a repost: 10 Products Linked To Cancer That Are Hiding In Almost Every Home

Article originally posted on Collective-Evolution

 

Kalee Brown-September 12, 2017

Do you ever walk through someone’s home and take note of items that could potentially be hazardous to their health? I know I do! I don’t mean to judge, but I can’t help but notice when people have fluoride-filled toothpaste sitting on their bathroom counters or chemical-ridden cleaners hiding in their cabinets. But, what if some of these items are sitting in your own home?

Most people have toxic products linked to cancer in every corner of their homes, often without even realizing it. It’s not like the labels of these products all have a huge warning sign that reads, “I can cause cancer!”

Nevertheless, whether people knowingly purchase these cancer-causing products or not, we need to educate one another on their potential harmful effects.

The following list highlights some of the most popular products found in North American homes that are linked to cancer:

1. Shampoo

One of the most common items hiding in most people’s homes are chemical-ridden hair products, particularly shampoos and conditioners. Some of the typical chemicals within conventional shampoos include sodium lauryl sulfate (SLS), parfum/fragrance, parabens, synthetic colours, and more.

Parabens are a known carcinogen, as they’re directly associated with different types of cancer; for example, one study found that 99% of breast cancer tissues tested had parabens in them. Some common ingredients in parfum/synthetic fragrances are benzene derivatives, aldehydes, phthalates, and many other toxins associated with cancer, birth defects, nervous-system disorders, and allergies.

Head & Shoulders specifically contains fragrance, synthetic colours, and SLS, amongst a myriad of other chemicals in the toxic cocktail that makes up their shampoos and conditioners. Some of their shampoo products also contain methylchloroisothiazolinone, a potential mutagen.

2. Non-Stick Cookware

When I first discovered non-stick cookware, I absolutely loved it! That was, until I found out about the potential health risks that come with cooking with these products. The issue is that non-stick cookware is created using a synthetic coating of polytetrafluoroethylene, otherwise known as Teflon, a plastic polymer that will actually release toxins when heated at 450 degrees Fahrenheit or higher.

One study found that heating cookware coated with Teflon for only two to five minutes on a conventional stovetop can cause the coating to break apart and emit toxic particles and gases. Even just inhaling these once can cause people to become sick with what’s known as the “Teflon flu.”

Some of the chemicals within that coating are also considered potential carcinogens.

 

3. Artificial Sweeteners

Artificial sweeteners are in so many products, and one of the most prevalent ones used is aspartame. Aspartame is commonly thought to only be in diet sodas, but it’s often added to teas, energy drinks, protein shakes, milk products, juices, and other artificially flavoured beverages. Aspartame has been linked to numerous health problems, including cancer.

There’s been a lot of controversy surrounding the aspartame/cancer link, and many corporations that profit off aspartame have funded research in efforts to disprove the causal link. However, a study performed in 2007 showed that aspartame can cause leukemias/lymphomas and mammary (breast) cancer.

Instead of using artificial sweeteners, try a natural alternative such as maple syrup, raw honey, Xylitol, Stevia, organic cane sugar, or dates.

 

 

4. Plastic Bottles and Food Containers

So much of our “food” comes in plastic bags, containers, and bottles. Even our fruits and vegetables are commonly wrapped in plastic. Not only is this extremely wasteful and bad for the environment, but it isn’t very good for our health, either.

If you’re drinking from a plastic water bottle, the chemicals within that plastic that are touching your lips can literally seep into your mouth, especially if your water has been sitting in the bottle for a while. Left your bottle in a hot car? That’s even worse, as the heat expedites this chemical leaching.

You’ve probably noticed more and more “BPA-free” labels on plastic bottles, and that’s because people have become increasingly aware of how using plastic containers can harm our health, as many contain BPA, which can cause cancer in people.

An easy solution is to use a refillable water bottle and glassware, which is not only better for your own health, but the health of the environment, too.

 

 

5. Air Fresheners

This is a big one. Air fresheners are all over people’s houses; from bedrooms to bathrooms to cars, people love them. Typically they’re made with synthetic fragrance, otherwise known as parfum. Parfum is basically a cocktail of toxic chemicals, but instead of listing all of these chemicals on the back of products, it’s conveniently labelled as “parfum” so that companies can keep their signature fragrance a trade secret.

Unfortunately, this also allows companies to hide harmful ingredients, many of which are known carcinogens, in their products without the consumer even knowing.

For a more natural alternative, try brands like Saje Natural Wellness or DoTerra, or make your own using essential oils and water! You could even use natural disinfectants like tea tree and pine essential oils.

 

 

6. Conventional Cleaners

Most families have an entire shelf filled with toxic cleaners because corporations convince consumers they need different products to clean specific surfaces. Even though most of these products have toxic warning signs on them that clearly state they’re poisonous and/or corrosive, people continue to, quite literally, buy into this corporate propaganda. Not only are they breathing in these fumes while cleaning, but so are any of their household visitors and/or children.

According to the David Suzuki Foundation, some of the common chemicals found in household cleaning products include 2-BE (causes reproductive problems), ammonia (associated with kidney and live damage), coal tar dyes (causes cancer and harms nervous system), and the infamous “fragrance” or parfum. For an all-natural, all-purpose household cleaner, check out Dr. Bronner’s.

 

 

7. Toothpaste

Commercial toothpastes primarily use toxic substances as a means to “clean your mouth,” as the ingredients in regular toothpastes can cause enamel damage, dental flourosis, stomach ailments, skin rashes, and more.

One of the worst ingredients found in most conventional and “dentist approved” toothpastes is fluoride, a known carcinogen. Fluoride has been a known neurotoxin for a long time, but the government claims it benefits our teeth. In reality, it hasn’t actually been proven to prevent the buildup of harmful oral bacteria; however, it has proven to be toxic, with long-term ingestion linked to brainheart, and bone issues. You can get fluoride free toothpaste here.

“In point of fact, fluoride causes more human cancer deaths than any other chemical. When you have power you don’t have to tell the truth. That’s a rule that’s been working in this world for generations. There are a great many people who don’t tell the truth when they are in power in administrative positions. This amounts to public murder on a grand scale, it is a public crime. . . . It is some of the most conclusive bits of scientific and biological evidence that I have come across in my 50 years in the field of cancer research.”

