The Beautiful Poisoned Children of China – EcoWatch: Cutting Edge Environmental News Service

Murder by pollution....
http://ecowatch.com/2013/beautiful-poisoned-children-of-china/

In the last four months, pollution levels in China have climbed to levels never before recorded in the history of our planet. More than 1.2 million Chinese per year are dying early due to pollution while birth defects soar. Education officials in the most polluted regions of China have moved beyond educational programs to try to change adult behavior that robs children of the possibility of a healthy life in their own country.

Foundation Training Helps Counteract the Effects of Sitting

http://fitness.mercola.com/sites/fitness/archive/2013/05/03/grounding-sitting-health-effects.aspx?e_cid=20130503_DNL_art_1&utm_source=dnl&utm_medium=email&utm_content=art1&utm_campaign=20130503

Visit the Fitness Video Library

By Dr. Mercola

Most people, including me, spend a large portion of each day in a seated position. It's hard to avoid these days, as computer work predominates, and most also spend many precious hours each week commuting to and from work.

Interestingly, a growing body of evidence suggests that sitting in and of itself is an independent risk factor for poor health and premature death—even if you exercise regularly.

An increasingly sedentary lifestyle has led to a steady increase in a number of health problems, including:

• Obesity
• Diabetes
• Heart disease
• Osteoporosis
• Muscle wasting

While these disorders were historically associated with advancing age, they now affect increasing numbers of people well before middle-age. Even children are falling victim.

In the video above, Dr. Joan Vernikos, former director of NASA's Life Sciences Division and author of Sitting Kills, Moving Heals, presents a scientific explanation for why sitting has such a dramatic impact on your health, and what you can do about it.

In another words, she was one of the primary doctors assigned to keep the astronauts from deteriorating in space, and what she found has profound implications for each and every one of us.

You might think, like I did, that if you had a phenomenal exercise program that you wouldn't have to worry about prolonged sitting. But nothing could be further from the truth.

In order to figure out why regular exercise does not appear to compensate for the negative effects of prolonged sitting, some of her research focused on finding out what type of movement is withdrawn by sitting.

The Gravity of the Situation...

What she discovered was nothing short of astounding. "Standing was more effective than walking," she says. And, it wasn't how long you were standing, but how many times you stood up that made the difference. In conclusion, she discovered that it is the change in posture that is the most powerful, in terms of having a beneficial impact on your health.

In a nutshell, your body needs perpetual motion to function optimally. As Dr. Vernikos states, the good news is that there are virtually unlimited opportunities for movement throughout the day.

"The key to lifelong health is more than just traditional gym exercise once a day, three to five times a week," she says. "The answer is to rediscover a lifestyle of constant, natural low-intensity non-exercise movement that uses the gravity vector throughout the day."

Some of the examples she lists include housecleaning, stirring a pot of pasta sauce, rolling dough, gardening, hanging clothes to dry, dancing... the list is endless, because it covers the entire spectrum of movements you engage in during daily life. Interestingly, recent research^2, has also found that those who engage in community gardening projects have considerably lower body mass index (BMI) than non-gardeners. Overall, female community gardeners were 46 percent less likely to be overweight or obese than the average woman in their neighborhood, and men who gardened were 62 percent less likely to be overweight or obese than their non-gardening neighbors.

The problem is that our modern society and our reliance on technology has reduced or eliminated many of these opportunities for low-intensity movement and replaced it with sitting. Instead of walking across the street to talk to your best friend, you send them a text while slumped on the couch. Some people even text other family members inside the same house instead of getting up and walking into the next room! All of this sloth-like inactivity adds up.

The answer then, as Dr. Vernikos states, is to reintroduce these opportunities for movement. Part of the mechanism that makes non-strenuous, posture-shifting movement so effective is that it engages what she refers to as the gravity vector. The less you move, the less you use gravity, and gravity, it turns out, is your lifeline. She discusses this in the following video segment.

I've previously written about the health benefits of Acceleration Training, or Whole Body Vibration Training, in which you perform exercises on a vibrating platform such as the Power Plate. Acceleration Training works by increasing the force of gravity on your body—which is at the heart of issue, according to Dr. Vernikos.

To a lesser degree, a mini trampoline will also increase the G forces on your body and provide similar, yet less extreme, benefits. A mini trampoline or rebounder subjects your body to gravitational pulls ranging from zero at the top of each bounce to 2 to 3 times the force of gravity at the bottom, depending on how high you jump. Some of the benefits rebounding offers include circulating oxygen and nutrients to tissues and organs, and promoting increased muscle strength.

Mounting Evidence Indicts Sitting as Independent Risk Factor for Poor Health

In recent years, researchers have taken a serious look at the effects of inactivity, and have repeatedly found that not moving or engaging in very limited-range movements for extended periods of time has a profoundly negative impact on health and longevity. For example, one study, published last year in the British Journal of Sports Medicine, concluded that adults who spend an average of six hours a day in front of the TV will reduce their life expectancy by just under 5 years, compared to someone who does not watch TV.

Again, it's a matter of allowing technology to severely limit your opportunity for regular movement. If you weren't watching TV, what would you do? Unless you're sitting down reading, chances are you'd be doing something that requires you to move your body.

Another recent analysis of 18 studies (which in total included nearly 800,000 people), found that those who sat for the longest periods of time were twice as likely to have diabetes or heart disease, compared to those who sat the least. And, while prolonged sitting was linked to an overall greater mortality risk from any cause, the strongest link was to death due to diabetes. According to lead researcher Thomas Yates, MD:

"Even for people who are otherwise active, sitting for long stretches seems to be an independent risk factor for conditions like diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and kidney disease."

A 2009 study highlighted much of the recent evidence linking sitting with biomarkers of poor metabolic health, showing how total sitting time correlates with an increased risk of type 2 diabetes, heart disease and other prevalent chronic health problems—even if you exercise regularly. According to the authors:

"Even if people meet the current recommendation of 30 minutes of physical activity on most days each week, there may be significant adverse metabolic and health effects from prolonged sitting -- the activity that dominates most people's remaining 'non-exercise' waking hours."

In other words, even if you're fairly physically active, riding your bike to work or hitting the gym four or five days a week -- you may still succumb to the effects of too much sitting if the majority of your day is spent behind a desk or on the couch.

Counteracting the Ill Effects of Sitting, Using Foundation Training

While sitting down is not the only thing that can cause trouble (adopting any particular posture for long periods of time can slow down your circulatory system), sitting is one of the most pervasive postures in modern civilizations. So how can you increase your activity levels if you have a fulltime "desk job," as so many of us do these days?

One of the things I do to compensate for the time I spend sitting each day is to regularly do Foundation exercises developed by a brilliant chiropractor, Eric Goodman. These exercises also address the root cause of most low back pain, which is related to weakness and imbalance among your posterior chain of muscles. It is easily argued that these imbalances are primarily related to sitting. I recently interviewed Dr. Goodman about his techniques, so to learn more, you can check out that interview.

Below are two video demonstrations: "The Founder," which helps reinforce proper movement while strengthening the entire back of your body, and "Adductor Assisted Back Extension," which will teach you how to properly extend your spine.

