FEMINISING OF MEN

Eight Ways Society is Feminising Men Through Food And Products

A reoccurring theme in many of the food health concerns revolves around high estrogen levels. This can be harmful to men and women. It’s almost as if there is a conspiracy to reduce the population of humans on planet earth.

Perhaps Ori Hofmekler said it best:

“We’re on the fast track to extinction. In the past 50 years, sperm counts in men have dropped 50 percent, while the average man’s testosterone and sperm count has plummeted 20 percent in just the last 20 years.” 

 

There are dozens of chemicals found nearly everywhere that confuse sperm and destroy male health.

The conspiracy behind it seems rather obvious but debating the point is futile. What matters most is that we recognize that it is a problem and find ways to fix it.

According to Dr. Russell Blaylock, noted neurosurgeon and author of The Blaylock Report:

“Studies show that xenoestrogens from plastics appear to cause premature menses in young girls. Soy isoflavones appear to increase aggressiveness and heighten antisocial behavior in monkeys and appear to feminize male animals.”

Below is a list of high-estrogenic foods that should be avoided to live a life of abundant health that can be passed down to offspring.

 

1. Pesticides Used On Fruits and Vegetables

Pesticides that are sprayed on conventionally grown vegetables (often GMOs) act as estrogens once ingested.

The pesticides sprayed on conventionally grown (non-organic) vegetables act as estrogens once inside the body. (Source: PESTICIDES MAY BLOCK MALE HORMONES)

 

2. Soy Is Not Healthy

 Soy causes Gynecomastia aka Man Boobs (Moobs)

There are many reasons to avoid soy, one of the most heavily subsidized crops by the United States government. One of the best is the high estrogen-like effects on the human body. Soy leads to enlargement of breast tissue, water retention, female pattern fat deposition and mood swings. It can also decrease testosterone. (Source: 170 Scientific Reasons to Lose Soy in your Diet)

 

3. Hormones In Some Beef

To increase meat and milk products hormones are given to cows by some farmers. This meat, when ate by humans, is transferred to us. Once inside the body these compounds have strong estrogenic effects.

In addition cows are fed soy that has been soaked in pesticides. This is a triple whammy. This is why it is critical to eat grass-fed beef.

 

4. Beer
 

In his book The Natural Testosterone Plan, Stephen Harrod Buhner writes:

“Hops is best known for its use in beer. The majority of physicians and men overlook its potent chemicals and do not realize that beer itself can significantly alter the male androgen levels. German beer makers noticed long ago that the young women who picked hops in the fields commonly experienced early menstrual periods. Eventually, researchers discovered the reason – hops is perhaps one of the most powerfully estrogenic plants on Earth. Just 100 grams of hops (about 3.5 ounces) contains anywhere from thirty thousand to three hundred thousand IUs of estrogen, depending on the type of hops.

Most of it is the very potent estrogen estradiol. Estradiol, as it is taken into the male body, causes a direct lowering of testosterone levels in the testes and an increase in SHBG levels, which then binds up even more free testosterone in the bloodstream. The estradiol in hops has also been found to directly interfere with the ability of the testes Leydig cells to produce testosterone. The presence of this highly estrogenic substance in beer is not an accident.”

Commercials will have one that that drinking beer makes a man macho. Nothing can be further from the truth!

  

5. Television and the Feminization of Men

Male feminization on television has slowly be conditioned into the psyche of men. This has dramatically altered behavior patterns. To discuss this among some, it can be seen as homophobic. In reality, it’s recognizing that through diet and entertainment, a new male has risen and ‘he’ is more ‘she’ than ever.

 

6. Unsaturated Fats

Unsaturated fats from vegetable oils are mostly soy, which is an estrogenic plant byproduct, among the highest on the planet. These are covered in pesticides, which come with their own estrogenic properties.

Saturated fats from lard, butter, tallow, coconut oil, and so on help produce testosterone and are preferred alternatives.

 

7. BPA in Plastics

Xenoestrogen is a class of chemical that mimics estrogen in humans. Chemicals from plastics leak into cans, bottles, packaging of food, rivers, streams, lakes, oceans and everything else. Plastic is everywhere.

According to the national Institute of Health:

 “Bisphenol A (BPA) is a chemical produced in large quantities for use primarily in the production of polycarbonate plastics and epoxy resins.”

Over 93% of American’s have BPA in their bodies. This reduces sperm counts in males.

Environmentalist Bruce Lowry describes the side effects we’re seeing from exposure to BPA:

“Things like Attention Deficit Disorder, Childhood Obesity, Asthma, Autism, and then a whole range of Cancer’s that we’re seeing too – Brain Cancer, Liver Cancer, Prostate Cancer. ”

 

8. Pthalates in Scents

Studies in male animals exposed to pthalates have found reduced sperm production, undescended testes, hypospadias, and decreased testosterone production.

Sources of Pthalates to avoid:

Shampoos, Colognes/Perfume, Deodorant, Hair Spray, Body Lotion, Makeup, Glade Plug-ins and other Air Fresheners.

 

TUMOURS DETOXIFY

ARE TUMOURS ONE OF THE BODY’S WAYS OF DETOXIFYING? 

 

Why the sickness industry’s approach to cancer is such a disaster.