– Dr. Dean Burk, Biochemist, Founder of Biotin and Former Chief Chemist at the National Cancer Institute of Heal (source)

 

 

8. Soap

Whether it’s dish soap, hand soap, or body wash, conventional soaps often contain a wide array of chemicals. Antibacterial soaps regularly contain Triclosan, which is a potential carcinogen, along with many of the other ingredients often found in typical soaps. Conventional soaps also often contain parfum/fragrance.

The good news is that organic/all-natural soap is widely available! Dr. Bronner’s makes a great dish soap, as does Green Beaver, and there are tons of great body products made by all-natural brands like Andalou and Saje Natural Wellness.

 

9. Laundry Detergent

Laundry detergents often contain phosphorus, enzymes, ammonia, naphthalene, phenol, and sodium nitilotriacetate, all of which can cause rashes, itchiness, dryness, and sinus problems. These chemicals are easily absorbed through your skin from your clothes and bed sheets. In addition, many conventional detergents contain artificial scents and “fragrance,” which is a code name for a sweet cocktail of hazardous chemicals and potential carcinogens. My favourite all-natural detergent is doTERRA’s On Guard Laundry Detergent.

 

10. Baby Powder

Many baby powders are talc-based, meaning that they contain high amounts of talcum powder. According to the American Cancer Society, talc in its natural form, which contains asbestos, can cause cancer. One of the most popular baby powders used produced by Johnson and Johnson is talc-based. The company has been sued many times and has paid millions of dollars to those who claimed their baby powder caused their cancer.

A more recent case against Johnson & Johnson involved a California woman who was awarded more than $70 million in her lawsuit against the company, as she claimed their baby powder caused her ovarian cancer. Johnson & Johnson, like many other companies, has failed to disclose the dangers of using their products. Although there are many all-natural alternatives available, here’s a link to a DIY Natural recipe for baby powder.

 

Final Thoughts

The great part about all of this is that there are incredible, all-natural alternatives to all of these products! You don’t need to be living in fear that you’ll get cancer because there are so many things you can do to prevent it, starting with replacing these products with all-natural alternatives.

Much love!

 

 

Advertisements

a repost: The Outrageous Ways Big Pharma Has Bribed Doctors to Shill Drugs

Here is another post on our “paid assassins.” It’s a year old, but it’s still relevant nonetheless.

-The Melanin Man

 

By Martha Rosenberg July 19, 2016

 

Editor’s Note: This article was originally published by The Influence, and is reprinted here with permission.

At the 2010 meeting of the American Psychiatric Association in New Orleans, a psychiatrist from the East coast shared her anger with me about the recent clamp down on Pharma financial perks to doctors. “They used to wine us and dine us. An SSRI maker flew my entire office to a Caribbean island… but now nothing,” she lamented.

She was right. Before news organizations and the 2010 Physician Financial Transparency Reports (also called the Sunshine Act, part of the Affordable Care Act) reported the outrageous amount of money Pharma was giving doctors to prescribe its new, brand-name drugs, there was almost no limit to what was spent to encourage prescribing.

At another medical conference I attended, soon after, when it was suggested that doctors not accept free meals from Pharma reps because of indebtedness, a doctor asked in all earnestness “but what do we do for lunch?”

He was right. Doctors seldom have to go hungry at lunchtime when Pharma reps are around. Not only do reps reliably bring lunch and free drug samples, until fairly recently they wielded thousand-dollar budgets to send doctors on trips to resorts, golf vacations and to sought after sports events. No wonder the docs saw them.

But by 2010, much of the over-the-top Pharma largesse had ended. Not just because the press and Sunshine Act exposed the huge payments, naming names—but because practically every major drug company from GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), Eli Lilly, Abbott, AstraZeneca, Pfizer and Johnson & Johnson to Amgen, Allergen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Cephalon, Novartis and Purdue had settled a wrongdoing suit. Both doctors and the public largely viewed Pharma’s safety and effectiveness claims as “bought” by such extravagance.

In fact, by 2010, the number of doctors even willing to see Pharma reps had fallen by almost 20 percent and the number of doctors refusing to see all reps increased by half.  Eight million sales calls were “nearly impossible to complete,” reported ZS Associates.

Still, here are some of the ways Pharma managed to get drugs into your medicine cabinet when the financial excess bestowed on doctors was tolerated:

1) Blue Cross Blue Shield said that Pfizer jetted 5,000 doctors to Caribbean resorts where they enjoyed massages, golf and $2,000 honoraria to try to increase prescriptions for its painkiller Bextra—a drug that proved so unsafe it was withdrawn from the market in 2005 for heart risks.

2) The Justice Department charged that GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) “paid millions to doctors to promote Wellbutrin, approved at the time for depression, for off-label uses by funding meetings, sometimes at lavish resorts,” according to CBS News. Off-label uses ignore FDA approved indications in favor of whatever Pharma wants to say to sell a drug.

3) In China, GSK was charged with being even more brazen—employing a network of 700 middlemen and travel agencies and sex workers to convince doctors to prescribe its drugs.

4) Johnson & Johnson wined and dined Texas Medicaid officials, charged state authorities, treating them to trips, perks and honoraria to get its expensive antipsychotic drug Risperdal preferred status on the state formulary where it would be paid for by taxpayers. (Taxpayers were also bilked by the Department of Veterans Affairs expenditure of $717 million on Risperdal only to discover the drug worked no better than a placebo.)

5) Bristol-Myers Squibb enticed doctors to prescribe its drugs with access to the Los Angeles Lakers and luxury box suites for their games, according to California regulators.

6) And, in keeping with the marketing free-for-all that has hooked so many Americans on opioid drugs, opioid makerVictory Pharma was charged with treating doctors to mortgage assistance and… lap dances.

Golf Trips Are Not the Only Way Pharma Pays Doctors

Doctors may not get to go to the Caribbean as they once did, but they make a huge amount of money from Pharma by giving speeches promoting its drugs. The speech-givers, who sit on Pharma’s speakers’ bureaus, are considered “key opinion leaders,” capable of convincing other doctors of a drug’s benefits so they will then prescribe the drug.

According to ProPublica, Sujata Narayan, a family medicine doctor practicing in Stanford, CA earned an astounding $43.9 million promoting drugs for Pharma. Karen Underwood, a pediatric critical care doctor in Scottsdale, AZ received a walloping $28 million. Moreover, hospitals are also awash in Pharma money with the City Of Hope National Medical Center receiving $361 million and the Cleveland Clinic Foundation $22 million.