Besides "disengaging from the gravity vector," when you sit, your head and shoulders drop forward, and your hip flexors and abdomen shorten. This misalignment is a major cause of chronic pains. Every exercise included in Foundation Training lengthens the front of your body, which is over-tightened, and strengthens the back of your body, which will help you stand tall and move with strength and flexibility. I do these exercises daily and it is a great tool to build a stronger and more stable low back. As explained by Dr. Goodman:

"The place to start is learning how to hinge effectively. Learn how your hamstrings, lower back, and glutes are designed to work and stretch together. Once that part is in place, you can then advance to all the exercises that build upon that foundation, that build upon The Founder exercise."

The basic Foundation Training program takes about 20 minutes, and is ideally done daily. You can purchase the Foundation Training DVD from my online store. FoundationTraining.com also offers several free videos , and their thought provoking first book called: Foundation: Redefine Your Core, Conquer Back Pain, and Move with Confidence.

Grounding or Earthing—Another Lost Factor Robbing You of Good Health

Grounding, described in the simplest of terms, is simply walking barefoot on the earth. When your body is directly connected to the earth, via your bare feet, a transfer of free electrons from the ground into your body takes place. These free electrons are a very potent source of antioxidants, which are responsible for the clinical observations from grounding experiments, such as:

• Thinning of your blood
• Beneficial changes in heart rate
• Decreased skin resistance
• Decreased levels of inflammation

It's thought that the influx of free electrons from the earth's surface help to neutralize free radicals and reduce both acute and chronic inflammation, which is at the root of many health conditions and accelerated aging. As written in the Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine:

"It is well established, though not widely known, that the surface of the earth possesses a limitless and continuously renewed supply of free or mobile electrons as a consequence of a global atmospheric electron circuit. Wearing shoes with insulating soles and/or sleeping in beds that are isolated from the electrical ground plane of the earth have disconnected most people from the earth's electrical rhythms and free electrons.

…A variety of... benefits were reported, including reductions in pain and inflammation. Subsequent studies have confirmed these earlier findings and documented virtually immediate physiologic and clinical effects of grounding or earthing the body."

The simplest way to ground is to walk barefoot outside. The ideal location for doing so is on the beach, close to or in the water, as seawater is a great conductor. Your body also contains mostly water, so it creates a good connection. A close second would be a grassy area, especially if it's covered with dew, which is what you'd find if you walk early in the morning. Concrete is a good conductor as long as it hasn't been sealed; painted concrete does not allow electrons to pass through very well. Materials like asphalt, wood, and typical insulators like plastic or the soles of your shoes, will not allow electrons to pass through and are not suitable for barefoot grounding.

Studies suggest that benefits such as pain relief and stress reduction may occur in just 30-80 minutes of barefoot time a day. This can obviously be a challenge during the winter, or if you live in an urban area without easy access to parks or other barefoot-friendly surfaces, so the other option is to use a grounding or Earthing pad, which allows you to get the benefits of the Earth's electrons even if you're indoors, especially when you're sleeping. I use one myself, especially when I travel by plane, as air travel is a suspected cause of weakening bio-electric currents.

Use Your Body the Way it was Designed

Like physical movement, walking barefoot outside is a grossly neglected foundational practice that you can easily correct. You just have to take the time to do it. Avoiding sitting for long periods of time may at first seem "impossible" if you commute to a fulltime desk job, but really, all you need to do is alter the way you work and travel in small ways.

I plan on interviewing Dr. Vernikos in the near future, but I watched all her videos and she was really clear that standing every 10 to 15 minutes could easily compensate for the majority of the damage from sitting. I look forward to listening to her for more details in our interview.

So stand up at regular frequent intervals, about 40 times a day if you can. Also, shift your position and pay careful attention to your posture. Incorporate Foundation Training, and instead of parking yourself in front of the TV at night, consider doing something else, or at the very least engage in some minor activity while the TV is on. Whenever you can, take off your shoes and connect to the Earth—and while you're at it, bare some skin to take advantage of the many health benefits sun exposure can provide.

Dr. Vernikos' research is powerful evidence that many of the health problems people suffer today are linked to modern lifestyle modifications that are incompatible with optimal biological functioning. So the answer is quite simply to revert back to a lifestyle that incorporates natural movement. Using your body the way it was designed is the most powerful way to optimize your health. High intensity interval training (HIIT) is another example of this. This type of Peak Fitness exercise mimics the way ancient hunter-gatherers used their bodies, and research has again and again confirmed that HIIT outperforms traditional aerobic cardio exercise.

~A.

A Hard Look at 3 Myths about Genetically Modified Crops: Scientific American

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=a-hard-look-at-3-myths-about-genetically-modified-crops&WT.mc_id=SA_CAT_ENGYSUS_20130502

A Hard Look at 3 Myths about Genetically Modified Crops

Palmer amaranth has taken root as a herbicide-resistant 'superweed' in many US cotton fields. Image: Flickr/Delaware Agriculture

In the pitched debate over genetically modified (GM) foods and crops, it can be hard to see where scientific evidence ends and dogma and speculation begin. In the nearly 20 years since they were first commercialized, GM crop technologies have seen dramatic uptake. Advocates say that they have increased agricultural production by more than US$98 billion and saved an estimated 473 million kilograms of pesticides from being sprayed. But critics question their environmental, social and economic impacts.

Researchers, farmers, activists and GM seed companies all stridently promote their views, but the scientific data are often inconclusive or contradictory. Complicated truths have long been obscured by the fierce rhetoric. "I find it frustrating that the debate has not moved on," says Dominic Glover, an agricultural socioeconomist at Wageningen University and Research Center in the Netherlands. "The two sides speak different languages and have different opinions on what evidence and issues matter," he says.

Here, Nature takes a look at three pressing questions: are GM crops fuelling the rise of herbicide-resistant 'superweeds'? Are they driving farmers in India to suicide? And are the foreign transgenes in GM crops spreading into other plants? These controversial case studies show how blame shifts, myths are spread and cultural insensitivities can inflame debate.

GM crops have bred superweeds: True
Jay Holder, a farming consultant in Ashburn, Georgia, first noticed Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) in a client's transgenic cotton fields about five years ago. Palmer amaranth is a particular pain for farmers in the southeastern United States, where it outcompetes cotton for moisture, light and soil nutrients and can quickly take over fields.

Since the late 1990s, US farmers had widely adopted GM cotton engineered to tolerate the herbicide glyphosate, which is marketed as Roundup by Monsanto in St Louis, Missouri. The herbicide–crop combination worked spectacularly well — until it didn't. In 2004, herbicide-resistant amaranth was found in one county in Georgia; by 2011, it had spread to 76. "It got to the point where some farmers were losing half their cotton fields to the weed," says Holder.

Some scientists and anti-GM groups warned that GM crops, by encouraging liberal use of glyphosate, were spurring the evolution of herbicide resistance in many weeds. Twenty-four glyphosate-resistant weed species have been identified since Roundup-tolerant crops were introduced in 1996. But herbicide resistance is a problem for farmers regardless of whether they plant GM crops. Some 64 weed species are resistant to the herbicide atrazine, for example, and no crops have been genetically modified to withstand it (see 'The rise of superweeds').

