It’s the hardest part of anything worth doing: taking that first step.
But for anyone who’s paying attention to what’s going on in the world—the intensification of global poverty and food insecurity, deteriorating public health, species extinction, rising sea levels and extreme weather events, refugees fleeing drought and famine, escalating geopolitical tensions—inaction isn’t an option.
It’s time to step up. It’s time to embrace hope. And our best hope is regeneration.
The paradigm shift from degenerative food, farming and land-use practices toward regenerative practices—those that regenerate soil, biodiversity, health, local economies and climate stability—is arguably the most critical transformation occurring throughout the world today.
But that transformation won’t happen fast enough, unless we all step up. And the best place to take that first step is in our own communities.
In “First Steps: Build a Regeneration Movement in Your Local Community,” OCA’s Ronnie Cummins offers suggestions for how to build a local core group to advance the regeneration movement.
You¹re sick. Your nose is stuffy. Your body aches, You¹re sweaty, coughing, sneezing and you don¹t have enough energy to get out of bed.
It¹s not the flu. It¹s a conspiracy, according to Dr. Len Horowitz. His opinion is not based on conspiracy theory but on conspiracy fact.
Over the past 10 years, Horowitz has become America¹s most controversial medical authority. A university-trained medical researcher, Horowitz, 48, charges that elements of the United States government are conspiring with major pharmaceutical companies to make large segments of the population sick.
The mainstream media is reporting that hospital emergency rooms are jammed with patients suffering from a bizarre upper respiratory infection that doesn¹t quite seem like a virus. They are reporting that it¹s a ³mystery² flu and that the flu vaccines are ineffective against it.
³That¹s all hogwash, bogus nonsense², says Dr. Leonard Horowitz. ³The fact of the matter is, we have seen this type of an epidemic since the end of 1998 and the beginning of 1999. People have been hacking and coughing with this bizarre illness that does not seem to follow any logical viral or bacterial onset and transition period.
If it was a really bacterial or a viral infection, it would have caused a fever but it didn¹t. It lasts for weeks, if not months. Sinus congestion, sinus drainage, cough, fatigue, general malaise. People have been feeling ³off².
The Armed Forces Research Institute of Pathology has registered a patent for the pathogenic micoplasma that is causing the epidemic. You can see the patent report in the book, Healing Codes for the Biblical Apocalypse.
Micoplasma is not really a fungus, it¹s not really a bacteria, it¹s not really a virus. It has no cell wall. It goes deep into the cell nuclei thereby making it very difficult to mount an immune response against it. It¹s a man-made biological weapon.The patent report explains how it causes chronic upper respiratory infections that are virtually identical to what¹s going on right now.²
CHEMTRAILS DESTROY YOUR IMMUNE FUNCTION
³I believe the chemtrails are responsible for a chemical intoxication of the public, which would then cause a general immune suppression, low grade to high grade, depending on exposure. The immune dysfunction allows people to become susceptible to opportunistic infections, such as this micoplasma and other opportunistic infections², says Dr. Horowitz.
³I first began to investigate chemtrails when some were sprayed over my home in Northern Idaho. I took pictures of them, and then contacted the Environmental Protection Agency of the state who were clueless and referred me to the Air Force. They got me in touch with Centers for Disease Control Toxicology, and after about a week I received a letter from one of their chief toxicologists saying, indeed there was some amount of ethylene dibromide in the jet fuel.
Ethylene dibromide is a known human chemical carcinogen that was removed from unleaded gasoline because of its cancer-causing effects. Now suddenly it has appeared in the jet fuel that high-altitude military aircraft are emitting!²
Ethylene dibromide is coming out of the jet fuels that is causing immune suppression and weakening people¹s immune system. Then you¹ve got a micoplasma microbe or a fungus that causes an upper respiratory illness. Suddenly you develop a secondary bacterial infection. Now you get hit with ANTIBIOTICS, and the antibiotics cause your body chemistry to go acidic, so now you get rashes and other things, your liver gets full of toxins and comes out through your skin in rashes and they get hyperallergenic reactions associated with the other chemicals. I¹ve got colleagues in the Bahamas, Bermuda, Toronto, British Columbia all reporting the same bizarre seeding of the atmosphere. What is going on is just despicable.
All of a sudden now you¹ve got human beings completely out of balance and infected by two, three or four microbial co-factors as well as intoxicated by a variety of different chemicalsŠ and you¹ve got somebody who¹s going to be chronically ill.
THE BLACK BUDGET
³The Frank Church Congressional Hearings of 1975 exposed the Central Intelligence Agency biological weapons contracting firms Litton Bionetics and the Army Corp of Engineers who were developing and utilizing various biological weapons on populations. And this is all done under black operations, covert operations, where they get funding and congressional people are never informed really where this money is going. It¹s the black budget², says Horowitz.
