From the heart through the mind, May The World awaken
Our Vision For
We should all be able to grow and have waking up day by day.
Make The World A Happy Place To Live
Peace & Unity
We aims to facilitate or catalyze something that many already consider essential if we want all, or at least the vast majority, to live free and in peace in this world.
Empower Yourself for Health
Latest From Blog
People are getting more and more concerned about the environment. Awareness about the dangers of certain practices has grown over the years with more businesses seeking to implement eco-friendly policies in the workplace. Companies are striving to become “greener” because of the media’s attention on businesses that have been negatively impacting the environment with their operations.
As an entrepreneur trying to build a positive brand image in the eyes of the public, you may want to achieve the status of an eco-friendly business. You are not alone in this quest, therefore, you should not be left behind as your competitors strive to attain that status. The 5 tips contained in this article should help.
- Build a Sustainability Plan
This is necessary in order to monitor how eco-friendly your workplace is. You do not have to aim for something extraordinary. What matters is that positive changes are recorded as time passes. You can start small by having a 5-point agenda for your green goals in the first month. Try to increase this number in subsequent months.
- Minimize the Use of Paper
You can reduce the use of paper in the office, or even go paperless. These days, most office work can be done without the use of paper. Software is the way. Utilize cloud storage services for a better file sharing experience. Think of a way to get rid of most of the printers in your workplace. If you still feel the need to use paper for certain tasks, ensure that it is recycled paper.
- Make Your Office Plastic-free
This may seem impossible to achieve, but you and your employees can work towards a score of 90% and above. The packaging of your products can be done with materials that are reusable and recyclable.
- Donate Unused Equipment
Sometimes, you may have stored office equipment that are no longer useful to the company. Instead of storing them and letting them rot away or expire in storage, why not give them out? Your target beneficiaries could be educational institutions, charity organizations, other companies, etc.
- Recycle Used Products
Used office items which cannot be reused could be recycled to produce green energy. The recyclable materials they were made from can be used to manufacture new products. You should aim to recycle as many waste products as possible regularly. A step in the right direction is the addition of recycling bins to your workplace.
In view of the above, it is clear that making your company an eco-friendly business is not so difficult. You just need to know the right things to do. A step in the right direction is the inclusion of this quest in your business plan. If you do so, your goal to become greener will be easier to achieve. Firms like Pro Business Plans can help you draft a plan that will do justice to this aspect of your vision for the company.
If you are able to make your business eco-friendly, endeavor to make it known to the public. It will definitely be a boost to your brand image.
Leonardo Dicaprio’s Oscar speech tells you a lot about Climate Change, and you need to get started on things. Each day of our existence ruins our planet to the brink and the future is something that seems to be uncertain. So, despite awareness, why is it that people sit in a corner and do nothing? Well, the answer talks a lot about the individual and who we are inside. But since we have no time to fight over the past, we need to start acting now. So, if you are concerned about the planet or your own existence, then keep reading to know how you can save it.
The Consumption of Energy
There are small acts that can take us a long way and help prevent climate change to a certain extent. One of those acts involves our use of energy and how it shapes our future. So the most important question you need to ask yourself is how to be more energy efficient? There are numerous methods that you can follow, and some of them are also beneficial to you. Be it the light bulbs or appliances; there is always a way to cut down on your consumption.
Our food habits can have a different impact on the environment, and it is high time that we react accordingly. A diet that contains less meat and more organic food items goes a long way in helping the planet. During any moment of your life, you should never think about wasting food, as that plays a major role. The decision to go vegan is not a bad choice and making an effort is the right way to start.
Our means and methods of transportation are all ways to increase our carbon footprint on the planet. But there are ways through which you can be eco-friendly, and we are sure that you are well aware of such facts. Riding a bicycle or walking are means that will also benefit you physically. By doing so, you are also saving a lot of money, and a good bank balance might pop up. Hence, avoid the sports car and take the cycle.
Politicians and Renewables
Being a part of this nation, you have the right to raise questions to the government, that needs to act for Climate Change.
The different governmental projects that they undertake needs to revolve around the planet and should never go against it. On the other hand, you should do your own part in the action by investing in renewable sources that will guarantee a future. In the end, the decision lies in your hands. You can either ignore that you read or begin the process of change.