Pharma also pays doctors to conduct studies of its drugs often paying them for each subject they recruit and winning their loyalty because they are then familiar with the drug after monitoring subjects on it. A huge Pfizer trial of the drug Neurontin was conducted just this way charged Carl Elliot in the New York Times: 772 study investigators were recruited so they would personally prescribe the drug once they were familiar with it. The study was not conducted to establish effectiveness and safety and the joke was on them—and the public.

Traditionally, Pharma also paid for Continuing Medical Education courses, or CME, that are required for doctors to keep their state licenses and sometimes their insurance. Since the Pharma subsidized CMEs were “free,” doctors saved money they would have spent to enroll in a real course but of course had to listen to a Pharma sales pitch as a captive audience, instead.

Until transparency laws, CME course materials did not even hide Pharma funding. For example, a 2008 course called “Bipolar disorder: individualizing treatment to improve patient outcomes, part 2” was unabashedly taught by teachers funded by Abbott, Eli Lilly, AstraZeneca; GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Wyeth, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Shire and four more drug companies.

Pharma has also used CMEs for damage control when safety signals about a drug could tank sales. When dentists, oral surgeons and patients began seeing “jawbone death” from the popular bone drugs called bisphosphonates, Pharma told doctors in its free CMEs it was not the drugs but patients’ poor “hygiene” that was causing the serious and disfiguring side effect. Right. Seven years after hormone replacement therapy (HRT) was linked to increased risks of cancer, heart disease and stroke Pharma CMEs marketing HRT as if nothing had happened at Duke University, Penn State University and University of Oklahoma medical schools, the Cleveland Clinic and on Medscape.

Pharma funded CMEs also helped “disease awareness,” an insidious selling tactic. When Lilly’s antidepressant Cymbalta got FDA approval for use in fibromyalgia, Lilly gave nonprofits$3.9 million in CME grants to raise “awareness” of fibromyalgia. Have drug; need patients.

Defending Pharma Payments

Medical professionals have accused journalists of putting undue focus on Pharma payments, maintaining that it does not affect their prescribing and also that the world has bigger problems. New York University professor Lila E. Nachtigall, who received $124,000 from Pharma for speaking and other promotional fees, said “It kind of makes me laugh” that Pharma links are a concern, “with what goes on in the Senate.”

But journalists hew to a strict “no gifts” code themselves. According to the Reuters Handbook of Journalism, professional journalists do not accept “any payment, gift, service or benefit (whether in cash or in kind) offered by a news source or contact,” or “hospitality when there is no news value,” or travel “junkets.” Journalists must pay their own way on trips to maintain “accuracy, balance and the truth,” says Reuters. Other reputable news organization adhere to the same standards.

At medical conferences, doctors often show slides disclosing all the Pharma companies who pay them before segueing into their “objective” medical study. Imagine what would happen if a journalist disclosed financial payments from an entity or industry and then proceeded to “report” on it.

Free Lunches Still Common—and Sway Prescribing

In 2002, Pharma’s lobbying group PhRMA adopted a voluntary code discouraging free trips and tickets to the theater or sporting event for doctors. But the code still allows free meals. A recent study in JAMA Internal Medicine found that even a lowly, $20 meal resulted in more prescriptions for Pharma.

The study found doctors who received even one free meal were 70 percent more likely to prescribe the brand-name beta blocker Bystolic, 52 percent more likely to prescribe the brand-name ACE inhibitor Benicar, 118 percent more likely to prescribe the brand-name antidepressant Pristiq and 18 percent more likely to prescribe the brand-name statin Crestor. Preference for the drug linked to a free meal existed even though generic equivalents exist for all four drugs which significantly save patients and the health care system money. The study found that more than one free meal increased the likelihood of doctors prescribing the drugs with the exception of Pristiq, a “me-too” antidepressant with significant risks that was included in a legal settlement charging misrepresentation.

Of course doctors can take umbrage at the suggestion that they “can be bought for a hero or a slice of pizza,” said the study’s lead author R. Adams Dudley, a professor of medicine and health policy at the University of California, San Francisco. But “it is human nature for a doctor to reciprocate by listening to the pitch of a sales representative bearing free food or beverages.”

An editorial accompanying the JAMA Internal Medicine study said, “There are inherent tensions between the profits of health care companies, the independence of physicians and the integrity of our work, and the affordability of medical care. If drug and device manufacturers were to stop sending money to physicians for promotional speaking, meals and other activities without clear medical justifications and invest more in independent bona fide research on safety, effectiveness and affordability, our patients and the health care system would be better off.” It is an understatement.

Not only do we now know that even a free meal can affect prescribing decisions, three years after the Sunshine Act, more than half of US doctors were still enjoying free meals, gifts and outright payments from Pharma.

a repost: Proof Surfaces Insurance Co Pays Massive Bonuses to Doctors for Vaccinating Babies

This is some bullshit! I’m not surprised by this, because I figured physicians were getting some sort of kickbacks for pushing the vaccine agenda so hard. The majority of us are not privy to this knowledge, but we need to be. Mannnn…your typical physicians (not all of them lol) are basically paid assassins.

STOP PLACING YOUR FAITH IN THE HEALTHCARE SYSTEM!!!

YOUR HEALTH IS YOUR OWN RESPONSIBILITY!!!

-The Melanin Man

 

Originally posted on Waking Times

Alex Pietrowski on August 8, 2017

 

Here is a perfect example of the tactics that Big Pharma uses to incentivize doctors to push vaccines on the public. Insurance company Blue Cross Blue Shield (BCBS) pays pediatricians $400 for EACH fully vaccinated child under the age of 2. This means that for every 100 vaccinated patients, the doctor gets a $40,000 bonus!

Moreover, it is now very difficult to find a pediatrician who will accept a family who doesn’t vaccinate. Even parents who partially vaccinate or follow a different schedule have a hard time finding a doctor. Here’s why: doctors have to vaccinate a certain percentage of their patients or they don’t get their bonus. BCBS says doctors need to vaccinate 63% of their patients to get the payout.

BCBS outlines the incentive program for vaccinating babies in the BCBS doctor incentives booklet. Below is an image of the childhood immunization incentives page.

BCBS incentives for vaccinating babies

 

The program specifies that patients under the age of 2 must receive 24 inoculations for the doctor to receive the $400 per-patient payout. Notice the list includes the flu vaccine, even though evidence suggests that the flu vaccine actually weakens the immune system long-term. Furthermore, during the 2012-2013 flu season, the flu vaccine’s effectiveness was found to be just 56 percent across all age groups reviewed by the CDC.