³And in the contemporary warfare arena, where experts in biological chemical warfare convene and discuss the ways that are ideal to conduct warfare today, to really take an enemy out, you don¹t want to kill the people. You want to produce people who are chronically ill and become dependant on the state and totally sap the resources of the country. And then you can move in with your military-medical-industrial complex and your international medical-pharmaceutical cartel. Then you sell these defeated countries all of the pharmaceuticals and chemicals that they need to maintain any semblance of healthy function.
They¹re completely depleted. They can¹t put together a military. You create a dependence and thereby you weaken the population, and weakened populations are easy to control. So you¹ve got population control, and you make vast fortunes doing it, versus just blowing up a nuclear weapon and devastating the infrastructure that you own. You and your colleagues own that infrastructure. You want to get rid of the people. You don¹t want to get rid of infrastructure²
WHO¹S RESPONSIBLE?
³What I¹m relating to you now is not speculation. If you were to read the top experts analysis of military warfare, including The Report From Iron Mountain the Rockefeller family is one of the major players in this conspiracy. They are one of the major players in world genocide, world population reduction. That¹s no mystery anymore
When you examine who owns the chemtrail fuel, who are the fuel company directors, suddenly you enter into the realm of the Rockefeller family and the royal families Standard Oil and British Petroleum. And what are their other agendas? Suddenly now you see their documents, showing that they have funded, historically, eugenics, racial hygiene, genocide, depopulation, family planning, maternal and child health where they make and deliver vaccines, and contaminated blood supplies. These are the banksters, the same people who run the blood banking as well as the money banking industries², says Dr. Horowitz.
³I reference a great book by Dr. John Coleman, who worked as a British Secret Service agent at the highest levels. And he articulated very clearly who was running those companies. It all goes back, ultimately, to the highest level of the royal family. The Bush family, Rothschild family, the Rockefeller money, and the entire Rockefeller establishment is based on Rothschild money and royal families.
If you can¹t explain it rationally or any other way, I think you¹ve got to begin to consider conspiracy theories and eliminate the negative label that you¹ve placed on conspiracy theories which have been demonized along with wholistic medicine.²
AMERICA¹S FOURTH REICH
The ruling crime families are making vast fortunes off of humanity¹s suffering. The Rockefellers monopolized American medicine in the 1920s. They, along with I.G. Farben, Germany¹s leading industrial organization, held the monopoly on the world¹s chemical and pharmaceutical industries.
The Rockefellers and I.G. Farben worked together before World War II and during World War II. For all practical purposes, the Rockefellers and I.G. Farben were the Third Reich.
Who else is involved? The Merck Pharmaceutical Company. Their president, George W. Merck, was America¹s biological weapons industry director during World War II. He was personally appointed by President Roosevelt and Secretary of War Stimson.
The Nazis planned for the New World Order. They even had a term for it ³neue Ordnung,² which means New Order, New World Order. This today, this New World Order, is the rise of the Fourth Reich. This is precisely what they envisioned and then carried out on a global scale. The goal of the Fourth Reich is population control and genocide.
99.99 percent of Masons have no clue what they¹re really up to at the highest levels. they give you increased knowledge at every higher degree of Freemasonry. When you get beyond the 33rd degree, you get the highest indoctrination into what¹s called the Ancient Arcana, the ancient sacred knowledge described in the book Healing Codes of the Biblical Apocalypse. That¹s where the devil-doers who are running this planet are nesting.
How does a person become that high in the Masonic organization? Through bloodlines. You¹ve got to be major royalty, major royalty, ideally a descendent or you¹ve got to be somebody who is very close to the royalty, the major bloodlines.
WHO ARE THEY TARGETING?
Who are they targeting for genocide? If there¹s an attempt underway to reduce the population of the planet, why isn¹t it happening?
³Look at countries like those in Africa, Third World nations that have been heavily targeted with HIV/AIDS. And consider that 73 percent of HIV/AIDS patients in America today are Black or Hispanic. Statistically, 55 percent of gay men in America are already dead. Are you seeing depopulation specifically targeting minority groups now? Of course. It¹s happening right now.
They don¹t want to totally eliminate populations completely, just certain populations. And isn¹t it, from their perspective, wonderful? They¹ve got a covert depopulation agenda that nobody¹s picked up on yet. It¹s ideally what they want to produce.
It¹s not just about the money. I think there¹s a Satanic or evil ideology, because Nixon himself said, referring to the Rockefellers, it¹s not about money for these people, it¹s about power.
THE MONOPOLY GAME
At the end of the Monopoly game, what do you do? One person wins, they own all of the real estate, they own all of the assets, they¹ve wiped all the other players out and the game is over. You can out the game away in your closet. But you don¹t do that on planet earth.
