Non-Sequiturs: 11.07.16

* Is the GOP writing a check its ass can't cash? (In regard to the Supreme Court.) [Talking Points Memo]

* What time will a new president be determined? Everything you think you know about election predictions is about to change. [Politico]

* The 75-mile problem with Donald Trump's wall. [Huffington Post]

* A deep dive into the D.C. bar exam stats. [Bar Exam Stats]

* A look at the Supreme Court's grant, vacate, remand ("GVR") dispositions this Term. [Empirical SCOTUS]

* The best of Assistant Attorney General Leslie Caldwell's recent Foreign Corrupt Practices Act speech. [FCPA Professor]

New MacBook Pro Touchbar justified

There has been much anguish over Apple's new MacBook Pros. In lieu of specifications more impressive than a 2 year-old HP Elite, Apple offered up the Touchbar, a touchscreen mini LED display where the function keys are supposed to be.

Though classic Apple-pursue clever innovations at the cost of appealing to the graybeards who still think they're Apple's customer base-the backlash was more pronounced than usual. But the Touchbar is just an easy scapegoat for the new model's 16GB RAM limit, an unsexy but more serious problem.

And guess what: that Touchbar is completely justified. If you object to it, your argument is now invalid. Criticism of the Touchbar is no longer permissible in civilized milieux.

Touchbar Nyancat

Stupid nyancat animation on your +$2k MacBook Pro's Touchbar. Enjoy

First person to get an ad to show up in the Touchbar, without the user's express consent, wins a cyanide-laced Apple.

How First Lady's Organic Garden Became a Junk Food Campaign

By Dr. Mercola

Mere months after President Obama came into office, first lady Michelle Obama launched an organic garden project at the White House, complete with a composting system and beehives.

During a recent White House Kitchen Garden dedication ceremony, the first lady reminisced about those early days, saying:¹

"… [W]e started thinking about the challenges that many families faced, so many other families were facing the same things that we were, trying to raise healthy kids.

And many of us didn't understand the impact that the food we ate was having on our bodies, on our kids' bodies, or how we felt. Like we just didn't have the right information, or we didn't have the time that we needed to buy and prepare healthy food for our families.

So I had this crazy idea that what if we planted a garden on the White House lawn to start a conversation about where our food comes from and how it impacts our children's health.

Well, fast-forward to spring of 2009 - Barack actually won … and that's when we decided to move forward on this idea of planting a garden."

Who Shut Down the White House Promotion of Local Organics?

As Mrs. Obama mentions later on in her speech, many were opposed to the idea of an organic garden in the White House, and even more so to having a first lady focused on organic food and organic gardening as a source of health.

Americans are quite used to politicians saying one thing and doing another, a form of 'private vs public' values.

In the end, we shouldn't be surprised. Talking points and policies are crafted by the industries, and politicians are tools hanging from the toolbelt of multinational corporate interests.

In response to her invitation to dialogue about the importance of healthy eating and her promotion of local and organic foods. In a March 2009 letter to President Obama, the Mid America CropLife Association wrote:²

"Fresh foods grown conventionally are wholesome and flavorful yet more economical. Local and conventional farming is not mutually exclusive.

If Americans were still required to farm to support their family's basic food and fiber needs, would the U.S. have been leaders in the advancement of science, communication, education, medicine, transportation and the arts?"

It appears CropLife would have you believe growing organic food and living off the land makes you a fool. While farmers were once considered the backbone of our country, industrial agriculture is suggesting that eliminating most of the farmers has allowed leaders to emerge in other fields.

In a Diane Rehm Show interview that same month, Bob Young, an economist for the American Farm Bureau Federation said:³

"We have no problem with this [organic] concept. But understand that you're making lifestyle choices here about how you want your food produced. Fine. But don't denigrate the other approaches to food production."

Organics Branded as 'Elitist' in Effort to Subdue Popularity

Others called the idea of organic gardening "charming" but impractical, due to the seasonality of different food items. In 2012, a number of media articles suddenly cropped up, in which they referred to organics as an "elitist lifestyle choice."

A spokesman for the American Council on Science and Health (ASCH) went so far as calling the Obamas "organic limousine liberals."⁴ Clearly, it was a poorly shrouded effort to quell the rising tide of organic food enthusiasts.⁵

It was also quite clear that the White House organic garden upset some significant donors, not because it was there, but because the first lady was implying that organic foods are healthier.

Pesticides become 'Crop Protection Products'

In May 2009, Tom Philpott wrote about how the Mid America CropLife Association stepped up its pressure on the first lady by urging its members to share the benefits of conventional agriculture with her through a letter writing campaign. According to Philpott, CropLife told its members:⁶

"What message does [a White House organic garden] send to the non-farming public about an important and integral part of growing safe and abundant crops to feed and clothe the world - crop protection products?

I hope that you will take a moment to consider how important that message is to your livelihood, your passion for agriculture, and your growers' future - and send your own letter, sharing the benefits of modern, conventional agriculture.

Help allay any fears by providing a specific example of how what you do on a daily basis, including custom application and/or the sale of crop protection products and fertilizers, has saved a crop and/or improved yields to benefit more Americans."

"Crop protection products" - that's the industry's term for what the rest of us call pesticides and toxic chemicals.⁷ According to the chemical industry, crops would suffer dramatic losses without these chemicals, and have positioned them as a farming necessity.

Nothing could be further from the truth, of course, as you can grow healthy, thriving plants without any pesticides at all, provided you're using appropriate support strategies. I've detailed many of these strategies in previous regenerative agriculture articles.

