Friday, July 25, 2014

Secrets of the CIA! (Part 2)

The CIA’s Global Torture Operations: Disclosure under Barack Obama, the Most Secretive President in U.S. History
By Joachim Hagopian
Global Research, July 24, 2014
Url of this article:
Journalist Mai Bei, (Yahoo News) is reminding America of its recent dark past vis-à-vis that longtime rogue agency the CIA’s global torture operations during that rogue regime of the Bush administration.
The plot thickens with the Senate Intelligence Committee strongly in favor of declassifying its five years in the making, 6,700 page report bringing to light in graphic criminal detail the plethora of Geneva Convention and international law violations committed by overzealous CIA henchmen in their quest to torture information out of thousands of detainees the world over "fighting" America’s so called war on terror. Today’s article attempts to create high drama Washington-style by hyping up anticipation of an executive-legislative showdown between how much of the CIA’s dastardly deeds should be disclosed to the waiting American public.
Pressure is mounting on our current beleaguered president known for his disastrous foreign policy on the heels of the exact same disastrous foreign policy launched by the war criminal neocons before him. As a recent backdrop leading to this latest theatrical release of government-gone-bad is the back and forth sniping charges between the Senate Intelligence Committee and the CIA, both accusing the other of illegal spying.
Committee Chair Diane Feinstein (D-CA) had long been cozy with protecting CIA secrecy and criminality right until she learned that Director John Brennan’s CIA was busily violating her committee’s privacy. She had no problem with the American public’s privacy constantly violated in act after unconstitutional act or for that matter any world citizen’s right to life being destroyed in the name of national security. But her ire was hypocritically provoked when the CIA no doubt got up too close and personal on her naked body politic and she did not like it one bit.
Then lest we forget we had President Obama campaigning on the promise once Bush was gone to be the most open, honest and transparent presidency in US history. What does he do? He proceeds to become the most secretive president in US history, racking up more cover-up scandals, more charges of espionage, more press harassment and more denials of Freedom of Information Act requests than all previous presidents combined! A Time Magazine article earlier this year noted: "The administration cited national security concerns a record 8,496 times as an excuse for withholding information from the public, a 57% increase from the year before." Barrack Obama has given a whole new meaning to the expression "double-speak," raising it to rarefied heights even his court jesting predecessor filled with his bumbling rendition of boldface lies and deception could never outdo. The man that raised not just America’s hopes but the entire world has the record of a proven imposter and fraudulent traitor to the American people.
But then his oligarch puppet masters are not just pulling his strings but all three treasonous branches of government as well. The joke of a corrupt and oligarch owned two party system lining its greedy pockets with the three ring circus of shadowy, shady lobbyists, Congress and think tank provocateurs, slithering amorally in and out of public life all to ensure that their puppet masters are fully obeyed and loyalty to them at all cost is maintained. The ideological dogma-quagmire of Republicans versus Democrats’ buffoonery is mere slight of hand, carefully orchestrated design. Meanwhile, the cherry picked judicial branch from the Supreme Court on down ensures every key decision pays homage to their masters as well.
So with everything so stacked against the lowly public citizens whose Constitution they lied under oath to protect, every branch of US government holds Americans in bold, in-our-face contempt. Why is there even a question being raised by a mainstream press insider about disclosure of criminal CIA behavior when even a half awake public already knows the score – secrecy in the name of national security rules the world. Theft in the name of national security rules the world. And death and destruction all around the world in the name of American Empire security.