The person who wins at the end of this World Monopoly Game gets to rearrange the board. And that¹s precisely what we¹ve seen in the last year. You¹ve seen not the biggest fish eating the biggest fish in international commerce, you have seen the mega-whales eating the mega-whales in these mega-mergers. All these little companies that are producing your vitamins are a subsidiary of a major conglomerate. Today a Warner Lambert or Glaxo Wellcom, all of these huge, huge corporations own all the little fish. They buy them out. So, again, now the game board gets to be changed if they desire, and apparently that¹s what they desire. That¹s their agenda, you can see it.
At the Denver Airport, there¹s a capstone, in the main terminal building dedicated to the New World Airport Commission by the Freemasons. And there¹s a big colorful mural that is dedicated to the extinct human species. And in the foreground, against the horrific backdrop of flames and destruction, there are three open coffins
BUILD YOUR IMMUNE SYSTEM
STEP ONE: Detoxification.
Because we¹ve all been fed Babylon¹s harvest and eaten the toxic garbage that comes from Monsanto, Dow Chemical and Archer Daniel and all their genetically engineered foods and the chemicals and the fluorides and the chlorines, we need to detox. An easy detoxification program using fresh squeezed lemonade that you make with maple syrup and fresh squeezed lemons and cayenne pepper
STEP TWO: Deacidification
To change your body¹s chemistry, make it more alkaline. It¹s only in the acid state that the growth of bacteria, viruses, fungus, molds, and cancer, cancer cells thrive. They cannot grow in an alkaline environment. What causes your body chemistry to go acidic and become a breeding ground for the bacterial and infectious agents? Caffeine, nicotine, sugar, refined carbohydrates, alcohol, pharmaceuticals including antibiotics, red meats, stress are the main causes. Eliminate or reduce them as much as possible.
Squeeze lemon juice into water. Lemon has a lot of calcium in it and it turns to calcium hydroxide in drinking water. That¹s alkalising. It raises the PH of that water from about 7 to about 8. Hot cayenne pepper is one of the most alkalising agents you can put in your body. It detoxifies and deacidifies all in one step.
STEP THREE: Spiritual
Meditate. There¹s mental, emotion, social, environmental and, above all, spiritual changes that people need to make to really prepare to withstand the plagues.
STEP FOUR: Oxygenation
The Rockefeller-directed international banksters, blood banksters and medical monopolists have been busy suppressing your immune system. You want to raise your blood oxygen levels
All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident. ‹Arthur Schopenhauer
“All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.”–Edmund Burke.
—
“We don’t see things as they ARE, we see them as WE are.” ‹Anais Nin
[Ed. Note: Always trust YOUR own knowingness. Never take anything for granted. Use your own mind to discern what you will from your own readings. Do your own additional research]. This is NOT a MLM and has been sent for information only. Under Bill s.1618 Title III passed by the 105th US Congress, this message cannot be considered Spam as long as the sender includes contact information and a method of “removal.” If at any time you no longer wish to receive email, please just hit return to sender with the word: REMOVE ME in the subject line. Thank you.
SCIENTIFIC STUDIES:
Inhibition of Cancer Cell Invasion by Cannabinoids via Increased Expression of Tissue Inhibitor of Matrix Metalloproteinases-1
http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/content/100/1/59.abstract
Anti-tumoral action of cannabinoids: Involvement of sustained ceramide accumulation and extracellular signal-regulated kinase activation
http://www.nature.com/nm/journal/v6/n3/abs/nm0300_313.html
Inhibition of tumor angiogenesis by cannabinoids
http://www.fasebj.org/content/17/3/529.full
Cannabinoids selectively inhibit proliferation and induce death of cultured human glioblastoma multiforme cells
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16078104?dopt=Abstract
A pilot clinical study of 9-tetrahydrocannabinol in patients with recurrent glioblastoma multiforme
http://www.nature.com/bjc/journal/v95/n2/full/6603236a.html
Cannabinoids as potential new therapy for the treatment of gliomas
http://www.expert-reviews.com/doi/abs/10.1586/14737175.8.1.37
Delta 9-tetrahydrocannabinol inhibits cell cycle progression by downregulation of E2F1 in human glioblastoma multiforme cells.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17934890?dopt=Abstract
Expression of cannabinoid receptors and neurotrophins in human gliomas
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18175076?dopt=Abstract
Δ9-Tetrahydrocannabinol Inhibits Cell Cycle Progression in Human Breast Cancer Cells through Cdc2 Regulation
http://cancerres.aacrjournals.org/content/66/13/6615.abstract
Anti-tumor activity of plant cannabinoids with
emphasis on the effect of cannabidiol on human breast carcinoma
http://jpet.aspetjournals.org/content/early/2006/05/25/jpet.106.105247.full.pdf+html
Antitumor Effects of Cannabidiol, a Nonpsychoactive Cannabinoid, on Human Glioma Cell Lines
http://jpet.aspetjournals.org/content/308/3/838.full
The endogenous cannabinoid anandamide inhibits human breast
cancer cell proliferation
http://www.pnas.org/content/95/14/8375.full.pdf+html
Cannabidiol as a novel inhibitor of Id-1 gene expression in aggressive breast cancer cells
http://mct.aacrjournals.org/content/6/11/2921.abstract
Cannabinoids reduce ErbB2-driven breast cancer progression through Akt inhibition
http://www.molecular-cancer.com/content/9/1/196
Cannabinoid Receptor as a Novel Target for the Treatment of Prostate Cancer
http://cancerres.aacrjournals.org/content/65/5/1635.abstract