Exorbitant Payouts for Vaccinating Babies

So how much money can a doctor make by pushing vaccines on trusting parents? Here’s the breakdown:

The average American pediatrician has 1546 patients, though some pediatricians see many more. The vast majority of those patients are very young, perhaps because children transition to a family physician or stop visiting the doctor at all as they grow up. As they table above explains, Blue Cross Blue Shield pays pediatricians $400 per fully vaccinated child. If your pediatrician has just 100 fully-vaccinated patients turning 2 this year, that’s $40,000. Yes, Blue Cross Blue Shield pays your doctor a $40,000 bonus for fully vaccinating 100 patients under the age of 2. If your doctor manages to fully vaccinate 200 patients, that bonus jumps to $80,000. (source: CongitiveTruths.com)

Doctors Receive Bribes for More Than Vaccinations

The complete BCBS doctor incentives booklet was posted by CognitiveTruths.com here.

The booklet shows that payouts aren’t available just for vaccines. Doctors receive bonuses for making sure that patients “adhere to their prescribed drug therapy.” This falls under BCBS category of “disease management” and includes statins, drugs for hypertension, and oral diabetes medications. Doctors also receive bonuses for helping patients manage depression…but only if they do so using drugs.

You May Also Like: The Outrageous Ways Big Pharma Has Bribed Doctors to Shill Drugs

These types of practices by the medical establishment give rise to many questions. First, are doctors more concerned about earning their bonus than about children’s health? That would explain why so many doctors are no longer taking families that do not vaccinate. Further, do doctors even care if the one-size-fits-all approach to vaccination is safe?

Finally, if doctors receive payouts for disease management, then why would they want to cure their patients? This approach definitely illustrates the biggest problem of our medical establishment. Let’s face it, the establishment is creating long-term customers instead of curing patients.

a repost: Canada’s single-payer healthcare system is imploding due to skyrocketing costs

Nothing in THIS life, IN THIS PARDIGM, IS EVER FREE!! Always remember that fam!

-The Melanin Man

 

Originally posted on Natural News

 

Image: Canada’s single-payer healthcare system is imploding due to skyrocketing costs

By Tracey Watson August 9, 2017

 

We are all immensely grateful that advances in medical treatment mean that people no longer die from easily treatable diseases. Most likely you or someone close to you has had to obtain medical treatment for a serious condition which could have resulted in their death. Indeed, access to healthcare is no longer viewed as a privilege but as a right by modern 21st century people. Two countries that are upheld as examples of free healthcare being made available to every citizen are Canada and the United Kingdom. These countries promise easy access to necessary treatment at no charge. A shocking new report from the conservative think-tank The Fraser Institute, has just revealed, however, that the healthcare system in Canada is imploding, and treatment is anything but “free.” The situation is almost exactly the same in the U.K.

The Daily Caller is reporting that a “typical” Canadian family of four with an annual income of $127,814, will pay around $12,057 for healthcare each year – albeit indirectly; the money is derived from taxes.

Bacchus Barua, senior economist with the Fraser Institute’s Centre for Health Policy Studies, and lead author of the study noted, “Health care in Canada isn’t free—Canadians actually pay a substantial amount for health care through their taxes, even if they don’t pay directly for medical services.”

You might be thinking that even $12,057 a year is acceptable for comprehensive medical treatment, but that’s only half the story. The reality is that many procedures are excluded, and Canadians must provide for their own dental care, eye exams and glasses, and a host of other treatments. A shocking shortage of healthcare providers means a Canadian family can wait years to be accepted by a family practitioner. And, as the Caller noted, those who need either routine or urgent surgery have to wait their turn on a very long waiting list. (Related: Keep up with the latest developments and changes that impact your family at Medicine.news)

Back in 2010, Michael Tennant of The New American noted:

The Canadian healthcare system has been slowly but surely collapsing of its own weight, as all socialist systems eventually do, for years. … What is needed is not more government involvement in the healthcare sector but less.

According to an earlier Natural News article, in the United Kingdom, where the socialist National Healthcare System (NHS) has been collapsing for years, the latest solution is to punish those whose lifestyles put them at increased risk for illness, like smokers and the obese, by denying them necessary surgical procedures to cut back on costs. Instead, they will be referred to a health program for six months – by which time some of them could be dead.

Those with a body mass index (BMI) of 30 or more will be “offered a referral to either a weight management program or stop smoking service for a six-month period of health optimization before being considered for surgery.”

To add insult to injury, while being denied the coverage to which every U.K. citizen is supposed to be entitled, these patients will still have to continue sacrificing a portion of their earnings to the healthcare system.

While it is, of course, always best to make the necessary lifestyle changes to get to the root causes of serious illnesses like diabetes, high blood pressure and heart disease, and nobody should be smoking anymore, this policy just goes to prove that “free” healthcare is never really free, and it is hardly ever available to everybody.

The best course of action is to get your health issues under control now, before you need expensive medical treatment. Maintaining a healthy weight, eliminating processed foods, eating plenty of non-GMO, organic fruits and veggies, and incorporating daily exercise into your lifestyle are the steps that will put you on the road to real health and longevity

Did You Know?- a repost: Congo, my Precious: The Curse of the Coltan Mines in the Congo

Thank these people for our ability to talk on our cellphones, or the use of our laptops, or any of our electronics that are wireless that we use daily. Blood has been literally shed for our ability to indulge in modern technology.

Please spare fifty-two minutes and check out the video. Very eye-opening.

(via Tales of the Conspiratum)

The Democratic Republic of Congo in Africa is one of the world’s most resource-rich countries. A wide range of rare minerals can be found here in abundance, all commanding high prices in world commodity markets. Diamonds for jewellery, tantalum, tungsten and gold for electronics; uranium used in power generation and weaponry and many others. Congo has copious deposits of raw materials that are in high demand internationally but remains one of the poorest countries in the world.

From colonisation, with the horrors of slavery and other atrocities, to a turbulent and equally brutal present in which militant groups control the mines, Congo’s richness in natural resources has brought nothing but misery. Referred to as “conflict minerals”, these riches leave only a trail of death, destruction and poverty.

Under Belgian rule, Congolese labourers were often required to meet quotas when mining different minerals. Failure could mean punishment by having a hand cut off with a machete. The country gained independence in 1960, but that didn’t put a stop to slave and child labour or to crimes being committed to extract and exploit the minerals. Warring militant fractions from inside the country and beyond seized control of mines for their own benefit while terrorising local populations.