The pretense of intergovernmental conflict over throwing a bone of reality to a truth-starved public is an affront to Americans’ intelligence. And even more insulting is the implicit reasoning that would have us citizens concluding that just because illicit torture never even worked as far as providing any relevant or useful information that helped the US "win" its war on terror, the biggest lie is asserting that torture because it was so against the law no longer is even happening just because our President says so.
Then this so called issue of invoking Senate Resolution 400 passed in 1976 creating the Senate Intel Committee has only been feebly threatened in the past to finagle grandstanding leverage against former presidents to nudge them a little closer toward honesty with the public. But not once has this little known provision been formally used and implemented to out a president on any real full and honest disclosure. It afforded the Senate the power to declassify information without the president’s approval. Though the stage is being set to send mainstream media into fulltime speculation spin, with such statements from today’s article as: "If the president didn’t object in writing within five days, the full Senate would then weigh the report in closed session and vote on whether to unilaterally declassify it."
But of course full declassification is precisely what is always avoided at all cost. Beyond the veneer of superficial appearance, the executive and legislative branches have always covertly worked their shady backroom deals out privately amongst themselves, far removed from the public eye of awareness, much less accountability, and that’s of course how it will stay.
Again Bai’s article makes reference that Obama will most likely reveal his heavily censored version of a generalized, ultra-brief summary that the CIA during the neocon regime engaged in some distasteful behaviors, slipping it by Americans busily "tanning themselves at the beach this summer." What is most certain is Obama’s loyal deference to more secrecy in the name of national security ad nauseum.
And as such, those 6700 pages of colorful twisted accounts of such criminal barbarism as water boarding victims to death by drowning, ripping out their fingernails, electrocuting their gonads, those kind of unsavory details will in good taste be conveniently omitted. One more sure thing prediction to come out of all this when our psychopathic president does finally go through the motions of public disclosure. He will promise (which in double-speak means lie) that no US agency now resorts to such inhumane internationally outlawed practices of torture under his clean-cut watch.
Please Mr. President, spare us, for we know better. You are enshrouded in deceit up to your ears, and so is your entire government enshrouded in deceit as the American public is on to you like never before.
So as the apartheid US Empire allows its apartheid Israeli ally to genocide Palestinians in Gaza while trumping up another false flag with Putin and his east Ukrainian cronies downing that Malaysian flight, we are all reminded of the false flag evoked nearly a year ago when you Mr. President and your three blind henchman Kerry, Hagel and Dempsey fell on your faces trying to convince the world that Syria’s Assad launched that gas attack in the Damascus suburb.
We saw through your lies then and will see through them again. You have no credibility left with the American public, much less the world. Your ploy to obediently ignite World War III per oligarch order to get to Iran through Syria on your way past Russia and China is the only thing transparent about your presidency.
Joachim Hagopian is a West Point graduate and former US Army officer. He has written a manuscript based on his unique military experience entitled "Don’t Let The Bastards Getcha Down." It examines and focuses on US international relations, leadership and national security issues. After the military, Joachim earned a masters degree in Clinical Psychology and worked as a licensed therapist in the mental health field for more than a quarter century. He now concentrates on his writing.
Copyright © 2014 Global Research
Also See:Are Suspicious 'Suicides' Really Government Murders? (Part 1)
21 January 2013
(Part 2)
25 March 2013
The Media is Controled by Mega-Corporations!
(Part 2)
19 December 2013
Secrets of the CIA!
(Part 1)
10 June 2012
Remember the 1960s?
20 April 2008