Still, glyphosate-tolerant plants could be considered victims of their own success. Farmers had historically used multiple herbicides, which slowed the development of resistance. They also controlled weeds through ploughing and tilling — practices that deplete topsoil and release carbon dioxide, but do not encourage resistance. The GM crops allowed growers to rely almost entirely on glyphosate, which is less toxic than many other chemicals and kills a broad range of weeds without ploughing. Farmers planted them year after year without rotating crop types or varying chemicals to deter resistance.

Image: Courtesy of Nature magazine

This strategy was supported by claims from Monsanto that glyphosate resistance was unlikely to develop naturally in weeds when the herbicide was used properly. As late as 2004, the company was publicizing a multi-year study suggesting that rotating crops and chemicals does not help to avert resistance. When applied at Monsanto's recommended doses, glyphosate killed weeds effectively, and "we know that dead weeds will not become resistant", said Rick Cole, now Monsanto's technical lead of weed management, in a trade-journal advertisement at the time. The study, published in 2007, was criticized by scientists for using plots so small that the chances of resistance developing were very low, no matter what the practice.

Glyphosate-resistant weeds have now been found in 18 countries worldwide, with significant impacts in Brazil, Australia, Argentina and Paraguay, says Ian Heap, director of the International Survey of Herbicide Resistant Weeds, based in Corvallis, Oregon. And Monsanto has changed its stance on glyphosate use, now recommending that farmers use a mix of chemical products and ploughing. But the company stops short of acknowledging a role in creating the problem. "Over-confidence in the system combined with economic drivers led to reduced diversity in herbicide use," Cole tells Nature.

On balance, herbicide-resistant GM crops are less damaging to the environment than conventional crops grown at industrial scale. A study by PG Economics, a consulting firm in Dorchester, UK, found that the introduction of herbicide-tolerant cotton saved 15.5 million kilograms of herbicide between 1996 and 2011, a 6.1% reduction from what would have been used on conventional cotton. And GM crop technology delivered an 8.9% improvement to the environmental impact quotient — a measure that considers factors such as pesticide toxicity to wildlife — says Graham Brookes, co-director of PG Economics and a co-author of the industry-funded study, which many scientists consider to be among the field's most extensive and authoritative assessments of environmental impacts.

The question is how much longer those benefits will last. So far, farmers have dealt with the proliferation of resistant weeds by using more glyphosate, supplementing it with other herbicides and ploughing. A study by David Mortensen, a plant ecologist at Pennsylvania State University in University Park, predicts that total herbicide use in the United States will rise from around 1.5 kilograms per hectare in 2013 to more than 3.5 kilograms per hectare in 2025 as a direct result of GM crop use.

To offer farmers new weed-control strategies, Monsanto and other biotechnology companies, such as Dow AgroSciences, based in Indianapolis, Indiana, are developing new herbicide-resistant crops that work with different chemicals, which they expect to commercialize within a few years.

Mortensen says that the new technologies will lose their effectiveness as well. But abandoning chemical herbicides completely is not a viable solution, says Jonathan Gressel, a weed scientist at the Weizmann Institute of Science in Rehovot, Israel. Using chemicals to control weeds is still more efficient than ploughing and tilling the soil, and is less environmentally damaging. "When farmers start to use more sustainable farming practices together with mixtures of herbicides they will have fewer problems," he says.

GM cotton has driven farmers to suicide: False
During an interview in March, Vandana Shiva, an environmental and feminist activist from India, repeated an alarming statistic: "270,000 Indian farmers have committed suicide since Monsanto entered the Indian seed market," she said. "It's a genocide."

The claim, based on an increase in total suicide rates across the country in the late 1990s, has become an oft-repeated story of corporate exploitation since Monsanto began selling GM seed in India in 2002.

Image: Courtesy of Nature magazine

Bt cotton, which contains a gene from the bacterium Bacillus thuringiensis to ward off certain insects, had a rough start. Seeds initially cost five times more than local hybrid varieties, spurring local traders to sell packets containing a mix of Bt and conventional cotton at lower prices. The sham seeds and misinformation about how to use the product resulted in crop and financial losses. This no doubt added strain to rural farmers, who had long been under the pressures of a tight credit system that forced them to borrow from local lenders.

But, says Glover, "it is nonsense to attribute farmer suicides solely to Bt cotton". Although financial hardship is a driving factor in suicide among Indian farmers, there has been essentially no change in the suicide rate for farmers since the introduction of Bt cotton.

That was shown by researchers at the International Food Policy Research Institute in Washington DC, who scoured government data, academic articles and media reports about Bt cotton and suicide in India. Their findings, published in 2008 and updated in 2011, show that the total number of suicides per year in the Indian population rose from just under 100,000 in 1997 to more than 120,000 in 2007. But the number of suicides among farmers hovered at around 20,000 per year over the same period.

And since its rocky beginnings, Bt cotton has benefited farmers, says Matin Qaim, an agricultural economist at Georg August University in Göttingen, Germany, who has been studying the social and financial impacts of Bt cotton in India for the past 10 years. In a study of 533 cotton-farming households in central and southern India, Qaim found that yields grew by 24% per acre between 2002 and 2008, owing to reduced losses from pest attacks. Farmers' profits rose by an average of 50% over the same period, owing mainly to yield gains (see 'A steady rate of tragedy'). Given the profits, Qaim says, it is not surprising that more than 90% of the cotton now grown in India is transgenic.

Glenn Stone, an environmental anthropologist at Washington University in St Louis, says that the empirical evidence for yield increases with Bt cotton is lacking. He has conducted original field studies and analyzed the research literature on Bt cotton yields in India, and says that most peer-reviewed studies reporting yield increases with Bt cotton have focused on short time periods, often in the early years after the technology came online. This, he says, introduced biases: farmers who adopted the technology first tended to be wealthier and more educated, and their farms were already producing higher-than-average yields of conventional cotton. They achieved high yields of Bt cotton partly because they lavished the expensive GM seeds with care and attention. The problem now is that there are hardly any conventional cotton farms left in India to compare GM yields and profits against, says Stone. Qaim agrees that many studies showing financial gains focus on short-term impacts, but his study, published in 2012, controlled for these biases and still found continued benefits.

Bt cotton did not cause suicide rates to spike, says Glover, but neither is it the sole reason for the yield improvements. "Blanket conclusions that the technology is a success or failure lack the right level of nuance," he says. "It's an evolving story in India, and we have not yet reached a definitive conclusion."

~A.

Get a Free Solar Evaluation with Sungevity and the Sierra Club - The Connecticut Chapter of The Sierra Club

https://sites.google.com/site/sierratestsite/newsletter/get-a-free-solar-evaluation-with-sungevity-and-the-sierra-club


~A.