The CDC ( Centers for Disease Control , Atlanta, USA) took 14 years (1981-1995) to build AIDS. Steps:
1.- 1981: in the USA, as of 5/6 the CDC affirmed, without any scientific evidence, that they had detected a contagious disease in Homosexuals, characterized by an immunodeficiency and inevitably fatal !, to which they named GRID (Gay Related ImmunoDeficiency) . Thus they started the construction of AIDS.
And to justify this first deception, the CDC directed all the tricks, heterodoxies, frauds and corruptions necessary to be able to impose a worldwide falsehood that had a pseudoscientific and technological appearance
2.- 1982: the CDC affirms in June with 452 cases that there is an “epidemic”, including 12 old diseases as defining and “four o’clock”, they change the name to AIDS and affirm that “AIDS is viral”, so that promote all the traps necessary to be able to fraudulently announce to the world that “the virus has been found”
3.- 5/20/1983: Dr. Luc Montagnier states (without demonstrating it) in the journal Science that he has isolated a virus in a pre-AIDS patient. For this article without any rigor, he was awarded the 2008 Nobel Prize in Medicine
4/23/1984: Without a single scientific article to support it, Dr. Robert Gallo announces at a press conference that he has found the virus that causes AIDS. Thus was born the fiction that since 1987 is called HIV / AIDS, also based on a scientific fraud in Science of 4/5, as evidenced by three documents made public in 2008
5.- 1985: ELISA tests are designed, manufactured and approved not to diagnose “HIV infection” but only to screen blood donations and destroy those that test positive
6.- 1987: mini-revolution within official AIDS: Heterosexuals are introduced, the WB test is passed, it is imposed on August 14 that ‘positive test’ means ‘active HIV infection’, the chemotherapeutic AZT is approved and coined HIV AIDS
7.- 1995: great revolution within the official HIV / AIDS, the AIDS assembly being established as it is known today. It consists of five components: 1) the HIV assumption model is changed, from the “HIV-Montagnier-HIV-model” to the “HIV-Ho-model”; 2) Cocktails are approved; 3) this chemotherapy is applied under the slogan “hit fast, hit hard”; 4) the false indirect marker called “viral load” is introduced; 5) it goes from the deceit “AIDS is inevitably deadly” to the softest lie “AIDS is a chronic disease”
8.- It will be addressed how the CDC included as “AIDS defining diseases” the biological processes that, in Dr. Hamer’s approach, appear with the labeling and overcoming the biological conflicts that it causes
9.- Why did the CDC build the AIDS criminal gear? Soft hypothesis Hard hypothesis
Foods with fiber, vegetables:
• Steamed vegetables, stewed (not too much), grilled, every day. • Salad if it is very hot and if we have a digestive system that is not very weak. • Whole or swollen cereals or organic muesli (non-commercial) • Cooked fruits such as roasted apple, etc. • Mashed carrots, squash and some onions are highly recommended, especially at night, for nervous people who need to sedate the liver or depending on sweets.
• Wholemeal, natural or moist whole-grain yeast bread (not roasted) • Whole or swollen cereals or biological muesli (non-commercial) • Organic jam (eg bitter orange or berries) • Sesame bars or molasses waffles of rice • Brown rice and whole grain pasta • Oatmeal or quinoa milk • Small legumes; chickpea, black beans, blue beans, lentils.
• Fish and seafood. Anchovies, tuna, bonito, mackerel • Pink or white veal. Suckling lamb Chicken. Poultry turkey • Acorn ham; Acorn-cut pork leg • Cooked egg, grilled or in French omelette (maximum 2 eggs per week) • Small legumes; Chickpea, black beans, azuki, lentils. • Brown rice and whole grain pasta • Tofu (must be cooked for one hour and change the water every day). • Seitan if tolerated or digested well.
• Crude olive oil • Coarse sea salt • Rice vinegar • Spices in moderate quantity: turmeric, curry, traditional spices especially.
Sweeteners and sweets :
• Rice molasses, panela or rapadura to sweeten, or stevia radix in drops or tablets • Organic jam (for example bitter orange or berries) • Fruit compotes without added sugars • Pure cocoa in tablet without milk or small sugar quantity and sporadically to sedate the dependence on sweets.
• Carrot, beet, lemon and mixed apple juice • Oat or quinoa milk • Natural coffee, or cereal compounds, alone or with oat or quinoa milk • Miso soups (in winter) • Beer with alcohol (very moderately ) • Red aging wine, reserve or large reserve (very moderately) • White grape wine (very moderately)
Iron : • Raw parsley, beets, lentils, meat (of those recommended).
