Are There Drugs in Our Water Supply?

June 6, 2013 | By Dylan Charles | Reply

Dr. Group, Global Healing Center
Waking Times
Did you know that when you ingest or are injected with prescription drugs, your body doesn’t necessarily use everything? Excess drugs are excreted as waste material.
That’s good news for your body since pharmaceuticals can be very hard on your system, it’s not good news for the ecosystem since these drug residues work their way into our waterways and water processing plants.

Things you need to know about municipal water

Tap water has been unsafe for a very long time. Tap water may contain toxic chemicals, some known carcinogens, added to make it “safe” for drinking. Three of the poisons that can be found in faucet water are chlorine, fluoride, and arsenic, a Category 1 carcinogen (cancer causing agent).
The newest acknowledgment of prescription drugs in waterways is one more toxin added to an already contaminated water supply and prescription medications are not easily filtered.

The drugs are not present in large quantities but they are a contaminant. This means you may be ingesting them continuously over a period of years and we don’t yet know what the long-term effects of such intake will be.
Studies are showing that the effects are already manifesting in fish (male fish producing female egg yolk proteins) and even earthworms and zooplankton. Antibiotics, for example, are less and less effective as treatments for ailments in humans, due to excessive prescribing practices. Bacteria have the ability to adapt to the antibiotics. Antibiotics in open water give bacteria more time to mutate.

How pervasive is the problem?

In America, traces of drugs are found in nearly every source of drinking water, including:

• Bottled drinking water – many bottlers do not test water for drugs right now and many just repackage tap water.
• Well-water – people dig these under the mistaken belief that this is a safe way to collect the most healthful drinking water.
• Home filtration systems – most don’t filter everything and they can get contaminated with drug residue.
• Aquifers which are deep underground water systems – they supply us with 40% of our drinking water in the United States and are also becoming effected in rural areas.

The business of prescription & over-the-counter medications

Prescription drugs are a major business in this country. Medical professionals have a history of pushing chemicals before natural, alternative treatments. These chemicals are designed to inhibit one function or another in the body and supposedly treat the symptoms of disease instead of the ROOT CAUSE.
One medication often leads to the necessity of taking another one. Don’t take my word for it; read the possible side effects that come with your medications. Side effects, like diarrhea, constipation, bloating, itchiness, and more, may cause you to return to the doctor for another prescription drug or suggestion for over-the-counter relief. This cycle is almost self-perpetuating.

What’s being done to fix the problem?

Not everyone is in denial about the true safety of municipal water. There are those who persist in trying to help the environment. For example, Benjamin H. Grumbles, assistant administrator for water at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has stated that his group takes the threat seriously.
Water suppliers are searching for ways to filter the impurities from the water. New screening methods must be developed to find the different chemicals. As states become more aware of the problem; they are implementing rules and guidelines to affect change. Several states are now requiring that testing be done and the appropriate filtration practices be implemented. Testing is being done to determine which method is the most effective.
Reverse osmosis is being studied, along with carbon filtration and other means of cleaning water. It may be that a combination of techniques and pre and post filtering may get the most done.

What can you do?

First, drink purified bottled water or distilled water. If you’re not drinking purified water, start. It’s the safest and healthiest thing that you can do for your body, since water sustains your body’s life force. Your body has enough work to do and doesn’t need to be hindered.
Our bodies already have a first line of defense, our immune systems. Take care of your body and search for natural methods to replace the need for prescription medication. Remember, there are alternatives. If you do drink distilled water be sure to add a small amount of organic raw apple cider vinegar to replace the minerals lost during the distillation process.
Next, consider the water that comes into your home. I personally use and recommend a high tech, carafe purifier which filters even the smallest toxins from the water.
-Dr. Edward F. Group III, DC, ND, DACBN, DABFM

