*

Thousands of protestors took to the streets of Brazil in 15 different cities on Tuesday, as the Brazil senate voted to impeach President Dilma Rousseff.

Protestors rallied in support of Rousseff, holding banners and signs calling for the Acting President Michel Temer to step down.

Protestors say the impeachment has no legal basis and that it amounts to “a coup”.

Sputniknews.com reports:

Leonardo Péricles, national coordinator of the Fight in Regions, Villas and Slums (Movimento de Luta nos Bairros, Vilas e Favelas), which is part of the Brazil Without Fear movement (Brasil sem Medo), told Sputnik why current situation in the government is considered a coup.

“We believe that Temer’s government is not legitimate, as it came to power due to the institutional coup that differs from the revolutions with military personnel, tanks and bayonets, to which we got used to throughout our history,” said Péricles, adding that the coup took place in the upper house, the Senate, with a conservative majority, which does not support interests of the population.

“Temer’s government can be called the most corrupt after the military government. This coup is not only against Dilma, but also against the entire working class,” the activist continued.

Every day it becomes clearer, as we see the proposals and bills that are currently being developed to increase the working day and intensify the exploitation of the working class. Major banks in our country offer to increase the interest on the repayment of the national debt, which had already been absurdly high during the previous government,” he added.

Péricles also told about the case of Minister of Foreign Affairs José Serra, who was accused of receiving 23 million Brazilian Reals (US $7 million) from a construction company off-the-books.

“José Serra is of Temer’s government. It was a very well-founded charge that 23 million Reals were transferred to his pocket, and nothing is done about that. Major media in this country treats this news as unimportant and focused on other secondary issues of our political scenario.”

The activist is certain that what is happening is a coup, as it does not take into account many issues.

“It is clear that the President did not break budget laws. From our point of view, the biggest of Dilma’s mistakes is that she ruled in collaboration with the sectors, most of which are still in power. They gave up on the government in times of crisis, took the opposite side and held one of those major institutional coups that Latin America and the world has already seen,” Péricles concluded.

Source*

Related Topics:

Court Rules in Favour of Brazilians Protest Against Temer inside Olympic Venues*

Protests Continued through the Rio Games

First Interview with Brazil’s President Dilma Rousseff Since the Senate’s Impeachment Vote*

Brazil Revolts as Michel Temer Forces Austerity, U.S. Dirty Tricks Exposed*

Child Abuse in Australian Detention Camp*

Child Abuse in Australian Detention Camp*

A shocking report compiled based on 2,000 leaked documents reveals extreme cases of sexual abuse and misconduct against refugee children and women at an Australian detention facility.

Britain’s the Guardian newspaper on Wednesday published the eight-thousand page report that includes more than 2,000 incidents from the remote Pacific island of Nauru between May 2013 and October 2015.

It highlights serious concerns about the ongoing risks to children and adults held on the island.

More than half of the incidents involve children despite the fact that they made up only 18% of those in detention on Nauru during the time covered by the report.

In the files, there are seven reports of sexual assault against children, 59 reports of assault on children, 30 of self-harm involving children and 159 of threatened self-harm involving children, the Guardian said.

‘Public pressure can change detention policy’

Gillian Triggs, the Australian human rights commissioner, reacted to the Nauru files, saying public attention is needed in order for the government to change its detention policy.

“We really need the public’s attention to ensure that our politicians change the policy. This is unsustainable, and of course extremely expensive to the Australian taxpayer,” Triggs told ABC radio.

She said: “We rely very heavily on the media to report these facts and ensure the public is accurately informed, and I think that’s the case here.”

‘Inhumane and irresponsible’

Human Rights Watch (HRW) has also criticized Canberra, saying it is deliberately making refugees suffer in offshore facilities to curb new arrivals.

HRW Australian Director Elaine Pearson slammed as “inhumane and irresponsible” Canberra’s detention policy, saying the files painted a “disturbing picture” of the abuse on Nauru.

“This policy is inhumane and irresponsible, and it means refugees and asylum seekers remain vulnerable to further abuse and mistreatment,” she said.

The rights group demanded Australia immediately remove refugees from Nauru.