How Junk Food Partnered with Obama's Campaign

In February 2010, Michelle Obama launched the "Let's Move" campaign, which by then had turned into something quite different from her original stance, which had been focused on raising awareness about the impact of food on health and the importance of organics.

Instead, the "Let's Move" campaign focused on "solving the challenge of childhood obesity" - primarily by getting kids to exercise more.

Riding on the coat tails of this public health campaign were messages promoting the ridiculous and clearly flawed "energy balance" model, promoted by the Global Energy Balance Network - an industry front group secretly funded by Coca-Cola.⁸

The aim of this group, which has since been disbanded,⁹ was to minimize and obfuscate the scientific evidence showing that sugar (and sweet beverages in particular) are a majorcontributor to obesity and diseases associated with insulin resistance, such as diabetes.

Arguing for more exercise is a good thing, but not when you're placing the sole focus on exercise and making people think you can exercise your way out of a high-sugar diet. The fact is, your diet can make or break your exercise efforts. Not the other way around.

Food Industry Legislation Falls by the Wayside

The "Let's Move" campaign also put an end to the first lady's push for food industry legislation. As noted by Think Progress in 2013:¹⁰

"Let's Move" has deliberately veered away from pushing actual legislation, instead focusing on personal responsibility in nutrition and fitness. That's a very different approach than the one Mrs. Obama took during the inception of her fight against childhood obesity.

In 2010, the first lady gave a fiery speech at a Grocery Manufacturers Association [GMA] conference, arguing that changing personal habits won't work if big companies like Kraft and General Mills continue to target children with misleading ads for sugary, fatty food:

'This is a shared responsibility … And we need you not just to tweak around the edges, but to entirely rethink the products that you're offering, the information that you provide about these products, and how you market those products to our children.

That starts with … ramping up your efforts to reformulate your products … so that they have less fat, salt, and sugar, and more of the nutrients that our kids need.

As a mom, I know it is my responsibility …  to raise my kids. But what does it mean when so many parents are finding that their best efforts are undermined by an avalanche of advertisements aimed at their kids? And what are these ads teaching kids about food and nutrition? That it's good to have salty, sugary food and snacks every day -  breakfast, lunch and dinner?'"

Junk Food for the People

In a recent New York Times article,¹¹ Michael Pollan expertly details the subversive influence of Big Food on Obama's presidency. Our broken food system contributes to many of our most pressing problems, including but not limited to health care costs, energy dependence, greenhouse gas emissions, antibiotic resistance and food safety. Yet the power of Big Food, in large part due to the centralization and monopolization that has occurred, effectively blocks any and all attempts at positive change.

There can be no denying that our current food system is undermining public health and is a major contributor to environmental destruction and pollution, and while on the presidential campaign trail, Barrack Obama appeared very supportive of regenerative agriculture, and seemed in favor of agricultural reform.

"In ways small and large, Obama left the distinct impression during the campaign that he grasped the food movement's critique of the food system and shared its aspirations for reforming it," Pollan writes.

Obama promised to label genetically modified organisms (GMOs), for example - a promise that was never fulfilled during his eight years in office.

He also promised to address pollution from concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) by bringing them under the authority of the federal Clean Air and Clean Water Acts - another campaign promise left unfulfilled, and there's reason to suspect that industry pressure was at play in both instances. Do you know how to tell when a politician is lying? You can see their lips moving.

Obama's Big Food Antitrust Initiative Went Nowhere

When Obama first took office, the new administration did launch an antitrust initiative, investigating potentially anticompetitive practices within several food sectors, including the poultry, dairy, cattle and seed industries.

"… [R]anchers and farmers testified to the abuses they suffered at the hands of the small number of companies to which they were forced to sell, often on unfavorable terms. In many regions … there were so few buyers for cattle that the big four meatpackers were able to dictate prices, impose unfair contracts and simply refuse to buy from ranchers who spoke out.

Chicken farmers testified about how they had been reduced to sharecroppers by the industry's contract system. Companies like Tyson and Perdue make farmers sign contracts under which the companies supply the chicks and feed and then decide how much to pay for the finished chickens based on secret formulas; farmers who object or who refuse any processor demands … no longer receive chicks, effectively putting them out of business."

After months of investigation, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) proposed new regulations to level the playing field for producers. The proposed rules specifically addressed legal recourse, making it easier for producers to sue packers for unfair practices.

Producers who complained or sued would also gain additional protection from retaliation under the new rules. The proposed legislation infuriated the meat industry, and after an intense lobbying campaign, the legislation was successfully squashed.

The antitrust initiative was also quietly dropped and never received any further attention, despite farmers' testimonies clearly having established that anticompetitive behavior was commonplace. Once again, many promises were made but in the end - the people lose and the industry wins. As noted by Pollan:

"Obama had launched the most serious government challenge to the power of Big Food since Teddy Roosevelt went after the Meat Trust a century ago, but in the face of opposition it simply evaporated."

The Four Horsemen of Agriculture Atrocities

How is it that an industry with such a clear pattern of malfeasance and wrongdoing can so successfully corrupt our politicians? Perhaps 'corrupt politicians' is a redundant phrase. According to Pollan:

"In order to follow the eight-year drama starring Big Food and both Obamas … it's important to know what Big Food is. Simply put, it is the $1.5 trillion industry that grows, rears, slaughters, processes, imports, packages and retails most of the food Americans eat."

