Aborted Fetal Cells in Pepsi?

Image via Wikipedia

Are there really aborted fetal cells in your drink? If its from PepsiCo- maybe. Apparently such human cells enhance flavor, so it just stands to reason that you would want aborted fetal cells in your Pepsi, right? As long as it tastes good, right?

Pro-life groups call for Pepsi boycott over aborted fetal cell lines

BY REBECCA MILLETTE

• Thu May 26, 2011 14:17 EST
• Comments (13)
• Tags: Abortion, Fetal Cell Lines, Pepsi, Senomyx

LARGO, Florida, May 26, 2011 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Scores of prolife groups are calling for a public boycott of food giant, PepsiCo, due to its partnership with Senomyx, a biotech company that uses aborted fetal cells in the research and development of artificial flavor enhancers.

LifeSiteNews previously reported on Senomyx’s partnership with major food corporations, most notably PepsiCo, Kraft Foods, and Nestlé. 

Pro-life watchdog group, Children of God for Life (CGL), is now joined by major pro-life organizations calling upon the public to target PepsiCo in a boycott.

Pepsi is funding the research and development, and paying royalties to Senomyx, which uses HEK-293 (human embryonic kidney cells) to produce flavor enhancers for Pepsi beverages.

“Using isolated human taste receptors we created proprietary taste receptor-based assay systems that provide a biochemical or electronic readout when a flavor ingredient interacts with the receptor,” says the Senomyx website.

“What they do not tell the public is that they are using HEK 293 – human embryonic kidney cells taken from an electively aborted baby to produce those receptors,” stated Debi Vinnedge, President for CGL, the watch dog group that has been monitoring the use of aborted fetal material in medical products and cosmetics for years.

The aborted fetal cells are not in the product itself. However, “there are many options PepsiCo could be using instead of aborted fetal cells,” noted Vinnedge.

The revelation about Senomyx’s research techniques motivated Campbell Soup to sever all relations with Senomyx.

However, PepsiCo continues their business relationship despite the abortion connection. They drew pubic ire earlier this year when they responded, saying, “our collaboration with Senomyx is strictly limited to creating lower-calorie, great-tasting beverages for consumers.”

When pressed further, PepsiCo sent out a form letter response saying they had been accused of conducting aborted fetal tissue research.

Bradley Mattes, executive director of Life Issues Institute, said, “While aborted fetal cells aren’t actually in the product itself, the close relationship is enough to repulse most consumers.  To our knowledge, this is the first time a food product has been publicly associated with abortion.”

The pro-life groups noted that additional companies collaborating with Senomyx will be targeted for boycott next.

The pro-life organizations are asking the public to boycott all Pepsi drink products and encourage consumers to contact Pepsi management requesting that they sever all ties with Senomyx.

For a list of Pepsi Beverages included in the boycott: http://pepsico.com/Brands/Pepsi_Cola-Brands.html

To Contact PepsiCo:

Jamie Caulfield, Sr. VP
PepsiCo, Inc.
700 Anderson Hill Road
Purchase, NY 10577
(914) 253-2000
Email form.

Edmund M. Carpenter, Chair, Corporate Development
Campbell Soup
1 Campbell Place
Camden, NJ 08103-1701
1-800-257-8443
Email form

Pro-life groups joining CGL in the boycott to date are:  Life Issues Institute, American Life League,  Colorado Right to Life, American Right to Life, Sound Choice Pharmaceutical Institute, ALL Arizona, Central Nebraskans for Life, Pro-Life Waco, Houston Coalition for Life, Mother and Unborn Baby Fox Valley, Womankind, Billboards for Life, Movement for a Better America, Defenders of the Unborn, Focus Pregnancy Help Center, Idaho Chooses Life, EMC Frontline Pregnancy Centers of NY, Four Seasons for Life, CREDO,  Life Choices, STOPP Dallas, CA Right To Life, Human Life Alliance, International Right to Life Federation, Operation Rescue, Pro-Life Nation, LifeNews.com, and Mary’s Outreach for Women.