Barbed wire fences surround the Don Dale Youth Detention Centre located near Darwin in the Northern Territory, Australia, July 27, 2016.
The revelations came just weeks after the brutal treatment of young people in detention in Australia’s Northern Territory was exposed, leading to a wide-ranging public inquiry.

Canberra has been under pressure from international rights groups and U.N. agencies for its asylum policies that send boat refugees to remote processing centers on Manus Island and Nauru.

A joint report by the Amnesty International and HRW on Tuesday said Australia is following the intentional inhumane policy of mistreating asylum seekers held on the South Pacific island of Nauru in a bid “to deter further asylum-seekers from arriving in the country by boat.”

According to the report, nearly 1,200 men, women and children who sought refuge in Australia but were forcibly transferred to the remote island nation of Nauru suffered “severe abuse, inhumane treatment, and neglect”.

A medical report by the Australian Human Rights Commission has further said that 95% of children held in detention centres showed risks of post-traumatic stress disorder.

Source*

Related Topics:

10,000 Kids Missing in E.U. as Criminals ‘exploit’ Migrant Flow*

Refugee Children being Raped in Calais Camp*

Turkish Camp Serial Rapist gets 108 years for molesting Syrian Children*

Where Children are Imprisoned and Sexually Abused*

U.S. Judge Orders Release of ILLEGALLY Imprisoned Immigrant Children From Detention Centres*

English Thugs Mock and Throw Coins at Refugee Children*

Syrian Children Fight Back Against Carpet Bombing*

Child Survivors of Nepal Earthquake Sold to Rich British Families*

Child Abuse – The Scourge of the West*

From Child Trafficking to Head of U.N. Ops. in Haiti

Crimean Leader Blames the U.S. for Failed False in Crimea*

Crimean Leader Blames the U.S. for Failed False in Crimea*

By Ian Greenhalgh

The Crimean head says the Ukrainian officials “wouldn’t have had the courage to hold such actions”

The former emblem of the Ukrainian army is covered in paint in the colors of Russia on the gate of a Crimean military base

 

The Crimean leader is pointing the finger of blame at John Kerry’s State Department; we feel this is only partially correct. Yes, the U.S. is probably behind this attempted attack, but it is more likely to have been the Zionist Neocons as they are the ones behind the Ukrainian junta, having put them in power in the first place.

The U.S. Department of State is behind the Ukrainian authorities’ attempts to carry out terrorist acts in Crimea, Crimean Head Sergei Aksyonov said in an interview with Rossiya-24 TV Channel on Thursday.

“You see, upon which path they [the Ukrainian authorities] have embarked – the path of terror. That is, they have decided to transfer abroad the method they have tested against their own citizens. But at the same time I’m confident that these are not their own actions and intentions – the U.S. Department of State is behind them because Ukrainian officials wouldn’t have had the courage to hold such actions,” the Crimean head said.

Russia’s Federal Security Service (FSB) reported on August 10 that it had prevented terrorist acts in Crimea that had been prepared by the Main Intelligence Department of the Ukrainian Defence Ministry.

One FSB officer was killed during the operation to detain the terrorists. Later a serviceman of Russia’s Defence Ministry was killed as the saboteurs made a second attempt of intrusion. The terrorist attacks were designed to target critical infrastructure and life support facilities of Crimea.

Russian President Vladimir Putin said on Wednesday that Russia would do everything to ensure the security of citizens and infrastructure in Crimea. The Russian president called as silly and criminal the attempt by Ukrainian special services to carry out a subversive act in Crimea. He said their attempt was aimed at distracting attention from internal Ukrainian problems.

Source*

Related Topics:

U.S.-NATO Next Battle Front towards WWIII in Crimea Causes National Blackouts*

Israeli Minister: “Brussels Wouldn’t Be Attacked If E.U. Didn’t Boycott Israeli Products.”*

Israel-MOSSAD all over Brussels False Flag*

Over One Third of Nice Attack Victims Were Muslim*

Terror Attack in Nice: One Frenchman Speaks Out*

Spanish Independence and the Re-colonization of Southern Europe*

Free European Army in Defence of Ukraine against NATO and EU*

NWO: Landgrab a European Reality*

Cupping at the Olympics – what is it and why do athletes use it?*

Cupping at the Olympics – what is it and why do athletes use it?*

U.S. swimmer Michael Phelps with tell-tale cupping marks. Bernd Thissen/EPA

You may have noticed several Olympic athletes covered in bruises, including swimmer Michael Phelps and U.S. gymnast Alex Naddour. No, these are not minor injuries obtained during training; they look oddly circular and are located symmetrically all over the body. In fact, they are self-inflicted marks caused by an ancient form of therapy called “cupping”.