The four proverbial horsemen that make up our food system are:

1. Industrial agriculture or "Big Ag": growers of commodity crops, GMO seed and chemical companies


2. CAFOs


3. Food processors


4. Food retailers and fast food franchises

As noted by Pollan:

"Each of these sectors is dominated by a remarkably small number of gigantic firms. According to one traditional yardstick, an industry is deemed excessively concentrated when the top four companies in it control more than 40 percent of the market.

In the case of food and agriculture, that percentage is exceeded in beef slaughter (82 percent of steers and heifers), chicken processing (53 percent), corn and soy processing (roughly 85 percent), pesticides (62 percent) and seeds (58 percent). Bayer's planned acquisition of Monsanto promises to increase concentration in both the seed and agrochemical markets."

Not only do all of these industry sectors have powerful lobbying organizations working on their behalf, they also have a large number of front groups secretly pushing the industry's agenda under various other guises. And, while these industries are sometimes at loggerheads, they all have one common enemy: The local and organic food movement.

One of the primary reasons why change is so difficult is because when these "four horsemen of agriculture" join forces, they form one formidable entity - one that Pollan refers to as "Big Food".

How Big Food Markets Junk Food to Kids

Pollan mentions Scott Faber, who in 2010 - at the time of Mrs. Obama's impassioned GMA speech in which she in no uncertain terms implored the food industry to clean up its act to protect children's health - was the chief lobbyist for the GMA. In a shocking twist, earlier this year Faber was hired by the Environmental Working Group (EWG) and represented Just Label It (JLI) during closed doors negotiations with Congress to undermine the GMO labeling effort.¹²

"The obesity epidemic 'had put a bull's-eye on the food industry's back,' Faber explained. Here was a chance to remove it, with the first lady's help," Pollan writes.

"[T]he industry adopted a clever two-track strategy to deal with the challenge laid down by the first lady. On a very public track, industry leaders engaged the foundation that she formed, the Partnership for a Healthier America, in negotiating a series of private-sector partnerships - a series of voluntary efforts that the industry hoped would help avert new regulations …

Supermarket retailers pledged to promote more healthful foods in their stores, like fresh produce … Food makers pledged to reduce harmful ingredients in processed food, like salt and sugar, while boosting healthy ingredients, like whole grains …

Michelle Obama has celebrated these partnerships as significant achievements, but do they match the ambitions of her 2010 speech, with its call for industry to do more than "tweak around the edges" and instead to "entirely rethink the products you're offering"? …

[M]aking junk food incrementally less junky is a dubious achievement at best. It tends to obscure the more important distinction between processed food of any kind and whole foods. What began as a cultural conversation about gardens and farmers markets and real food became a conversation about improved packaged foods, a shift in emphasis that surely served the interests of Big Food.

While it can be argued that this was simply a concession to reality - because most Americans eat processed foods most of the time - to give up on real food so fast was to give up a lot."

Scott Faber Takes Pride in Efforts That Destroy Children's Health

Big Food even derailed Mrs. Obama's efforts to implement voluntary guidelines for marketing foods to children, and Faber was instrumental in this industry coup as well. The guidelines, which set standards for salt, sugar and fat in processed foods marketed to kids, were "a turning point" for the food industry,

Faber told Pollan, because even though they were voluntary, they could potentially give certain popular kid foods a bad rap. The GMA decided to face the administration head on - and won without so much as a fight.

"Faber … told me he was 'frankly surprised the administration never came back with a revised set of guidelines.' Evidently the White House had lost its stomach for this particular fight. That wasn't the only one, either. In the years after, Big Food scored a series of victories over even the most reasonable attempts to rein in its excesses."

Those successes include but are not limited to:

• Preventing CAFOs from being regulated like other polluting industries


• Preventing antibiotics from being regulated out of agriculture


• Undermining the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act by getting Congress to refuse its reauthorization


• Circumventing the inclusion of CAFOs and agriculture as industries to be regulated under new, more stringent pollution standards aimed at lowering greenhouse gas emissions


• Preventing the labeling of GMOs

With clear evidence that processed junk food is responsible for childhood obesity and related health problems, Faber seems proud of his successful efforts to ensure that junk food manufacturers can continue to manipulate children with their cartoon marketing style. And as the health of Americans keep declining, he seems proud of his ability to influence politicians to ensure that toxic foods remain the status quo.

Circumventing Big Food

Big Food is a formidable opponent. There's no denying that. But we can still win; we can still steer the agricultural industry toward safer, more sustainable systems. The key is to keep supporting local farmers and choosing fresh, local produce over processed and fast food fare. Every dollar you spend pays not just for a food but for an entire food system.

There's a tipping point at which the failing system must change or perish, so it's all a numbers game, really. The more people that buy non-toxic, whole, unprocessed foods, the closer we get to that tipping point. Big Food wields great political power, but our power is our sheer numbers. If you live in the U.S., the following organizations can help you locate farm-fresh foods:

✓ EatWild.com EatWild.com provides lists of farmers known to produce wholesome raw dairy products as well as grass-fed beef and other farm-fresh produce (although not all are certified organic). Here you can also find information about local farmers markets, as well as local stores and restaurants that sell grass-fed products.

✓ Weston A. Price Foundation Weston A Price has local chapters in most states, and many of them are connected with buying clubs in which you can easily purchase organic foods, including grass fed raw dairy products like milk and butter.

✓ Grassfed Exchange The Grassfed Exchange has a listing of producers selling organic and grass-fed meats across the U.S.

✓ Local Harvest This website will help you find farmers markets, family farms, and other sources of sustainably grown food in your area where you can buy produce, grass-fed meats, and many other goodies.