ROLE OF THE TUMOR

Cancer and toxicity go together. The role of tumors is to store or sequester the toxins to a small circumscribed area to keep the poisons confined and prevent them from spreading. We know that tumors are highly toxic because when conventional cancer therapies break up a tumor very quickly and suddenly release cellular components into the bloodstream (a situation referred to as tumor lysis syndrome),1 this disturbance releases so much toxicity (or poison) that the person may die.

Researchers noted over twenty-five years ago that breast tissue stores toxic chemicals such as polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). They observed elevated levels of PCBs and other chemical residues “in fat samples from women with cancer, compared with [women] who had benign breast disease.”2 Investigators concluded that “environmentally derived suspect carcinogens” likely play a role in the “genesis of mammary carcinoma.”2 Looking at the issue of cancer and toxicity from another perspective, an independent researcher examined root canals and oral infections in nearly four thousand women who had lung or breast cancer and found that in 100 percent of the cases—without a single exception—the oral health problems were on the same side of the mouth and body as the cancers.3

We have known for even longer—nearly a century—that populations exposed to toxic substances have higher cancer and tumor rates. This is especially the case for people living or working near, downwind or down river from chemical factories, oil refineries, toxic waste dumps and other entities that spew poisons. The observation is inescapable—people exposed to toxins get cancer.

One of the best books ever written on this subject is The Secret History of the War on Cancer by Devra Davis.4 Dr. Davis wrote that in the 1930s, researchers in countries around the world (including Argentina, Austria, England, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Scotland, and the U.S.) all came to the same conclusion: “Where people lived affected getting cancer.”4

Like these 1930s researchers, European doctors have understood the role of toxicity in causing cancer for a long time. Dr. Natasha Campbell-McBride, popularizer of the Gut and Psychology Syndrome (GAPS) dietary protocol, went to medical school in Russia and says, “In Russia and Europe, it was always known that toxicity caused cancer; there was no question about it” (personal communication, May 2017). On the other hand, if you ask an American oncologist “Why did I get cancer?,” the oncologist will look at you like a deer in the headlights and mumble something about genetic mutations.

TUMORS COME AND GO

In most cases, tumors have a limited life span. In fact, tumors come and go throughout our lives. You may have many tumors today and none tomorrow— if your body is working as it should—because you have a natural ability to remove toxins. With effective detoxification, the tumors are no longer necessary, and your body can dissolve, neutralize and eliminate them. “Spontaneous remission” is the medical term that describes the body’s ability to dissolve and excrete tumors, even life-threatening ones. The tumors just disappear. Spontaneous remission is a well-documented phenomenon in the biomedical literature.5,6

Pathologists find far more tumors and cancers in autopsies (such as in victims of auto and other accidents) than doctors diagnose in living patients in their offices. A 1993 report noted that whereas 1 percent of living women between ages forty and fifty have “clinically apparent breast cancer,” almost two-fifths (39 percent) of autopsied women in the same age group show evidence of breast cancer.7

CHEMOTHERAPY HAS IT BACKWARD

Sadly, there is no guarantee of experiencing spontaneous remission. In the modern era, it is easy to become overly toxic from repeated exposure to internal toxins (endotoxins) and external toxins (exotoxins). When we cannot detoxify quickly enough, then tumors, although necessary, can grow out of control.

Josef Issels, MD, who recognized that tumors are “a late-stage symptom of a generalized illness affecting the whole body,” developed one of the most successful approaches to address cancer.8 He wrote that “a tumor can only develop in a diseased organism” and that “the tumor is a symptom of that illness.”8 Operating on the premise that “optimal” cancer treatments need to have a “causal” focus, Dr. Issels was able to restore many late-stage terminal cancer patients to good health.

The prevailing treatment model of the “War on Cancer”—kill the tumor—is completely backward. Attacking a tumor actually may cause a kickback effect wherein the body struggles harder to keep the tumor functioning. The body wants the tumors. Tumors are the answer, not the problem.

In this context, it should come as no surprise that studies have found that chemotherapy can make tumors more aggressive. In 2012, for example, news headlines announced the “shocking” and “completely unexpected” finding that chemotherapy can “backfire” and make cancer worse.9 Reporting on a prostate cancer study published in Nature Medicine about “treatment-induced damage to the tumor microenvironment,” 10 the news summary noted that “healthy cells damaged by chemotherapy secreted more of a protein called WNT16B, which boosts cancer cell survival.”9

A more recent report (July 2017) in Science Translational Medicine on breast cancer came to much the same conclusion, stating that chemotherapy promotes circulation of tumor cells in the bloodstream.11 In the researchers’ words
“chemotherapy, despite decreasing tumor size, increases the risk of metastatic dissemination.”11

It should be readily apparent that the answer to a toxic condition is not more toxicity. Chemotherapy is highly toxic. That is why courageous investigators have been sounding the alarm about chemotherapy for many years. A comprehensive review in 1992 of chemotherapy clinical trials and publications described the success rate of chemotherapy as “appalling,” with strong evidence pointing to “the absence of a positive effect.”12 In 2004, another major study reviewed fifteen years of chemotherapy treatments for the most common cancers causing the most deaths; the contribution of chemotherapy to five-year survival was minimal (about 2 percent).13

In 2015, researchers reporting on patients with end-stage cancer in JAMA Oncology concluded that “not only did chemotherapy not benefit patients…it appeared most harmful to those patients with good performance status.”14 The authors cautiously suggested that chemotherapy use in patients with terminal cancer “may need to be revised.”14 They also noted that an American Society of Clinical Oncology expert panel “identified chemotherapy use among patients for whom there was no evidence of clinical value as the most widespread, wasteful, and unnecessary practice in oncology.”14

COMPLETE HEALING

For complete healing, we must address cancer’s causes. What a person diagnosed with cancer needs most is a health-promoting lifestyle that reduces toxicity, provides nourishment and minimizes stress. The goal of health care practitioners who want to support full recovery should be to locate the causes of the toxicity (both internal and external) and work with the patient to enhance detoxification, cleansing and purification.