Calcium : Beneficial foods: Cereals. Sesame seeds and sunflower seeds. Sardines, wild salmon, almonds and nuts (cooked), black beans. Turnips, broccoli, Alfalfa.
Foods to be suppressed: Refined hydrocarbons: white flour, white sugar, non-integral sweets, jams, pastries, candies, sugary drinks (almost all) … Coffee and alcohol. Cola drinks Salt and antacids with aluminum.
Amount of calcium in food … Food Calcium in mgrs / 100 grs.
Hiziki Seaweed 1400 Wakame Seaweed 1300 Kelp Algae 1099 Sesame Seeds 975 Araga Seaweed 830 Kombu Seaweed 800 Sardines 443 Seaweed Agar Agar 400 Seaweed Nori 390 Almonds 266 Amaranth 222 Nato 217 Beer Yeast 210 Hazelnuts 209 Turnip Leaves 190 Brazil Nuts 186 Crepe Cabbage 186 179 Bean 150 Quinoa 141 Parsley 138 Black beans 135 Pistachios 135 Black beans 135 Kale 135 Cabbage 135 Walnut 134 Spirulina 131 Watercress 120 Sunflower seeds 116 Tofu 100 Walnuts 99 Spinach 99 Tempeh 93 Shrimp 92 Sargo 89 Mussel 88 Oyster 82 Miso 80 Lentil 79 Salmon 79 Azuki 75 Oats 54 Eggs 49 Brown rice 33 Blue fish 23 Cod 13 Chicken 11 Minced meat 10. Many fish and seafood are also very rich in calcium. Source: USA and Japan food composition tables, 1998
Essential fatty acids : • First-pressure oils from vegetable seeds. Eg: sesame, sunflower, linen, etc. • Borage oil, hemp, and primrose. • Hazelnut and almond nuts (nuts always cooked, or hydrated, not dried). • Mainly blue fish: mackerel, salmon, herring and tuna. • Pumpkin seeds, flax, soy, wheat and hemp germ and their oils. (GLA) • Seed oil
Some recommended publications :
– Diet, nutrition and prevention of chronic diseases. report of a joint WHO / FAO consultation. Executive Summary World Health Organization. Geneva – January 1991.
– Energy nutrition and health. Dr. Jorge Pérez-Calvo
– Chapter!: Diet and Nutrition. The tao of health, sex and long life. Daniel Reid Uranus.
– Chapter 6: simple proposals to maintain optimal health without effort. The eternal secrets of health. Andreas Moritz Obelisk.
Some Movies : – Supersize Me – We feed the world – Ayurveda.
May the best medicine be your food.
umor markers are not a diagnosis of cancer, so we put them in a different article.
The markers do not serve as an early diagnosis before indeterminate clinics. They should be asked only when there is “suspicion” of cancer or when it is already diagnosed. They serve especially for, counting on the initial figure if it were high, to assess its evolution. Your request in healthy patients can scare the patient unnecessarily and have other unwanted effects (iatrogenesis).
If they are used without real data of suspicion of cancer, it is “bad praxis”, if they are used alone to rule out a diagnosis, it is also bad praxis, if the patient is told that we make them it is iatrogenic because they are scary, and especially if they are He says they are high without having diagnosed yet cancer is iatrogenic because they are not diagnosed with cancer.
If someone asks you for a marker without any clinical criteria, ask for explanations of why you have done it, but do not panic. If he says “it has come out high and it can be cancer” also ask him why he alarms you if he still does not know if that is cancer.
If you do not ask for more evidence that it is not acting scientifically . Some doctors believe they have the authority to request them without clinical data of “well-founded” suspicion of cancer, which they have to diagnose first. If they are asked for without more diagnosis, but the mortality is not improved, or does it increase? It is a subject that should be studied because it is not clear and there are already more than important data that we are diagnosing cancers that would not give problem to the patient.
Some say: then what do we do? Well, to begin being serious and rigorous, not to be carried away alone by fear, not to infuse fear unreasonably, not to do defensive medicine only, to use the tests when they are “indicated” according to medicine based on evidence.
