Friday, March 25, 2016

Ted Cruz is shilling for Monsanto - Wonder How MUCH They Paid Him

During a recent agricultural summit in Iowa, the fact that Ted Cruz chose to use the words "anti-science" and "zealot" to describe his stance on GMO, actually supports the fact that he is already BOUGHT by biotech, the most evil industry on the planet – which inserts cancer-causing herbicides and chemical-based toxins into U.S. food, while claiming it can feed the starving, broken, burning-up world. Of course, a zealot describes just about any person who is fanatical in their pursuit of their own ideals, and eating clean food can be quite the uncompromising, ideal way of living (without preventable diseases and cell disorders) for about 25 million Americans or more, so this food topic spills into politics, and it spills back onto the food, and it spews out of Ted Cruz's mouth like roach-killer spray on a cob of corn.

Learn more:

Wednesday, March 23, 2016

US Government bans e-cigs from airplanes – another reason to quit nicotine

Use of e-cigs (electronic cigarettes) is now banned on commercial planes according to the new rule set in place by the Department of Transportation. This applies to all domestic and international flights, and includes all e-cigs, including pipes and devices that look like pens, boxes, tubes, etc. Not included in the ban are nebulizers people use for asthma or cystic fibrosis. Vaporizers sometimes look like pens, so this could get confusing quickly, but don't worry, TSA will be sure to feel you up and check all of your orifices, your underwear, your bra–you know the drill. Your vape machine may look like a smart phone with some tubes attached and confuse the TSA also. Watch out.


What's the problem? First of all, vape usually contains nicotine, so anywhere it's exhaled, yes, it still contains the nicotine, and people have to breathe that. Second, it could cloud up the whole cabin, maybe even get into the cockpit. Nobody wants that. Third, it could be a distraction for some terrorist or nutcase so you can't see what's going on. Fourth, it could blow up, from the overcharged lithium battery, or the wrong battery, like that guy in Florida who lost some teeth and half his tongue that way. No more vaping on planes. Awe shucks! No mist. No vapor. No aerosol. Maybe it's time to quit nicotine all together, huh? How could somebody quit the third most addictive drug in the world, though?


Escape the nicotine prison, go from e-cigs to no-cigs!

It's tough to criticize electronic cigarettes (e-cigs) because those who use them brag that they have eliminated most of the toxic chemicals found in commercial cigarettes, and that they're saving money and have cut back on how often they smoke. Plus, about one out of every three e-cig "fan" will tell you they quit smoking entirely thanks to e-cigs, and that's great, but what happened to the other 66%, and are things getting better or worse for them?

It is true that e-cigs have a better success rate for helping smokers quit than the nicotine patch, the gum, the medications (Chantix and Zyban), and hypnotherapy - all combined (American Journal of Preventive Medicine), but the ultimate irony is that e-cigs were never meant to be marketed as a quit smoking aid, according to the inventor, the Ruyan Group from Hong Kong. It just goes to show how brutally toxic the 4,000-chemical-concoction in commercial cigs has become that Big Tobacco has engineered over the past 50 years, and how happy smokers are to have some form of escape from the poisonous prison better known as "cancer sticks." People just want a way out, and e-cigs shine a little bit of light at the end of that tunnel.

E-cigs are tough for the FDA to regulate, mainly because they sink into a loophole, since they are not actually tobacco products, but simply nicotine delivery devices. But nicotine is a drug, insidiously powerful and capable of causing a lethal overdose (especially for kids and teens), unlike marijuana, so where's the logic?

The benefits and "safety" of e-cigs are quite misleading. There are 20 varieties of e-cigs that contain nitrosamines, the same carcinogen found in real cigarettes, and most e-juice (nicotine juice) cartridges contain diethylene glycol, the highly toxic poison found in antifreeze, which causes leukemia. Many e-cigs which claim to have no nicotine will contain some, and many of the levels of nicotine disclosed on the packages are completely wrong, so it's kind of a guessing game as to how much "drug" you're getting and which manufacturers actually know what they're doing when they "load them up."