The Shady Past of The Rockefeller Family & Its Haunting Effect on the World

June 5, 2013 | By Dylan Charles | 6 Replies

Christina Sarich, Staff Writer
Waking Times 
Perhaps you have heard of the Rockefellers, and the often romantic tale told of the riches that accompany their mark on Americana. John Davidson Rockefeller, (1839-1937) the patriarch of the family, was the first billionaire in the United States. Often we are told he lived the American dream, pulling himself up by his boot straps and working tirelessly to build his family’s wealth. The truth that has come out over the years, however, is that Rockefeller was a Nazi sympathizer and fascist wealth gatherer who used others for his own whims.
Rockefeller amassed his wealth almost entirely with a global strong hold on oil production – a habit common to companies that rape foreign soil and instigate war, and are still practicing today. He also dabbled in steel, railroads and banking, establishing monopolies in the industries he pursued. His grandfather was a snake-oil salesman who sold ‘cancer’ cures to the public, mostly women, as he traveled across the United States, calling himself, ‘the celebrated Dr. Livingston.’ There’s nothing like good press and propaganda to make a decent living. The same man was also indicted for rape, but never formally charged.

The Rockefeller duplicity of character and complete disregard for public health have carried into almost every aspect of modern corporatism. We no longer make laws based on the well being of the public at large. Corporations are allowed to dump toxins like oil into oceans, and are free to grow and market GM foods when they are proven to cause cancer, stop organ functioning and cause infertility. Banking systems, via the Federal Reserve, and other fluffy brokerage houses are given carte blanch to rape us, by gambling away our money, sucking down an ever-expanding barrel of cash through tax dollars, and shoving huge debts off onto the people of multiple countries. We are also sold ‘cancer’ cures in the form of chemo and radiation when they are being proven to cause death in many cases while definitely supporting a booming industry monopolized by a small handful of pharmaceutical companies.

We’ve been sold snake oil, in the very least, and it appears more likely that we are part of a greater plan, which the Nazis first introduced pre-WWII, and which the Rockefellers sympathized with. Eugenics, or population cleansing and control are happening whether you want to use that specific terminology or not.

In the 1900s, a group of Californians exported the idea of Eugenics, to Nazi Germany. It became the third state to instate laws that supported cleansing for a ‘master race.’ Ultimately, in California, and other states, eugenics practitioners coercively sterilized some 60,000 Americans, barred the marriage of thousands, forcibly segregated thousands in “colonies,” and persecuted untold numbers in ways we are just learning about. (hnn.us)

With chemtrails, antibiotic-induced super bugs, hormone laden farm animals, super weeds and people like Dr. Oz saying that ‘organic food is elitist’ in a recent Time magazine article, it starts to make you wonder.

Joseph Pulitzer is digging deeper into the Rockefeller past and if nothing else, it points to our ‘roots’ in corporate wealth in ways that many of us have never imagined were possible. The legacy of the Rockefeller family has impacted our country but also the global culture in very real ways.
America is based on lies and usury at best, and pure evil at worst when you consider the mindset of those who would sterilize unsuspecting women. So what can we do to take back our country? Corporate capitalism and ‘inverted totalitarianism’ obviously haven’t worked. Are there better ways for people to survive in today’s toxic world?
Gift economies have been suggested, with a radical belief that the more you give, the more you get. This type of economy would also drive people to give form their true passions, instead of being motivated purely by greed. Others have suggested returning to a simpler way of life, choosing to purchase fewer things, and invest more in people and experiences. Ultimately it will have to be a system of governance that honors both the individual and the whole, with a truly integrated benevolence that honors both. Communism only honors the grand ideas of an ‘all-seeing’ or ‘all-knowing’ leader, subsuming the individual completely into complete oblivion. Capitalism is all self-centered. A new world will have to look hard and cold at our past mistakes, and take into account the needs of both the microcosmic part and the macrocosmic whole.
If you have suggestions on how to organize society to avoid the greed that has currently compromised the entire global parade, please suggest them below.