Cupping has long existed in many cultures including China, ostensibly to stimulate the flow of energy in the body. In recent months, however, there has been a flurry of renewed interest in it. It seems that cupping is having a comeback, and one does not need to be a clairvoyant to predict that, after the Olympic games, cupping will become flavour of the month.

Essentially there are two types: dry and wet cupping. Dry cupping involves a warm cup being placed over the skin. As the air in the cup cools it creates a suction effect which draws in the skin as the cup is placed on it. The suction is usually strong enough to create a haematoma, a swelling of blood within the tissues that is much larger than a normal bruise. As the cup normally has a circular shape, the haematoma is circular as well. These are the strange marks we see on the Olympic athletes.

Wet and dry

Wet cupping involves causing a superficial injury to the skin and then applying a cup over the injured site. This procedure will draw a small amount of blood into the cup. Wet cupping is painful and carries a risk of infection. By contrast, dry cupping is harmless and almost painless – when done correctly.

When, about 40 years ago, I worked in a homeopathic hospital, we used dry cupping regularly. There are several techniques, but the method we used was simple: all you need is a small glass cup, some cotton wool and white spirit. You soak a bit of cotton wool in the white spirit, set it alight, place it in the glass cup and then swiftly place the cup on the patient’s skin. The fire stops instantly, and the change in temperature creates the desired suction. After a while, the effect recedes and the cup falls off by itself. This method is simple but I do not advise anyone to try it at home. If you make a mistake, you can burn yourself badly.

Wet cupping is done in much the same way. Only one thing is different: one has to injure the skin before placing the cup over it, and this is what causes the pain. We used to do this with a little device that had multiple needles on it and looked like a miniature hedgehog; alternatively, we employed a scalpel to cut small, superficial incisions into the skin.

Back then, we used cupping mainly for musculoskeletal problems, such as back pain, neck pain or shoulder pain. Did it work? My impression was that it helped ease the pain of most patients. However, there weren’t any proper clinical trials to tell us more back then.

This lack of evidence continued until recently. I suspect it was Hollywood actress Gwyneth Paltrow who prompted some research into cupping. In 2004, she was photographed in a shoulderless evening dress which displayed the typical circular haematomas of cupping on her back. These photos went around the world and got people interested in this forgotten form of therapy.

Since then, there have been several clinical trials of cupping showing that it can work for pain, but I am not impressed. These studies are of very poor quality – many do not have good controls and/or are subject to bias, and some report results which, quite frankly, are too good to be true.

Yet I can well believe that cupping is effective – after all, I have seen it working with my own eyes. The question is how does it work? The procedure is clearly most impressive to the patient. It would be hardly surprising if cupping generated a significant placebo effect. In addition, it might work via a phenomenon called “counter irritation”. If you have a mild toothache and accidentally hit your thumb with a hammer, you will find that the counter irritation of the hammer strike made your tooth ache disappear instantly, at least for a while.

Of course, this is not what the cupping therapists will tell you. Depending on which tradition they subscribe to, they will spin a long yarn about life forces, chi or energies being put back into order. Like cupping itself, these explanations originate from the pre-scientific era and do not make the slightest sense in the light of what we know today.

Naturally, all this does not matter to the Olympic athletes who obviously swear by cupping. They want to ease the pain of overexertion and, because of the doping regulations, they have to be careful with many types of medicines. So any drug-free method to alleviate their pain is more than welcome. And whether it works via a pronounced placebo effect, counter irritation or some mystical energy is the least of their worries.