Right now in
America, e-cig devices are available in over 3,000 retail outlets, and all over the internet. They cost anywhere between $45 and $75, and sales have skyrocketed in the past year, exceeding $100 million.

Clearing any E-cig confusion, rumors, myths (Q&A):

Are e-cigs legal all over the world? Australia and Canada have banned e-cigs, classifying them as a tobacco product. Though the e-cig does not contain tobacco, those governments won't make the exception. As far as the U.S. is concerned, national border security is confiscating e-cigs, but there is no law banning their use yet. However, since they're quickly depleting Big Tobacco's profits, the FDA will likely step in very soon!

What really happened to the guy in
Florida who's e-cig blew up in his face, and was that a cheap version? Tom Holloway of Niceville, Florida, is still alive, but is missing half his tongue, all of his front teeth, and has permanent burn scars on his face. Contrary to what the "e-cig community" would like to believe, it was not some cheap version of an e-cig, but a faulty, over-charged lithium battery which caused the life-threatening explosion.

What are the side effects of nicotine? Nicotine by itself causes an increased heart rate, heightened blood pressure, narrowing of blood vessels (leads to heart attacks and strokes), gastrointestinal problems, depression, mood swings, sleep disturbances, headaches, loss of sex drive, insulin resistance, and vision problems.

How do you quit nicotine forever, one of the most addictive drugs in the world (running a close third behind heroin and cocaine)? The physical addiction is actually broken in 3 to 4 days, but the cravings for the feelings that nicotine brings can take weeks, months, or even years to break, without the proper nutritional and herbal replacement and replenishment supplements (explained further in 14AndOut* description below).

How are the stop smoking pills like Chantix and Zyban dangerous? These pharmaceutical toxins not only block nicotine receptors in the brain, but also block naturally occurring dopamine, so the patient suffers from heightened depression and anxiety, which fuels feelings of suicide and can even lead the patient to commit suicide (

How is 14AndOut* different from other cessation programs like the patch, the pills, gum, e-cigs and hypnotherapy; and where did the name 14AndOut come from? 14AndOut addresses the chemical addiction, behavioral patterns and rituals, and nutritional guidance so desperately needed to quit smoking for good. If you feel incarcerated by the nicotine addiction, you now have the key to free yourself from your nicotine cell. Check out 14AndOut, the most inexpensive, comprehensive method to stop smoking in 14 days or less, and it comes highly recommended by The Health Ranger himself:

The e-cig hangover and the CURE!

What most smokers don't realize is that nicotine creates its own vicious cycle of need and feed. Nicotine is a depressant in the long term, but serves as a short term stimulant, so it actually relieves the smoker of the very feeling it created, which has quickly worn off from the last smoking session. In other words, a few nicotine drags are like taking aspirin for an alcohol hangover, except most smokers engage in this "hangover relief system" about every hour. It's a hook and an evil drug from which the body wants to escape. Go from e-cigs to no-cigs as soon as possible and you're body will reward you with natural energy and true happiness. Click here to learn HOW.











Have confidence without cigarettes!


Check out the smoker's workout! Get a great laugh (at yourself)


There's fiberglass in cigarette filters - unbelievably shocking photos


Subscribe for free and get the updates at least 4 times a week!


Organic tobacco – who knew it’s an AMAZING way to quit smoking!


Western preventable disease epidemics – you should actively PREVENT them


Stop Smoking King (himself)





Monday, March 21, 2016

You Got GMO Questions? We Got GMO Answers!