Thursday, July 24, 2014

The Wonderful World of Cell Phones! (Part 2)

Cellphone use for half hour a day linked to tripled brain cancer risk, French researchers suggest
May 14, 2014
Heavy cellphone users — i.e. those who use their phones for a half hour or longer per day — over a 5-year period had higher rates of brain tumours than those who used the devices less often, a new French study says.

Using a cellphone for more than half an hour a day over five years can triple the risk of developing certain types of brain cancer, a French study suggests.
Researchers found that people who used mobiles for 15 hours per month on average had a two to three times greater risk of developing glioma and meningioma — the main types of brain tumour — compared with those who used their phone rarely.
The findings, by researchers at Bordeaux University, supported other international studies, suggesting a "higher threat of a brain tumour observed solely among heavier [mobile phone] users."
While a string of studies have failed to find conclusive proof of a link between mobile use and
cancer, several have suggested intensive, long-term use can raise the likelihood of contracting
Isabelle Baldi, one of the scientists who led the French research, published in the British journal Occupational and Environmental Medicine, said: "Our study is part of that trend, but the results have to be confirmed." Researchers examined 253 cases of glioma and 194 cases of meningioma reported in four French departments, or counties, between 2004 and 2006.
These patients were compared with 892 "controls," or healthy individuals.
The comparison found a higher risk among those who used their phone intensively, especially those who used it for their work, such as in the sales industry. The duration of use in this category ranged from between two and 10 years, averaging at five years.
‘It is difficult to define a level of risk … as the technology is constantly evolving’
There were, however, unexplained anomalies. In contrast with previous research, the study found that cancer occurred on the opposite side of the brain to where the phone was habitually used, rather than on the same side.
"It is difficult to define a level of risk, if any, especially as mobile phone technology is constantly evolving," the study conceded.
"The rapid evolution of technology has led to a considerable increase in the use of mobile phones and a parallel decrease of [radiowave intensity] emitted by the phones.
"Studies taking account of these recent developments and allowing the observation of potential long-term effects will be needed."
In 2011, the International Agency for Research on Cancer warned that radiofrequency fields used by mobile phones were possibly carcinogenic.
The largest study to date on the risks of mobile phone use, the 2010 Interphone study, found no raised risk of brain tumours among those who regularly used mobiles.
What's More Important -- Your Cell Phone Or Your Brain?
Dr. Mercola
May 20, 2008
By Enrico Grani (with Paul Doyon)
"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident." -- Arthur Schopenhauer
My name is Enrico Grani and I presently live in Australia. I used cell phones for ten-plus years extensively on-and-off, and because of this I developed a brain

In 2007, about one week before my birthday, I was diagnosed with a 3 cm by 4 cm brain tumor. I had a stroke (my first one) the previous year in late November 2006. An MRI examination revealed a brain tumor in the area of my brain next to my ear where I always used my cell phone -- in the exact position where the cell phone’s antenna was located.
My goal here is to try to make you and your loved ones aware of the extreme dangers posed by these microwave-emitting devices. Please read about my experience carefully and thoroughly, and please do not make the same mistakes that I have made.
Rationalizations Won’t Save You
My father told me constantly that cell phones were very dangerous and that I would get a brain tumor. We actually had many big arguments because of my cell phone use. I would say "Yeah, Yeah, Papa, what do you know about cell phones anyway?" It went in one ear and out the other.
I rationalized that I needed this cell phone for my business. What I didn’t understand was the terrible price I would pay. I thought that if I exercised and ate healthy food, that I would be able to reverse the negative effects -- if there were any at all! After all, we were ALL told that cell phones posed no risk to our health. Remember?
I was very wrong. Cell phones are much more dangerous than anyone can possibly imagine. By just owning one of these devices, you are paying the cell-phone industry -- you are giving them the power to destroy your life -- and to make an increasing number of people sick. To think that I have paid the cell-phone industry thousands of dollars over the years to get a brain tumor (which has completely destroyed my life) sickens me.
I would gladly trade in all my money (which isn’t much now) and every single material possession I have for the chance to have my brain function restored. I was foolish!
Please don’t make the same mistake. Your brain is much more precious than the device called a cell phone. If you don’t believe this after reading this completely then there is no hope for you, and you will find out the hard way just like I have.
There’s No Customer Service When You’re Dying

Remember one thing, when you get a brain tumor from cell-phone use and you nearly die as a result, ring up the cell-phone shop and you will see how quickly they hang up on you.
All the smiles you remember in the shop -- going through all the models with the sales people -- are gone, and now you are totally alone in a world of pain, torment, and humiliation.
"Brain Tumor Day"

After I had my first stroke, my left arm became paralyzed and I now have severe cognitive difficulties, and problems with fine-motor movement in my hand. The brain tumor was situated in the right parietal lobe -- exactly in the position where I used the cell phone.
I was diagnosed one week before my 40th birthday with a meningioma brain tumor. I was so shocked my legs went weak. This was a birthday present that I will never forget -- ever! My birthday will always be remembered as "Brain Tumor Day." I can no longer work as I am disabled, but this does not mean that I cannot make you aware, so that you or your loved ones never endure my fate.
All I can do now with my life is to try and increase awareness of this serious problem.
Nothing Left to Do But Spread the Word