Source*

Related Topics:

Prophet Muhammad Said It, Now Top Doctors are Saying It*

Court Rules in Favour of Brazilians Protest Against Temer inside Olympic Venues*

Protests Continued through the Rio Games

Justice Department declined FBI Request to Investigate Clinton Foundation*

Justice Department declined FBI Request to Investigate Clinton Foundation*

By Sarah Westwood

Justice Department officials decided against an investigation into the Clinton Foundation after the FBI requested the agency open a case into allegations of corruption stemming from Hillary Clinton’s tenure as secretary of state.

But the Justice Department’s public integrity unit declined to pursue the probe given what it characterized as insufficient evidence, according to a CNN report Wednesday.

The State Department’s seemingly preferential treatment of foundation donors under Clinton’s leadership has raised questions about whether she and her aides ignored conflicts of interest in order to help the charity’s most generous donors. Emails made public this week have deepened suspicions that donors were afforded access and favors that other outsiders could not get from the agency.

FBI Director James Comey declined to comment last month on whether the FBI’s reported investigation of the Clinton Foundation had concluded with a separate probe into Clinton’s emails. For months, reports had hinted at a widening FBI inquiry related to the philanthropy’s foreign activities.

The Justice Department did not immediately return a request for comment.

Source*

Related Topics:

IRS Launches Investigation of Clinton Foundation*

Fed and State Raid on Union IBEW and Hillary Campaign Office*

Dallas Mum Discovers New Secret Service Sex scandals through Public Information Requests*

Clinton Body Count in Six Weeks*

Rothschilds, Trump, Killary and the Rigged U.S. Presidential Election*

What Hillary Clinton Did To Haiti Should Scare any Voter*

#DemExit Threatens To Fracture DNC – Media Told Not To Cover Movement*

Americans are Fleeing the U.S. in Droves*

Leaked DNC Documents Show Plans to Reward Big Donors with Federal Appointments*

Back to School Shots: How Your Child is Being Programmed*

Back to School Shots: How Your Child is Being Programmed*

Many parents already know that it is common practice for health departments, schools, and insurance companies to offer prizes to children and their families for being vaccinated. These programs have been implemented across the country and are designed to boost vaccination rates, rather than protect children’s health.

Prizes are also offered to health care providers who increase their immunization rates and fully immunize babies and toddlers within their practices.

However, parents may be surprised to learn about, later in this article, the massive amounts of money some doctors receive as bonus payments for vaccinating young patients. This article is a must-read for all parents, whether or not you have a child who will be resuming traditional school in the fall.

These Incentive Programs are Nothing New

Sadly, the idea to offer prizes in exchange for vaccinations has been around for decades or longer. A New York Times article from 1988 outlined the many ways our own city and state governments had already misguidedly encouraged parents to vaccinate their children, including offering prize drawings for a new car, bicycles, and coupons for discounted meals at fast food restaurants.

Children were encouraged to create designs for billboards to promote vaccination, at a time when health departments were facing declining vaccination rates, increasing costs, and growing vaccine schedules. Despite these concerns confronting public health departments, in 1988, children only needed 13 doses of ten vaccines by age 12, compared with 69 doses of 16 vaccines by age 18 today.

On the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) own website, the organization admitted that “since 1988, the U.S. childhood immunization schedule has rapidly expanded.” The number of recommended vaccinations has increased over 414 percent since 1950, when children were vaccinated with only seven vaccines by age six.

As the number of recommended vaccines has increased, the incentive programs have become more numerous, too.

Immunize to Win a Prize, Thanks to the Government

The Community Guide, a website with ties to the CDC and Healthy People 2020, has a task force which “recommends client or family incentive rewards, used alone or in combination with additional interventions, based on sufficient evidence of effectiveness in increasing vaccination rates in children and adults.”

Health departments across the country are heeding these ill-advised words.

In south-eastern Idaho, the public health department is offering Kindle Fire tablets in monthly drawings for children who receive vaccines at special clinics. They are offering a total of 24 tablet devices each month to entice children and parents into accepting vaccines.

Their state health department claims that “legally, in order to enter kindergarten, children are required to have five DTaP, two MMR, four Polio, three Hepatitis B, two Varicella (Chickenpox), and two Hepatitis A” vaccinations.