GMOs have been around for thirty years, but recently a new website gained popularity and public scientist support that auspiciously fostered connections between academics at well-known US universities and agri-chemical corporations that manufacture, distribute, advertise and push GMO, genetically modified organisms on Americans. Most Americans, in fact over 90%, want labels on their food in order to know if the ingredients have been genetically modified or not. This is of great concern to humans that suspect that eating chemical pesticides could cause cancer, Alzheimer's, lowered immunity, suppressed brain function, disrupted central nervous system functioning, and a host of other chronic-care, yet preventable diseases and disorders. Genetically modified organisms serving as pesticides is new to the world, as of just thirty years ago, when agri-chemical companies first discovered how to insert pesticide genes into the seedlings of corn and soy without killing them. The website is ironically not scientific at all, but rather a response to this valid, monumental concern that health enthusiasts have about this new technology that is experimental and infantile in it's depth of true research regarding safety, efficacy, and resistance to bugs, weeds and crop disease.


The top questions posed and answered by the biotechnology constructed Q&A (home page) address several concerns they have most likely received from skeptics and scientific or holistic person's questioning their tactics and less-than-thorough science proof. Why would anyone want to eat a product that contains pesticide on the inside and outside when organic foods have been proven safe for thousands of years? (1)


Do people believe that the biotechnology, chem-ag firms will take over all food and seeds and make everything genetically modified, thus controlling all the seeds of the world? How can we sustain our soil, animals and humans if we are inserting the genes of toxic, dangerous pesticides into the food and then spraying those fruits and vegetables with more toxic herbicide, insecticide, fungicide, algaecide, and foreign bacteria or virus that otherwise would not normally or naturally enter our food? How can that be called sustainable farming practice?


And finally, what is the true difference in cost, when true yield is examined, and the healthcare costs for those who suffer from GMO toxicity and exposure to these chemicals on the farms and fields of America? Are we actually using MORE pesticide, since the superbugs and superweeds have become immune or "resistant" to the new super-toxic cocktails of pesticides? These are the concerns that must address in order to quell public fear of their practices, and companies like Monsanto, Dow, Dupont, BASF, Bayer, Cargill and Syngenta (3) want to be sure they've countered every major concern, so they've hired and paid scientists and PR firms to draft up some user-friendly propaganda. (2)


Dirty NY Public Relations firm feeds answers to via public scientists and academics

Ketchum PR group and "Frankenfoods" Monsanto organize (recruit) dozens of "public scientists" from universities around the country and journalistic hacks (shills) who reiterate prolific-sounding industry slogans and rhetoric (4) that have no scientific basis in order to brainwash the public and government officials alike into accepting this new, dangerous form of agriculture–genetically modified organisms functioning as pesticides and combined with synthetic, chemical insecticides, herbicides, and fungicides, and then inserted into the genetic makeup of our food. Here's the header at the top of the home page on


"More than 100 experts have contributed to this site including independent experts in leading academic institutions, industry groups and representatives from member companies."


More than a few of those "experts" have been caught recently in a dirty public relations game (5) of promoting propaganda for money and luxurious favors. The US Right to Know group used the FOIA - Freedom of Information Act, to request email correspondence that reveals a whole hidden inner-network of biotechnology companies paying off university scientists and public scientists to say exactly what industry hacks have written in their own literature about the so-called safety, sustainability, drought-resistant miracles they've somehow created with chemical pesticides inserted into seeds.


Epitomes of the Corporate Shills


Among the top creators, website launchers and "experts" answering questions at are the following:


Georgina Gustin, Staff Writer, CQ RoleCall and Dwell Media -

Launched; Covers Monsanto and most other biotech propaganda


Jenny Hopkinson, Agriculture and Food Policy Issues Reporter, Politico -

Top GMOAnswers specialist; vies for deregulation of biotechnology


Dr. Kevin M. Folta, Chairman and Associate Professor, University of Florida -

Horticultural Sciences Dept., Plant Innovation Program & Molecular Biology

GMOAnswers specialist and Monsanto's favorite of the whole "enlisted" response team.