There is a reason why we find evidence of detoxification practices such as hot baths, saunas, fasting, cleanses, herbs and many other practices in every culture throughout humanity’s history. If ancient Greeks and Romans and native peoples from all over the world could understand the need for detoxification—long before the advent of the twentieth-century chemical industry—shouldn’t modern-day Americans recognize its importance as well? As a culture, we are far more toxic than any other civilization, and we have the diseases to show for it.

In 2003, I developed a system of working with body biofeedback that I now call the Koren Specific Technique (KST).15 KST practitioners locate and release hidden areas of toxicity and stress that other health care professionals often miss. Practitioners can use KST with anyone, no matter their age or health challenges.

Nine years ago, when doctors diagnosed a close family member with life-threatening brain tumors, I used KST along with the detoxification and support principles mentioned above—and the tumors disappeared.

The most important thing to remember is that cancer is a disease of toxicity. The best way to achieve a true cure, therefore, is to address this underlying cause. Recognizing that a tumor is an ally, not an enemy, makes it possible to work to promote its function so it will no longer be needed.

---

DIETARY PRINCIPLES FOR CANCER PATIENTS

A diagnosis of cancer often serves as a wake-up call to make profound dietary changes. Obviously, the first step is to
eat nothing but clean food, including pasture-fed animal products, and to avoid all processed foods containing refined sweeteners and industrial seed oils. The following foods support detoxification while nourishing the body:

COD LIVER OIL: Unprocessed cod liver oil provides vitamins A and D in a range of forms. Vitamin A is the vitamin for
detoxification and the first requirement for cancer patients. Vitamin D supports the immune system and works synergistically with vitamin A.
RAW WHOLE MILK: Raw milk is our best source of glutathione, the body’s master detoxification compound. Plus, raw milk provides complete nourishment in a form that is easily digested.
GELATIN-RICH BONE BROTH: Glycine in bone broth supports the liver in detoxification.
POULTRY LIVER: Liver from chicken, ducks and geese is an excellent source of vitamin K, which provides strong protection against cancer. It works synergistically with vitamins A and D in cod liver oil. Plus, liver is a powerhouse of many other important nutrients.
BUTTER: Butter is the queen of fats and provides many compounds, specifically CLA, that help protect against cancer. Be sure to use butter from grass-fed cows.
LACTO-FERMENTED FOODS: Fermented foods provide vitamin C and good bacteria for healthy gut flora.

---

REFERENCES

1. Hochberg J, Cairo MS. Tumor lysis syndrome: current perspective. Haematologica 2008;93:9-13.
2. Falck F Jr, Ricci A Jr, Wolff MS, Godbold J, Deckers P. Pesticides and polychlorinated biphenyl residues in human breast lipids and their relation to breast cancer. Arch Environ Health 1992;47(2):143-146.
3. Hughes F, with contributions from Dowling R. Am I Dead? Or Do I Just Feel Like It? Cancer Cured…the Coming Storm. Live Oak, FL: Hobbies for Health, 2007.
4. Davis D. The Secret History of the War on Cancer. New York, NY: Basic Books, 2007.
5. Potts DA, Fromm JR, Gopal AK, Cassaday RD. Spontaneous remission of an untreated, MYC and BCL2 coexpressing, high-grade B-cell lymphoma: a case report and literature review. Case Rep Hematol 2017; 2017: 2676254.
6. Ahmadi Moghaddam P, Cornejo KM, Hutchinson L, et al. Complete spontaneous regression of Merkel cell carcinoma after biopsy: a case report and review of the literature. Am J Dermatopathol 2016;38(11): e154-e158.
7. Black WC, Welch HG. Advances in diagnostic imaging and overestimations of disease prevalence and the benefits of therapy. N Engl J Med 1993;328: 1237-1243.
8. Issels J. Cancer: a Second Opinion, the Classic Book on Integrative Cancer Treatment. Garden City Park, NY: Square One Publishers, 2005.
9. AFP Relax News. Shock study: chemotherapy can backfire, make cancer worse by triggering tumor growth. Daily News, August 6, 2012. http://www.nydailynews.com/life-style/health/shock-study-chemotherapy-backfire-cancer-worse-triggeringtumor-growth-article-1.1129897.
10. Sun Y, Campisi J, Higano C, et al. Treatment-induced damage to the tumor microenvironment promotes prostate cancer therapy resistance through WNT16B. Nat Med 2012;18(9):1359-1368.
11. Karagiannis GS, Pastoriza JM, Wang Y, et al. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy induces breast cancer metastasis through a TMEM-mediated mechanism. Sci Transl Med 2017;9(397): eaan0026.
12. Abel U. Chemotherapy of advanced epithelial cancer—a critical review. Biomed Pharmacother 1992;46(10): 439-452.
13. Morgan G, Ward R, Barton M. The contribution of cytotoxic chemotherapy to 5-year survival in adult malignancies. Clin Oncol 2004;16(8): 549-560.
14. Prigerson HG, Bao Y, Shah MA, et al. Chemotherapy use, performance status, and quality of life at the end of life. JAMA Oncol 2015;1(6): 778-784.
15. Koren Specific Technique. http://korenspecifictechnique.com/kst.asp.