Thanks to the help of some good friends, scientists, epidemiologists, and a few doctors, I have been able to learn so much about the severe dangers posed by cell phones, cell-phone base stations, and the increasing levels of ambient electromagnetic radiation (EMR) permeating our living environments.
If we don’t do something about this now, I believe firmly, as do many renowned scientists, that this is posing a severe threat to all life on this planet.
There is growing evidence that the drastic disappearance of frogs, insects, and birds -- and now food production -- is connected to the growing microwave radiation permeating our environment. What I am trying to say here is that we are seriously looking at extinction as a species if something isn’t done soon -- if people continue to remain complacent and in denial about this problem because of another related problem -- the selfishness, greed, and stupidity infecting our way of life.
If we remain ignorant and uneducated about the seriousness of this situation, then many people, children, animals, and all life forms will gradually become sick and die. It has already started to happen!
Who Do You Trust?

I now sincerely wish that I had seriously listened to my father -- but I was really stupid. Now that I know what I know, I know that I have made a big mistake in trusting the cell-phone industry and my government to protect me against this danger.
After all, everyone was using them and they seemed OK. If I had had a better understanding of two things -- (1) the effects of electromagnetic radiation, and (2) the blatant irresponsibility of a government bought and paid for by an industry blinded by senseless greed -- I would never have encountered this sad fate.
Being disabled is very hard for me to deal with, as it complicates every aspect of what is left of my life. However, knowing now that my disability could have been prevented, knowing now that numerous scientific studies years ago had already shown cell-phone radiation causes DNA damage and brain tumor development, knowing now that these scientific studies were completely ignored because of industry greed many years ago prior to my tumor, and knowing now that it could have been prevented, is even harder for me to deal with emotionally.
Now I want to tell you all that I firmly believe that cell-phone use was the cause of my brain tumor. And I pray you don‘t think that you are the lucky, untouchable one!
I pray that you don‘t think you are immune to this either! Electromagnetic Radiation (EMR) does not discriminate. If you use a cell phone, the chances of you also getting a brain tumor, not to mention all kinds of other serious health problems, are extremely high.
My goal here is not to scare you, but rather to give you the cold hard facts -- facts that you may not know about and facts that you need to be aware of.
Brain Tumors are On the Rise

In the past few years there has been a drastic increase in the number of people getting brain tumors (not to mention other cancers and disease states like Autism, ADHD, CFIDS and so on). Brain tumors are now the number-one cause of death in children in Australia and the United States (and I imagine many other countries also).
It is now being predicted by epidemiologists that within the next ten years we will see at least a 1,000 percent increase in this disease state. A major brain-tumor epidemic is just around the corner. It saddens my heart to watch all the children with their cell phones glued to their ears; they have no idea what they are in for in years to come. This should not be happening, but it is and it is a serious crime against humanity being committed by humanity itself. I seriously believe this now!
My life has been completely destroyed. I have seizures nearly all the time now and it is extremely painful to experience these; it feels as if I am being electrocuted over and over again, with the flesh peeling off my bones. It took me over two months to learn how to walk again. However, I am a fighter and I always will be!
Systemic Genocide Against Humanity

I have always tried to take good care of my health and I was always very conscious of the importance of my body and mental strength, as I am quite a fitness buff. I just wasn’t aware how seriously dangerous cell phones actually were. I really just wanted to quickly recover after having the tumor removed from my brain and I was exercising, lifting weights, and leg pressing twice my body weight, as soon as I could walk again. I just wanted my health back, and to be able to work again and regain the lifestyle I once had!
However, having said that, I am still suffering drastically because of this. What the phone companies did to me with their lies and their greed is a crime that should never have been allowed to happen.
What will happen to an increasing number of people can only be considered as "Systematic Genocide Against Humanity."
I know it and many other people know it too. Unfortunately, not enough people want to believe it -- until of course something like this happens to them. It is as if they are drug-addict zombies in a trance -- addicted to their cell phones. The only difference here being is that the cell phone is the new "Electromagnetic Drug." This is what the cell-phone industry wants and has seemingly planned and now totally achieved.
The First Hit is Free