✓ Farmers Markets A national listing of farmers markets.

✓ Eat Well Guide: Wholesome Food from Healthy Animals The Eat Well Guide is a free online directory of sustainably raised meat, poultry, dairy, and eggs from farms, stores, restaurants, inns, and hotels, and online outlets in the United States and Canada.

✓ Community Involved in Sustaining Agriculture (CISA) CISA is dedicated to sustaining agriculture and promoting the products of small farms.

✓ FoodRoutes The FoodRoutes "Find Good Food" map can help you connect with local farmers to find the freshest, tastiest food possible. On their interactive map, you can find a listing for local farmers, CSAs, and markets near you.

✓ The Cornucopia Institute The Cornucopia Institute maintains web-based tools rating all certified organic brands of eggs, dairy products, and other commodities, based on their ethical sourcing and authentic farming practices separating CAFO "organic" production from authentic organic practices.

✓ RealMilk.com If you're still unsure of where to find raw milk, check out Raw-Milk-Facts.com and RealMilk.com. They can tell you what the status is for legality in your state, and provide a listing of raw dairy farms in your area. The Farm to Consumer Legal Defense Fund13 also provides a state-by-state review of raw milk laws.14 California residents can also find raw milk retailers using the store locator available at www.OrganicPastures.com.

Adonit's new Snap stylus wants to upgrade your selfies

Whether it's Snapchat or iMessage, doodling is one of the more creative ways to enhance the photos you share in messaging apps. But no matter how big our phone screens get, drawing with your finger can be clumsy and awkward for anything more than a simple smiley face. 

Adonit thinks it has a solution with its new Bluetooth stylus that was created with Snapchat and other messaging apps in mind. 

SEE ALSO: Snapchat is making some big changes to Stories (again)

Called "Snap," the $34.99 stylus has a 1.9mm tip that Adonit says is among the smallest currently available. Though the 1.9mm size is the same as many of the company's other styluses, it's a big part of what supposedly makes the stylus perfect for Snapchat and other apps. Generally, the smaller the stylus tip, the finer your illustrations can be, particularly on smaller smartphone screens. Read more...

More about Stylus, Snapchat, Gadgets, and Tech

Shawnee Snake Removal

I encountered a huge snake on our deck!

We recommend Animal Solutions Pest Control for ​Snake Removal in Kansas City

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9UeJWP-aGN4

 

How legacy brands and retailers can keep up with our tech-driven world

 The U.S. apparel industry is currently valued at $12 billion, and with the high number of dollars pouring into the retail economy, brands are looking to technology to foster deeper connections with consumers and elevate the overall shopping experience. Whether it's in-store or online, technology is becoming a lever to bolster brand loyalty and customer satisfaction. Read More

Mother moose protects her calves from stalking grizzly bear

I like the way every time the mother moose turns around, the bear pretends to be paying attention to something else.

Hover-parenting is all about moral superiority, not protecting kids

(more…)

Satisfying Gluten-Free Coconut Macaroons

Recipe From Healthy Holistic Living

Subtly sweet, moist and chewy on the inside, and delectably crisp on the outside, coconut macaroons are an irresistible treat. This healthy yet delicious snack can suit your gluten-free diet, and is lactose-free too.

Here's a quick and easy gluten-free coconut macaroons recipe from Healthy Holistic Living. Try it, and an appetizing batch of these macaroons can be yours in less than half an hour!

Ingredients:

1 cup shredded, unsweetened coconut

1 Tbsp. coconut flour

½ cup plus 2 Tbsp. coconut milk

3 Tbsp. raw honey

¼ tsp. pure vanilla extract

Directions:

1. Preheat the oven to 350 degrees Fahrenheit.

2. Place parchment paper or reusable non-stick baking sheet on tray.

3. Mix all ingredients in a saucepan over high heat, and then bring down to a simmer for two minutes, or until it thickens.

4. Remove from the heat. Scoop mixture into balls and place on the baking sheet.

5. Bake until golden brown on top (five to 15 minutes, depending on your oven. Be sure to check every few minutes).

6. Allow to cool and set for several minutes, and then enjoy!

This recipe makes 10 to 12 macaroons.

Go Nuts for Coconuts With This Recipe

While coconut is considered exotic in the U.S. and most Western countries, it is a dietary staple in the Pacific islands and tropical countries. Coconut is a healthy, delicious and refreshing tropical fruit hailed for its many nutritional benefits. This recipe uses three kinds of coconut products, all of which have an impressive nutritional profile:

• Unsweetened Shredded Coconut – Also called desiccated coconut, this is a flavorful addition to a variety of foods, including pastries, soups and pies. A one-cup serving of shredded coconut gives you:

o 2.68 grams of protein

o 1.79 milligrams of iron

o 1.68 milligrams of zinc

Shredded coconut also contains essential minerals, including selenium and manganese, which both stimulate enzymes like antioxidants. Your cells need antioxidants for protection against cellular damage caused by free radicals - the common pathway for aging, tissue damage, cancer and other diseases. Selenium helps relieve arthritis symptoms by controlling free radicals and reducing the risk of joint inflammation. On the other hand, manganese promotes healthy bone structure and nerve function.