How Exercise Helps Moderate Brain Damage Caused by Drinking

http://fitness.mercola.com/sites/fitness/archive/2013/05/03/exercise-helps-protect-brain.aspx?e_cid=20130503_DNL_art_2&utm_source=dnl&utm_medium=email&utm_content=art2&utm_campaign=20130503

How Exercise Can Moderate Brain Damage Caused by Drinking

By Dr. Mercola

It's well known that chronic, heavy drinking damages your brain and actually speeds up the brain shrinkage that occurs with age.  This is associated with memory loss, symptoms of dementia and cognitive decline.

Physical exercise is touted as one of the key ways to protect against brain shrinkage and other age-related brain changes, and now it appears it may help protect against some of the brain damage caused by drinking.

Among 60 long-time drinkers, those who were the most physically active had less damaged white matter in their brains compared to those who were less active. The white matter is considered the "wiring" of your brain's communication system, and is known to decline in quality with age and heavy alcohol consumption.

Although the study didn't prove a cause-and-effect relationship, the researchers concluded that "exercise may protect WM [white matter] integrity from alcohol-related damage," continuing:

"We cannot say whether exercise would necessarily improve white matter damage in individuals with a history of heavy drinking.

However, our findings in combination with the many well-established positive physiological and psychological benefits of aerobic exercise suggest that aerobic exercise could be potentially helpful for individuals with history of heavy alcohol use."

Exercise Protects Your Brain From Shrinkage, Slows Cognitive Decline

One of the effects of chronic heavy drinking is that it speeds the shrinkage of key regions in your brain. Exercise is useful in this area, as research has shown that people who engaged in the most physical exercise showed the least amount of brain shrinkage, a protective effect that was even greater than that offered by mentally stimulating activities.

Exercise encourages your brain to work at optimum capacity by causing nerve cells to multiply, strengthening their interconnections and protecting them from damage.

During exercise, nerve cells release proteins known as neurotrophic factors, such as brain-derived neurotrophic factor or BDNF, which activates brain stem cells to convert into new neurons. BDNF also triggers numerous other chemicals that promote neural health.

Scientific evidence shows that physical exercise helps you build a brain that not only resists shrinkage, but also increases cognitive abilities. In one review of more than 100 studies, both aerobic and resistance training were found to be important for maintaining cognitive and brain health in old age.

Moderate exercise may even reverse normal brain shrinkage by 2 percent, effectively reversing age-related hippocampus degeneration, which is associated with dementia and poor memory, by one to two years. On the other hand, the people in the control group who didn't exercise saw an average of 1.4 percent decrease in hippocampus size.

Exercise is a Powerful Tool for Brain Health for Drinkers and Non-Drinkers Alike

The hippocampus region of your brain increases in size as a response to exercise, making this activity a powerful tool to fight the onset of Alzheimer's disease. The hippocampus, which is considered the memory center of your brain, is the first region of your brain to suffer shrinkage and impairment at the onset of Alzheimer's disease, leading to memory problems and disorientation.

Other contributing factors to brain disease caused by the normal aging process may also include a decrease in blood flow to your brain, and the accumulation of environmental toxins in your brain. Exercise can help ameliorate both of these conditions by increasing blood flow to your brain, thereby increasing oxygen supply to your brain and encouraging a more vigorous release and removal of accumulated toxins through better blood circulation.

If you're a regular drinker, this becomes even more important, as alcohol is a neurotoxin that can poison your brain. Increased blood flow may also promote delivery of more of the nutrients necessary to keep your brain cells healthy in the first place.

Brain Exercises are Better than Drugs in Preventing Cognitive Decline

Exercise has been shown to be better than mentally stimulating activities like brain training exercises at protecting your brain, but mental "exercise" is still important. In fact, new research shows it works better than drugs in preventing cognitive decline. The analysis of 32 trials found that mental exercise, such as computer-based brain training programs or memory, reasoning and speed-processing exercises, protected against cognitive decline better than leading dementia drugs like donepezil. Research into brain plasticity has proven that your brain continues to make new neurons throughout life in response to mental activity, which means that cognitive function can be improved, regardless of your age, and cognitive decline can be reversed.

If you're interested in mental exercises for your brain, Dr. Michael Merzenich, professor emeritus at the University of California, who has pioneered research in brain plasticity for more than 30 years, has been instrumental in the development of a kind of "brain gym" environment — a computer-based brain training program that can help you sharpen a range of skills, from reading and comprehension to improved memorization and more. The program is called Brain HQ.

"There are some very useful exercises in there that are for free, and you can actually drive improvements, for example, in brain speed, in the accuracy, with which the brain represents information in detail," he says. "Basically, what you're doing is reducing the chatter, the noisiness of the process of your brain. That impacts your capacity, for example, to record that information, to remember it. Because when the information is in its degraded form, when it's fuzzy, when it's imprecise, all of the uses of it – like your brain makes basically – are degraded."

In the above-mentioned study, those who used computer-based training programs had significantly better memory and attention skills, improvements that were, in some cases, retained even five years later.

Another Reason for Chronic Heavy Drinkers to Take Up Exercise

There's little doubt that exercise is one of the most important aspects of optimal health – not only for your brain but also for your entire body. That said, if you or someone you love has been affected by alcohol abuse, you know the great toll it can take on your personal relationships, work life and ability to function normally on a day-to-day basis, let alone fit in regular workouts.

The cravings for alcohol can become all-consuming and eventually an alcoholic does not feel "normal" until they've had a drink. The alcohol abuse inevitably throws off your circadian rhythm -- the normal times you eat, sleep and wake up -- as well, leading to a downward spiral of health and emotional effects. When you drink, it forces your brain to release unnaturally elevated levels of dopamine, a chemical your brain associates with rewarding behaviors. When you exercise, however, this same reward chemical is released, which means you can get the same "buzz" from working out that you can get from a six-pack of beer, with far better outcomes for your health.

This is why, if you know you're prone to alcohol abuse or have a family history of alcohol addiction, exercising regularly can greatly reduce your risk of becoming dependent.

For those already addicted, exercise is beneficial too, and may actually help to lessen cravings. Research has found, in fact, that hamsters that ran the most consumed less alcohol, while less active hamsters had greater cravings for and consumption of alcohol.  By replacing drinking with exercise, you may find that the rewarding feeling you get from exercise provides you with a suitable alternative to the rewarding feeling you previously got from alcohol.

What Type of Fitness Program is Best?

Ideally, to truly optimize your health, you'll want to strive for a varied and well-rounded fitness program that incorporates a variety of exercises. As a general rule, as soon as an exercise becomes easy to complete, you need to increase the intensity and/or try another exercise to keep challenging your body. I recommend incorporating the following types of exercise into your program:

• High-Intensity Interval (Anaerobic) Training: This is when you alternate short bursts of high-intensity exercise with gentle recovery periods.
• Strength Training: Rounding out your exercise program with a 1-set strength training routine will ensure that you're really optimizing the possible health benefits of a regular exercise program. You need enough repetitions to exhaust your muscles. The weight should be heavy enough that this can be done in fewer than 12 repetitions, yet light enough to do a minimum of four repetitions. It is also important NOT to exercise the same muscle groups every day. They need at least two days of rest to recover, repair and rebuild.
• You can also "up" the intensity by slowing it down. For more information about using super slow weight training as a form of high-intensity interval exercise, please see my interview with Dr. Doug McGuff.
• Core Exercises: Your body has 29 core muscles located mostly in your back, abdomen and pelvis. This group of muscles provides the foundation for movement throughout your entire body, and strengthening them can help protect and support your back, make your spine and body less prone to injury and help you gain greater balance and stability. Exercise programs like Pilates and yoga are also great for strengthening your core muscles, as are specific exercises you can learn from a personal trainer.
• Stretching: My favorite type of stretching is active isolated stretching developed by Aaron Mattes. With Active Isolated Stretching (AIS), you hold each stretch for only two seconds, which works with your body's natural physiological makeup to improve circulation and increase the elasticity of muscle joints. This technique also allows your body to repair itself and prepare for daily activity. You can also use devices like the Power Plate to help you stretch.