Why would a cell-phone company make you sign a contract and then give you "free" minutes? Sounds to me like what a "drug pusher" would do.
As the saying goes "nothing is for nothing." Free minutes "equals" more time on the cell phone, "equals" addiction, "equals" a brain tumor, cancer, disability, allergies, feeling unwell, plus once you are addicted your "free minutes" are quickly all used up and then you will pay even more to your cell-phone company.
The cell-phone companies are killing us and no one seems to have a clue about what is really going on -- or they are so addicted to their cell phones that most don’t seem to care.
No one can deny that cell phones caused my brain tumor, except perhaps the unethical liars bought and paid for by the cell-phone industry. No matter how much proof you submit, they will deny it to no end, backed by their highly paid unethical lawyers, who have no soul! It’s totally disgusting. These people have sold their souls for money and gold, at the expense of the health of people worldwide!
It is time for me to go public with this and I suggest that if you (or someone that you know) are in the same or a similar situation that you go public as well. I am not scared of the cell-phone industry because I have a soul filled with love for humanity. They have no soul at all, or they would not be doing this to us!
Placing cell-phone towers next to people’s homes and nearby children‘s schools, and selling cell phones to young children when it is a known fact that a child‘s skull is thinner than an adult‘s, and a child‘s brain is not fully developed and is damaged greatly by cell phone use, is completely unethical and irresponsible.
The cell-phone industry, while completely aware of these facts, still -- blinded by greed, it seems -- engage in this ironically legal "Crime Against Humanity." I really don’t care if they try to kill me, harass me, or whatever else they may try to do to me. Sure, they have so much money, and I have none. So what? At least I am a human being with dignity and a conscience -- and that is much more than I can say about them.
I was in a coma for three days, I had three strokes, and I had a good portion of by brain cut out of my head. What more needs to be said? How could I possibly be scared of them?
My life is garbage and I know many other people that have been seriously affected from all walks of life. Once a person has cheated death as many times as I have, then one no longer holds any fear of anyone or anything. I just want to get this story out to the public and hopefully from reading about my experience some people’s lives can be spared from fates similar to mine. My only goal in life right now is to save life through educating people about my experience.
Mass Media Avoids the Truth Like the Plague

I have approached many TV stations here in Australia and none of them have wanted to touch my story. It seems to me that they are also bought and paid for by the cell-phone industry. This is not hard to believe either.
How many people must die before this situation with the electromagnetic radiation (EMR) is taken seriously in my country and given the worldwide coverage that it deserves? I suppose many people are fearful of losing their jobs by speaking out. All I can say to these people is that when they are in a wheel chair and can no longer work it’s "You had the chance to speak out but chose to remain silent."
Should it be Considered Premeditated Murder?

It really makes me extremely angry because it is the children, with their lives still ahead of them, who are going to suffer the most because of this. The children‘s brains and immune systems are still in a process of development. The cell-phone industry, fully ignoring this fact, manipulates children into purchasing a cell phone by using Mickey Mouse designs on the phones to get the child‘s attention.
All I can say is that this is "premeditated murder." What else can it be called when they are fully aware from all the data, facts, and studies (except the ones they have manipulated) by an army of ethical scientists and researchers out there saying that these things are dangerous!
You May be Affected But Attribute it to Other Things