Linguistics tricks and illegal "paid-for" propaganda

Most of the answers, language and diction found on is directly derived from the agrichemical industry hacks' writing themselves, and those same writers use many words that have no business anywhere in the biotech "manuals" or "guides" for agriculture, such as the word sustainable. Huge corporations implement dirty tricks and industry lingo that's designed to fool authorities, like the USDA, and the public, into believing their methods and products are somehow tested for safety. True independent experts do not accept gifts and bribes from corporations, especially not to say and write what the corporations want them to say and write. This is fraud and would be illegal, not to mention unethical. Public scientists, reporters and journalists alike are supposed to report the truth as best they can and let the public be the final decider on the facts and/or theories with scientific evidence that at least support it. (6)


These so-called experts are far from independent, as revealed by the US Right to Know group (USRTK) through FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) requests for hundreds (possibly thousands) of emails and documents sent back and forth from public scientists to PR firms to Monsanto and other Biotech firm representatives.T This collusion of industries between agricultural biotechnology and academics that study science and communication is an atrocity that must be revealed to all consumers, for their safety and ingredient awareness regarding every product they purchase and consume. (7)

Because the website GMOAnswers is funded by the industry giants, including Monsanto, DuPont, BASF, Bayer and Syngenta, there is much money to be "thrown around" to inspire public scientists and academics to regurgitate industry lies without any scientific proof, simply because they enjoy science and enjoy the cash and gift payoffs.

On the "Studies and Articles" page of, you will see the following quote:

"The viewpoints expressed by our contributors are their own and do not necessarily represent those of the Council for Biotechnology Information."

Notice the linguistics and context they deliver when they tell you that the viewpoints "do not necessarily represent" those of CBI. The site group has said themselves, as uncovered in emails, that their experts are a "straight-up marketing tool to spin GMOs in a positive light." So they are spin doctors, more-or-less who are showered with extravagant gifts to take something bad and make it sound good, but in this case, it's not some gimmick or cheap product for sale on late night television, but rather 90% of America's staple crop (corn, soy, canola, cottonseed, alfalfa, sugar beets) converted into food that contains chemical pesticides in their genetic makeup. These public scientists, public speakers and journalists lie through their teeth in order to receive grants that, as Monsanto reps write, "may be used at your discretion in support of your research and outreach projects."


Public Scientists Regurgitate Industry Lies Verbatim

Dr. Folta of University of Florida has sworn up and down for years that he has no financial ties to Monsanto and would never accept money (personal compensation) from them, that he is not a shill or a huckster, although now it is proven that he has done exactly that–accepted bribes–and is exactly that–a shill for Monsanto (8). He has outright offered a "solid return" on Monsanto's investment in him, and he has outright offered to "write anything" they want him to write. This is not a public scientist. This is a man who loves science and loves making easy money for regurgitating industry-fabricated lies about GMOs and theories and products in use right now that neither he nor the corporation ever tested for safety regarding the environment, farm animals, crops or humans who consume them.


Nobody tests GMO for safety because no regulatory agency opposes GMO

The biotech industry can hire anyone they want to for attesting to their rogue and reckless technologies, including public relations firms that run their websites, because the scripted responses will never be held to the test of science, at least not by the US government or the regulatory agencies like the FDA, USDA, CDC or the EPA, that fully support GMO and marketing it all to Americans with no labels or warnings whatsoever. The PR firm Ketchum runs "Public Scientist" Kevin Folta is one of the most frequent contributors to the website and has been exposed for cutting and pasting exact scripted answers to the site that "Frankenfoods" Monsanto sent him, even though they told him to make his responses authentically his own. After doing this, Folta could not remember later whether he "used them, modified them or what" - - per the emails revealed by USRTK.


Private sector scientists are being revealed as charlatans lately, and now the health enthusiasts across the world that suspected this deep-seeded brain-washing and blatant miseducation by the biotech industry are proven right. This strengthens the fight for organic food that is free of chemical pesticides and genetically modified and mutated organisms that cause cancer, Alzheimer's and other preventable diseases. This strengthens the organic, clean food movement and the dire need for consumers to read the labels of all products to distinguish these lethal food chemicals the biotech industry has manipulated and modified to seem normal and beneficial in the eyes of millions of unknowing, unsuspecting chemical-food victims.