This article appeared in Wise Traditions in Food, Farming and the Healing Arts, the quarterly magazine of the Weston A. Price Foundation, Fall 2017.

About Tedd Koren

Tedd Koren, DC, is a chiropractic practitioner who writes, lectures and teaches in the US, Europe and Australia. Dr. Koren developed the Koren Specific Technique and trains other practitioners in its use (korenspecifictechnique.com). This article was adapted from a blog post published at https://korenwellness.com/about-tedd-koren/

COFFEE IS A POISON

More than 20 years ago, I drank a cup of coffee. My excuse was I had a long drive ahead and wanted to be alert. Unfortunately I ended up feeling sick for the whole drive, and couldn’t sleep that night. Or the next night…

Despite being surrounded by coffee shops I’ve avoided it ever since. I actually quite like the smell but it’s clearly a toxic drug, and feeling like I wanted to hurl for two days really sucked. This article helps explain what it’s actually doing.

Caffeine is a pesticide

1. Caffeine is an alkaloid that the coffee plant uses to kill bugs, which eat its seeds.

The coffee plant also uses caffeine in the coffee pods to kill surrounding plants, so the coffee plant can attain more sunlight and grow larger. Caffeine is a pesticide, which causes genetic termination in living cells that come into contact with it.

2. MRI images taken before and after 1 cup of coffee showed a decrease in blood flow to the brain by 45%. When the blood flow reduction was measured exactly, it was actually 52% less blood flow to the brain, after just one small cup of coffee. http://abcn.ws/2ipmLj7

3. Brain imaging studies of chronic coffee drinkers showed they presented the same degradation of their brains as chronic alcoholics, cigarette smokers, Parkinson’s patients and marijuana users. http://dailym.ai/1qjSqi0

4. Coffee can cause an urge to move one’s bowels because this is one way the body tries to eliminate poison from the system. The sudden urge to take a big dump after drinking coffee is one of the body’s defense mechanisms to poison.

5. Coffee increases energy via the human fight or flight metabolic response, because the body is afraid of the caffeine based poison. Coffee doesn’t give energy, it removes it from the body.

The energy a person feels when they drink coffee is the body going into overdrive because caffeine is a poison and all poisons activate an energy release in the body. (fight or flight)

Coffee removes energy from the system, leaving the person progressively more and more exhausted each day that passes, therefore setting up the world’s most dangerous energy stimulation addiction… coffee dependence for energy.

6. When the fight or flight response is triggered in the body, the lower IQ centers of the brain are activated as well as hormonal systems in control of aggression, violence, irrational and illogical decision making, jealousy, rage, anger, fear and paranoia.

Coffee generates lower end mental functioning with a side of every negative emotional response the body can generate.

7. When measured, one coffee activated the fight and flight response for three consecutive weeks, even though no other caffeine was consumed after that one cup of coffee. One cup of coffee poisons the body for three consecutive weeks, on a decreasing scale.

8. When coffee (caffeine) is consumed, the limbic part of the brain is hyper activated and the higher learning centers of the mind inhibited. The limbic part of the brain is only concerned with sex, reproduction, protection of territory, food acquisition and personal safety.

The limbic portion of the brain is the most primitive and least developed portion of the mind complex. When you want to out smart or dominate another person, it’s best that their limbic system is activated, because it brings them to a mental state equal to that of a child.

9. The birth control pill inhibits clearing of ingested caffeine. This effect is increased dramatically by alcohol or pain killer use, therefore causing many cases of caffeine poisoning, which get treated as other things once the person reaches the hospital.

10. Coffee is proven to cause an enlarged prostate, high anxiety, insomnia, depression, birth defects, pain syndromes, unnatural breathing patterns, brain damage, hyperactivity, learning disorders (from the brain damage) behavior disorders, fatigue, certain types of cancer, Crohns, IBS, colitis, carpel tunnel, ulcers, low iron, heart disease, headaches, PMS, increased incidence of muscle and tendon injury, joint pain, heart attack, stroke,TIA’s (mini strokes)… and that’s a short list.

11. Coffee causes fat gain and cellulite because by triggering the body’s flight or fight system (which any poison or threat does). This eventually changes the body’s primary fuel source requirement to one of fat.

When the body is threatened, it prefers fat as its primary fuel source, over sugar or protein.

Constant activation of the body’s fight or flight system (via the daily ingestion of caffeine poison) aids in a metabolic shift to fat storage and fat conservation, because again the body prefers fat as a fuel source when fighting any toxic intruder… because fat contains 9 calories per gram for the fight, as opposed to 4 calories per gram housed by sugar and protein.

Welcome to the land of caffeine)induced fat gain, weight gain and cellulite. Coffee also destroys muscle, as the body purposely flushes muscle, when it’s poisoned, to facilitate additional fat storage.

12. Caffeine blocks iron absorption, causing the vast majority of anemia today.

The entire threat of caffeine in general includes caffeine teas, chocolates, caffeine based energy drinks, caffeine based pre work out drinks and over 2000 over the counter and prescription medications that PURPOSELY include caffeine.

13. An investigation conducted by the author of the most extensive book on coffee ever written, reviewed almost every scientific research piece regarding coffee and his conclusion was that there’s absolutely no scientific evidence what so ever that coffee provides any health benefits to the human body, on any level, in anyway.