Anti-proliferative and apoptotic effects of anandamide in human prostatic cancer cell lines: implication of epidermal growth factor receptor down-regulation and ceramide production
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12746841?dopt=Abstract
The endogenous cannabinoid, anandamide, induces cell death in colorectal carcinoma cells: a possible role for cyclooxygenase 2
http://gut.bmj.com/content/54/12/1741.abstract
Cannabis-induced cytotoxicity in leukemic cell lines: the role of the cannabinoid receptors and the MAPK pathway
http://bloodjournal.hematologylibrary.org/cgi/content/full/105/3/1214
Delta9-tetrahydrocannabinol-induced apoptosis in Jurkat leukemia T cells is regulated by translocation of Bad to mitochondria
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16908594
Δ9-Tetrahydrocannabinol inhibits epithelial growth factor-induced lung cancer cell migration in vitro as well as its growth and metastasis in vivo
http://www.nature.com/onc/journal/v27/n3/abs/1210641a.html
Cannabinoids Induce Apoptosis of Pancreatic Tumor Cells via Endoplasmic Reticulum Stress–Related Genes
http://cancerres.aacrjournals.org/content/66/13/6748.abstract
Cannabinoids in pancreatic cancer: Correlation with survival and pain
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2225529/
Inhibition of Cancer Cell Invasion by Cannabinoids via Increased Expression of Tissue Inhibitor of Matrix Metalloproteinases-1
http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/content/100/1/59.abstract
Cannabinoids inhibit cellular respiration of human oral cancer cells
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20516734
The dual effects of delta(9)-tetrahydrocannabinol on cholangiocarcinoma cells: anti-invasion activity at low concentration and apoptosis induction at high concentration
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19916793
Cannabinoid receptor-mediated apoptosis induced by R(+)-methanandamide and Win55,212-2 is associated with ceramide accumulation and p38 activation in mantle cell lymphoma
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16936228
xpression of cannabinoid receptors type 1 and type 2 in non-Hodgkin lymphoma: Growth inhibition by receptor activation
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ijc.23584/abstract
Cannabidiol enhances the inhibitory effects of delta9-tetrahydrocannabinol on human glioblastoma cell proliferation and survival
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20053780
Cannabinoids and Cancer
http://www.bentham.org/mrmc/contabs/mrmc5-10.htm#6
Inhibition of skin tumor growth and angiogenesis in vivo by activation of cannabinoid receptors
http://www.jci.org/articles/view/16116/version/1
http://medlibrary.org/medwiki/Glioma: (specifically section under THC – “Most Recently investigators at the University of California, Pacific Medical Center reported that cannabinoids possess synergistic anti-cancer properties — finding that the administration of a combination of the plant’s constituents is superior to the administration of isolated compounds alone.[13]”)
Cannabidiol enhances the inhibitory effects of Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol on human glioblastoma cell proliferation and survival
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2806496/?tool=pmcentrez
Cannabinoids and cancer
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16250836
Delta9-tetrahydrocannabinol induces apoptosis in C6 glioma cells.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9771884
Enhancing the in vitro cytotoxic activity of Delta9-tetrahydrocannabinol in leukemic cells through a combinatorial approach.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18608861
Cannabinoids for Cancer Treatment: Progress and Promise
http://cancerres.aacrjournals.org/content/68/2/339.abstract :
Cannabinoid Receptors, CB1 and CB2, as Novel Targets for Inhibition of Non–Small Cell Lung Cancer Growth and Metastasis
http://cancerpreventionresearch.aacrjournals.org/content/4/1/65.abstract
A Combined Preclinical Therapy of Cannabinoids and Temozolomide against Glioma
http://mct.aacrjournals.org/content/10/1/90.abstract
The Levels of the Endocannabinoid Receptor CB2 and Its Ligand 2-Arachidonoylglycerol Are Elevated in Endometrial Carcinoma
http://endo.endojournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/151/3/921
Synthetic cannabinoid receptor agonists inhibit tumor growth and metastasis of breast cancer
http://mct.aacrjournals.org/content/8/11/3117.abstract
Potentiation of Cannabinoid-Induced Cytotoxicity in Mantle Cell Lymphoma through Modulation of Ceramide Metabolism
http://mcr.aacrjournals.org/content/7/7/1086.abstract
Cannabinoid Receptor Activation Induces Apoptosis through Tumor Necrosis Factor α–Mediated Ceramide De novo Synthesis in Colon Cancer Cells
http://clincancerres.aacrjournals.org/content/14/23/7691.abstract
Breast CancerDelta(9)-tetrahydrocannabinol inhibits 17beta-estradiol-induced proliferation and fails to activate androgen and estrogen receptors in MCF7 human breast cancer cells
http://www.uccs.edu/~rmelamed/Evolutionism/medical_uses_of_cannabinoid_2/cancer/cancer.html
Colorectal Cancer
The cannabinoid 9-tetrahydrocannabinol inhibits RAS-MAPK and PI3K-AKT survival signalling and induces BAD-mediated apoptosis in colorectal cancer cells
http://www.uccs.edu/~rmelamed/Evolutionism/medical_uses_of_cannabinoid_2/cancer/colorectal_cancer.html
Lymphoma
Cannabinoid receptor ligands mediate growth inhibition and cell death in mantle cell lymphoma
http://www.uccs.edu/~rmelamed/Evolutionism/medical_uses_of_cannabinoid_2/cancer/lymphoma.html
Melanoma
Cannabinoid receptors as novel targets for the treatment of melanoma
http://www.uccs.edu/~rmelamed/Evolutionism/medical_uses_of_cannabinoid_2/cancer/melanoma.html
LINK TO 500+ MEDICAL ARTICLES ON PUBMED.GOV
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?Db=pubmed&term=cannabinoid+cancer+treatment
It turns out that the real TOFU was not made from SOYBEANS before the 1930’s.