For our translator, Bernard Kalume Buleri, his country’s history of turmoil is very personal; like most Congolese people, he and his family fell victim to the unending mineral based power struggle. Born in the year of his country’s independence, he has lived through war and seen his homeland torn apart by violent looting and greed. His story is a damning testament, illustrating how nature’s bounty, instead of being a blessing, becomes a deadly curse.

 

Watch more on illegal mining:  https://rtd.rt.com/tags/illegal-mining/

 

 

ED vs. EL- repost: Why You Can Eat Bread In Europe But Not In The United States

Maybe you once struggled with joint and muscle pain, or perhaps chronic bloating or diarrhea. Perhaps you used to feel fatigued all the time. Everybody you knew was talking about going “gluten free,” and said how much better they felt when they did. But you hesitated—after all, bread is delicious! Could you really go the rest of your life without eating “real” pasta or pizza crusts or fresh-baked bread? You Googled it and found that all kinds of “reputable” sources said gluten sensitivity wasn’t real.

But still… could everyone you knew be wrong?

At last you just tried it, and you were amazed at how much better you felt without gluten as a staple in your diet. But that still didn’t totally make sense to you. Our ancestors have been eating wheat for thousands of years, after all! 

Then maybe you went on vacation in Europe, and thought, what the heck… I’m going to eat what I want. It’s vacation! To your surprise, the Italian pasta and the French pastries caused you no problems whatsoever. You wondered if maybe you’d imagined gluten sensitivity after all… until you came back to the States and tried to maintain your new diet. Quickly, all the old symptoms returned.

So are you allergic to gluten, or aren’t you?

I’d heard this story many times from my patients before it happened to me personally. Bread is one of my favorite things, but I learned the hard way that eating gluten makes my gut very unhappy. It’s just not worth it. Yet while vacationing in Southern Ireland, the hearty brown bread served at nearly every meal looked too good to pass up. I ate it at every opportunity (it was vacation, after all)… and I felt just fine. But when I tried to eat the brown bread in Northern Ireland (part of the UK), I felt sick again. We crossed over to Southern Ireland again (part of Europe): no problems. Then in the States: sick again.

After investigating this upon my return, I found that there are three main possible causes of the disparity between gluten in the US (and the UK potentially), and gluten in Europe.

Differences in Gluten Abroad vs At Home

  • Wheat has higher gluten content in the States than in Europe. In the states, our wheat is roughly 15% gluten. In Europe, it’s more like 10%.
  • Conventional wheat in the US is often soaked in Round-Up prior to harvesting. Round-Up, the pesticide at the center of the GMO controversy, contains the active ingredient glyphosate. This acts as a pesticide by perforating the intestines of insects. While Monsanto, the parent company, claims that ingestion by humans is safe, the data suggests that it leads to inflammatory diseases as well as gluten sensitivity specifically. In Europe, while Round-Up is not completely prohibited, usage is far more restricted.
  • Cooking with buttermilk. I noticed many European bread recipes call for buttermilk. Buttermilk is made from introducing lactic acid bacteria to milk, which ferments the lactose into lactic acid. Lactic acid serves to break down the gluten protein, rendering the gluten content in the bread lower than it might be with other ingredients. This is the same reason why gluten sensitive individuals can often consume sourdough bread without a problem.

Can You Have Your Bread (and Eat It Too?)

If you are gluten sensitive (not Celiac) in the US, but you don’t want to move to Europe OR give up your bread, here are a few approaches to try.

  1. Choose 100% Sourdough. As mentioned here, sourdough pre-digests the gluten protein for you, so that most people who are gluten sensitive can eat sourdough bread without a problem. If you buy sourdough from the grocery, though, it’s likely been mixed with regular flour. The safest way to do it is to buy a sourdough starter and make your own.
  2. Choose sprouted grains. The sprouting process also breaks down the gluten proteins. It does not render the bread completely gluten free, but it does lower the gluten content enough that some people who are gluten intolerant can eat it without a problem. It is possible to sprout your own grains, or you can choose some of the sprouted brands already on the market.
  3. Choose organic wheat. The organic label means non-GMO, and no synthetic pesticides. This is a good way to avoid the Round-Up content in your wheat. While you’re at it, consider baking recipes that include buttermilk as well.

ED vs EL- repost: Were Those Who Roamed The Earth Before Us Nearly All Vegetarian?

Article was posted on Collective Evolution (click link for original)

 

By Arjun Walia

 

*The title of this article was inspired by a guest post written for Scientific American

If you’re considering a vegan/vegetarian diet, modern day science is showing that it is completely natural, and that our bodies our totally capable of sustaining one. In fact, a lot of evidence is showing that a vegan/vegetarian diet (if done correctly) can have a tremendous amount of health benefits.

“Studies are confirming the health benefits of meat-free eating. Nowadays, plant-based eating is recognized as not only nutritionally sufficient but also as a way to reduce the risk for many chronic illnesses.” – Harvard Medical School (source)

You can find out more information about that (to start you off on your research) here.

Whether you subscribe to the theory of evolution, or creationism, a bit of both, or anything else it, is irrelevant to this article. This article does not go into these complexities as that is an entirely different subject, with lots of information, examination and factors to consider.

There is still much we don’t understand and, the connection between humans and what we refer to as our ‘ancestors’ isn’t solid enough to regard it as truth. Evolution is real, and can be seen throughout nature, but the human connection to it is still a mystery.

It’s no secret that human beings do not require meat to survive and live a healthy lifestyle. In fact, large amounts of research now suggests that a vegetarian diet is actually a healthier option as opposed to eating meat, or what is commonly referred to as the “Paleo Diet.” (source)(source)(source) Whether you believe this or not, you do not need meat to live a healthy lifestyle and get all of the nutrients you need.

The general gist of the Paleo Diet, also known as the “caveman diet,” the “Stone Age diet” or the “hunter-Gatherer diet” is based on the idea that if our ancestors who lived in the Palaeolithic era -a period lasting approximately 2.5 million years that ended about 10,000 years ago -ate it, then we should be doing the same.

What advocates of this diet -and those who often point towards our ancestors as justification for eating meat -fail to realize is that scientists and researchers have not been able to pinpoint with one hundred percent certainty what our ancestors really ate, and how often they ate it.