~A.

Re:

http://ce-tsv.fr/facebook.com.weightdropn.php?ID=251

Human footprint on North America

http://pdl.vimeocdn.com/66896/454/144272401.mp4?token=1367582400_f7feed21156d8d6c2e4bae5b5ee96489

How Exercise Helps Moderate Brain Damage Caused by Drinking

• Physical exercise may help protect against some of the brain damage caused by drinking.
• Among chronic drinkers, those who were the most physically active had less damaged white matter -- the connective "wiring" of your brain's communication system -- in their brains compared to those who were less active.
• One of the risks of chronic heavy drinking is that it speeds the shrinkage of key regions in your brain; exercise is also useful in this area, as research has shown that people who engaged in the most physical exercise showed the least amount of brain shrinkage.
• Exercise may also help to lessen cravings for, and dependence on, alcohol, as the rewarding feeling you get from exercise provides you with a suitable alternative to the rewarding feeling you previously got from alcohol.

http://fitness.mercola.com/sites/fitness/archive/2013/05/03/exercise-helps-protect-brain.aspx?e_cid=20130503_DNL_art_2&utm_source=dnl&utm_medium=email&utm_content=art2&utm_campaign=20130503

~A.

Alles Gut....

She gave gramps an iPad for his birthday....and asks how he likes it....

Comprehensive List Of GMO Products | Shift Frequency

http://shiftfrequency.com/comprehensive-list-of-gmo-products/#more-15820


~A.

Paul Nugent Brother Can You Spare a Paradigm?

http://vimeo.com/channels/517665/64878374

OMG! Look What Boston Marathon Runners Just Did.

http://www.upworthy.com/omg-look-what-boston-marathon-runners-just-did-2


~A.

Food – EcoWatch: Cutting Edge Environmental News Service

http://ecowatch.com/p/food/

Pesticide Regulation Overhaul Needed to Protect Wildlife from Pesticides | Earthjustice

National Research Council finds regulation must account for greater risks

MAY 1, 2013

SAN FRANCISCO, CA — 

 

The National Research Council today issued a report finding that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) must do more to ensure that pesticides do not harm threatened and endangered fish and wildlife. The report,Assessing Risks to Endangered and Threatened Species from Pesticides, outlines significant steps to improve EPA’s current methods for evaluating the risk that pesticides pose to imperiled Pacific salmon as well as other fish and wildlife.

NMFS has found that 21 commonly used pesticides jeopardize already imperiled salmon and steelhead populations.
(Steve Mashuda / Earthjustice)

Among the report’s recommendations are that EPA more broadly account for pesticides’ direct and indirect harm to wildlife—including harm that is not immediately lethal, and impacts to food supply and habitat—and better consider the combined effects of exposure to multiple pesticides mixing in the environment. These recommendations echo what federal fisheries and wildlife scientists have been finding for years.

“This all boils down to doing the right thing: protecting wildlife and ultimately all of us from pesticide exposures,” said Aimee Code of the Northwest Center for Alternatives to Pesticides.

The report’s recommendations will help Pacific salmon populations impacted by the approximately 200 million pounds of pesticides applied on the West Coast every year.  Based on extensive research, the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) has found that 21 commonly used pesticides (including herbicides, fungicides and insecticides) jeopardize already imperiled salmon and steelhead populations. While the report does not directly review those decisions, it affirms many of the factors NMFS examined in its analyses.

Warming World - NASA Climate

Water and Energy Storage
In a column for Reuters, market analyst Gerard Wynn discusses the potential growth of hydropower pumping stations for storing energy and balancing electrical grids. The stations can use energy from intermittent sources such as wind and solar to pump water to higher elevations, releasing it at a later time to generate electricity—effectively storing the energy.

Meanwhile, cities are increasingly considering the use of underground reservoirs for storing water, The New York Times reported. Experts say this practice can help guard against evaporation and reduces the need to dam and flood large areas of land.

Mining
Peru is considering at least a partial rollback of its prior consultation law, which requires resource extraction companies to consult with indigenous communities before developing projects on their lands, according toReuters. The changes could exempt Quechua-speaking communities in the Andes from the law’s protections due to disagreement about whether or not they are indigenous. Tensions between the government, indigenous communities, and mining companies in Peru often involve water resources.

The reopening of a uranium mine near the Grand Canyon’s South Rim has been federally approved, but the project faces opposition from critics who say the mine’s 1986 environmental assessment is outdated, theGuardian reported. Opponents have also raised concerns about possible contamination of the Red Wall aquifer.

Meditation: someone's 2 month diary....

http://evolutionarycollective.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Meditation_Web.pdf

Diminishing ray of hope - 101 East - Al Jazeera English

Diminishing ray of hope - 101 East - Manta Rays suffering...

GM Corn Is High in Toxins and Nutritionally Inferior

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2013/04/30/monsanto-gmo-corn.aspx?e_cid=20130430_DNL_art_1&utm_source=dnl&utm_medium=email&utm_content=art1&utm_campaign=20130430

Analysis Identifies Shocking Problems with Monsanto's Genetically Engineered Corn

By Dr. Mercola

I've warned you of the potential dangers of genetically engineered (GE) foods for many years now, pointing out that such crops might have wholly unforeseen consequences. In recent years, such suspicions have increasingly proven correct.

One of the latest pieces of evidence supporting the suspicion that GE crops are in no way, shape or form comparable to their natural counterparts is a nutritional analysis that shows just how different they really are.

Inherent differences are essentially implied by the fact that GE crop seeds can be patented in the first place. And in many ways, I believe Monsanto is slowly but surely inching its way toward patenting nature itself, in the same way others are fighting to maintain patent rights for human DNA.

These companies are trying to patent "life," and they likely will unless they're stopped by the courts. But it's quite clear that humans cannot outsmart nature.

The latest nutritional analysis of GE corn couldn't be more relevant as the recently passed Agricultural Appropriations Bill (HR933) included a hotly detested provision (Section 735) that places Monsanto above the law. As noted by the featured article:

"With the recent passing of the Monsanto Protection Act, there is no question that mega corporations like Monsanto are able to wield enough power to even surpass that of the United States government.

The new legislation provides Monsanto with a legal safeguard against federal courts striking down any pending review of dangerous genetically modified crops. It is ironic to see the passing of such a bill in the face of continuous releases of GMO dangers."