• Coconut Flour – This product is made from finely grated dried coconut meat, with a powder-like texture similar to grain flours. It has a mild coconut scent and flavor that will not overwhelm your recipes, but rather will impart a natural sweetness and rich texture. Coconut flour is light and airy, making it an ideal alternative for baking. Here are others reasons to ditch your regular flour for coconut flour:

o It's 100 percent gluten-free. Coconut flour is a healthy gluten-free alternative to wheat. Gluten is highly allergenic and can even be fatal for people with Celiac disease, a digestive and autoimmune disorder where gluten damages the lining of the small intestine, and interferes with the absorption of nutrients in food.

o Coconut flour is rich in dietary fiber. Fiber encourages proper digestion and regular bowel movements. It also helps lower cholesterol levels and improve blood sugar control. Each tablespoon of coconut flour contains 6 grams of dietary fiber per serving, which is triple the amount compared to whole flour, and almost double that of wheat bran.

o It's packed with protein. Coconut flour is exceptionally filling because it contains more protein than other flours. Protein is an essential component in rebuilding cells and maintaining healthy tissues and muscles.

o It helps regulate blood sugar level spikes. It has a lower glycemic index than regular flour, making it a healthier option for diabetics and prediabetics. The glycemic index measures how foods affect blood sugar levels - the higher the glycemic index, the greater an effect a particular food has on raising blood sugar.

However, coconut flour's composition is very different from other flours, and there are a few things to keep in mind when using it for cooking or baking:

o You cannot substitute coconut flour for wheat or other grain-based flours at a 1:1 ratio. Generally, you should use only one-quarter to one-third cup of coconut flour for every one cup of grain-based flour.

o You need to increase the number of eggs. Because coconut flour is extremely absorbent and dense, you should add in one egg per ounce of coconut flour to take the place of gluten and help bind the mixture together.

o Coconut flour is clumpy. For this reason, you should mix it thoroughly with the other ingredients in your recipe to end up with a fine-textured dough or mixture.

• Coconut milk – This is the liquid extracted from grated coconut meat. Its rich and creamy consistency makes it a scrumptious ingredient in Southeast Asian cuisine, such as for cooking curries and soups. Coconut milk is lactose-free, so it is suitable for people with lactose intolerance.

In terms of health benefits, the fatty acids in coconut milk may improve immune function because it is a good source of lauric acid, capric acid and antimicrobial lipids, which have antibacterial, antiviral and antifungal properties.

The medium-chain saturated fatty acids in coconut may help reduce your heart disease risk. These fatty acids help eradicate the three major types of atherogenic organisms, which are bacteria that cause plaque formation in the arteries.

Coconut milk may also aid weight loss on a reduced-calorie diet because it is rich in fiber, which can potentially increase your body's metabolism.

Raw Honey Adds Sweetness to This Snack

Raw honey, also touted as “liquid gold,” is a natural sweetener with many nutritional and medicinal values. A tablespoon of raw honey gives you 17 grams of carbohydrates. It is fat-free, cholesterol-free and sodium-free as well. Raw honey's natural unprocessed fructose and glucose directly goes into the bloodstream and can provide a quick boost of energy.

However, since raw honey is high in fructose (averaging around 53 percent), it should be consumed in moderation. If you have insulin resistance or are taking medications for diabetes, high cholesterol and high blood pressure, it would be wise to avoid or reduce your consumption of sweeteners, including honey.

About the Author:

Healthy Holistic Living is an independent alternative health news resource that provides innovative, alternative health-related content, resources and product information that empowers individuals to make positive change in their lives and in the world.

Third batch of Disrupt SF Hackathon tickets now available

 Disrupt SF 2016 is right around the corner, and soon thousands of the best and brightest entrepreneurs and tech enthusiasts will make their way to San Francisco's Pier 48 for the show.
But one of our favorite parts of Disrupt actually happens before the show floor opens up for the week - the Disrupt Hackathon. We're happy to announce that the third wave of tickets to the… Read More

That silly Galaxy Note7 vs. iPhone 6S speed test is meaningless

Sorry nerds, but the days of claiming "Phone X" dramatically smoking "Phone Z" are over.

Nobody cares which phone has a faster clock speed or more cores or more RAM. Speeds and feeds haven't mattered in years. 

SEE ALSO: No, the Samsung Galaxy Note7 doesn't 'need' to be cheaper than iPhone

Phones are now fast enough to do all of the daily tasks like web browsing, messaging, email, playing music, taking photos, playing games, etc., that a speed test only tells one increasingly meaningless part of the user-experience story.

There's a speed test video from Phonebuff making the rounds that pits Samsung's new Galaxy Note7 and the iPhone 6S in an app-launching race. Read more...

More about Speed Test, Iphone 6s, Apple, Galaxy Note 7, and Samsung

A pocket-sized power bank that'll help your laptop stay alive

 I've lived through a lot of liveblogs in my life, mostly by the skin of my teeth, desperately watching as my battery ticks down, hoping desperately that the company is nearing the finish line.
Of course, the fact that both my personal work computers sometimes feel like they're on their last legs doesn't help much, but the fact remains: there are few things in this life as… Read More

Why Are Vaccine Rights Being Removed While Safety Issues Are Increasingly Brought to the Fore?

By Dr. Mercola

As noted by Barbara Loe Fisher,¹ founder of the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC), July Fourth celebrates the American Declaration of Independence, which asserts that "all men are created equal," and are "endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights."

Unwilling to submit to the tyranny of the aristocracy any longer, the Declaration is a pledge, promising that the United States would uphold the "unalienable natural right to life and liberty that belongs to every person."

Yet today, 240 years later, we again find ourselves in a situation where we're increasingly oppressed by an elite "who want the legal right to judge, shame, segregate, discriminate against and punish fellow citizens who do not share their beliefs," Fisher writes, adding:

"Nowhere is this truth more self evident than in the oppressive implementation of one-size-fits-all mandatory vaccination laws that fail to respect biodiversity or human rights and crush citizen opposition, in violation of the informed consent ethic and freedom of thought, speech, conscience and religious belief ...