About the Author

Christina Sarich is a musician, yogi, humanitarian and freelance writer who channels many hours of studying Lao Tzu, Paramahansa Yogananda, Rob Brezny,  Miles Davis, and Tom Robbins into interesting tidbits to help you Wake up Your Sleepy Little Head, and See the Big Picture. Her blog is Yoga for the New World. Her latest book is Pharma Sutra: Healing the Body And Mind Through the Art of Yoga.
This article is offered under Creative Commons license. It’s okay to republish it anywhere as long as attribution bio is included and all links remain intact.

Supreme Court allows police to take DNA without a warrant

Get short URL

Published time: June 03, 2013 23:51

AFP Photo / Johannes Eisele

Tags

Court, Crime, Human rights, Law, USA

US police are now legally allowed to take DNA samples from those who are arrested, even if they have not been convicted for a crime or gone to trial. The Supreme Court ruled 5-4 to uphold the controversial practice on Monday.

Critics claim that taking DNA samples from anyone in custody without a warrant is considered an unconstitutional “search”, but the high court believes otherwise. US police who arrest anyone for a felony are now legally allowed to take a cheek swab of the arrestee to obtain a DNA sample, regardless of whether or not an individual has been convicted.

The court compared this practice to fingerprinting and photographing, and ruled that it is “a legitimate police booking procedure that is reasonable under the Fourth Amendment.” The court also described DNA sampling as the 21st century version of fingerprinting.

“DNA identification of arrestees is a reasonable search that can be considered part of a routine booking procedure,” Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote, representing the court’s majority decision.

The Supreme Court narrowly ruled 5-4 in favor of this practice, which Justice Samuel Alito described as “the most important criminal procedure case that this court has heard in decades.”

In response to critics’ claims that DNA sampling is an unconstitutional search, the court said that the procedure requires nothing beyond “a light touch” and does not require a surgical intrusion, which is why it does not constitute a “search”. Twenty-eight states and the federal government currently take DNA samples from those who are under felony arrest, but have not yet gone to trial.  

Justice Antonin Scalia, who ruled with the minority, responded angrily to the ruling, suggesting that DNA sampling of arrestees may be a stepping-stone to future privacy violations of innocent Americans in the name of safety.  
 
“Make no mistake about it: because of today’s decision, your DNA can be taken and entered into a national database if you are ever arrested, rightly or wrongly, and for whatever season,” Scalia said in response to the decision. “This will solve some extra crimes, to be sure. But so would taking your DNA whenever you fly on an airplane.”

During oral arguments in February, Justice Sonia Sotomayor expressed her concern that DNA swabs could eventually be conduced in schools and workplaces if the court upholds the police procedure.

“Why don’t we do this for anybody who comes in for a driver’s license?” she asked.

But President Barack Obama has made comments in which he appears to favor DNA sampling of arrestees. In January 2012, the president signed the Katie Sephich Enhanced DNA Collection Act, which provides states with federal funding for police to conduct cheek swabs.

“It’s the right thing to do,” Obama said in a 2010 appearance on America’s Most Wanted, referring to the procedure of taking DNA from arrestees. “This is where the national registry becomes so important.”

The DNA sampling case landed on the Supreme Court’s desk this year after 26-year-old Alonzo King, a Maryland resident, was arrested for second-degree assault in 2009. Police took a DNA sample from his cheek and matched it to an unsolved rape from six years earlier. As a result, King was convicted of both the 2009 assault and the 2003 rape and was sentenced to life in prison. The rape conviction was later overturned after the Maryland Court of Appeals ruled that the DNA sampling was considered an unreasonable search. The state then brought the case to the Supreme Court, which on Monday upheld the police procedure.

But the procedure remains controversial, and Scalia warned that the decision will lead to dire consequences.

“Make no mistake about it,” Scalia wrote. “As an entirely predictable consequence of today’s decision your DNA can be taken and entered into a national DNA database if you are ever arrested, rightly or wrongly, and for whatever reason.”