He openly declares that any positive promotion of coffee consumption is a blatant lie, doing grave harm to our entire society. The publication of any positive effects of coffee are false and all can be traced back to a very powerful, covert and secret “coffee lobby”, which has both commercial and ruling family origins.

The author reviews the research in the book at this link. How many coffee shops have opened near you in the last 20 years?

So why the lying about coffee? Think of government and how governing a brain damaged population is easier than governing a healthy population. Start there and keep connecting the dots. Coffee is only one brain damaging weapon used against an uninformed slave class.

The 10 most popular brain damaging weapons used against the slave class are listed below.

Although personally I would add in social media misinformation and mind control at #2, shift coffee down a few rows, and remove cigarettes which are no longer very popular in New Zealand these days.

1) vaccines
2) coffee and caffeine products
3) alcohol
4) medical drugs
5) sugar
6) fluoride
7) cigarettes
8) processed junk foods and genetically modified foods
9) EMF radiation from wireless devices and
10) chemtrails.

If you’ve ever posed the question, “why are people so stunned, as to not figure any of this out?”… you’re missing the point that the brain damage of the slave class is the primary agenda of the ruling 1%.

Coffee and vaccines are the elite’s 1-2 punch within “operation brain damage” down here on the human farm. The best slave is a brain damaged slave, unable to think or care for themselves without the help from slave master.

A helpless population guarantees a need for government. This is why the ruling families do everything in their power to create a helpless population, day in and day out. Governments exist because they perpetually create the conditions for their own existence.

Ancient ruling families, who masquerade as modern altruistic governments, are not there to help the people progress, evolve or become more. You live on a chemically controlled slave based control grid.

Coffee is just another massive lie inside the human control operation. Want to shut the human farm down? Want to really become more than the stereotypical diseased, overweight, dis-empowered, depressed, and dysfunctional human mess? Reject the poisons!

http://humansarefree.com/2017/08/13-little-known-facts-about-coffee.html 

DDT IS GOOD FOR ME

In our deranged post covidhoax world, there is often an attitude of "things were better in the good old days", but in actual fact the programing and misinformation has long been just as full on as it is now.

These 10 old adverts are mind boggling examples:

 “Sugar might just be the willpower you need to curb your appetite”

1. Junk Food, Now Fortified with Vitamins and Minerals

Disguising empty calories with healthful nutritional values has been a trope of the processed food world ever since vitamins were first discovered in the 1910s. 

This 1942 poster for “Vitamin Donuts” may be a little hard to swallow today, but Ovaltine’s reputation as a health drink is still being disputed, a powerful testament to simple brand positioning. But let’s be real, we’re talking about powdered chocolate milk made by Nestlé, the company who brought us such healthy foods as Butterfinger candy bars and Häagen-Dazs ice cream.

The Ovaltine ad from 1947 still boggles the mind with its display of so many nutritional perks packed into two glasses of powdered milk, and seems eerily similar to the many supposed benefits contained in drinks like Vitamin Water or Gatorade. In reality, even the benefits of ordinary vitamin supplements are now being questioned, despite the fact that around half of American adults take them regularly.

2. Let Them Eat Lead

The most heartbreaking part of this 1923 brochure is its emphasis on kids having fun with the whole “Lead Family” of products, whose presence in everything from their nursery walls to their windup toys made young children particularly susceptible to its dangers. Combined with lead paint’s seductively sweet flavor, putting kids in environments literally covered with the stuff was a recipe for disaster.

In fact, the effects of lead poisoning (brain damage, seizures, hypertension, etc.) were known long before the Consumer Product Safety Commission finally banned them in 1977; the industry had simply refused to acknowledge them.  

An article by Jack Lewis published in the EPA Journal in 1985 covers lead’s history as an additive and poison, and how we’ve consistently downplayed its adverse effects. Lewis writes:

“The Romans were aware that lead could cause serious health problems, even madness and death. However, they were so fond of its diverse uses that they minimized the hazards it posed. Romans of yesteryear, like Americans of today, equated limited exposure to lead with limited risk.”

3. 7-Up is good for Babies

Not only were sugary soft-drinks great for adults, but sodas like 7-Up used to help babies grow up strong and fit, or so these ads from 1955 and 1953 would have you believe. That’s pretty disturbing, considering that childhood obesity, linked arm-in-arm with massive soda intake, is shortening our youngest generation’s lifespan. The high amount of refined sugar in soda has also been shown to be particularly harmful for children.

Today it seems crazy to show a baby drinking a soda, as the tide finally turns against the sugary drinks: School districts across the nation have removed soda machines from their schools and New York City’s Board of Health has proposed a ban on over-sized sodas. However, many adults today opt to serve kids “healthy” fruit juice, which may be just as bad, despite its deceptive nutritional marketing.

4. Cigarettes: Just What the Doctor Ordered

Camel’s campaign featuring doctor endorsements is probably the most familiar instance of false advertising, seen here in an ad from 1948. Yet almost every cigarette company twisted science to support its products, including Chesterfield’s 1953 ads, which rephrased expert findings to show that smoking had “no adverse effect.” Long after 1950, when Morton Levin published his definitive study linking smoking to lung cancer, experts continued to imply that there were other factors causing cancer and lung disease.

Though the industry has been seriously weakened over the past 20 years, primarily by government regulation, Big Tobacco is still issuing misleading health information in an attempt to reap a profit.