These FOIA revelations are huge but are only the tip of the iceberg, revealing a long arduous battle for human rights, ethics in agriculture, MORE stringent regulations, checks and balances, and thorough investigations of any PUBLIC SCIENTISTS or JOURNALISTS who defend or apologize for GMO. The public now knows, with proof, that they recruit and enlist these plant scientists to be shills for their "toughest" GMO questions and answers.


The Council for Biotechnology Information (CBI), which funds GMO Answers, includes most if not all the major biotechnology companies and corporations, who know the value of fooling millions of people into believing their agricultural practices are sustainable. Much like the Genetic Literacy Project, run by the most notorious shill, Jon Entine, former writer for, GMO Answers is a front for biotech propaganda meant to derail any skeptics of GMO and further convolute the gray area where GMO has not proven their own safety nor proven their own massively toxic and destructive chemical agents they manufacture, use in combination with their own patented toxins, and market as being safe, sustainable herbicides and insecticides. (9)


Food Transparency Campaign Gains Ground from FOIA Revelations

The US Right to Know investigation of this intricate networking of biotech fraud has revealed over 4,500 pages of emails and other records of the propaganda campaign being run by biotech, mainly Monsanto. US Right to Know has referred to Ketchum PR firm out of New York as a marketing tool being used to spin and flip the whole GMO image, which is not very good right now, and getting worse fast, ironically. Monsanto must have forgot that the records of public-sector researchers are all subject to freedom-of-information laws, that, or Folta just got too sloppy and carefree and blew the whole thing wide open.

Folta actually used material provided by Ketchum's PR representatives as his own GMO answers, so essentially a PR firm is brainwashing millions of people and a public scientist is signing his name to it for $25,000 here and there, to be used at his discretion to promote GMO, without any science to back it up. These are the same shills who refer to anyone who challenges their concocted theories as "anti-science." Meanwhile, Folta has gone on record time and time again saying he has no connections to Monsanto and has never taken "a dime" or any gifts from them. (10)


Glyphosate Apologist and Monsanto "Public Scientist" #1 Puppet: Kevin Folta

Dr. Kevin Folta, the favorite speaker and writer of the "enlisted response team" for,  has been known to fly off the rails, by daring to drink Monsanto's Roundup herbicide during public talks and he posts on Twitter that he drinks this known carcinogen and registered poison in order to convince consumers it's safe. On Twitter, he said he drinks it "to demonstrate harmlessness." On another occasion he declared, “I'm going to tip a freshly-opened pint next week at ISU. No fear here. Trust science.”


This is the same "clowny" and radical "public scientist" guy who promised Monsanto reps a solid return on (their) investment (in him).


Disclosures of industry payments such as these, most notably by scientific journals, proves this networking has been going on since the inception of GMO. The AMA and the notorious Morris Fishbein ran their racket in a similar fashion nearly a century ago. (11)








Sunday, March 20, 2016

Cowboy Killers - The History of When Cigarettes Became So Deadly

Before the 1960s, none of the Big Tobacco manufacturers knew that they could cook tobacco with ammonia and the nicotine would be thirty-five times as potent. Sure, cigarettes before that still caused cancer, especially the tobacco coated with insecticides and herbicide, but if you wanted to quit smoking, say, in the 1940s or 1950s, you just quit. It was as simple as that. It was more of a social thing to smoke, so if you weren't "in it for that," it was just exit, stage left. For the past fifty years or so, though, quitting smoking is a TOTAL NIGHTMARE for most people, and 95% of people who attempt to quit without some kind of help–fail in the first six months, and once they smoke ONE single cigarette, within a couple days or weeks–it's right back to a pack a day or more.