However, the press release fails to disclose that in Idaho, parents may file a medical, philosophical, or religious exemption from those vaccines on behalf of their children.

In Kansas, health departments in 105 counties have recently offered an outreach incentive program called “Immunize and Win a Prize,” targeting children under the age of two. Children must complete 19 vaccine doses before their second birthday in order for their parents to be eligible to win a prize, including a $200 or $300 utility bill payment at each of 380 participating providers and 300 smaller prizes. The program also provides petty incentives like sippy cups and diaper wipes.

This program was instituted in 2003 and all children are now eligible to participate, not just children who participate in Medicaid programs. Since its 2003 inception, immunization rates in Kansas have risen from 49% to 87% in 2010. In some counties, immunization rates have even doubled.

In Montana, a local news site informs readers that “all children who attend public and private schools in Montana are required to have specific, age-dependent immunizations,” also failing to note that medical and religious exemptions are available for families to opt out of vaccination. School-age children who are vaccinated early in the summer, before the back-to-school rush, are eligible to win prizes, including “iPods, bikes, backpacks, school supplies and passes to the Alpine Slide at Big Mountain at Glacier National Park,” courtesy of the state health department.

In Minnesota, families who participate in state health care programs are eligible to receive hundreds of dollars in gift cards for vaccinating their children and attending frequent well-child visits, which can be opportunities to pressure parents to obtain vaccinations for their children.

On its primitively designed website, one county in Wyoming boasts about its “enjoyable immunization incentive program,” which offers small weekly prizes and claims that “timely immunizations are healthy and fun.”

Prizes from Insurance Companies

One insurance company, Unity Insurance, promotes its own incentive program, “Fill it In and Win,” which offers cash prizes ranging from $25 to $150 to children who have been fully immunized by their 24 month birthday.

One vaccine advocacy organization, Partnership for Prevention, encourages insurance companies to increase vaccination rates by offering their policy holders monetary rewards, gift cards, or discounted insurance premiums when they accept vaccinations.

Humana health insurance company and John Hancock life insurance company offer policy holders “Vitality Points” to earn gift cards and fitness trackers when they complete certain “healthy” behaviors, including getting a flu shot.

Medical health plans offer hundreds of dollars worth of Visa gift cards to families who complete a series of well-child visits from birth to age 20, which offers providers dozens of chances to vaccinate pediatric patients. [19]

Prizes for Providers

In Michigan, nine counties participated in a health department program called “Adolescent Rate Challenge (ARC),” which offered trivial prizes to health care providers who increased their vaccination rates among adolescent patients. The program goals included administering 17 doses of vaccines to children ages 11 through 18.

Nearly laughable prizes awarded to participating providers included a family chicken dinner and a half-day pass to a local water park, as well as prizes for the office staff, including “Smoothies and Cookies, Desserts Delight, Parfait Splendor, Pizza & Pop Party, Espressos & Bagel Spread.” The website even noted that a bonus prize, a smoothie machine, had been added to the program.

Most disturbingly of all, Blue Cross Blue Shield insurance company offers health care providers a massive $400 bonus for every child patient who is vaccinated with at least 24 doses of ten vaccines before the age of two. For family practitioners and paediatricians who have dozens or hundreds of young patients, this bonus could add up to tens of thousands of dollars.

Conclusion

Where are the government-based incentives offering prizes to parents who read to their children? Or rewards for parents who provide their children with adequate levels of vitamin D to boost their immune systems, instead of rewarding them with meagre incentives for injecting their children with toxins?

This article outlines a mere fraction of the publicly and privately sponsored incentive programs in existence designed to pressure parents to vaccinate their children. If vaccines are so safe and effective, why do organizations need to provide toys, gift cards, money, and other prizes to boost vaccination rates in the United States? How can parents trust their health care providers to offer unbiased, fact-based information about vaccines, when those doctors receive enormous financial incentives for vaccinating their patients?

Please share this article to help other parents avoid vaccinating their children with toxic ingredients in order to win a prize. The costs of vaccine injuries, including developmental delays, symptoms of autism, seizures, and more, are too great and long-lasting to justify vaccination, especially in pursuit of a trivial prize.