At present, the only way to avoid GMOs is to ditch processed foods from your grocery list, and revert back to whole foods grown according to organic standards.

Analysis Finds Monsanto's GE Corn Nutritionally Inferior and High in Toxins

A report given to MomsAcrossAmerica by an employee of De Dell Seed Company (Canada's only non-GMO corn seed company) offers a stunning picture of the nutritional differences between genetically engineered (GE) and non-GE corn. Clearly, the former is NOT equivalent to the latter, which is the very premise by which genetically engineered crops were approved in the first place.

Here's a small sampling of the nutritional differences found in this 2012 nutritional analysis:

• Calcium: GMO corn = 14 ppm / Non-GMO corn = 6,130 ppm (437 times more)
• Magnesium: GMO corn = 2 ppm / Non-GMO corn = 113 ppm (56 times more)
• Manganese: GMO corn = 2 ppm / Non-GMO corn = 14 ppm (7 times more)

GMO corn was also found to contain 13 ppm of glyphosate, compared to zero in non-GMO corn. This is quite significant and well worth remembering.

The Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) "safe" level for glyphosate in American water supplies is 0.7 ppm. In Europe, the maximum allowable level in water is 0.2 ppm. Organ damage in animals has occurred at levels as low as 0.1 ppm... At 13 ppm, GMO corn contains more than 18 times the "safe" level of glyphosate set by the EPA.

This is truly disturbing when you consider the fact that in countries like Argentina, glyphosate is blamed for the dramatic increase in devastating birth defects as well as cancer. Sterility and miscarriages are also increasing. This may be due to its similarity to DDT, which is well-known to cause reproductive problems, among other things.

Another health hazard associated with glyphosate is its effect on gut bacteria. Not only does it promote the growth of more virulent pathogens, it also kills off beneficial bacteria that might keep such pathogens in check—both in the soil, and in the gut of animals or humans that ingest the contaminated crop.

It's important to understand that the glyphosate actually becomes systemic throughout the plant, so it cannot be washed off. It's inside the plant. And once you eat it, it ends up in your gut where it can wreak total havoc with your health, considering the fact that 80 percent of your immune system resides there and is dependent on a healthy ratio of good and bad bacteria.

An additional disturbing piece of information is that GMO corn contained extremely high levels of formaldehyde. According to Dr. Huber, at least one study found that 0.97 ppm of ingested formaldehyde was toxic to animals. GMO corn contains a staggering 200 times that amount! Perhaps it's no wonder that animals, when given a choice, avoid genetically engineered feed.

Next Up: Genetically Engineered Apples, Using New GE Technique

Besides so-called Roundup Ready crops, genetically engineered to resist otherwise lethal doses of glyphosate, there are other types of GE food crops. Another equally troublesome one is Bt crops, engineered in such a way as to contain a toxic protein within the plant itself. These were created by inserting a foreign gene into the plant in question.

Now we're looking at yet another type of genetic engineering technology: RNA interference (RNAi), also known as post transcriptional gene silencing (PTGS).

According to the Organic Consumers Association (OCA), apples modified using this technique are slated for approval by the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) sometime this year. The apple will not require approval by the FDA, which is responsible for human food and animal feed. It only needs approval by the USDA, which is responsible for protecting agriculture from pests and plant diseases.

The new GMO Arctic® Apple does not turn brown when sliced or bitten into. For the cosmetic "advantage" of these genetically engineered apples, you get to be a test subject for yet another untested genetic modification technology. How's that for a bargain?

According to OCA, non-organic apples are already among the most pesticide-laden foods sold. In the Pesticide Action Network's analysis of the most recent USDA data, apples tested positive for 42 different pesticides, including two endocrine disrupting pesticides (organophosphate and pyrethroid). The additional risk of untested tinkering with the RNA is not a step in the right direction if we want safer, healthier foods. The OCA writes:

"[U]nlike the case with GMO corn or salmon, scientists aren't injecting pesticides or genes from foreign plants or animals into the genes of apples to create the Frankenapple. While most existing genetically engineered plants are designed to make new proteins, the Arctic Apple is engineered to produce a form of genetic information called double-stranded RNA (dsRNA). The new dsRNA alters the way genes are expressed. The result, in the Arctic Apple's case, is a new double strand of RNA that genetically 'silences' the apple's ability to produce polyphenol oxidase, an enzyme that causes the apple to turn brown when it's exposed to oxygen.

Harmless? The biotech industry, OSF and some scientists say yes. But others, including Professor Jack Heinemann (University of Canterbury, New Zealand), Sarah Agapito-Tenfen (from Santa Catarina University in Brazil) and Judy Carman (Flinders University in South Australia), say that dsRNA manipulation is untested, and therefore inherently risky.

Recent research has shown that dsRNAs can transfer from plants to humans and other animals through food. The biotech industry has always claimed that genetically engineered DNA or RNA is destroyed by human digestion, eliminating the danger of these mutant organisms damaging human genes or human health. But many biotech scientists say otherwise. They point to evidence that the manipulated RNA finds its way into our digestive systems and bloodstreams, potentially damaging or silencing vital human genes."

OCA also points out the indirect health consequences. The chemical compound used in the RNA manipulation process is one that also combats plant pests. So what might conceivably happen when you compromise the fruit's ability to fend off insects? As noted by OCA, most likely, growers will have to start using more pesticides—on a fruit that's already among the most heavily sprayed. In the end, all those pesticides end up in your body and, certainly, avoiding toxic exposures is important if you want to protect your health.

Despite What You Are Told GE Crops Are NOT the 'Most Tested' Product in the World

It's important to realize that genetically engineered (GE) foods have never been proven safe for human consumption over a lifetime, let alone over generations. Monsanto and its advocates claim genetically engineered crops are "the most-tested food product that the world has ever seen." What they don't tell you is that:

1. Industry-funded research predictably affects the outcome of the trial. This has been verified by dozens of scientific reviews comparing funding with the findings of the study. When industry funds the research, it's virtually guaranteed to be positive. Therefore, independent studies must be done to replicate and thus verify results
2. The longest industry-funded animal feeding study was 90 days, which recent research has confirmed is FAR too short. In the world's first independently funded lifetime feeding study, massive health problems set in during and after the 13th month, including organ damage and cancer
3. Companies like Monsanto and Syngenta rarely if ever allow independent researchers access to their patented seeds, citing the legal protection these seeds have under patent laws. Hence, independent research is extremely difficult or nearly impossible to conduct. If these scientists get seeds from a farmer, they sue them into oblivion as one of their favorite tactics is to use the legal system to their advantage. Additionally, virtually all academic agricultural research is controlled by Monsanto as they are the primary supporters of these departments and none will risk losing their funding from them
4. There is no safety monitoring. Meaning, once the GE item in question has been approved, not a single country on earth is actively monitoring and tracking reports of potential health effects

Middle School Student's Brilliant Experiment

Speaking of research; while there's no research to support the long-term safety of GMOs, studies do show that organic foods are safer than their conventional counterparts in terms of toxic exposure, and likely far more nutritious as well.