It was made from MARIJUANA SEEDS !
Actually The real name for Marijuana grown for food is HEMP.
HEMPSEEDS are actually a fruit and is the NUMBER ONE source of protein for the human species.
check out this article:
https://www.majik.org/cruxenrose/?p=21
Soybeans were brought in to replace HEMPSEEDS even though Soybeans are number 100 on the list of best protein !!!
Making TOFU-MA (from hempseeds) is EASY !
just google ‘how to make tofu’ and then use HEMP MILK instead of SOY MILK.
I think it was changed so that when we were all smart enough to figure it out we would change it back…
The big problem is most of us are not even smart enough to quit eating cows yet !!
It seems that most of us are going to die, from STUPIDITY, and lack of motivation to change that.
OH WELL….
Here’s the answer to the problem anyway, hopefully some of us will take it to heart and apply it in our lives.
“Is the ‘Feminization’ of Cannabis Seeds for the purpose of forcing the plant to yield Pistillate or ‘female’ flowers NATURAL and acceptable?”
Maji:
I grow traditional method, outdoors, THUNDERGRO™ treated, cull the males, and raise the females through the flowering process, and the use the graduated cull method to harvest the flowers. I feel like it is an important part of the process to let the seeds flower whichever way they wish to go, HOWEVER- I have experienced an ‘influence’ of older more mature flowering females over young undifferentiated (have not turned male or female yet)-
whenever I have a bunch of those (older flowering females) around, and also young plants, I have a HUGE increase in the number of the young plants that turn male! This influence must be happening by the females using pheromones or something, so in a sense nature is doing the same thing in a subtler way, soooo…….. still undecided on it, but lean toward the natural , NON PROHIBITION INDUCED methods and processes. I guess that would technically mean indoor growing as well.. tough to draw the line when we are a part of nature herself, so you are telling nature she cannot do anything she wishes!!! You see the conundrum I am attempting to reveal here…?!”
grin
International Journal of Biological Sciences, Abstract, 2009 – We present for the first time a comparative analysis of blood and organ system data from trials with rats fed three main commercialized genetically modified maize, which are present in food and feed in the world. . . Approximately 60 different biochemical parameters were classified per organ and measured in serum and urine after 5 and 14 weeks of feeding. GM maize-fed rats were compared first to their respective isogenic or parental non-GM equivalent control groups. This was followed by comparison to six reference groups, which had consumed various other non-GM maize varieties. . . Our analysis clearly reveals for the 3 GMOs new side effects linked with GM maize consumption, which were sex- and often dose-dependent. Effects were mostly associated with the kidney and liver, the dietary detoxifying organs, although different between the 3 GMOs. Other effects were also noticed in the heart, adrenal glands, spleen and haematopoietic system. We conclude that these data highlight signs of hepatorenal toxicity, possibly due to the new pesticides specific to each GM corn. In addition, unintended direct or indirect metabolic consequences of the genetic modification cannot be excluded.
Wikipedia – A 2008 review published by the Royal Society of Medicine noted that GM foods have been eaten by millions of people worldwide for over 15 years, with no reports of ill effects. Similarly a 2004 report from the US National Academies of Sciences stated: “To date, no adverse health effects attributed to genetic engineering have been documented in the human population.” A 2004 review of feeding trials in the Italian Journal of Animal Science found no differences among animals eating genetically modified plants. A 2005 review in Archives of Animal Nutrition concluded that first-generation genetically modified foods had been found to be similar in nutrition and safety to non-GM foods, but noted that second-generation foods with “significant changes in constituents” would be more difficult to test, and would require further animal studies. However, a 2009 review in Nutrition Reviews found that although most studies concluded that GM foods do not differ in nutrition or cause any detectable toxic effects in animals, some studies did report adverse changes at a cellular level caused by some GM foods, concluding that “More scientific effort and investigation is needed to ensure that consumption of GM foods is not likely to provoke any form of health problem”.