Source*

Related Topics:

Five Year Old Girl Died from the MMR Vaccine Required for Kindergarten*

Mother Confronted Doctor with Undeniable Evidence Vaccines Harmed Her Child*

Finally a Real Lawsuit against Enforced Vaccinations in California*

Unvaccinated Children Seem Immune to Mysterious Virus Spreading in the Midwest*

Doctor Vows “No More Vaccines” at his Practice after Attending The AutismOne Conference*

Vaccines Injuries and Deaths Increase in Government Vaccine Court – June 2016 Report*

Flu Pandemic Drills for Mass Flu Vaccinations Begin in the U.S. Targeting Children in Schools*

Teenager Dies Five Days after HPV Vaccination*

Recent Harvard Mumps Outbreak Occurred only Among Vaccinated Students*

6-Month Old Paralyzed and Brain Damaged from Vaccines*

Meningitis Vaccines Suspended At U.K. School After Up to 15 Students Collapse*

Borax Being Added to Vaccines*

Vaccine Court Stats on Injuries and Deaths Betray Government’s Position on Vaccine Safety*

Congressional Testimony Exposes the Truth of the Vaccine-Autism Cover-up*

Western Governments Are Enslaving Humanity through Vaccines*

Documents from U.K. reveal 30 Years of Vaccine Cover-up*

WHO Admitted Smallpox Vaccine Caused AIDS after Requesting It*

Rockefeller, Ford Foundations behind World Social Forum (WSF)*

Rockefeller, Ford Foundations behind World Social Forum (WSF)*

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky

This year the World Social Forum is being held in Montreal, regrouping committed social activists, anti-war collectives and  prominent intellectuals. 

Most of the participants are unaware that the WSF is funded by corporate foundations including Ford, Rockefeller, Tides, et al.  Much of this funding is channelled to the WSF organizers under the helm of the WSF International Council. 

This is an issue which has been raised on numerous occasions with progressive organizations and WSF activists: you cannot effectively confront neo-liberalism and the New World Order elites and expect them to finance your activities.

The World Social Forum operating under the banner of  “Another World is Possible” was founded in 2001 at its inaugural venue of Porto Alegre. Brazil.

From the outset in 2001, the WSF has been upheld as an international umbrella representing grassroots people’s organizations, committed to reversing the tide of globalization. Its stated intent is to challenge corporate capitalism and its dominant neoliberal economic agenda.

The World Social Forum at its inaugural meeting defined itself as a counter-offensive to the World Economic Forum (WEF) of business leaders and politicians which meets annually in Davos, Switzerland. The 2001 Porto Alegre WSF was held simultaneously with that of the WEF in Davos.

While  there have been many important accomplishments of the WSF, largely as a result of the commitment of grassroots activists, the core leadership of WSF  –rather than effectively confronting the New World Order elites– has  (often unwittingly) to serve their corporate interests. In this process, cooptation has been achieved through the corporate funding of the WSF.

Among the two major accomplishments are the participation of the WSF in the February 2003 Worldwide protest against the U.S. led war on Iraq. The WSF has also supported progressive movements and governments, particularly in Latin America.

In contrast, at the Tunis 2013 WSF, the final declaration paid lip service to the U.S. sponsored “Syrian opposition”.  Similarly the Al Qaeda affiliated Libya Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) which allegedly led the “Arab Spring” against the government of Muammar Gaddafi was tacitly upheld as a revolutionary force. Several workshops on  Libya applauded Western military intervention. A session entitled “Libya’s transition to democracy” focused on “whether Libya was better off without Muammar Gaddafi.”

Funding dissent

From the outset in 2001, the World Social Forum was funded by governments and corporate foundations, including the Ford Foundation which has ties to U.S. intelligence.

The anti-globalization movement is opposed to Wall Street and the Texas oil giants controlled by Rockefeller, et al. Yet the foundations and charities of Ford, Rockefeller et al will generously fund progressive anti-capitalist networks as well as environmentalists (opposed to Wall Street and Big Oil), etc. with a view to ultimately overseeing and shaping their various activities.