The belief that our ancestors exclusively consumed meat is completely false, and a great example of how many can believe a theory, or have a belief system and accept it as absolute fact when there is evidence to the contrary.

The majority of the food eaten by primates is plant-based, not animal, and there is research suggesting that it’s been that way for a long time. Our ancestors were clearly not the meat-eating caveman that they are so often portrayed to be, and even if they did eat meat, that doesn’t mean that we are genetically wired to do the same:

“It’s difficult to comment on ‘the best diet’ for modern humans because there have been and are so many different yet successful diets in our species. Because some hunter-getherer society obtained most of their dietary energy from wild animal fat and protein does not imply that this is the ideal diet for modern humans, nor does it imply that modern humans have genetic adaptations to such diets.”  – Katherine Milton, anthropologist at the University of California, Berkeley (source)

Today, there are a number of papers that’ve been published -in peer-reviewed scientific journals -that have analyzed the diets of a variety of ancient hominin species by looking at their fossilized teeth. These findings have shown that human ancestors ate far more plant material than what was previously suspected.

One study, for example, analyzed the diet of Neanderthals (who are closely related to human beings), a species that disappeared sometime between 20,000 and 24,000 years ago. Up until a few years ago it was believed that their diet consisted predominantly of meat, but this all changed when a large amount (and growing) body of evidence emerged suggesting that their diet also included a variety of plants. The researchers also offered evidence that these plants were also used for medicinal purposes. (source)

Another team of researchers published a study in the American Journal of Physical Anthropology which stated:

“We are suggesting that animal proteins would be less important overall and that’s particularly true for interpretations of Neolithic farmers. What that would mean is that they are having more of a balance of animal and plant protein in their diet, suggestive of a mixed existence strategy.” (source)

A Scientific American Blog Post

An article by Rob Dunn written for Scientific American by titled “Human Ancestors Were Nearly All Vegetarians“, goes into great detail about this issue, from an evolutionary perspective, brining up multiple details and points about how our guts might be evolved to stick to a vegetarian diet, with perhaps the occasional piece of meat here and there as a rare treat.

“So what do other living primates eat, the ones with guts mostly like ours, eat? The diets of nearly all monkeys and apes (except the leaf-eaters) are composed of fruits, nuts, leaves, insects, and sometimes the odd snack of a bird or a lizard (see more about chimpanzees). Most primates have the capacity for eating sugary fruit, the capacity for eating leaves and the capacity for eating meat. But meat is a rare treat, if eaten at all. Sure, chimpanzees sometimes kill and devour a baby monkey, but the proportion of the diet of the average chimpanzee composed of meat is small. And chimps eat more mammal meat than any of the other apes or any of the monkeys. The majority of the food consumed by primates today–and every indication is for the last thirty million years–is vegetable, not animal. Plants are what our apey and even earlier ancestors ate; they were our paleo diet for most of the last thirty million years during which our bodies, and our guts in particular, were evolving. In other words, there is very little evidence that our guts are terribly special and the job of a generalist primate gut is primarily to eat pieces of plants. We have special immune systems, special brains, even special hands, but our guts are ordinary and for tens of millions of years those ordinary guts have tended to be filled with fruit, leaves, and the occasional delicacy of a raw hummingbird.” (source)

He also goes on to show evidence for the fact that our bodies might not have really been designed to eat meat, but rather evolved and developed in order to eat and digest meat. It’s kind of like Milk, and why most of the world is lactose intolerant.

Every other species weans and then never drinks milk again for the rest of their lives, and because of that they don’t have an enzyme to break down the sugar in milk. But during human evolution, some humans experienced a mutation in the LTC gene, the lactase gene, these mutations allow us to process lactose as adults. With approximately 65- 75 percent percent of humans on the planet unable to properly process it, it is evidence enough that we are not doing what is natural and in accordance with our bodies. You can read more about this in detail HERE. 

A Very Brief Dietary History of Human Ancestors & ‘Relatives’

“For a long time, primates stuck by the old restaurants –leaves and fruits –and by 3.5 million years ago, they started exploring new diet possibilities –tropical grasses and sedges –that grazing animals discovered a long time before, about 10 million years ago” – University of Utah geochemist Thure Cerling (source)

Since Cerling has published some of the most recent work in this field, I thought it would be a good idea to go with his very brief historical account of the history of our ancestral diet:

Previous research showed that 4.4 million years ago in Ethiopia, early human relative Ardipithecus ramidus (“Ardi”) ate mostly C3 leaves and fruits.

– About 4.2 million to 4 million years ago on the Kenyan side of the Turkana Basin, one of Cerling’s new studies shows that human ancestor Australopithecus anamensis ate at least 90 percent leaves and fruits – the same diet as modern chimps.

– By 3.4 million years ago in northeast Ethiopia’s Awash Basin, according to Wynn’s study, Australopithecus afarensis were eating significant amounts of C4 grasses and sedges: 22 percent on average, but with a wide range among individuals of anywhere from 0 percent to 69 percent grasses and sedges. The species also ate some succulent plants. Wynn says that switch “documents a transformational stage in our ecological history.” Many scientists previously believed A. afarensis had an ape-like C3 diet. It remains a mystery why A. afarensis expanded its menu to C4 grasses when its likely ancestor, A. anamensis, did not, although both inhabited savanna habitats.

– 3.4 million years ago in Turkana, human relative Kenyanthropus platyops had switched to a highly varied diet of both C3 trees and shrubs, and C4 grasses and sedges. The average was 40 percent grasses and sedges, but individuals varied widely, eating anywhere from 5 percent to 65 percent.

– About 2.7 million to 2.1 million years ago in southern Africa, hominins Australopithecus africanus and Paranthropus robustus ate tree and shrub foods, but also ate grasses and sedges and perhaps grazing animals. A africanus averaged 50 percent C4 grass-sedge-based foods, but individuals ranged from 0 to 80 percent. P. robustus averaged 30 percent grasses-sedges, but ranged from 20 percent to 50 percent.

– By 2 million to 1.7 million years ago in Turkana, early humans, Homo, ate a 35 percent grass-and-sedge diet – some possibly from meat of grazing animals –while another hominin, Paranthropus boisei, was eating 75 percent grass –more than any hominin, according to a 2011 study by Cerling. Paranthropus likely was vegetarian. Homo had a mixed diet that likely included meat or insects that had eaten grasses. A drier climate may have made Homo and Paranthropus more reliant on C4 grasses.