So the cowboys on the silver screen look cool smoking. So what. Arnold Schwarzenegger looks cool in movies shooting people with a machine gun, but we don't all go out and do it, now do we? Ya, and those doctors looked real cool in the 1930s, 40s and 50s advertising their "favorite" brand, (Camels), and talking about "roasty, toasty flavor (Marlboro), endorsing cigarettes via the AMA in the Journal of the American Medical Association, who hid the FACT from the American public that smoking was linked to LUNG CANCER as proven with scientific-backed studies and multiple research experiments–Oh they knew alright! Those lying MDs. They're all STILL at it, lying and lying, writing prescriptions for pharmaceuticals to cover up symptoms of deeper rooted diseases and disorders caused by eating chemicals and lacking vitamins and minerals. Do you smoke to look cool like doctors whose nurses light their cigarette in their office for them? What's your favorite brand? Is it strong enough? Can you quit it?


Nearly every commercial brand of cigarettes TODAY has freebased the tobacco with ammonia to make the nicotine super-addictive, that's why people since the 1960s can't quit when they want to, even when they "give it their all." It's almost like a drug addict who has to have that fix and will do almost anything to get it.


You know, four of the "Marlboro Man" actors all died of lung cancer. One of them started smoking at age 14. That's really sad. "Come to where the flavor is ..." Really? How about, "Come to where the lung cancer is." For decades and decades, the "Marlboro Man" was an American iconic image for toughness. Those tough guys that always have a cigarette in their mouth. Cancer eats 'em alive, right down to the bone. Some people go from weighing 200 pounds to about 80 pounds before they suffocate to death from lung cancer. It's a horrible way to go. Still, America loved those 20th century ad campaigns, that really kicked into gear in the 1950s, at least 20 years after scientists figured out the smoking–lung cancer connection. Yep, that's America for ya' - buy just about anything you see on TV and it slowly poisons you to death, that including the prescription psyche, depression, anxiety and pain meds sold to the unknowing public with tons of insane side effects as they tell you to "ask your doctor if (killyerdumbassslow) is right for you!"


Today, reality paints a much darker image for smokers. They're outcasts. Rebels without a clue. Lost vagabonds of the world. Dingy. Stinky. Weak. Kids HATE smokers. Period. Ask them. Kids get diseases from smokers. Second hand smoke, in fact, and according to scientific research, is just as bad, if not worse, than actually smoking the ammonia-laced cancer stick yourself. Cigarettes don't just have "a hold" on people, they simply CAN NOT STOP.


Quitting cowboy killers can be as hard as quitting crack cocaine or heroin - who's next?

Do you know what the ten hardest drugs are to quit, in order? This is just a survey, of course, because depending on many factors, like your social history, genetics, and how much money you have to waste, it's a different story for everyone, but one thing is for sure, some drugs actually TRAIN YOUR BRAIN to crave them. See how high up on the list yours is (or are):


1. Heroin - "smack"


2. Crack cocaine - freebased cocaine for smoking



4. Methadone - reduces withdrawal symptoms of smack addicts


5. Crystal Meth - think "Breaking Bad"


6. Alcohol - You know, hooch, moonshine, sauce, suds, juice, the "hard stuff"


7. Cocaine - the devil's white


8. Amphetamines - CNS stimulants mainly used for ADD and ADHD


9. Benzodiazepines (psychoactive drugs mainly for anxiety)


10. GHB ("club" drug and depressant)


Nobody ever said quitting is easy, but nobody has proven it to be impossible either. In fact, with the right method that incorporates not only knowledge about the chemicals that are affecting you, but excellent behavior modifications (mental and physical), and some sound nutritional advice from the best experts in the world, you could be well on your way after just a one-hour-course to quitting the third most addictive drug on the planet, and reclaiming your "organic" self you once knew! Do it.

Free Preview of Best Stop Smoking Program in the World (and it's natural):










Get rid of your “cigarette hangover” for good the natural way