Stinky the Bug is Eating Your Food

Stink bugs are everywhere. I never saw one before until last summer when I saw one in my house. So far this year I've killed at least 6 in my house and I am starting to see them everywhere. I didn't know they were eating up America's fruit, but they are bringing farmers to the brink of disaster. In some cases 50% or more of crops are destroyed. I heard of the 4 horsemen of the Apocalypse, but nothing about a bug. Famine brought to you by a little bug by the name of Stinky.

Now U.S. plagued by stink bug epidemic, causing $37m in damage as one-fifth of apple harvest is ruined

By DAILY MAIL REPORTER

Last updated at 5:38 PM on 21st May 2011

• Comments (11)
• Add to My Stories
• Share

• 'Bug from hell' spreading after surviving the winter
• Asian invader affecting crops in 33 states

Brown stink bugs are causing millions of dollars in crop damage, with the apple industry being hit the hardest.

Growers in the mid-Atlantic region have reported the worst problems with about 18 per cent of the crop ruined.

The industry has reported $37million in damage to apple growers in Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia and West Virginia this spring.

The enemy: The brown marmorated stink bug has now been spotted in 33 states

SPREAD OF THE STINK BUG

The brown marmorated stink bug - or Halyomorpha halys - is not native to the U.S.

First found in Allentown, Pennsylvania, in 1998, it is believed to have been introduced into the east of the state a few years earlier.

While not dangerous, it is clear when a stink bug is around due to the appalling smell it emits when squashed or crushed.

The insect does not transmit disease and is not poisonous, but can bite humans. It also likes to eat plants and vegetables. Irritatingly, the stink bug is extremely difficult to catch as it can simply fly away.

Coming from the insect family Pentatomidae, it is well known as an agricultural pest in its native habitat of China, Japan, Korea and Taiwan.

In recent years it has feasted on crops on islands in the mid-Atlantic and is now feared to become a regular feature in the U.S. in summers to come, although it sometimes surfaces during sunny winter days.

Its scent glands, which are found on the dorsal surface of the abdomen and underside of the thorax, are responsible for its repulsive stink.

It typically lays yellow or yellow/red eggs on the underside of leaves in batches of 20 to 30.

The bug, a three-quarter-inch invader native to Asia, has a huge appetite and has no domestic natural predators.

It is believed to have been brought first to the Allentown area of Pennsylvania in 1998.

The bug began appearing in mid-Atlantic orchards in 2003-04 and exploded in number last year.

They have now been seen in 33 states, including every one east of the Mississippi River and as far west as California, Oregon and Washington.

Research entomologist Tracy Leskey, who works at the U.S. Agriculture Department's Appalachian Fruit Research Station in Kearneysville, West Virginia, said: 'All that we do know for certain is that a tremendously large population went into overwintering in fall 2010.

'So, if they survived, there could be a very large population emerging.'

Mark Seetin, the association's director of regulatory and industry affairs, called it the worst threat to farmers he's see in his 40 years in agriculture.

America's biggest apple producer, Washington state, has yet to report serious so far.

Aside from apples, the bug, named for the foul smell it gives off when crushed, will feed on nearly anything, including cherries, tomatoes, grapes, lima beans, soybeans, green peppers and peaches.

It uses a needle-like mouth to pierce the skin of its host fruit or vegetable, leaving behind a spot that is disfigured and discolored.

Stink bugs wiped out up to 40 per cent of Tom Haas's peaches last season at his Cherry Hill Orchards in Lancaster, Pennsylvania.

Mr Haas, the owner of the family-run orchard, said: 'This is the worst, probably, that I've dealt with in 25 years. The damage they do to fruit is horrendous.' 

'Horrendous damage': Orchard owner Tom Haas shows an apple with damage caused by brown marmorated stink bugs in Lancaster, Pennsylvania

At Catoctin Mountain Orchard, about ten miles south of the Maryland-Pennsylvania line, owner Robert Black said he did not realise how bad the stink bug damage was until his apples ripened.

He said: 'My late varieties of Pink Ladies is what really took the damage. We had a 50 percent damage there.'

Federal researchers have set up devices in Black's operation and in eight other commercial orchards in Maryland and West Virginia to monitor the bugs, the Associated Press reports.