This microwave radiation is destroying people’s lives and most people do not even realize this because it seems that they are attributing their symptoms to other things.
It is difficult for people to realize that something they can‘t sense with their senses -- see, touch, taste, smell, or hear -- is harmful, and most don’t even imagine that this is indeed the cause of their symptoms.
Not even the doctors are aware of the problem it seems, and if they are, most are keeping their mouths shut (for fear of losing their jobs). The cell phone companies are making staggering amounts of money, the pharmaceutical companies are making money, and doctors and hospitals are making money. And as long as they are all making money, it seems as if everyone is happy -- until of course they also get sick!
I spent approximately $4,000 AUS dollars on my cell-phone bills in 1996. I still can’t believe that I gave those Criminals all that money and I don’t expect that they will ever pay me back any of it either.
In the initial stages of having a cell phone I started to notice a burning sensation above the ear (where the tumor was diagnosed), but at the time I didn’t give it much thought, like many of you out there I presume.
However, come to think of it, there were a few times when I had to end the phone call because the pain was unbearable and I would have to call the person back later after the pain had subsided. I would also get these chronic headaches and pain in my eyes, but then again, I just attributed this to the pressures of the work. I even started to lose my memory and get lost while driving, which is strange since before that I always had a decent sense of direction.
All these symptoms started with the business and the cell phone usage. I finally left that business after 17 months on the job.
I went to see about five doctors over a period of years because of the headaches. Not one of them told me to stop using my cell phone. They all just diagnosed me with having tension headaches and prescribed Panadol or Aspirin or some other drug, which I usually did not take since I never trusted pharmaceuticals. Had just one of these doctors ordered a MRI brain scan, or a CT brain scan, I probably would not be so disabled today. If my brain tumor had been diagnosed earlier, I most likely would be working now and enjoying life.
Conventional Medicine is Still Clueless About the Dangers of EMR

The brain rehabilitation team was utterly astounded with my progress after my brain tumor was removed. However, they seemed to be completely clueless about the dangers of EMR and often would take their cell phone calls directly in the immediate vicinity of my head. They really should be aware that one should not put one of these microwave-emitting devices next to one’s head and especially not close to the head of someone who has just had a brain tumor removed.
However, like most people out there they are completely and utterly clueless regarding the dangers posed by this EMR weapon. It’s a complete irony and utter contradiction, but the people in the medical profession -- the people who are supposed to be helping us -- do not have any clue about the harmful effects of EMR on living organisms.
Hopefully, in the future -- if we have one -- this will change! At this point, people really have to do the research on EMR themselves. I have personally had to do my own research regarding EMR and my condition. Doctors are just too happy to prescribe drugs without really thinking too deeply about the underlying causes.
Now, my only mission in life is to make people aware of the dangers posed by this wireless technology. What else can I do? I just hope people are smart enough to listen. My only desire is for people to have life -- not death!
To my father: I am sorry Papa that I failed you by not listening to you. Papa you were right just as usual, and I paid the price for not listening to your words of wisdom as usual. The only thing is, this time I cannot correct my mistake. I am disabled for life. Sorry Papa, please forgive me for my stupidity.
To read more about my experience, please visit the website below, where my experience since being diagnosed with a brain tumor has been documented.
"The Truth Shall Set You Free"Dr. Mercola's Comments:
First, I want to thank Mr. Grani for sharing his personal story. I believe the dangers of cell phone usage are the 21st Century version of smoking. Remember how medical doctors used to say smoking was harmless? Heck they were even used in advertising, stating that smoking was GOOD for you! Only decades later, after vehement denials, was the undisputable truth finally accepted -- that smoking does cause lung cancer.
History is now repeating itself. There is ever growing evidence that the information-carrying radio waves transmitted by cell phones and other wireless devices can:

Cause brain tumors
Harm blood cells and cause cellular changes
Damage your DNA
Cause nerve-cell damage
Accelerate and contribute to onset of autism, and trigger Alzheimer’s disease
Damage your eyes
Cause sleep disruptions, fatigue and headaches