Physorg, 2005 – A recent Russian study says 55.6 percent of the offspring of female rats fed genetically engineered soy flour died within three weeks. The female rats reportedly received 5-7 grams of the Roundup Ready variety of soybeans, beginning two weeks before conception and continuing through nursing. By comparison, scientists said only 9 percent of the offspring of rats fed non-GM soy died.
Furthermore, Russian researchers said offspring from the GM-fed group were significantly stunted — 36 percent weighed less than 20 grams after two weeks, compared with only 6.7 percent from the control group.
The study was conducted by Dr. Irina Ermakova of the Institute of Higher Nervous Activity and Neurophysiology in Moscow, a part of the Russian Academy of Sciences.
The study was presented during the recent conference of the American Academy of Environmental Medicine in Tucson, Ariz.
The AAEM board issued a statement saying: “We recognize this study is preliminary in nature. It hasn’t yet been peer reviewed and the methodology has not been spelled out in detail. But given the magnitude of the findings and the implications for human health, we urge the National Institutes of Health to immediately replicate the research.”
(FOXNEWS) President Obama’s school age daughters have not been vaccinated against the H1N1 flu virus. White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs says the vaccine is not available to them based on their risk.
Much of the medical marijuana discussion has focused on the safety of marijuana compared to the safety of FDA-approved drugs. On June 24, 2005 ProCon.org sent a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to find the number of deaths caused by marijuana compared to the number of deaths caused by 17 FDA-approved drugs. Twelve of these FDA-approved drugs were chosen because they are commonly prescribed in place of medical marijuana, while the remaining five FDA-approved drugs were randomly selected because they are widely used and recognized by the general public.
We chose Jan. 1, 1997 as our starting date as it is the beginning of the first year following the Nov. 1996 approval of the first state medical marijuana laws (such as California’s Proposition 215). The FDA reports we read from Sep. 13, 2005 to Oct. 14, 2005 included drug deaths “to present”, which was the date each report was compiled for our request. We cut off the counting as of June 30, 2005 to provide a uniform end-date to the various reports.
On Aug. 25, 2005 the FDA sent us 12 CDs and five printed reports containing copies of their Adverse Event Reporting System (AERS) report on each drug requested. These reports included all adverse events reported to the FDA, only a portion of which included deaths. We manually counted the number of deaths reported on each drug from the FDA-supplied information.
A review of the FDA Adverse Events reports also revealed some deaths where marijuana was at least a concomitant drug (a drug also used at the time of death) in some cases. On Oct. 14, 2005 we used the Freedom of Information Act to request a copy of the adverse events reported deaths for marijuana/cannabis. We received those reports on Aug. 3, 2006 in the form of three additional CDs.
II. Cause of Death Categories & Definitions
The FDA AERS reports rely on health professionals to detect an “adverse event” and attribute that event to the drug, and then to voluntarily report that effect to either the FDA or the drug manufacturer. The drug firm, by law, must report that event to the FDA. The FDA states “ninety percent of the FDA’s reports are received from drug manufacturers” on page one of its “Adverse Event Reporting System (AERS) Brief Description with Caveats of System.” (PDF 2.7 MB)
Select instructions on how to report adverse events, as per the FDA’s AERS Form Instructions (PDF 65 KB), are provided below:
Adverse Event: Any incident where the use of a medication (drug or biologic, including HCT/P), at any dose, a medical device (including in vitro diagnostics) or a special nutritional product (e.g., dietary supplement, infant formula or medical food) is suspected to have resulted in an adverse outcome in a patient.
Death: Check only if you suspect that the death was an outcome of the adverse event, and include the date if known. Do not check if:
The patient died while using a medical product, but there was no suspected association between the death and
A fetus is aborted because of a congenital anomaly (birth defect), or is miscarried
Suspect Product(s): A suspect product is one that you suspect is associated with the adverse event.Up to two (2) suspect products may be reported on one form (#1=first suspect product, #2=second suspect product). Attach an additional form if there were more than two suspect products associated with the reported adverse event.
To report: it is not necessary to be certain of a cause/effect relationship between the adverse event and the use of the medical product(s) in question. Suspicion of an association is sufficient reason to report. Submission of a report does not constitute an admission that medical personnel or the product caused or contributed to the event.