The mechanisms of “manufacturing dissent” require a manipulative environment, a process of arm-twisting and subtle co-optation of  a small number of key individuals within “progressive organizations”, including anti-war coalitions, environmentalists and the anti-globalization movement. Many leaders of these organizations have in a sense betrayed their grassroots.

The corporations are funding dissent with a view to controlling dissent.

The Ford Foundation (which has links to the CIA) provided funding under its “Strengthening Global Civil Society” program during the first three years of the WSF.

When the WSF was held in Mumbai in 2004, the Indian WSF host committee declined support from the Ford Foundation. This in itself did not modify the WSF’s relationship to the donors. While the Ford Foundation formally withdrew, other foundations positioned themselves.

The WSF (among several sources of funding is supported by a consortium of corporate foundations under the advisory umbrella of Engaged Donors for Global Equity (EDGE). 

This organization, which previously went under the name of The Funders Network on Trade and Globalization (FTNG), has played a central role in the funding of successive WSF venues. From the outset in 2001, it had an observer status on the WSF International Council.  

In 2013, the Rockefeller Brothers representative Tom Kruse co-chaired EDGE’s program committee. At the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, Kruse was responsible for “Global Governance” under the “Democratic Practice” program. Rockefeller Brothers grants to NGOs are approved under the “Strengthening Democracy in Global Governance” program, which is broadly similar to that put forth by the US State Department.

A representative of the Open Society Initiative for Europe currently sits on EDGE’s Board of directors. The Wallace Global Fund is also on its Board of Directors. The Wallace Global Fund is specialized in providing support to “mainstream” NGOs and “alternative media”, including Amnesty International, Democracy Now (which supports Hillary Clinton’s candidacy for president of the U.S.).

Several members of the EDGE BoD, however, are from non-corporative and family foundations with a social mandate. (see below).

In one of its key documents (2012), entitled Funders Network Alliance In Support of Grassroots Organizing and Movement-Building  (link no longer available) EDGE acknowledged its support of social movements which challenge “neo-liberal market fundamentalism.” including the World Social Forum, established in 2001:

“From the Zapatista uprising in Chiapas (1994) to the Battle in Seattle (1999) to the creation of the World Social Forum in Porto Alegre (2001), the TINA years of Reagan and Thatcher (There Is No Alternative) have been replaced with the growing conviction that “another world is possible.” Counter-summits, global campaigns and social forums have been crucial spaces to articulate local struggles, share experiences and analyses, develop expertise, and build concrete forms of international solidarity among progressive movements for social, economic and ecological justice.”

But at the same time, there is an obvious contradiction: another world is not possible when the campaign against neo-liberalism is financed by an alliance of corporate donors firmly committed to neo-liberalism and the U.S. -NATO military agenda.

The following is the EDGE Montreal WSF Communique. The donors not only fund the activities, they also influence the structure of the WSF venue, which was determined in Puerto Alegre in 2001, namely the decentralized and dispersed mosaic of “do it yourself” workshops.

With regard to the Montreal WSF, the Consortium of Donors (EDGE) intent is:

“…to develop an intersectional space for funders and various movement partners – organizers thought leaders and practitioners – to build alignment by cultivating a shared understanding of the visions, values, principles and pathways of a “just transition.”  (See http://edgefunders.org/wsf-activities/)

“Just Transition” implies that social activism has to conform to a “shared vision” with the corporate foundations, i.e. nothing which in a meaningful way might upset the elite structures of global capitalism.

From the standpoint of the corporate donors “investing in the WSF” constitutes a profitable (tax deductible) undertaking. It ensures that activism remains within the confines of  ”constructive dialogue” and “critique” rather than confrontation. Any deviation immediately results in the curtailment of donor funding:

“Everything the [Ford] Foundation did could be regarded as “making the World safe for capitalism”, reducing social tensions by helping to comfort the afflicted, provide safety valves for the angry, and improve the functioning of government (McGeorge Bundy, National Security Advisor to Presidents John F. Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson (1961-1966), President of the Ford Foundation, (1966-1979))

The limits of social dissent are thereby determined by the “governance structure” of  the WSF, which was tacitly agreed upon with the funding agencies at the outset in 2001.