– By 1.4 million years ago in Turkana, Homo had increased the proportion of grass-based food to 55 percent.

– Some 10,000 years ago in Turkana, Homo sapiens’ teeth reveal a diet split 50-50 between C3 trees and shrubs and C4 plants and likely meat –almost identical to the ratio in modern North Americans.

Modern Day Food Industry

Again, it’s clear when we examine the diet of those who roamed the Earth before us, that a large portion of their diet was  vegetarian, and as outlined, possibly one hundred percent vegetarian for some individuals. One thing is for certain, it was not all predominately meat. So ask yourself, when did the notion of the “cave man” diet become such a backbone for people to use as justification for eating meat? Why do so many people believe that our ancestors ate so much meat, and that it’s all they ate?

The average North American diet today is one that involves ingesting what seems to be abnormal amounts of meat, on a daily basis. Even if our ancestors did consume meat, they did not consume it on a daily basis. In fact, there is evidence suggesting that those who lived in the “hunter gatherer” period went very long periods without eating at all. This – as pointed out by Mark Mattson, a professor of neuroscience at John Hopkins University – is precisely why our bodies have evolved to go long periods of time without food, and why intermittent fasting is now a healthy practice with a tremendous amounts of health benefits. (source) You can read more about fasting here.

As for the modern day meat industry, billions of animals are killed every year for food consumption alone. They are being raised to be slaughtered, injected with various chemicals, mistreated and more. They are also roaming in pesticides and fed GMO feed (which studies have shown to be detrimental to human and animal health, something we’ve written about in depth and provided evidence for on our website).

Our modern day food industry is one that is full of harmful substances, chemicals and other artificial ingredients that are making many wonder how we can even call it “food” anymore.

We still have a long way to go and lots of work to do if we want to become a healthy species again, something we are far from achieving.

The Health Science Says About A Meat Free Diet

Studies are confirming the health benefits of meat-free eating. Nowadays, plant-based eating is recognized as not only nutritionally sufficient but also as a way to reduce the risk for many chronic illnesses.” – Harvard Medical School (source)

The science regarding a meat free diet is also showing that human beings might not be build to eat it. For the sake of shortening this read, I’m going to link some previous heavily sourced articles that go into more detail.

The Heart Disease Rates of Meat Easters Compared To Vegetarians/Vegans

9 Things That Happen When You Stop Eating Meat 

Plant-Based Protein vs. Protein From Meat. Which One Is Better For Your Body? 

Be sure to check out those articles for a brief glimpse of what I mean. Before you do, you can check out a snippet of an interview below with Michelle McMacken. She’s an internal medicine physician, Assistant Professor of Medicine, NYU School of Medicine Director, Bellevue Hospital Weight Management Clinic. It’s one of the largest safety-net hospitals in New York City.

 

a repost: A Black Woman-Owned Company That Employs Youth and the Formerly Incarcerated Will Replace Flint’s Corroded Water Pipes

I approve of this story. Big props to this company for stepping up to the plate in not only correcting this intentional, blatant atrocity but employing brothas who would not be able find work under “normal” circumstances.

-The Melanated Man

 

Article posted on Truthout.org (click link for original)

By Lauren Longo

The Flint water crisis has dragged on for over three years now, leaving residents to rely on bottled water for drinking and cooking while they await clean water. But one black woman and her business may finally end the injustice.

At the end of March, the state of Michigan agreed to pay up to $97 million in combined federal and state funds to replace Flint’s corroded water pipes. The state will have three years to replace any lead or galvanized steel pipes for at least 18,000 homes.

A federal judge approved the agreement, which also entitles residents to have their water tested for lead four times a year, as well as access to free bottled water and filters.

“For the first time, we’ve been able to have a federal court enforce the state to do the right thing,” Flint resident Melissa Mays told All Things Considered, “which is to replace the pipes that their agencies and their administration broke. And now the people can start to see progress.”

WT Stevens Construction, a black woman-owned company, will lead that progress. One of four companies contracted to replace the city’s contaminated pipes, WT Stevens is the only one owned by a black person.

W.T. Stevens founded the family-owned company in the 1990s, and when he died, Rhonda Grayer began running the company with her seven siblings. The company is a state-certified lead-abatement contractor, which started replacing the city’s water lines in 2016.

This will be the biggest project the company has ever undertaken.

“I will tell you that it is really exciting and the most important part of it is the opportunity to employ people who may not have had other opportunities,” Grayer told The Hub Flint.

But replacing the water pipes isn’t WT Stevens’ only contribution to the community of Flint. The company has added 20 employees to handle the project’s workload, including ex-offenders and youth in order to provide training and opportunities to these specific populations.

Flint residents comprise about 60 percent of Grayer’s team, so this project is definitely about more than a paycheck for them.

“They’ve had firsthand experiences with the water crisis,” Grayer told Mic. “This is the community in which they live and when they’re on the job they see that they’re helping residents they know.”

And Grayer thinks her dad would be “very, very proud” of the work that they’re doing.

The crisis in Flint began when city officials wanted to save money by switching the city’s water source from Detroit to the Flint River. The government then failed to treat the water with an anti-corrosive agent, so the water corroded the city’s lead pipes, essentially turning tap water into poison.

The government’s actions have been called an act of environmental racism against the city’s mostly black residents.

Last summer, scientists finally considered the water safe for bathing and hand-washing  — but not for consumption.

And as of March, Flint residents were expected to start paying the full cost of their water, even though it is still unsafe to drink without a filter. More than 8,000 Flint residents now face foreclosure for outstanding bills on water that is still, after over three years, toxic.

a repost: New DNA Proves African Americans Are In Fact Indigenous Aborigines Of America – Better News

Some of us are already privy to this knowledge. To the rest of us this knowledge may have never crossed our mind. Nevertheless, it’s STILL contrary to the popular opinion that still infects our grade schools, universities, and perpetuated the mainstream media to this day. It’s always refreshing to be reminded of this piece of knowledge. Can’t lie, makes me feel good inside! Enjoy your day, melanated family!
-The Melanated Man
Article posted on Better News (click link for original)
New DNA Proves African Americans Are In Fact Indigenous Aborigines Of America

New DNA Proves African Americans Are In Fact Indigenous Aborigines Of America

Malcolm X once stated “Aborigine. Which means what? Black Folks.” Then he later went on to say “You and I are Aborigine.”