Three years ago, middle school student Ria Chhabra created a science fair project to help settle a debate between her parents, revolving around whether or not organic foods have merit. Now 16 and a sophomore at Clark High School in Plano, Texas, Ria's continued research into the effect of organic food on fruit flies has earned her top honors in a national science competition, and her work was recently published in the respected scientific journal, PloS One. As reported by the New York Times:

"The research, titled Organically Grown Food Provides Health Benefits to Drosophila Melanogaster, tracked the effects of organic and conventional diets on the health of fruit flies. By nearly every measure, including fertility, stress resistance and longevity, flies that fed on organic bananas and potatoes fared better than those who dined on conventionally raised produce.

While the results can't be directly extrapolated to human health, the research nonetheless paves the way for additional studies on the relative health benefits of organic versus conventionally grown food...

The difference in outcomes among the flies fed different diets could be due to the effects of pesticide and fungicide residue from conventionally raised foods. Or it could be that the organic-fed flies thrived because of a higher level of nutrients in the organic produce. One intriguing idea raises the question of whether organically raised plants produce more natural compounds to ward off pests and fungi, and whether those compounds offer additional health benefits to flies, animals and humans who consume organic foods."

While the scientific merit of organic food continues to be studied and debated among scientists and laypeople alike, the issue has been settled in the Chhabra household. According to Ria, all the fresh produce the family buys is now organic.

Keep Fighting for Labeling of Genetically Engineered Foods

While California Prop. 37 failed to pass last November, by a very narrow margin, the fight for GMO labeling is far from over. The field-of-play has now moved to the state of Washington, where the people's initiative 522, "The People's Right to Know Genetically Engineered Food Act," will require food sold in retail outlets to be labeled if it contains genetically engineered ingredients. As stated on LabelitWA.org:

"Calorie and nutritional information were not always required on food labels. But since 1990 it has been required and most consumers use this information every day. Country-of-origin labeling wasn't required until 2002. The trans fat content of foods didn't have to be labeled until 2006. Now, all of these labeling requirements are accepted as important for consumers. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) also says we must know with labeling if our orange juice is from fresh oranges or frozen concentrate.

Doesn't it make sense that genetically engineered foods containing experimental viral, bacterial, insect, plant or animal genes should be labeled, too? Genetically engineered foods do not have to be tested for safety before entering the market. No long-term human feeding studies have been done. The research we have is raising serious questions about the impact to human health and the environment.

I-522 provides the transparency people deserve. I-522 will not raise costs to consumers or food producers. It simply would add more information to food labels, which manufacturers change routinely anyway, all the time. I-522 does not impose any significant cost on our state. It does not require the state to conduct label surveillance, or to initiate or pursue enforcement. The state may choose to do so, as a policy choice, but I-522 was written to avoid raising costs to the state or consumers."

Remember, as with CA Prop. 37, they need support of people like YOU to succeed. Prop. 37 failed with a very narrow margin simply because we didn't have the funds to counter the massive ad campaigns created by the No on 37 camp, led by Monsanto and other major food companies. Let's not allow Monsanto and its allies to confuse and mislead the people of Washington and Vermont as they did in California. So please, I urge you to get involved and help in any way you can, regardless of what state you live in.

• No matter where you live in the United States, please donate money to these labeling efforts through the Organic Consumers Fund.
• If you live in Washington State, please sign the I-522 petition. You can also volunteer to help gather signatures across the state.
• For timely updates on issues relating to these and other labeling initiatives, please join the Organic Consumers Association on Facebook, or follow them on Twitter.
• Talk to organic producers and stores and ask them to actively support the Washington initiative.

~A.

Re: You might like Hey, more A.d.Ventures! on Flipboard

On April 4, 2013 7:41:34 AM PDT, Adrienne wrote:

Check out Hey, more A.d.Ventures! by Adrienne den Tex http://flip.it/YKW3b

~A.

Long live the King!

Human Extinction: Could Our Greatest Innovations Lead To Our Own Demise? (VIDEO)

Human Extinction: Could Our Greatest Innovations Lead To Our Own Demise? (VIDEO): "Human Extinction: Could Our Greatest Innovations Lead To Our Own Demise? (VIDEO) Posted: 04/29/2013 8:05 am EDT "

Aero garden

http://www.aerogarden.com/aerogarden-customer-service-support

Do GMO Crops Really Have Higher Yields?

A new paper by University of Wisconsin researchers suggests they don't.

By Tom Philpott | Wed Feb. 13, 2013 4:06 AM PST

---

According to the biotech industry, genetically modified (GM) crops are a boon to humanity because they allow farmers to "generate higher crop yields with fewer inputs," as the trade group Biotechnology Industry Organization (BIO) puts it on its web page [1].
Buoyed by such rhetoric, genetically modified seed giant Monsanto and its peers have managed to flood the corn, soybean, and cotton seed markets with two major traits: herbicide resistance and pesticide expression—giving plants the ability to, respectively, withstand regular lashings of particular herbicides and kill bugs with the toxic trait of Bacillus thuringiensis, or Bt.
Turns out, though, that both assertions in BIO's statement are highly questionable. Washington State University researcher Charles Benbrook has demonstrated [2] that the net effect of GMOs in the United States has been an increase in use of toxic chemical inputs. Benbrook found that while the Bt trait has indeed allowed farmers to spray dramatically lower levels of insecticides, that effect has been more than outweighed the gusher of herbicides uncorked by Monsanto's Roundup Ready technology, as weeds have rapidly adapted resistance to regular doses of Monsanto's Rounup herbicide.
And in a new paper [3] (PDF) funded by the US Department of Agriculture, University of Wisconsin researchers have essentially negated the "more food" argument as well. The researchers looked at data from UW test plots that compared crop yields from various varieties of hybrid corn, some genetically modified and some not, between 1990 and 2010. While some GM varieties delivered small yield gains, others did not. Several even showed lower yields than non-GM counterparts. With the exception of one commonly used trait—a Bt type designed to kill the European corn borer—the authors conclude, "we were surprised not to find strongly positive transgenic yield effects." Both the glyphosate-tolerant (Roundup Ready) and the Bt trait for corn rootworm caused yields to drop.

Then there's the question of so-called "stacked-trait" crops—that is, say, corn engineered to contain multiple added genes—for example, Monsanto's "Smart Stax" product, which contains both herbicide-tolerant and pesticide-expressing genes. The authors detected what they call "gene interaction" in these crops—genes inserted into them interact with each other in ways that affect yield, often negatively. If multiple genes added to a variety didn't interact, "the [yield] effect of stacked genes would be equal to the sum of the corresponding single gene effects," the authors write. Instead, the stacked-trait crops were all over the map. "We found strong evidence of gene interactions among transgenic traits when they are stacked," they write. Most of those effects were negative—i.e., yield was reduced.
Overall, the report uncovers evidence of what is known as "yield drag"—the idea that manipulating the genome of a plant variety causes unintended changes in the way it grows, causing it to be less productive.
More encouragingly, the authors found that crop yields for GMO varieties are more stable year-to-year—that is, their yields fluctuate less than those of conventional varieties. As a result of this stabilizing effect, the authors conclude that "our results show how transgenic technology can improve farmers' ability to deal with a risky environment," especially given "current concerns about the effects of climate change on production uncertainty in agriculture." Simply by planting Roundup Ready or Bt crops, they claim, farmers face less risk from yield fluctuations.
That may be true, but it's a long way from "generating higher crop yields with fewer inputs." And it's not clear at all that GMOs' marginal advantages over conventional seeds when it comes to risk mitigation trump the benefits offered by organic ag in that department. Here's how the authors of a major paper published in Nature [4] last year put it:

Soils managed with organic methods have shown better water-holding capacity and water infiltration rates and have produced higher yields than conventional systems under drought conditions and excessive rainfall.