III. FDA Disclaimer of Information
Included in the 15 CDs and five printed reports from the FDA was the following disclosure:
“The information contained in the reports has not been scientifically or otherwise verified. For any given report there is no certainty that the suspected drug caused the reaction. This is because physicians are encouraged to report suspected reactions. The event may have been related to the underlying disease for which the drug was given to concurrent drugs being taken or may have occurred by chance at the same time the suspected drug was taken.
Numbers from these data must be carefully interpreted as reported rates and not occurrence rates. True incidence rates cannot be determined from this database. Comparisons of drugs cannot be made from these data.” — July 18, 20/05 – FDA Office of Pharmacoepidemiology and Statistical Science, “Adverse Event Reporting System (AERS) Brief Description with Caveats of System”
[Editor’s Note – ProCon.org makes no claim that the data below reflects occurrence rates. The information is presented for our readers’ benefit who may feel that the relative comparisons have value. ProCon.org attempted to find the total number of users of each of these drugs by contacting the FDA, pharmaceutical trade organizations, and the actual drug manufacturers. We either did not receive a response or were told the information was proprietary or otherwise unavailable]
V. Chart of Deaths from Marijuana and 17 FDA-Approved Drugs
A. Marijuana
DRUG (Year Approved)
Primary Suspect of the Death
Secondary Suspect (contributing to death)
Total Deaths Reported 1/1/97 – 6/30/05
1.
Marijuana (not approved) also known as: Cannabis sativa L
0
109
109
2.
Cannabis (not approved) also known as: Cannabis sativa L
0
78
78
3.
Cannabinoids (unclear if these mentions include non-plant cannabinoids)
0
92
92
Sub-Total – Marijuana
0
279
279
FDA-Approved Drugs Prescribed in Place of Medical Marijuana
B. Anti-Emetics
DRUG (Year Approved)
Primary Suspect of the Death
Secondary Suspect (contributing to death)
Total Deaths Reported 1/1/97 – 6/30/05
1.
Compazine (1980) also known as: Phenothiazine, prochlorperazine
15
30
45
2.
Reglan (1980) also known as: Metaclopramide, Paspertin, Primperan
37
278
315
3.
Marinol (1985) also known as: Dronabinol
4
1
5
4.
Zofran (1991) also known as: Ondansetron hydrochloride
79
76
155
5.
Anzemet (1997) also known as: Dolasetron mesylatee
22
5
27
6.
Kytril (1999) also known as: Granisetron hydrochloride
36
24
60
7.
Tigan (2001) also known as: Trimethobenzamide
3
15
18
Sub-Total – Anti-Emetics
196
429
625
C. Anti-Spasmodics
DRUG (Year Approved)
Primary Suspect of the Death
Secondary Suspect (contributing to death)
Total Deaths Reported 1/1/97 – 6/30/05
1.
Baclofen (1967) also known as: Lioresal, 4-amino-3-(4-chlorophenyl)-butanoic acid
72
33
105
2.
Zanaflex (1996) also known as: Tizanidine hydrochloride, Sirdalud, Ternelin
46
23
69
Sub-Total – Anti-Spasmodics
118
56
174
D. Anti-Psychotics
DRUG (Year Approved)
Primary Suspect of the Death
Secondary Suspect (contributing to death)
Total Deaths Reported 1/1/97 – 6/30/05
1.
Haldol (1967) also known as: Haloperidol, Haldol Decanoate, Serenace, Halomonth
450
267
717
2.
Lithium (1970) also known as: Lithium Carbonate, Eskalith, Lithobid, Lithonate, Teralithe, Lithane, Hypnorex, Limas, Lithionit, Quilonum
175
133
308
3.
Neurontin (1994) also known as: Gabapentin
968
302
1,270
Sub-Total – Anti-Psychotics
1,593
702
2,295
E. Other Well-Known and Randomly Selected FDA-Approved Drugs
DRUG (Year Approved)
Primary Suspect of the Death
Secondary Suspect (contributing to death)
Total Deaths Reported 1/1/97 – 6/30/05
1.
Ritalin (1955) also known as: Methylphenidate, Concerta, Medadate, Ritaline
(used to treat ADD and ADHD)
121
53
174
2.
Wellbutrin (1997) also known as: Bupropion Hydrochloride, Zyban, Zyntabac, Amfebutamone
(used to treat depression & anxiety)
1,132
220
1,352
3.
Adderall (1966) also known as: Dextroamphetamine Saccharate, Amphetamine Aspartate, Dextroamphetamine Sulfate USP, Amphetamine Sulfate USP
(used to treat narcolepsy or to control hyperactivity in children)
54
12
66
4.
Viagra (1998) also known as: Sildenafil Citrate
(used to treat erectile dysfunction)
2,254
40
2,294
5.