And that’s the short list.
Radio Waves Have Reached Critical Mass -- Health Problems Bound to Erupt
Information-carrying radio waves have increased dramatically and exponentially over the last few years. Just think: it took 20 years for the first 1 billion cell phones to be sold -- a milestone reached in 2004. The next billion took just 18 months. The third billion was sold even faster -- just nine months, and we will reach the fourth billion by the end of this year.
Add to that all the wireless networks that are now becoming standard, exposing you to massive amounts of radio waves whether you actually use wireless or not. Most major office buildings now have WiFi, as do Starbuck’s, Panera Bread, and most libraries.
The biological danger from WiFi routers, cell phones and land-based portable phones comes from two sources:

The modulated signals that are carried ON the carrier microwave, and
The carrier wave itself
The modulated information-carrying radio waves resonate in biological
frequencies of a few to a few hundred cycles per second, and can stimulate your vibrational cellular receptors, causing a whole cascade of pathological consequences that can culminate in fatigue, anxiety and ultimately cancers.
And the carrier wave has been found to create damage NOT related to thermal heat damage, which the industry has long argued is the only possible cause of biological harm (i.e. "radio waves do not create enough thermal heat to pose a risk to biological tissue.") Therefore, simply lowering the SAR rating on cell phones -- which determines how much radiation your body absorbs -- or making sure your phone is within legal SAR limits, will not guarantee your safety by any means.
Your cells will interpret even a minute amount of cell phone radiation as a threat, and shut down. This is a response intended to protect them, but when you talk on a cell phone, it lasts for far longer than your body can handle. A lot of the damage is caused by the disruption microtubular connections that allow biophotons to communicate between cells, which decreases intracellular communication. Increased deposits of heavy metals also begin to accumulate in your cells, which increases intracelluar production of free radicals, and can radically decrease cellular production of energy, thus making you incredibly fatigued.
Once your body’s communication system is damaged, it is very easy to develop all sorts of pathologies related to disrupted intracellular antioxidant systems and heavy metal toxicities.
Recent studies have found that cell phone users are 240 percent more prone to brain tumors and a study back in 2004 found that your risk of acoustic neuroma (a tumor on your auditory nerve) was nearly four times greater on the side of your head where your phone was most frequently held. Listen, there is VERY solid evidence that the number of brain tumors will increase to 500,000 per YEAR in 2010 -- and will double to 1 million every year by 2015 if the causes are not addressed.
Folks, this is the real deal and represents an impending health care crisis.

The Truth No One Wants to Face
There should be no doubt that you are being deceived about the safety of cell phones and WiFi, the same way the public was deceived for decades about tobacco. Back then, large corporate interests were very effective at manipulating the media and legislation to perpetuate the myth that smoking was safe, and nothing has changed in that regard.
The United States protects corporate interests above public health more than ever.
Therefore, your first mistake would be to be fooled by the mainstream media silence.Remember, the media outlets in the United States are owned by a minuscule SIX corporations. Today, your mind is controlled by Time Warner, Disney, Murdoch's News Corporation, Bertelsmann of Germany, Viacom (formerly CBS) and General Electric's NBC. These are the top owners of the entire media industry, which includes everything you read and hear in newspapers, magazines, TV and radio stations, books, records, movies, videos, wire services and photo agencies. Can you believe what they say?
Not a chance. Because the telecommunication industry, which is even BIGGER than the drug cartel, Big Pharma, have far more influence than the drug companies -- and you already know what heavy-weights they are when it comes to spreading misinformation.
Protect Yourself from the Invisible Danger of EMR
Some individuals believe that relatively expensive fixes like nano polymers (like those used by BioPro) can help, but my initial investigation strongly suggests that this technology protection is only minimally effective, and dissipates rapidly.
Of course, the only real solution is to move our culture away from wireless back to more wired. As for myself, I completely renovated my new home prior to moving in, earlier this year, and part of the project was to put in wired CAT-5 cables so I have no wireless connections at all. We will also be moving into a brand new 25,000 square foot office building in June and we will have absolutely no wireless in the entire building.
I’ve also learned that most portable home phones are a major source of these information carrying radio waves. The only exception would be the much older, essentially antiquated 900 MHz portable phones. Fortunately they are still readily available online. One of the major differences is that they are only on when in use. The other higher MHz phones are on continuously, bombarding your cells with tissue damaging radiation even when you’re not using them.
If you do choose to use a cell phone, use the speakerphone function whenever possible -- and keep the phone about two feet away from any body part. Do not keep the phone on your belt or in your pocket even when you’re not using it, as the radiation WILL penetrate your body wherever the phone is attached. Instead, stow it away in a purse, backpack, or your car’s glove compartment.
For times when a speakerphone isn’t practical, use an air-tube headset, rather than Bluetooth.