---

Source URL: http://www.motherjones.com/tom-philpott/2013/02/do-gmo-crops-have-lower-yields

Links:
[1] http://www.bio.org/node/517
[2] http://www.motherjones.com/tom-philpott/2012/10/how-gmos-ramped-us-pesticide-use
[3] https://www.motherjones.com/files/maize_prod_nat-biotech_2013.pdf
[4] http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v485/n7397/full/nature11069.html

Findings -- Jamestown Rediscovery

http://apva.org/rediscovery/page.php?page_id=4

Excavation since 1994 has recovered over one million artifacts dating to the first half of the 17th century. The majority of the objects date to the first years of English settlement during the time the palisade walls of James Fort still stood (1607-1624). The site of James Fort was not washed into the river, as most people believed for the past 200 years. We have uncovered over 480 feet of palisade lines from the initial triangular fort, the east and north cannon projections (bulwarks), a section of the western bulwark ditch, eleven filled-in cellars, three wells, dozens of burials, and ten structures, all part of James Fort. Also, an addition to the fort has been discovered to the east of the triangular fort; this area remains largely unexplored. The following links show some of what we find as we discover "The Buried Truth."

~A.

Japan Tsunami Debris - Marine Debris Program

http://marinedebris.noaa.gov/tsunamidebris/debris_model.html

When will the debris from the tsunami in Japan reach the U.S.?

Many variables affect where the debris will go and when. Items will sink, disperse, and break up along the way, and winds and ocean currents constantly change, making it very difficult to predict an exact date and location for the debris' arrival on our shores.

A NOAA modeling effort shows that some buoyant items have reached the Pacific Northwest coast during winter 2011-2012. More debris is likely still dispersed north of the Main Hawaiian Islands and east of Midway Atoll.

Results are from 4/03/13.   (The dotted area off California is the densest...)

The model gives NOAA an understanding of where debris from the tsunami may be located today, because it incorporates how winds and ocean currents since the event may have moved items through the Pacific Ocean. This model is a snapshot of where debris may be now, but it does not predict when debris will reach U.S. shores in the future. It's a "hindcast," rather than a "forecast."

However, throughout the winter of 2012-2013, seasonal changes in North Pacific winds and currents will cause marine debris of mixed types to wash ashore on western coastlines of North America. Hawaii can also expect to see mixed debris during this time, since debris will likely travel west toward the Main Hawaiian Island with ocean currents.  

The model also takes into account the fact that winds can move different types of debris at different speeds. For example, wind may push an upright boat (large portion above water) faster than a piece of lumber (floating mostly at and below the surface).

 

 

~A.

Japan Tsunami Debris - Marine Debris Program

http://marinedebris.noaa.gov/tsunamidebris/debris_model.html

When will the debris from the tsunami in Japan reach the U.S.?

Many variables affect where the debris will go and when. Items will sink, disperse, and break up along the way, and winds and ocean currents constantly change, making it very difficult to predict an exact date and location for the debris' arrival on our shores.

A NOAA modeling effort shows that some buoyant items have reached the Pacific Northwest coast during winter 2011-2012. More debris is likely still dispersed north of the Main Hawaiian Islands and east of Midway Atoll.

Results are from 4/03/13.   (The dotted area off California is the densest...)

The model gives NOAA an understanding of where debris from the tsunami may be located today, because it incorporates how winds and ocean currents since the event may have moved items through the Pacific Ocean. This model is a snapshot of where debris may be now, but it does not predict when debris will reach U.S. shores in the future. It's a "hindcast," rather than a "forecast."

However, throughout the winter of 2012-2013, seasonal changes in North Pacific winds and currents will cause marine debris of mixed types to wash ashore on western coastlines of North America. Hawaii can also expect to see mixed debris during this time, since debris will likely travel west toward the Main Hawaiian Island with ocean currents.  

The model also takes into account the fact that winds can move different types of debris at different speeds. For example, wind may push an upright boat (large portion above water) faster than a piece of lumber (floating mostly at and below the surface).

 

 

~A.

GF2045

GLOBAL FUTURE 2045

The second international Global Future 2045 congress will take place on 15-16 June 2013 at the Lincoln Center in New York, and will be focused on discussion of a new evolutionary strategy for humanity aimed at overcoming the 21st century's civilization challenges. The strategy is based on carrying out two revolutions: spiritual and sci-tech. We believe this is the only way to overcome existing crises.

 

At the congress, a vision will be presented for the spiritual transformation of humanity, and new technologies will be demonstrated which are likely to form the basis of the sci-tech revolution. The congress will also showcase our Avatar science mega-project, aimed at accelerating the creation of technologies enabling a gradual transition from our biological bodies to an increasingly advanced artificial carrier of the human self.

 

The first GF2045 congress took place in Moscow in February 2012. Its main goal was a discussion of global threats and opportunities arising from the development of new technologies, and the formulation of recommendations for the realization of the optimal scenario for the future with regard to the expected usage of these technologies. In the world of international science, this was the first time at this level and in this form, that not only the key directions of innovations in the coming decades were examined, but also their ethical and philosophical aspects.

 

In the 3 days of the congress, over 1,500 participants took part, with 50 speakers from countries around the world, including the USA, the Netherlands and Australia. The congress received wide coverage in the press, and was positively assessed in scientific circles.

 

The congress was organized by the strategic social movement Russia 2045, a.k.a The 2045 Initiative.

 

The 2045 Initiative

 

Founded by Russian entrepreneur Dmitry Itskov in February 2011 with the participation of leading Russian specialists in the field of neural interfaces, robotics, artificial organs and systems.

 

The main goals of the 2045 Initiative: the creation and realization of a new strategy for the development of humanity which meets global civilization challenges; the creation of optimale conditions promoting the spiritual enlightenment of humanity; and the realization of a new futuristic reality based on 5 principles: high spirituality, high culture, high ethics, high science and high technologies.

 

The main science mega-project of the 2045 Initiative aims to create technologies enabling the transfer of a individual's personality to a more advanced non-biological carrier, and extending life, including to the point of immortality. We devote particular attention to enabling the fullest possible dialogue between the world's major spiritual traditions, science and society.

 

A large-scale transformation of humanity, comparable to some of the major spiritual and sci-tech revolutions in history, will require a new strategy. We believe this to be necessary to overcome existing crises, which threaten our planetary habitat and the continued existence of humanity as a species. With the 2045 Initiative, we hope to realize a new strategy for humanity's development, and in so doing, create a more productive, fulfilling, and satisfying future.

http://gf2045.com/program/

~A.