As in the diagnostic chapter, I recommend that patients not read the tests because they do not understand them and can be scared for no reason, in this I recommend that if they already have a cancer do not always believe that an elevation is bad because a single elevation It is not reliable, and because an elevation can also occur when the tumor is being destroyed as we will see later.
Therefore, this test should only be requested by doctors with practice in cancer, but currently it is requested without criteria sometimes …
I will use the information from the American Cancer Society what I am going to do is put sentences not all the text, in any case I will omit things that can change the meaning of what I put, and in any case the reader can refer to the source and read it full.
What are tumor markers?
Tumor markers alone are rarely enough evidence to prove cancer .
Most tumor markers can be produced by normal cells , as can cancer cells.
Occasionally, non-cancerous diseases can also cause the levels of certain tumor markers to increase more than normal. And it may be that not all people with cancer have elevated levels of a particular tumor marker.
When a doctor observes the level of a tumor marker, he will consider it along with the patient’s history and general physical examination, as well as with the other laboratory tests and imaging studies . – But beware! That he is not saying that a marker can be made and if it goes wrong then ask for more tests, but precisely the opposite: the markers are requested when we are already diagnosing a cancer with other tests “as a complement”, but if we read it with the wording that they have made it can lead to error, however I know because they taught me that way –
How are tumor markers used?
Tumor markers can be useful in a variety of ways.
1. Cancer screening and early detection
Testing for screening refers to the search for cancer in people who have not shown symptoms of the disease. Early detection means finding cancer in its early stages, when it is less likely to spread and is therefore easier to treat. – We do not agree that they should be used to search for cancer in people without symptoms, but it seems that they already give it as valid, however this is not proven “scientifically”, in fact they say it below –
Tumor markers were initially developed to test people without symptoms for cancer screening , but very few markers have been able to give useful results in this way. An ideal tumor marker would be one that could be used as a blood test for the detection of the disease in all people. Such a tumor marker would only be present in people with the disease and would reveal to the doctor the type of cancer, how much cancer is present and which treatment would be the most appropriate. At present, there is no tumor marker that is so .
The most widely used tumor marker is that of the blood test for the prostate specific antigen or PSA (also known as prostate specific antigen or APE). – note: prostate specific non-cancer – This antigen test is used in the detection of prostate cancer, and men with prostate cancer usually have elevated PSA levels. But the test results are not always clear, since men with a high level of PSA have been seen without cancer ; likewise, a normal PSA level does not always mean that there is no cancer. The prostate specific antigen is not a perfect tumor marker . So far, not all doctors agree that the screening test for PSA is suitable for all men . – You do not need comments, and remember that it is the “most widely used” because then it says : –
For now, no other tumor marker is used as support in the detection of cancer in the general population . – that is, they admit that the PSA can be used, what studies support it? -Some of the tumor markers currently used may help in the detection of early-stage cancer, but can only be subject to review in people known to be at high risk of developing certain types of cancer. – That is to say that they are not saying that they can be done to anyone, for example a PSA for being a man over 40 or a CEA because your grandfather had colon cancer, to give two examples –
Before continuing with what the American Cancer Society says about markers, go a little further into this topic “which is the most transcendent.” When they are asked for no reason or how supposed unscrupulous scientific evidence (such as PSA) their positivity leads to cancer diagnoses or false diagnoses and therefore also to iatrogenesis due to unnecessary dangerous diagnostic treatments or tests that should only be justified with a clinical criterion , not analytical . We have already talked about this in the article Prostate Cancer
On the web you can find information about this scientist and his avatars, you will be surprised at what is written, it seems like a police novel. But what interests us is the polymorphism and the researchers who talked about the cancer microorganism. Dr. Royal Raymond Rife (1888-1971) was an undoubted scientist, we are not here to prove it. He worked for Zeiss ( current Spanish website ) for the American government and for private benefactors such as Henry Timken.
In 1920 he began to investigate the possibilities of electrical treatment of diseases. He built a 5,682-piece microscope that saw live microorganisms and also the “Beam Ray Machine”, several increasingly improved versions, a frequency machine that killed microorganisms: in this video you can see how microorganisms with frequencies can be broken down. Timken (from the Timken Roller Bearing Co. and Bridges Transportation Co.) provided him with funds for research, beginning with tuberculosis and in 1922 with cancer research.
For 40 million years we live a glaciation. It is important to remember, first of all.