The appropriation of unaccountable authority by medical trade and the militarization of public health in the 21st century should be of concern to every person who values life and liberty."

Vaccines Are 'Unavoidably Unsafe'

Both the U.S. Congress and the Supreme Court have concluded that government licensed vaccines are "unavoidably unsafe,"² and this is what precipitated the decision to grant drug companies immunity against vaccine injuries and deaths.

If vaccine makers could actually be sued for damages, most would probably go out of business.

This "free pass" means that if the vaccine fails to protect you or your child, or worse, ends up injuring or killing, you cannot sue the vaccine manufacturer or the doctor who administered the vaccine. 

As a result of having zero liability for harm arising from the use of their products, vaccine makers have started churning out an ever-growing number of poorly tested vaccines with dubious benefits.

Bill Threatens to Strip Virginia of Religious and Medical Exemptions

At the same time, there's a concerted, nationwide effort to eliminate choice by removing religious and conscientious [sic] vaccine exemptions, which were instituted more than 50 years ago.

"[In] 2015, Vermont lost the conscience exemption and California lost the personal belief exemption protecting both exercise of conscience and religious beliefs. This year, the vaccine machine invaded Virginia," Fisher writes.³

"A proposed law was introduced in the House of Delegates in January 2016 to strip away not just the religious vaccine exemption, but also the medical exemption for all children, whether they are being homeschooled or are enrolled in public or private schools.

An individual physician would no longer exercise professional judgment when granting a child a medical exemption but would become a government agent enforcing the narrow one-size-fits all federal vaccine contraindication guidelines ... which means that 99.99 percent of children would not qualify for the medical vaccine exemption in Virginia."

Fortunately, parents in Virginia rose up and were able to suppress the bill. But it may be only a temporary victory. Similar legislation is expected to be reintroduced next year.

Interestingly, not only does Virginia have one of the lowest vaccine exemption rates in the U.S., Virginia is also "hallowed ground where freedom of thought, conscience and religion [were] first defined as a natural right and [were] codified into American law," Fisher notes.

Virginia's history as a leading defender of religious and personal rights is likely one of the reasons they're now trying to undermine personal and religious freedom in that state with the most restrictive anti-choice law of any state to date.

Lawsuit Filed to Overturn California Vaccine Requirements

Despite overwhelming opposition, California lost the personal belief exemption last year. The new law took effect on July 1.

That same day, a group of parents and the nonprofit Education 4 All filed a lawsuit to overturn the new law, which requires all children to be fully vaccinated in order to attend public or private school and/or daycare.

Parents who refuse to vaccinate their child according to the mandated schedule have only two options: they can try to get a medical exemption, which is extremely difficult and rarely obtained, or home-school their child.

Any child who previously attended school under a personal belief exemption must be fully vaccinated by kindergarten and seventh grade to be allowed to stay in school.

According to CBS News,⁴ the lawsuit says "the law violates the children's right to an education as guaranteed under California's constitution, and asks for a judge to suspend the law while the suit plays out."

The plaintiff's attorney, Robert T. Moxley, said the law "has made second class citizens out of children who for very compelling reasons are not vaccinated," adding they hope to be granted an injunction "while the judicial process takes place to see if this law is constitutional, which it most certainly does not seem to be."

Forced Vaccinations Are Unethical and Dangerous

In a recent article for congressional blog The Hill, Gretchen DuBeau, executive director for Alliance for Natural Health USA (ANH-USA), writes:⁵

"When health officials assure us that almost all children should receive the full schedule of vaccinations, you would think that rigorous safety testing has repeatedly proven vaccines, their ingredients and the CDC schedule to be completely safe.

The sobering truth is, however, that this safety testing has been conspicuously lacking and in many cases simply has not been done. Until these extremely serious safety concerns are adequately addressed, it is unethical - and very possibly dangerous - to force children to be vaccinated.

Take aluminum, for example, which has been added to vaccines since the 1930s to help jolt the body's immune system into action.

Aluminum is a well-documented neurotoxin linked with Alzheimer's disease, epilepsy, asthma, hyperactivity and Down's syndrome. Despite these dangers, adequate clinical research proving aluminum adjuvants to be safe has never been done."

Indeed, it is the lack of evidence of safety that concerns most parents who decide to delay or forgo one or more vaccinations for their children. They're not doing it out of some misplaced desire to rebel against authority.

But rather than conducting the necessary research to settle these uncertainties, the vaccine industry has chosen to simply push for forced vaccinations instead. And why not? Forced vaccination guarantees maximum profits since there are no repercussions should their vaccines turn out to do more harm than good.

Assumptions and Comparing Apples to Oranges Are Not Good Science

DuBeau goes on to talk about how the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) set the limit on the amount of aluminum allowed in vaccines, saying this limit is not based on safety studies but rather on the amount required to boost vaccine effectiveness. The agency is simply assuming the current levels are safe, based on inappropriate data.

The safety level for orally ingested aluminum was set by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) based on rat studies. However, while the EPA's minimum risk level is used to justify aluminum adjuvants in vaccines, you really cannot compare orally ingested aluminum and intra-muscularly injected aluminum. These two routes of administration do not produce the same health effects. As noted by DuBeau:

"[I]ngesting aluminum orally, where only about 0.25 percent is absorbed and then filtered by the kidneys, is very different than injecting it directly into muscle, where it may be absorbed at nearly 100 percent efficiency over time and can accumulate in organs, including the brain.