Other scientists from North Carolina to New York are scrambling to fight back against the pests.

Rep. Roscoe Bartlett, from Maryland, started demanding federal action last year after hearing from orchard growers in his western Maryland district.

Spreading: The eight states in red are the most recent to have reported infestations, while those in green show the furthest they have travelled north, south and west

He said: 'If I was a mad scientist doing gene splicing and putting together a bug that would really be nasty and I was turning it loose on my enemy, I probably couldn't do a better job.

'One might define this thing as the bug from hell."

Researchers are considering long-term solutions, such as finding chemicals that can attract stink bugs to traps before they can feed on fruit — a strategy that has worked in controlling Japanese beetles.

For growers seeking immediate help, the best hope is an insecticide called dinotefuran, the active ingredient in the commercial products Venom and Scorpion.

New threat: Tom Haas looks through a bin of apples after attacks by stink bugs, who arrived in 1998 from Asia

The chemical compound is labelled by the Environmental Protection Agency for use on vegetables, grapes and cotton, but not in orchards, as it is in Japan and other Asian countries.

The EPA said manufacturer Mitsui Chemicals Inc. didn't ask to have dinotefuran licensed for tree fruit applications when the agency approved it in 2004.

Now the EPA is reviewing an emergency-exemption petition from the Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services that could allow the compound's use in orchards in Delaware, Maryland, New Jersey, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Virginia and West Virginia, starting in mid-July.

At a recent meeting with growers at a Penn State research station in Biglerville, tree-fruit entomologist Greg Krawczyk warned that insecticides couldn't provide an easy solution.

He said: 'When you spray the crop with completely legal, viable insecticide, you will kill the stink bug, but the problem is that you will do it today, and a few days later you will have another whole group of them migrating from the outside. So they just keep moving.'

Explore more:

People: 

Robert Black 

Places: 

New York, 

China, 

Japan,

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1389340/Stink-bug-epidemic-causes-37m-damage-fifth-apples-ruined.html#ixzz1N6ZNLqzg

Related articles

• Mid-Atlantic Dreads Bad Summer of Foul, Hungry Stink Bugs (nytimes.com)
• Stink Bugs To Cause Havoc To Hudson Valley Fruit Crops (newyork.cbslocal.com)
• THE STINKING TRUTH: Asian bugs threaten U.S. farmers (politico.com)
• Forget Bed Bugs: Stink Bugs Are America's Newest Pest (newsfeed.time.com)

Raw Milk Demonstration Hits DC (video)

Original Scientist: Nuclear Expert Says: "Fukushima Out of Control..."...

Original Scientist: Nuclear Expert Says: "Fukushima Out of Control..."...: "Instead of President Obama waging a global assassination campaign against imaginary impotent enemies, he should be addressing the true globa..."

Radiation Protection for You and Your Children

The news from Japan is grim. It seems that what happened at Fukishima in the wake of the quake and tsunami is much much worse than previously believed.  The authorities of the Japanese government now admit that there has been a complete meltdown in at least one reactor, but maybe in three reactors! Recent reports also make it clear that there is no reliable plan underway to contain the spreading radiation. Plutonium, the most toxic substance in the Universe has been spread as far as 30 kilometers from Fukushima, and radioactivity is raining down on Tokyo, prompting talk of removing the government from there to another, safer location. If the Fukushima disaster was just Japan's problem, we could all just tune out and watch the NBA playoffs as per usual, but, such disasters are not local, or national in nature- They are truly global and involve us all. You and me and everybody we know is at risk from what is taking place in Japan. Here is something you can do to help protect yourself and your children, as we have now entered into a new phase of human civilization on this planet.

Radiation Protection: Your Child and Your Pregnancy...

As multiple nuclear reactors in Fukushima exhaust their particles into the ocean and atmosphere, certain species and categories of life prove their greater or lesser cellular vulnerability. If you want quick solutions, go here.