5. Feminine Hygiene: The Original Home Wrecker

Long before Lysol was reinvented as the caustic household cleaner we know today, the same substance was basically promoted for use as a feminine hygiene product. These Lysol ads from 1948 tout the internal use of poisonous Lysol as a marriage saver. To sum up the message: if you weren’t so dirty down there, he would love you more.

In a time when speaking about sex was even more frowned upon than today, a whole spectrum of sexual products, including vibrators and contraceptives, was marketed with campaigns focusing on their dubious health benefits for women.

6. Plastics, Plastics, Everywhere

Suffocating babies in Cellophane! A bunch of infants tied up in clear cellophane packaging is pretty frightening to modern viewers, but at the time, these ads were just plain cute. When these Du Pont Cellophane ads came out in 1954, things like plastic grocery bags weren’t a ubiquitous part of American culture. 

Only after plastic bags became widespread during the 1970s did their strangulating qualities become frighteningly clear.

7. You're right in liking meat 

At least this one was good advice, but it wasn't very fashionable in 2012 when the appalling low fat high carb diet craze was all the rage

In post-World War II America, eating more red meat seemed like a great way to keep yourself “in trim,” at least according to these two ads, from 1956 and 1946. Like other food fads, this campaign was orchestrated by the American Meat Institute, a lobbying group that is still working to improve public and political opinion toward its products. 

Maybe that’s why almost nobody in America knows that nutritionists generally recommend only 2-3 servings of red meat per week. And don’t get the experts started on sodium nitrite in processed meat.

We now know that eating too much meat increases the risk of heart disease and cancer. Yet industry trade groups are still creating food trends to spur sales or combat negative public stereotypes: Think of modern wonder-foods like agave nectar or chia seeds that seemed to appear from the heavens, as well as the bitterly argued corn syrup campaign.

8. Dieting? Try Sugar

In a time before the current widespread obesity epidemic, sugar companies wanted shoppers to believe that a sweet treat would somehow inspire you to eat less. These ads from 1969 coach readers to “have a soft drink before your main meal” or “snack on some candy an hour before lunch.” 

Their strange logic isn’t even backed by a company name, though the campaign does include a helpful mailing address for “Sugar Information.” Talk about creepy.

Now refined sugar is presented as the dieter’s enemy, and is thought to make you want to eat more rather than less.

9. Shock Your Way to Physical Perfection

In 1922, “Violet Rays” were said to cure pretty much anything that ailed you. This Vi-Rex device plugged into a light socket so users could give themselves home shock-treatments, which would supposedly make you “vital, compelling, and magnetic.” Various recalls and lawsuits erupted throughout the U.S., forcing the FDA to finally prohibit their manufacture. The last batch of Violet Ray products was seized in 1951.

10. DDT is good for you and me

This ad for “Penn Salt Chemicals” from 1947 shows a range of dangerous applications for now-illegal DDT, from agricultural sprays to household pesticides. Particularly disturbing is the image of a mother and infant, above the caption stating that DDT “helps make healthier, more comfortable homes.” Not quite.

While effective in eliminating dangerous mosquitoes that carry malaria, DDT also has a variety of hazardous effects: Especially among young children, the chemical has been shown to damage the nervous, immune, endocrine, and neurological systems, not to mention its devastating influence on the natural environment. 

The spread of DDT across mid-century America is mirrored today by the success of Monsanto (one of the companies that originally manufactured DDT) in placing its genetically modified products on store shelves before researchers have a full understanding of their larger ecological impacts.

 

 This content is an updated copy of a post from 2012: the-top-10-most-dangerous-ads