 

Malcolm X stated that the rock landed on us after he returned across the waters because he learned new things. He learned that the rock had truly landed on us, and that we were from these lands.

Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. also stated, in his I Have A Dream speech that we are held in exile in our own homeland. Now we have a lot of scholars out there, and individuals are missing the point. How can you be held in exile in your own homeland, without it being your own homeland?

The tens of millions of Black Americans, or rather Indians, who ‘disappeared’ after 1492 did not all die in the ‘holocaust’ inflicted within America. Hundreds of thousands were shipped to Europe and Africa as Indian slaves.

The whole slave trade story was given to all of us in reverse. A mass colony of Africans were not shipped from Africa to America. The truth is that Black Indians were shipped from America to Europe!

They were then shipped from Spain to Africa as commodity for African resources. These Black Indians, now mistaken as African Americans, were shipped back to America and classified as “African Slaves.” This part of our history is what the school systems fail to mention in history programs.

The American Colonization Society was an organization formed in 1816 with the purpose of transporting free African Americans, or rather Indian Slaves; classified as Negros back then, from the United States to settle on the west coast of Africa.

During the decades, the society operated and transported more than 12,000 people to Africa, and the African nation of Liberia was founded.

The term African-American, to refer to all black people was endorsed only since 1988, but was against the desires of the majority of black people. In fact, the term was endorsed by only five people; including Rev. Jesse Jackson and Ramona Edelin leading the charge, as a result of a gathering called The African American Summit, without the input of the majority of black people.

Author Avis J. Smith went to the District court in Washington, D.C., to stand against this term, as well as against the notion that a small group of powerful individuals should be able to compel the masses into adopting it.

The systematic destruction of the Native Americans, or rather Native Indigenous Aborigine people, and their entire way of life was not only one of recorded history’s greatest tragedies, but, as with the slave trade, deeply spiritually wounding to all involved.

 

Did You Know? Africa’s OWN Natural Nuclear Reactor

 

nuclearpowerpic.jpg

From the Melanated Man:

I was reading an article earlier today discussing how the Fukushima disaster that occurred back in 2011 is continuing polluting the Pacific Ocean with radiation. I reposted another article about this topic maybe a little over six months ago. Both articles mention the devastating effects of the radiation pollution within the Pacific could certainly last for thousands and thousands of years.I wondered how it could be possible for the Earth, which is a living being itself, could recover from not only this travesty, but the other massacres and constant poisoning that are  byproducts of  mankind’s MAN-ipulation.

Thus, I was more curious on the subject of nuclear energy.

I consider myself to be a scientist by way of my civil engineering degree, and I have worked within a coal-fired power plant before. I understand the power plant process: coal  is intensely heated to boil purified water into piping-hot steam, which spin the turbines that generate your electrical  energy. Wallah. 

Nothing more, nothing less.There isn’t that much of a difference between  a coal-fired power plant and a nuclear power plant…

…BESIDES THE FACT that nuclear power plants are HEAVILY guarded for obvious reasons, and there is radioactive waste involved.

All in all, one uses coal and the other uses the nuclear reaction between plutonium and uranium to heat the water into steam to spin the turbines. I was little unfamiliar with the nuclear reaction process between plutonium and uranium. So I did some research on it.

Oddly enough, I came across this article:

2-Billion-Year-Old African nuclear reactor proves that Mother Nature still has a few tricks up her sleeve

Check out these links  as well:

https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/natures-nuclear-reactors-the-2-billion-year-old-natural-fission-reactors-in-gabon-western-africa/

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/ancient-nuclear-reactor/

 

This was an incidental find on my part. I did not even know there was such thing as an “natural nuclear reactor.”

Found in Africa…THE MOTHER LAND…OF ALL PLACES!!!

Yet I was not surprised either. Like the Good Book says, “there is nothing new under the sun.”

Contrary to what the hell Massa, the powers-that-be may be claiming to be the newest technology these days.

AND AGAIN…it came from the African continent no less.

Mmmhmmm.

There should not be any more reason to wonder why the African continent has been constantly raped and abused of its resources, human and non-human. ALL MODERN TECHNOLOGY AND THE KNOWLEDGE TO BUILD IT COMES FROM AND IS SUPPORTED BY THE AFRICAN CONTINENT!!

Check out: A Reblog: Facts on Coltan

Facts are facts, people.

Once I learned of this natural nuclear reactor in Africa, naturally I assumed since Mother Earth knew how to create her own nuclear reaction (a natural means in electrical energy generation procedure, anyone?) that she knew how to get rid of the waste created from that nuclear reaction. 

Does that make sense to YOU?!!!!

It definitely makes sense to me.

So how much should we really be concerned about the waste that was caused from the Fukushima incident? Granted, the electric energy that is generated by nuclear power plants is done by ARTIFICIAL MEANS. That ARTIFICIAL WASTE produced from that ARTIFICIAL NUCLEAR REACTION will obviously have a different, possibly catastrophic effect on the planet and its inhabitants.

BUT…once again, if Mother Earth is a living being, is it also possible that she can self-correct herself over the course of time if we treated her the way she was meant to be treated in the first place?

I think so.Personally I believe Mother Earth to be highly-intelligent organism.

Hue-mans, specifically my Melanin-Dominant brothers and sisters, definitely have the ability to  self-correct and rid ourselves of the ARTIFICIAL, EUROPEAN LIFESTYLE we have been accustomed to and return back intune with Nature, with Mother Earth.  I’m pretty sure Mother Earth intrinsically knows how to clean herself and return her roots as well. \

My Melanin-Dominant brothers and sisters, we have to stop feeding the beast, THIS ARTIFICIAL EUROPEAN PARADIGM, for that to happen. We have to cease our participation in the madness so it can DIE ONCE AND FOR ALL!

Remember…Participation = Validation

We have the strongest connection to the planet out of any group of people, Melanin-Dominant brothers and sisters. We have to lead the pack in this endeavor. Our Melanin-Recessive brethren, who are leading the pack, continue to go against the grain and damn us all to Hell in the process. Mother Earth definitely has the ability to overcome the wrath, but it may come at the cost of riding itself of the parasites.

Many of us are demonstrating parasite behavior…THAT MUST END IMMEDIATELY FAM!!!

Let’s get back to where it all started, where it was intended to be in the beginning.

That’s the only way we will totally achieve the freedom and liberation we deeply desire!

 

 

Peace and Love to my melanated family,

The Melanated Man