Radiation affects cells that are in vulnerable phases of their life cycles.  The most vulnerable times of life are in the pre and peri-natal stages,  and therefore women who are pregnant.  It is CRUCIAL that we understand that everything that happens to a pregnant mother, whether it be radiation exposure, drugs prescription or otherwise, alcohol, emotional trauma…  are felt and IMPRINTED into the fetus.  The child’s physical and emotional health will then be influenced by those factors.  It’s a miracle we all aren’t sick or insane.  On the other hand, we have one crazy planet on our hands. If you or someone you know has been affected by birth trauma, we have a miracle-worker therapist that comes to our clinic.  (call us).

The remaining population with great vulnerability is those that are already compromised by weakened immune systems such as in HIV, post-chemotherapy patients and some auto-immune disorders.  This article summarizes the reasons why pregnant women and infants through pubescent individuals are more likely to be affected by radiation, and what can be done to optimize their own protective mechanisms besides adding challenges to their immune systems such as dietary toxins (artificial sweeteners, sugar, processed meats, toxic fats).

Children grow rapidly. There are more cells dividing and a greater opportunity for radiation to disrupt the growth process than in adults.  Fetuses are even more highly sensitive to radiation. The resulting effects depend upon which systems are developing at the time of exposure.

Radiation causes several destructive processes to occur at the cellular and organ-functional levels:

1)    Rupturing of the cell membrane, allowing for fluids that should be kept outside the cell to come inside as ions and nutrients from the cell are lost.
2)    Disruption to the mitochondria, this interrupts the cells food supply (ATP). If the cell has a large reserve of ATP it can repair the damage and continue to produce ATP. The cell will eventually die from starvation if the dose of radiation is great enough or the cell is vulnerable enough.
3)    Lysosomal destruction. A lysosome is a cellular component that is damaged with only 500 rads, and by this disruption, enzymes are released within the cell and then start digesting structures within the cell itself.  In the case of large doses of radiation, even digestive enzymes secreted by the pancreas and stomach are rendered inactive.
4)    Nucleus Impairment. Perhaps the most sensitive part of the cell to radiation is the nucleus.  There is a wide band of sensitivity for cell nuclei, quantifying a dose range is difficult. The major effect of radiation here is the inhibition of DNA replication.  This means the cell is unable to prepare for division.  Before a cell divides it produces a complete set of chromosomes which carry all the information needed to reproduce the organism.  With damaged DNA, duplicate chromosomes cannot be manufactured.  If this process is delayed long enough, the cell dies and the death can be compared to death in childbirth.
5)    In pregnancy, radiation damage to mitotic processes.  This involves the replacement of stem cells with somatic cells that form our organs.

In 1906, Bergonie and Tribondeau exposed rabbit testes to X-Rays and observed the effects on the testicular reproductie cells.  They determined that radiosensitivity (vulnerability to radiation) is a function of the metabolic state of the cell being irradiated.  The degree of damage and mutation is exactly proportionate to the level of metabolism and division of that cell.  Therefore fetuses and infants are much more vulnerable to lower amounts of radiation than those with normal rates of cellular processes and development.  Stem cells are the most vulnerable, since they are not yet differentiated and have a very high mitotic rate.

Another effect of radiation passing through living cells is the direct ionization or excitation of atoms and molecules in the cell structure. These changes affect the forces that bind the atoms together into molecules.  If the molecule breaks up (dissociates) the fragments are called ‘free radicals’ and ions and are not chemically stable anymore.  Free radicals are electrically neutral structures with one unpaired electron. When a free radical interacts with healthy cells, they become unhealthy.

Most effects from radiation are of course from chronic exposure of a low dose over years.

The systems of the body most affected is the hematopoietic systems that include the bone marrow, lymph nodes, spleen and thymus glands.  The diseases associated with radiation exposure are Cancers of the bile ducts, bone, brain, breast, colon, esophagus, gall bladder, liver (primary site, but not if cirrhosis or hepatitis B is indicated), lung (including bronchiolo-alveolar cancer), pancreas, pharynx, ovary, salivary gland, small intestine, stomach, thyroid, urinary tract (kidney/renal, pelvis, urinary bladder, and urethra), leukemia (except chronic lymphocytic leukemia), lymphomas (except Hodgkin’s disease), and multiple myeloma (cancer of plasma cells).