This complete lack of evidence proving the safety of aluminum adjuvants in vaccines is unacceptable and should concern any parent who trusts health authorities with the safety of their children."

Many Scientists Have Raised Concerns About Potential Vaccine Dangers

DuBeau takes a strong stand against California's mandatory vaccination law (SB 277), calling it "ill-advised," as it mandates dosing all school-aged children with a dangerous metal known to have neurological effects. She also points out that the scientific community is nowhere near as unanimous as proponents of SB 277 and other forced vaccination laws would like you to believe.

"Many doctors and researchers have raised serious concerns about vaccine ingredients like aluminum," she writes. "Animal studies, for instance, have demonstrated a link between repeated inoculation with aluminum-containing vaccines and severe neurobehavioral outcomes ... and altered expression of certain genes in the brain.

According to DuBeau, children who get all of the vaccines on the CDC's schedule may receive as much as 4,225 micrograms of aluminum in their first year of life. "To put this in perspective," she says, "the animals mentioned above were given an aluminum dose in a range that is nearly comparable to what children on the CDC schedule receive. This should give us all pause."

Also consider this: the amount of aluminum injected into a newborn baby via the hepatitis B vaccine equates to an adult getting 10 doses of the vaccine in one day, when you consider the difference in weight between the two.

In order for an adult to get the same amount of aluminum per kilo of weight that a child receives at the age of 2 months, the adult would have to get 34 adult doses of the hepatitis B vaccine in one day. Does it really seem reasonable or wise to inject that hefty a dose of aluminum into a baby?

Doctor Highlights Risks and Excessive Cost of HPV Vaccine

One medical doctor raising concerns about vaccine hazards is Gary G. Kohls, who is now retired. In a recent article,⁶ he responds to a commentary in the News Tribune, "written and endorsed by area board-certified pediatricians, oncologists and obstetricians/gynecologists," who promote "the universal use of the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine for pre-teen and teen-age girls."

According to Kohls, "the commentary appeared to be a part of a worldwide, billion-dollar promotion campaign," to encourage women around the world to get vaccinated, and financing this campaign is "one of the most profitable, price-gouging pharmaceutical companies in the world, Merck."

"In 2006, after only three to five years of clinical trials, the FDA approved for marketing the most expensive vaccine in the history of the world, Gardasil, which has been proclaimed as preventative for cancer of the cervix, a claim that was never proved and which has, to date, not prevented a single case of cervical cancer ... mainly because cancer of the cervix takes 20 to 50 years to develop," he writes.

The only thing these short-term industry-funded studies showed was that the vaccine "produced transient anti-HPV immune complexes in most of the young female vaccine recipients." They also found "modest reductions in the development of abnormal Pap smears." However, it's well known that 90 percent of all HPV infections clear up on their own within two years anyway, so that's hardly a medical breakthrough.

Kohls notes that the antigens in Gardasil and GlaxoSmithKline's version of the HPV vaccine, Cervarix, are "genetically engineered proteins that, thanks to the neurotoxic aluminum adjuvant in each dose, can cause serious autoimmune disorders and unknown levels of potentially serious mitochondrial damage."

'Number Needed to Treat' Statistic Reveals Risks and Cost of HPV Vaccine Far Outweigh Alleged Benefit

The HPV vaccines are also exorbitantly priced, costing approximately $140 for three doses, plus office visit charges. According to Kohls, the News Tribune commentary bore all the hallmarks of an industry campaign, including all the standard talking points. Missing entirely was any mention of the potential downsides and risks of the HPV vaccines, and without this information, how can a parent or young woman make a fully informed decision?

Kohls goes on to discuss the statistical measure known as "Number Needed to Treat" (NNT), which is a simple way to relate the effectiveness of any given treatment. A drug's NNT tells you how many people have to receive the drug in order for one person to benefit from it.

"For instance, the NNT for a course of penicillin for penicillin-sensitive streptococcal pharyngitis is one, meaning that one cure occurs for every one course of treatment. If a treatment results in only half of patients benefitting, the NNT is two (the inverse of the fraction 1/2). The smaller the NNT, the more beneficial the treatment," he explains.

"An article published in the Canadian Medical Association Journal (CMAJ) ...  stated that for Gardasil, the Number Needed to Vaccinate (same principle as the NNT) to prevent four or five cases of cervical cancer for a typical 12-year-old girl would be 9,080, meaning that 9,075 girls would be risking the serious adverse health consequences of Gardasil ... while still not receiving the alleged benefit, the prevention of cervical cancer." [Emphasis mine]

Neither doctors nor patients are informed about NNT statistics, yet this can be a very important treatment consideration. In Kohl's view, the cost of the HPV vaccine, both in terms of dollars and cents and their potential adverse health effects "come nowhere near outweighing the alleged benefit."

It's very unusual for a doctor to come out with such strong views. Most would do so under the threat of potentially losing their medical license. However, Kohl is retired, so he doesn't have to fret about that possibility, which may be why he's able to be so outspoken in the first place.

Complaint Filed Over European HPV Vaccine Assessment

Kohls is not the only one expressing concerns over the way the HPV vaccine is being pushed while risks are overlooked. On May 26, the Nordic Cochrane Center, which is part of Cochrane, an international network considered the gold standard within the evidence-based medical model for assessing the effectiveness of common medical interventions, filed a complaint with the European Medicines Agency (EMA), questioning the EMA's 2015 Assessment Report on the safety of HPV vaccines. In the 19-page letter to the EMA, Cochrane Nordic Center writes:⁷

"We are concerned about the EMA's handling of this issue as reflected in its official report and ask the EMA to assess:

1. Whether the EMA has been open and accountable to the citizens and has respected their rights to know about the uncertainties related to the safety of the HPV vaccines.