VACCINATIONS & COT DEATHS

Although vaccination is undoubtedly the single biggest and most preventable cause of cot-death, it is not the only one.  If we write too much about vaccination, we would inevitably create an impression that we think vaccines are the only cause of cot death. The key words in cot death are Non-Specific Stress Syndrome. Related: Vaccine Court Is a Big Pharma Fraud This is the underlying mechanism of all cot deaths and it explains all pathological and clinical observations. [Note: This article was written in 1991. To say that given this information, that there remains nefarious intent behind the pro-vaccine propaganda that continues to exist - would be an abhorrent understatement.] Cot Death is the single biggest cause of death in infants from about four weeks to six months of age, with another peak at about 9 months in industrially developed countries. It gets a lot of media exposure and people are successfully asked to dip into their pockets and contribute to cot death research. This has been going on for some fiftty years now and yet cot death remains a "mystery which may never be resolved". Perhaps the time has come for the doctors and the public to start asking some relevant questions, such as why, with so much money poured into research, cot death is still officially presented as that famous 'mystery' and more and more money is 'needed' to resolve it in 'years to come'. Some 30 years ago, my husband Leif Karlsson, a biomedical engineer specialising in patient monitoring Systems, and myself, a retired Principal Research Scientist, were looking for a paediatrician willing to undertake proper research with our Cotwatch Breathing Monitor. The emphasis with this equipment is on 'breathing' because most, if not all of the machines used to monitor babies' breathing in their homes are not breathing monitors - they are "motion monitors" where any movement is taken as breathing. After one particular meeting, where our demonstration of marked differences between the level of alarms in near miss and new born babies fell on the deaf ears of cot death 'researchers', we looked at each other and said with one breath: "Let's do a damn good job of this research ourselves". Related: Vaccine Authoritarians Try To Censor Billboard That Dares Ask, “Do You Know What’s In A Vaccine?” & Australia Will Now Fine Parents Twice A Month If They Don’t Vaccinate Their Kids Leif spent one and a half years developing a microprocessor-based Cotwatch. With this equipment you don't have to rely on records of alarms; you get computer printouts of the longitudinal record of a baby's breathing. You can't have more objective information than that. Our records confirmed the existence of a Stress-Induced Breathing Pattern, which is a low-volume breathing (5-10% of the volume of normal unstressed breathing), occurring in clusters (3-6 shorter episodes within 10-15 minutes) when a child is incubating illness or teething or following "insults", such as exposure to cigarette smoke, fatigue, over handling by visitors, or vaccination needles. Numerous causes, but the same reaction. Many years ago, a Canadian medical doctor, Dr Hans Selye, became particularly interested in the well-known fact that for a number of days before patients develop symptoms of specific illness, which can be diagnosed, they always show signs of a non-specific nature which are common to many or possibly all diseases. Related: Dr. Brian Hooker debunks the myth that vaccines are “safe” for pregnant women When he in-injected extracts of tissues, or a great variety of noxious substances into rats, he observed the following signs of organ damage: spot-like bleeding into lungs and thymus, shrunken thymus and all lymphatic structures, enlarged adrenal cortex, ulceration of the gastro-intestinal tract, derangements in body creased or control, viscosity of the blood, disappearance of eosinophils (white blood cells) from blood, etc. He concluded that he was looking at a universal reaction of organisms to any noxious substance. He also connected the results of his experiments with his earlier observations of patients with non-specific symptoms of the initial stages of any illness. Seyle also concluded that the Non-Specific Stress (or General Adaptation) Syndrome has three stages: the alarm stage when the body is under acute attack and mobilises all its defences; the stage of adaptation or resistance, when it seems to relax and seemingly accepts the intruding noxious substance; and the stage of exhaustion, when the body again tries to rid itself of the intruder. Death may occur in any of the three stages. Related: Killing Babies - Vaccinations: Part 1: Medical Research on SIDS and Epidemics     The definition of Cot Death is:    "The sudden death of any infant or a young child, which is unexpected by history, and in which a thorough port-mortem examination fails to demonstrate an adequate cause of death".   - Byard, 1991 What does all this have to do with cot death and breathing? Similarly to what Dr Selye found with noxious substances, there are many interesting and consistent tell-tale signs that forewarn of impending cot death. Cot death is a very well-defined pathological entity and all babies who succumb to it have the same post mortem findings. These are: petechiated lungs, thymus and sometimes also pericardium (spot like haemorrhaging on surface); shrunken thymus and lymphatic structures; signs of increased adreno-cortical activity; signs of ulceration of the gastro-intestinal tract (reflux); many babies have low viscosity blood; up to 90% of babies who succumb to cot death have a number of non-specific symptoms for up to three weeks before death, such as runny nose, coated tongue, sticky eyes, otitis media, enlarged tonsils, spleen and liver, rash, a variety of upper respiratory tract infections, and loss of body weight to mention just a few. Related: Harvard Immunologist: Unvaccinated Children Pose Zero Risk To Anyone And Here’s Why + New York Times Confirms Natural News Investigation: Mumps Now Spread Mostly By Vaccinated Children These are all symptoms of the Non-Specific Stress Syndrome as defined by Dr Selye.. Those people involved in Cot Death management all over the world know about these symptoms, but they usually play them down as unimportant and insufficient to cause death in an infant. None of them has connected these well-known symptoms associated with cot death, with the Non-Specific Stress syndrome. Perhaps for their sake this is just as well, because they would have been unable to prove the validity of this connection in the absence of adequate means to demonstrate it in the infant's breathing pattern. So where does vaccination come into the problem of Cot Death? Initially we did not know about the controversy surrounding vaccination. We merely observed that vaccination was the single greatest cause of stress in small babies, as indicated by the standard Cotwatch equipment, and also the single greatest factor preceding cot death in a large number of cases. We concluded that the timing of 80% of the cot deaths occurring between the second and sixth months is due to the cumulative effect of infections, timing of immunisations and some inherent specifics in the baby's early development. Related: It IS the vaccines – Aluminum adjuvants in vaccines linked to autism We started yet another search for more information. Soon we discovered a wealth of it in medical journals like The Lancet concerning not only the ineffectiveness of vaccines in preventing children from contracting infectious diseases, but also on adverse effects of various vaccines, including death. Regarding the former aspect, we found numerous reports that vaccinated and