Diseases of infants and children from radiation exposure is blindness, mental deficiency, coordination defects, deformation and physical subnormality.  Most abnormalities of the fetus are produced from exposures during the first trimester, particularly in the 2nd to 6th week.  Exposures as low as 25 rad have been shown to produce developmental changes. Less obvious effects can be seen in exposures at later periods of gestation.

Both the type of radiation and the pathway by which a person is exposed influence the overall effects. Different types of radiation vary in their ability to damage different kinds of tissue.  Radiation and radiation emitters (radionuclides) can perfuse the whole body or expose certain tissues when they are inhaled or swallowed.   Many kinds of ionizing radiation can cause cancer and other health effects.  The main difference in the ability of alpha and beta particles and gamma and x-Rays to cause health problems is the amount of energy they can deposit in a given space.  Their energy determines how far they can penetrate into tissue.  It also determines how much energy they are able to transmit directly or indirectly to tissues and the resulting damage.  Although an alfpha particle and a gamma ray may have the same amount of energy, inside the body, the alpha particle will deposit all of its energy in a small volume of tissue, where the gamma radiation will spread energy over a much larger volume. This is because alpha particles have a mass that carries the energy, and gamma rays do not.

As if that isn’t enough, radioactive elements/particles such as Uranium are toxic even when they are not radioactive.  The same with many other heavy metals.  There is research to suggest that the more heavy metal toxicity a person has (very common nowadays), the more likely that person is to absorb and retain radioactive nuclides.

In my practice we have determined that there is a pronounced upward trend in heavy metal toxicity that can result in cognitive disorders, ADD, chronic infections, cancer and many other syndromes.  Europe and North America has seen rises recently in Lead, Mercury, Uranium, Cadmium, Arsenic, Aluminum and Lithium.  For example, recently we have seen a rise in Uranium.  This is not radioactive Uranium.  The element alone has been studied and has been found to block the processes of metabolism of carbohydrates by the inhibition of enzyme systems, creating a strong effect of fatigue and lowered oxygenation of cells. Uranium is present in air, water, and food, and most people consume tiny amounts of it daily.  Uranium is a heavy metal similar to tungsten, lead, mercury, and cadmium. As we said, its toxic chemical characteristics as a heavy metal are independent of its radiological characteristics.

More than a third of Britain is still contaminated by radioactivity from the Chernobyl disaster two decades ago, and children are getting cancer as a result.

Why are Children Really more Vulnerable?

Children are much more vulnerable to the harmful effects of radiation disasters than the general population because their bodies absorb and metabolize substances differently, and because they are more likely to develop certain cancers from such an exposure. They also are closer to the ground, where radioactive fallout settles. In addition to physical harm, children may suffer from loss of parents, separation from their homes, and post-traumatic stress.

Radioactive Iodine is the first isotope to consider in any nuclear fallout or disaster.  The dosages are designed to block the thyroid absorption of radioactive iodine in order to prevent thyroid cancer.  The treatment is normally harmless and should be only continued for acute exposures of high amounts of I-131 (see our Geiger counter page and our Radiation Protection I article) in the high levels usually found nearby a nuclear event.  Do not take Potassium Iodide, the blocking agent, if there is an autoimmune thyroid disease or if you do not know whether the radioactive Iodine is highly elevated where you are exposed.

How it works: The thyroid is the only part of the body that absorbs and stores iodine. By taking FDA Approved potassium iodide prior to exposure of radioactive iodine, your thyroid will become saturated with safe, stable iodine. This will prevent your thyroid's absorption of any additional iodine (radioactive or not) long enough for the radioactive iodine inhaled or ingested to be safely dispersed through the kidneys. Outcome: No Thyroid Cancer

We treat mothers and children with non-drug precision supplements for many maladies from developmental disorders, digestive complaints, behavioral complaints, as well as allergies.  In case of birth trauma, effects from anesthesia or drugs and other emotional trauma, we now have a trauma specialist on our team that uses a neurologically-based therapy called,  “Somatic Experiencing” that is the treatment of the future, and is very affordable.  Call Nicole for appointments at (831) 685-1125 or make your appointment through our website www.fortifyhealth.com.