The monumental scratch that he began to do then ended up freezing an entire continent, today called Antarctica. The North Pole, Greenland’s mountain glaciers and ice appeared much later, “alone” 3 million years ago.
During some of the coldest stages of this Era (glacial periods), an ice crust 30 meters thick covered almost all the land of Europe to France, decimating any form of life.
The last cold stage has lasted one hundred thousand years. It is believed that it was one of the causes that led the Neanderthal Man ahead.
Luckily, these cold stages alternate every several thousand years with more temperate ones (interglacial periods). Homo Sapiens-Sapiens inaugurated the last of these just 12,000 years ago and we are still in this warmer period, which is called Holocene. Even so, it is colder today than when Antarctica formed.
The next thing to come will be another glacier winter. No one doubts that the cycle will stop. It will take a few hundred or a few thousand years, but it will come.
It is therefore appropriate to put the current ice in context, just in case this fear that its volume recedes, has more to do with the bucolic picture of Santa Claus than with the dramatic conditions of life that we would endure if the ice, with capital letters, It is encouraged to come.
Within these last 12000 years, the first 7000 were warm, it is estimated that about 0.5-3º more than now. Since 5500 there has been a slow and progressive decrease in temperatures called Neoglacial, dotted with a few exceptions that have been called «Optimal climate» for housing a temperature suitable for life, as between the I-IV centuries, or between the X- XIV The highlight of this Neoglacial was the Little Ice Age, with three minimums over 1650, 1770 and 1850.
Since 1850, after three cold centuries, the planet recovers temperature, oscillates again towards another «Optimal climate» and it turns out that all this is one of the biggest problems facing humanity.
There are thousands of frontline scientists, including some Nobel laureates who believe that all this is not a problem and seriously doubt their anthropic or anthropogenic (man-made) origin, but we have already seen in the previous post how it is dispatched to any scientific dissent. It’s about you believing that it barely exists, that it doesn’t publish, that it’s paid by the oil companies or that it belongs to the Aznar lobby.
The temperature of the last 150 years has also not been uniform and has mislead about its tendency to such an extent that, only in the 20th century, the media and the “scientific community” have warned of terrible weather forecasts up to four times. Interestingly, two warned of warming and the other two feared a new Ice Age.
In 1912, after a continuous period of 20 years of falling temperatures, the Los Angeles Times published an article predicting nothing less than: “The human race will have to fight for its existence against the cold. The 5th Ice Age is on its way ”
They also looked at the temperature drop for 4500 years (a certain thing) and the following year, on August 10, 1923, an article in The Washington Post already declared: “The Ice Age is coming.”
By 1930, the media recalls and, far from detailing what that Ice Age was like that was already arriving (sic), reactivate the alarm in the opposite direction. There is a danger from global warming: “America in Longest Warm Spell Since 1776” (America in the longest warm period since 1776) stated a New York Times article on March 27, 1933, among many others.
It was true. Since the mid-eighteenth century, with the exception of the minimum around 1850, the planet recovered temperature.
Again, on December 29, 1974, after 35 cold years, The New York Times in an article on global cooling summarized another “consensus” among climatologists:
“(…) The facts of the present climate change are such that the most optimistic experts would assign near certainty to major crop failure in a decade. Mass deaths by starvation and probably in anarchy and violence ”(… The facts of current climate change are such that even the most optimistic experts would grant almost complete certainty to the prognosis of a serious fall in crops in a decade. Mass deaths from starvation and probably in a context of anarchy and violence).
A year later, the same newspaper published: “A serious cooling is widely considered inevitable”
Shortly after, on April 28, 1975, Newsweek magazine announced the almost unanimity of meteorologists in which global cooling would cause “catastrophic famines.”
On May 21 of that same year, The New York Times collected that scientists gave as “well established” that the Northern Hemisphere had been cooling since 1950.
On December 10, 1976, the journal Science warned of the proximity of an “extensive glaciation” in our hemisphere. Two years later, The Day , insisted: “Are we headed for another ice age?” .
It had been 30 years of little explainable cold and a glaciation was feared, because in reality everyone waits for it – according to cycles of 100,000 years – and already “touched us” (sic).
The weather began to warm up in the late 1970s and, at the beginning of the next decade, the alarm, again, was spreading in the opposite direction. Of course, this time with an unusual force.
Since 1895, the media have changed their alarm predictions four times in relation to the weather and although they assured a high degree of probability, the previous three have ended u