non-vaccinated children contract the relevant infectious disease at approximately the same rate, or that vaccinated children are even more susceptible to the infectious diseases. Inevitably, we began recording breathing patterns of babies after vaccination. The results of these recordings were presented to the 2nd Immunisation Conference, held in Canberra, 27~29th May 1991. We demonstrated that microprocessor records of babies' breathing after DPT (Diphtheria, Pertussis, Tetanus) injections reveal a pattern of flare-ups of Stress-Induced Breathing closely following the dynamics of adreno-cortical activity in an individual under stress and as observed by Dr Selye. We also demonstrated that flare-ups of Stress-Induced Breathing in babies after administration of the DPT vaccine occur characteristically on certain days even though the amplitude of the flare-ups varies from child to child. Related: Renowned Doctor Slams Medical Education & Says We Have “An Epidemic Of Misinformed Doctors” For seventy babies who succumbed to cot death, although babies could die on any day after DPT injection, there were significantly more deaths on the days which closely correlated with flare-ups of Stress-Induced Breathing after DPT injections. The data on the time interval between the DPT injection and cot death in most of the seventy babies was taken from the published reports which concluded that there was no connection between DPT and cot death. The authors of these papers had little idea what they were looking at or what to look for. Most researchers arbitrarily accept that only deaths within 24 hours of administration of the vaccine can be attributed to the effect of the vaccine. Yet, babies may and do die for up to 25 or more days after vaccination, and still as a direct consequence of the toxic effects of the vaccines. How do we know this? Because of the observed repetition of the pattern of flare-ups of Stress-Induced breathing in a number of babies over a long period of time. What are the vaccines composed of? Vaccines contain live or 'attenuated' (weakened) viruses and bacteria or parts of them (representing foreign genetic material), animal tissue, formaldehyde and/or aluminium phosphate or hydroxide. Related: American Academy of Pediatrics Concerned About Unregulated Food Additives, but Not Vaccine Additives The toxicity of vaccines varies widely and unpredictably, a DPT vaccine containing from 1 to 26.9 micrograms of endotoxin per millilitre. Geraghty and others in California tried unsuccessfully to make sure that the toxicity and composition of the vaccines is properly disclosed on the ampules. Injecting any of these substances into the blood stream of another animal species, including humans, is absolutely biologically unacceptable. H.L. Coulter in his book, Vaccination, Social Violence and Criminality: the Medical Assault on the American Brain, mentions that repeated injections of sterile extracts of rabbit brain tissue into monkeys cause an 'experimental allergic encephalomyclitis' in the monkeys. Regardless of the validity or otherwise of animal experiments for humans, Coulter points out that it is an observed fact that vaccine injections often cause the same syndrome in human babies. It has been confirmed that a great number of babies, if not all, suffer a clinical or subclinical encephalitis shortly after being injected with a variety of vaccines. Coulter talks about a postencephalitic syndrome. The great increase in a large array of brain-related conditions in the United States closely followed chronologically mandatory administration of vaccines en masse in that country. Related: The Chilling Image Behind Every Vaccine These conditions include autism, learning difficulties, cerebral palsy, dyslexia, hyperactivity, deafness and blindness, left-handedness (according to latest statistics, left-handed people live 9 years less than right-handed people) and permanent brain damage with serious and often life-long consequences. Vaccines by virtue of their composition act as noxious substances and elicit a response equivalent to the Non-Specific Stress Syndrome. Recently, we recorded the breathing of an infant injected with only DT (the P component was omitted because the baby had experienced a violent reaction to the two previous DPT injection). The reaction, as reflected in its breathing, closely resembled the record of its breathing after DPT vaccination. This is not meant to justify the inclusion of the Pertussis (Whooping Cough) component, but to emonstrate that all vaccines are potentially harmful. It should worry all of us that a large number of medical doctors are forcefully (by psychological pressure and publicity campaigns) without producing any evidence whatsoever of the benefits of vaccination and against all the evidence of the ineffectiveness and dangers of vaccines, injecting vaccines into our children. Related: What Do Smart Meters And Vaccinations Have In Common? + Another Vaccine Dump There are even noises indicating that soon the same forceful and unreasonable attitudes will be adopted towards adults. This is especially bad since it is a public secret that many medical doctors do not vaccinate their own children. This extraordinary fact is reported in DPT-A Shot in The Dark, by H.C. Coulter & B.L. Fisher. These authors also report that most gynaecologists in the USA refused to be injected with Rubella vaccine. Were they afraid of the side-effects, whilst routinely recommending the procedure for women of childbearing age? Our conclusion is that if vaccination were to be suspended, the cot death rate would be halved! What are the remainder of cot deaths attributed to? The Non-Specific Stress Syndrome is the key to cot deaths. It is the consistent, general reaction of mammals, including humans, to any damage or injury or to substances perceived as noxious by the recipient's body. There are a great many injuries or substances perceived as noxious which affect babies and produce the same response. Related: Doctor Robert Scott Bell Explains The History Of Modern Medicine + Why Medical Researcher Calls Doctors 'The Most Brainwashed People On The Planet' The indiscriminate and routine administration of pain killers during birth, and the substances used for inductions expose our babies to potent allopathic chemicals shortly before they are born. To say that these substances do not affect the babies is not only highly unscientific, it is against commonsense. Before babies have a chance to fully recover from these potent chemicals, they may be given nasal drops and cough mixtures and, and worse still, antibiotics for those first common colds. Most of these substances are immuno-suppressive and are not helping the child's immune system to be primed and challenged in a natural and beneficial way by the common cold. Again, before a baby has a chance to fully recover from the effects of these potent chemicals, there is the first DPT injection. So the immature immune system of a baby is further suppressed, allowing micro-organisms to become especially virulent and life-threatening. This leads to further drug administration, a vicious circle, unfortunately too often resulting in cot death. Related: The Eradication Of Natural Alternatives: Big Pharma Wants To Eliminate The Competition The official figure of 2 cot deaths per 1,000 babies is fifty years old, and obsolete. The rate is more like 7-10 per 1,000, otherwise we would not even hear about cot death. Our records demonstrate that there is a direct causal relationship between injections of DPT and cot deaths. The time has come to call for suspension of all vaccination programs.   This post was copied from:  Dr.VieraScheibner / TheVaccineReaction