Related articles

• Q&A: Health effects of radiation exposure - BBC News (news.google.com)
• Radiation Health Risk (lifeabundantly-alim.blogspot.com)
• Radiation - The Effects of Radiation on Man (socyberty.com)

Why You Should Eat Your Salt

Why the purified chemical, sodium chloride (NaCl), improperly known as "table salt" should be allowed to wear the name salt at all is beyond me. It's like "soy milk" and "rice milk" which of course are just corporate fictions that have nothing to do with real milk designed to make 

Real salt containing 92 essential minerals 

you think that some artificial factory product that they make is related to food. Only God knows how to make food, not some chemical company or a so-call "food giant" who thinks that food is a business. In my opinion only humans should be allowed to be involved with food. No corporations should be allowed any where near where human food is concerned. 

Another good idea would be to have doctors educated about food instead of drugs. Then maybe they could get somewhere in helping people to be healthy. As anybody who has ever cried salty tears knows, salt is a part of what makes up a healthy human body, but not pure sodium chloride, real salt, as found in the living oceans of the world, that contains all the trace elements needed for optimum human functioning. My favorite is  light grey Celtic Sea Salt. Get it and use it.

Heart Disease Deaths Four Times Higher With Low Salt Intake

Submitted by Lois Rain on May 10, 2011 – 8:51 pm20 Comments

Share

The phony stuff, pure chemical NaCl

Maybe you are among the fortunate few who enjoyed salty seasoned meals, defying all medical warnings and nagging from your friends and family. The Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) is changing their tune about salt intake. Natural health professionals have long valued salt for cardiovascular balance among other benefits.

JAMA will publish a study that shows that people with greater salt intake are the ones more likely to avoid hypertension, heart disease and death. Doctors never really could explain why they believed lower salt intake would improve heart health.

But don’t expect convention doctors to sing the praises of salt any time soon.

~Health Freedoms

Heart Disease Deaths Four Times Higher With Low Salt Intake: JAMA Study

As Gaia Health has informed you, there is no truth to the claim that high salt intake is unhealthy. In fact, evidence shows the opposite to be true.

Forget all those claims that you need to keep your salt intake low to maintain heart health. It isn’t true. Those claims have been based on deeply flawed studies and the medical establishment’s enforcement of lock-step obedience to whatever the current orders happen to be. Right now, one of them is that lower salt intake is healthy for everyone. The reality is exactly the opposite for most people.

Today, the Journal of the American Medical Association(JAMA) is publishing a study of 3,681 people that correlated their salt intake with hypertension and cardiovascular disease and death. The results are clear: People with greater salt intake have significantly less heart disease and death from it.

The authors concluded:

The associations between systolic pressure and sodium excretion did not translate into less morbidity or improved survival. On the contrary, low sodium excretion predicted higher cardiovascular mortality. Taken together, our current findings refute the estimates of computer models of lives saved and health care costs reduced with lower salt intake. They do also [sic] not support the current recommendations of a generalized and indiscriminate reduction of salt intake at the population level. However, they do not negate the blood pressure-lowering effects of a dietary salt reduction in hypertensive patients

Notice, also, that lowering blood pressure is not beneficial to health, though that claim is also routinely made. As the JAMA study shows, a slight decrease in blood pressure occurs with lowered salt intake; it’s nominal and entirely unrelated to outcomes.Trial participants were followed for a median of 7.9 years. Overall, the death rates were:

Independence of the Study

The study, entitled “Fatal and Nonfatal Outcomes, Incidence of Hypertension, and Blood Pressure Changes in Relation to Urinary Sodium Excretion”, did not suffer from the common flaws of many, if not most, medical studies. It wasn’t financed by Big Pharma. None of the authors received money from Big Pharma or industries related to the topic studied. There were no ghost authors; the researchers who drafted the manuscript are specified. The researchers named first and last in the credits, Katarzyna Stolarz-Skrzypek, MD, PhD and Jan A. Staessen, MD, PhD for the European Project on Genes in Hypertension, were both the research leaders and the actual authors.