2. Whether the EMA has lived up to the professional and scientific standards that must be expected of the agency to guarantee that the administration enjoys legitimacy when evaluating the science and the data related to the safety of the HPV vaccines.

3. Whether the EMA has treated fairly - in a manner that guarantees that the administration enjoys legitimacy - a Danish whistleblower, Dr. Louise Brinth, when she raised concerns about possible serious harms of the HPV vaccines.

4. Whether the EMA has treated fairly ... the observations and concerns the Danish Health and Medicines Authorities and the Uppsala Monitoring Centre had raised about possible serious harms of the HPV vaccines.

5. Whether the EMA's procedures for evaluating the safety of medical interventions guarantee that the administration enjoys legitimacy. The EMA asked the manufacturers of the vaccines to assess potential harms of their own products in which they have huge financial interests.

6. Whether the extreme secrecy, with life-long confidentiality agreements, which the EMA imposed on its working group members and scientific experts, is needed; is legitimate; is in the public interest; and guarantees that the administration enjoys legitimacy.

7. Whether the redactions the EMA imposed on documents it delivered to the citizens according to Freedom of Information requests were needed; were legitimate; are in the public interest; and guarantees that the administration enjoys legitimacy.

8. Whether the EMA has behaved in a manner that guarantees that the administration enjoys legitimacy in relation to declaring conflicts of interest. We noticed a Guido Rasi's name associated with patents for inventions and wonder whether this is the same person who is the EMA's director.

If so, we believe Rasi has failed to declare his conflicts of interest. We also believe that the rapporteur for the EMA's report, Julie Williams, has failed to declare her conflicts of interest.

9. Whether the EMA behaves in a manner that guarantees that the administration enjoys legitimacy when the agency use experts with financial ties to the manufacturers, in particular considering that it is always possible to find experts without such conflicts.

10. In the interest of transparency, we urge the EMA to ensure that the names of all the experts consulted are disclosed together with their conflict of interest declarations ... "

Functional Disorders Linked to HPV Vaccine

According to Cochrane Nordic Center, the EMA ignored significant data showing there may be severe adverse events associated with the HPV vaccine, "the prominent symptoms, which are suspected of being caused by the vaccine," bearing strong similarities to functional disorders such as:

• Chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS)


• Postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS)


• Chronic regional pain syndrome (CRPS)

According to the complaint, "the hypothetical mechanism is an autoimmune reaction triggered by either the active component of the vaccine or the adjuvant in the vaccine."

Cochrane also claims the EMA's internal 256-page report, which served as the basis for the draft of its 40-page official report, contradicts the final report. "We find that the EMA's comments are unprofessional, misleading, inappropriate and pejorative, and that the EMA's approach involves cherry-picking, which is unscientific," Cochrane writes.

Cochrane also notes that the Uppsala centre compared adverse events reported following HPV vaccination and vaccination with all other vaccines given to women. Based on their findings, it would appear the HPV vaccine carries a FAR higher risk of severe side effects than any other vaccine, yet the EMA claims no conclusions could be drawn from this data:

• POTS was reported 82 times for HPV vaccines versus once for other vaccines


• CRPS was reported 69 times for HPV vaccines versus 16 for other vaccines


• Autonomic nervous system imbalance was reported 77 times versus 16 for others


• Fibromyalgia was reported 62 times for HPV versus 39 for other vaccines

FluMist Found to Be Worthless Against Influenza

In related news, The Washington Post⁸ recently wrote about the "mystery" of why FluMist suddenly stopped working. Until recently, the spray form of the flu vaccine was preferred over the injectable flu vaccine for children between the ages of 2 and 8. FluMIst is a live attenuated vaccine, meaning it contains a live but weakened version of the flu virus.

In June, a CDC advisory panel decided the nasal spray "was so ineffective that it should not be used by anyone during the 2016 to 2017 season," The Washington Post reports. Data from last winter's flu season revealed FluMist was only 3 percent effective among children aged 2 to 17. This is yet another instance where almost everyone who received the vaccine risked their health for what amounts to no potential benefit whatsoever.

According to Dr. David Kimberlin, a professor of pediatrics at The University of Alabama at Birmingham (UAB), the reason for FluMist's failure is still not understood. Researchers at MedImmune, the makers of FluMist, are trying to determine the cause. As noted by The Washington Post:

"In any given flu season, vaccine effectiveness varies. One factor is how well the vaccines match the virus that is actually prevalent. Other factors include the age and general health of the recipient.

In the overall population, the CDC says studies show vaccines can reduce the risk of flu by about 50 to 60 percent when the vaccines are well matched. Now, researchers are trying to find a common factor behind FluMist's recent incidents of poor performance."

One of the questions researchers will attempt to answer include whether the flu vaccine may lose effectiveness when given to a child who has been previously vaccinated against influenza several times.

What does all of this tell you? In my view, it speaks loud and clear to the fact that vaccine makers really don't know as much about their product as they purport to know. Yet despite this lack of knowledge, they insist vaccines are beneficial and worth just about any risk to the individual in order to protect society at large.

After five years, Juno arrives in orbit around Jupiter

 After traveling five years through the solar system, Juno has finally reached its destination and is currently in orbit around Jupiter, traveling nearly 250,000 kilometers per hour (150,000 mph). Read More