Vioxx (1999) also known as: Rifecixub, Arofexx
(used to treat osteoarthritis and pain)
“Marijuana is rarely the only drug involved in a drug abuse death. Thus … the proportion of marijuana-induced cases labeled as ‘One drug’ (i.e., marijuana only) will be zero or nearly zero.” 2003 – Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration
“Each of the 3 cannabis-associated cases of cerebellar infarction was confirmed by biopsy (1 case) or necropsy (2 cases)… Brainstem compromise caused by cerebellar and cerebral edema led to death in the 2 fatal cases.” Apr. 4, 2004 – Thomas Geller, MD
Liliana Bachs, MD, Senior Medical Officer at the Norwegian Institute of Public Health, et al., wrote the following in their Dec. 27, 2001 article titled “Acute Cardiovascular Fatalities Following Cannabis Use,” published in the journal Forensic Science International:
“Cannabis is generally considered to be a drug with very low toxicity. In this paper, we report six cases where recent cannabis intake was associated with sudden and unexpected death. An acute cardiovascular event was the probable cause of death. In all cases, cannabis intake was documented by blood analysis… Further investigation of clinical, toxicologial and epidemiological aspects are needed to enlighten causality between cannabis intake and acute cardiovascular events.” Dec. 27, 2001 – Liliana Bachs, MD
[Editor’s Note: Dr. Bachs clarified the findings from her Dec. 27, 2001 study reported above in a Nov. 28, 2005 email to ProCon.org, as quoted below.
“Causality is a difficult assessment in forensic toxicology. It is often an ‘exclusion diagnosis,’ and so it is in our cases. I’m therefore not sure about how to classify those deaths.
At the time I published that study I would probably not classify [the cannabis] as primary causation because it was not broadly accepted that [a death from cannabis] could occur at all. Today I see reports coming all the time that acknowledge cannabis cardiovascular risks, and the situation may be different.”]
Stephen Sidney, MD, Associate Director for Clinical Research at Kaiser Permanente, wrote the following in his Sep. 20, 2003 article titled “Comparing Cannabis with Tobacco — Again,” published in the British Medical Journal:
“No acute lethal overdoses of cannabis are known, in contrast to several of its illegal (for example, cocaine) and legal (for example, alcohol, aspirin, acetaminophen) counterparts…
Although the use of cannabis is not harmless, the current knowledge base does not support the assertion that it has any notable adverse public health impact in relation to mortality.” Sep. 20, 2003 – Stephen Sidney, MD
Joycelyn Elders, MD, former US Surgeon General, wrote the following in her Mar. 26, 2004 editorial published in the Providence Journal:
“Unlike many of the drugs we prescribe every day, marijuana has never been proven to cause a fatal overdose.” Mar. 26, 2004 – Joycelyn Elders, MD
VII. Full Text of All 20 FDA “Adverse Event” Reports
[Please note that some of these PDF files exceed 5 megabytes and may take several minutes to load]
Sacramento, CA: The Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) and the California Environmental Protection Agency have added marijuana smoke to the state’s list of official carcinogens, pursuant to Title27, California Code of Regulations, section 25305(a)(1).
Under state law, the Governor’s office is required to publish an annual list of chemicals that possess potential carcinogenic properties and/or are associated with reproductive toxicity, such as arsenic, lead, and tobacco smoke. Products containing such chemicals are required to carry warning labels. Business establishments with ten employees or more are also are mandated to post signs indicating whether there is a likelihood that an individual may be exposed to such chemicals while on the premises.
State environmental regulators determined that there is “limited” evidence “suggestive” that marijuana smoke exposure may be associated with an increased cancer risk in humans. Their review added, “[T]he similarities in chemical composition and in toxicological activity between marijuana smoke and tobacco smoke, and the presence of numerous carcinogens in marijuana (and tobacco) smoke, provide additional evidence of carcinogenicity.”
Presently, over 300 separate chemicals – including aspirin and alcoholic beverages – are designated as carcinogens under California law.
Labeling requirements for marijuana smoke will not take effect until June 2010. Neither marijuana nor edible products containing marijuana will be designated as carcinogens under state law.
Regulators made no official determination regarding the status of cannabis vapor, which does not contain combustion gases and has been determined to be a “safe and effective vehicle” for cannabis delivery in clinical trials.
Authors of the review did note that the largest population case-control study ever to assess the use of marijuana and lung cancer risk did not find a positive association between long-term cannabis smoking and cancer.
California NORML Coordinator Dale Geiringer said that the ruling did not come as a surprise because it has been well known for years that cannabis smoke contains known carcinogenic chemicals. However, he noted that the intake of these noxious chemicals “can be completely eliminated by vaporization or by consuming marijuana orally.”
NORML Deputy Director Paul Armentano said that it remains unclear what effect, if any, these new regulations will have on the dispensing of medical marijuana in California. “Since it is marijuana smoke, not marijuana per se, that is at issue here, it is not clear that legally operating medicinal cannabis dispensaries will have to alter their actions to comply with Prop. 65,” he said – noting that few such facilities allow patients to smoke cannabis on the premises. “Liquor stores are not required to post warnings on the premises just because they dispense alcohol, so why would medical cannabis dispensaries be treated any differently?”