How Are Estimates of Death Rates from Salt Intake Generally Made?

Of course, we’re all aware of just how consistently we’re told that lower salt intake improves heart health. But how do you suppose they come up with the estimates that supposedly prove it? It’s done by magic, of course! As the study’s authors point out, presumptions are fed into computer models, which grind out predefined results of “lives saved”. The claims are based on bits being tossed around inside computer chips, not on real-life data.

Furious Response from Mainstream Medicos

As might be expected, mainstream medical so-called experts are furious about the study. According to reporting by Lisa Nainggolan of theHeart.org, Dr. Graham MacGregor, of Queen Mary University, London, a low-salt promoter who has managed to con the entire UK nation into reducing food salt content, the findings are “paradoxical” and, therefore, cannot be trusted. He stated:

They’ve shown that salt puts up blood pressure, and yet they then claim that salt relates inversely to events. Well, that doesn’t make sense…[It illustrates] the bias of the authors, in my view. Everything else that has been shown to lower BP is beneficial in terms of heart attacks and strokes.

He further stated that the paper is “badly written” and has “severe methodological problem, and continued with:

I really don’t think this is worth paying attention to. They are trying to create a stir. This is clever, but it’s harmful in my view. It’s like saying we don’t think cigarettes are harmful so we shouldn’t do anything about smoking.

The overall evidence [in favor of salt reduction] is overwhelming. That isn’t to say we wouldn’t change our mind if we had really good evidence, but I don’t think this is it. This will not divert us from reducing salt intake worldwide. At a high-level meeting of the World Health Organization, salt reduction has been recommended as the next thing after tobacco reduction because it’s so cost-effective to implement and so easy to do.

MacGregor uses typical methods of obfuscating. He attacks the quality of the study, but offers little to support his assertion. He makes sweeping claims without supporting them. He then falls back on one of the grand standards for those who don’t really have good evidence to support their contentions: They make clear that their view is the popular one.

In the end, MacGregor states that, even if the study were “perfectly done” it wouldn’t make any difference, because there are so many that support his point of view. What he doesn’t mention is how deeply flawed those studies are. As I discussed in Take a Grain of Salt With That Salt Reduction Advice, careful analysis of most of those studies shows that they tend to cherry-pick data, while meta analysis of the data itself shows the same results as this study.

Turning Differing Views Into Heresy

The danger inherent in rigidly held beliefs by entrenched health powers is clearly revealed here. Modern medicine’s focus on treating disease, rather than on maintaining health, has resulted in promotion of many false claims, with obvious negative effects on the well-being of people.

It has become virtual heresy to suggest that any claims by modern medicine are incorrect. It’s so ingrained that even alternative medicine often follows the pack, as in the advice to lower salt intake.

And now, we have governments enforcing these false claims. Salt reduction is being enforced in the food industry. Schools are reducing salt in lunches—and some schools are forcing children to eat their lunches instead of bringing them from home. There is now an industry in place to push people into consuming less salt.

Don’t expect the results of this study to have any effect on what modern medicine or their cohorts in crime, governmental agencies, do regarding salt recommendations. Too much is riding on them. Reputations of doctors and high-ranking government officials could be harmed if the truth were acknowledged. The waste of massive amounts of the public’s money in promoting lower salt intake would betray the political health of elected officials. In that world, the actual health of the people carries little weight.

As a result, any pseudo-study that promotes the approved doctrine is pointed out as “proving” the official proclamation. Any honest study that demonstrates the truth is quickly ridiculed, condemned, and then quietly swept under the rug.

Humans have understood the value of salt since humans have existed. It was traded among the earliest communities on earth—likely back in the times of cave dwelling. We use expressions like “salt of the earth” because of that recognition of its value. Only in modern times, with science corrupted by corrupted medicine and government,is salt treated as our enemy.

by Heidi Stevenson

Source:

http://gaia-health.com/articles401/000449-lower-salt-higher-death.shtml

Related articles

• Take heart: Salt may not be bad (nydailynews.com)
• High salt diet 'lowers heart disease risk' (news.bioscholar.com)