“No Leaders”

The WSF has no leaders. All the events are “self-organized”. The structure of debate and activism is part of an “open space” (See y Francine Mestrum, The World Social Forum and its governance: a multi-headed monster, CADTM, 27 April 2013, http://cadtm.org/The-World-Social-Forum-and-its ).

This compartmentalized structure is an obstacle to the development of a meaningful and articulate mass movement.

How best to control grassroots dissent against global capitalism?

Make sure that their leaders can be easily co-opted and that the rank and file will not develop “forms of international solidarity among progressive movements” (to use EDGE’s own words), which in any meaningful way might undermine the interests of corporate capital.

The mosaic of separate WSF workshops, the relative absence of plenary sessions, the creation of divisions within and between social movements, not to mention the absence of a cohesive and unified platform against the Wall Street corporate elites, against the fake U.S. sponsored “global war on terrorism”, which has been used to justify and US-NATO’s  ”humanitarian R2P interventions (Afghanistan, Syria, Iraq, Libya, Ukraine, etc).

The corporate agenda is to “manufacture dissent”.“The limits of dissent” are established by the foundations and governments which ultimately finance this multimillion dollar venue. The financing is twofold:

  1. Core financing of the WSF Secretariat and the Costs of the WSF venue.
  2. Many of the constituent NGOs which participate in the venue are recipients of donor and/or government support.
  3. The WSF venue in Montreal also receives funding from the Government of Canada as well as from the Quebec provincial government.

What ultimately prevails is a ritual of dissent which does not threaten the New World Order. Those who attend the WSF from the grassroots are often misled by their leaders. Activists who do not share the WSF consensus will ultimately be excluded:

“By providing the funding and the policy framework to many concerned and dedicated people working within the non-profit sector, the ruling class is able to co-opt leadership from grassroots communities, … and is able to make the funding, accounting, and evaluation components of the work so time consuming and onerous that social justice work is virtually impossible under these conditions” (Paul Kivel, You Call this Democracy, Who Benefits, Who Pays and Who Really Decides, 2004, p. 122 )

“Another World is Possible” is nonetheless an important concept, which characterizes the struggle of the peoples movements against global capitalism as well as the commitment of thousands of committed activists who are currently participated in the Montreal 2016 WSF.

Activism is being manipulated:  ”Another World is Possible”  cannot, however, be achieved under the auspices of the WSF which from the outset was funded by global capitalism and organized in close liaison with its corporate and government donors.

The important question for activists in Montreal:

Is it possible to build “an Alternative” to global capitalism, which challenges the hegemony of the Rockefellers et al and then asks the Rockefellers et al to foot the bill?  

We call upon participants of the Montreal World Social Forum (WSF) to raise and debate these issues: the campaign against neo-liberalism is financed by corporate foundations (and governments) which are firmly committed not only to the tenets of neo-liberalism but also to the U.S.-NATO led military agenda.

Why would they fund organizations which are actively campaigning against war and globalization? The answer is obvious. …

Source*

Related Topics:

Another World is Possible!

U.S. Attorney Escalates Attacks Palestinian Human Rights Activists

Condemnation of FBI Raids on Homes of Peace Activists

Sacred Activism and the Lighting of the Third Fire*

The Never-ending Feminist War on Children*

Why Billionaire Oligarchs Bankroll Feminism*

How Feminism Destroys Society*

Gays Who Reject the Illuminati Agenda*

Gay Activist Admits our Goal is to Indoctrinate Children*

ACLU At Odds With Activists*

Rockefeller Music Project in the War on Consciousness*

Western Medicine Is Rockefeller Medicine*

1924 Newspaper Article Outlines Six Goals of the Illuminati*

The Illuminati’s 2016 Summer Of Chaos! Race War, Martial Law, Obama 3rd Term?

New Israeli Crackdown Aims to Root Out, expel BDS Activists*

Top Illuminati Grand Wizard: “We Control Islam and We’ll Use It to Destroy the West.” (WW3)*

New Zealand Police Intimidate Anti-TPP Activists in Their Homes*

The Radical Work of Healing: Fania and Assata (Angela Davis) on a New Kind of Civil Rights Activism*

Far-right Activists Impersonated Police, Attacked Refugees, Stole their Possessions in Calais*