Cell Phones are Changing Social Interaction
Breaking up by text message.
Published on January 26, 2014 by Ira Hyman in Mental Mishaps
Would you break up by sending a text message? How much of your social life do you conduct through text messages? Do you schedule face-to-face time? Do you track where your friends are by texting? Do you have conversations with text messages?
Having a cell phone completely changed my social life. This is what my sons told me after we finally got them cell phones when they were in high school. I also have a cell phone, but don’t feel having it changed my social life. For my sons, however, the effect was dramatic. Cell phones may be changing how people interact with each other and changing their expectations for social interaction.
A recent set of research indicates that young people use their cell phones differently than older adults use their cell phones. We have this belief that young people are constantly using their cell phones – texting, checking email, searching the web, taking pictures, and tweeting. Supposedly, older people (people like me) use their cell phones less frequently. But there is actually very little data on differences in how age impacts cell phone use and beliefs about etiquette. With my colleague, Deborah Forgays, and one of our students, Jessie Schreiber, we’ve recently published an investigation on how people use their cell phones for social interaction and their beliefs about etiquette. The fun part is that we looked at people in different age groups (18-24; 25-34; 35-49; and 50-68).
First the obvious finding. Age relates to big differences in how many text messages people send and receive each day. Young adults rely on text messages but older adults send and receive substantially fewer texts. In the over 50 group, more that 80 percent send and receive fewer than 10 texts each day. But young adults are texting much more every day. Interestingly, we found no difference in the number of cell phone calls made and received. Nobody is making very many – over 90 percent in every age group made fewer than 10 calls each day. The age difference in cell phone use is in texting.
Young adults also use text messaging as their primary method of contacting friends – over 80 percent report texting as their preferred method. The percentage of people who use texting as their primary method of contacting friends drops in older age groups. Older adults (over age 50) prefer calling or email. Given the age difference in the number of texts, it shouldn’t be surprising that younger adults believe it is more appropriate to use their cell phones in a greater variety of situations than do older adults. We asked about a lot of contexts – having dinner with friends, in line at the store, in church, intimate situations, at the gym, having coffee with a friend. Across the board, younger adults saw text messaging as more acceptable than older adults.
So the quick message is that younger adults are texting in more situations, using it to contact friends, and see texting as acceptable.
This seems to be having an impact on their expectations in relationships. You’ve got to feed the beast in text interactions with young adults. Young adults expect quicker responses from friends than do older adults. By the way, we didn’t find any difference in how quickly people expect responses from romantic partners – everyone expects a response relatively quickly. So when you get a text from your partner, stop what you’re doing and respond. Oh, and if you are slow to respond to young adults, they will get irritated with you more quickly than older adults.
Young adults text more, use texts to contact friends, and expect quicker responses. Younger adults also use text messages for a variety of functions in romantic relationships. In particular, about 15 percent of young adults reported they had ended a relationship via text message and 25 percent reported they had been dumped via text. The percentage of text break ups dropped in older age groups and the over 50 crowd never reported text dumps. We’ve always known that breaking up is hard to do – so why not do it via text?
I think this may explain why young adults are so attached to their cell phones. This isn’t addiction. This is social interaction. When you conduct your social life via text, keeping track of your cell phone takes on particular importance. Older adults, like me, shouldn’t make judgments about cell phone use in younger adults, or at least we should withhold the negative evaluations of people constantly checking their cell phones. Perhaps instead we can respect the cell phone and internet natives. These young adults have grown up using cell phones and the internet. They’ve learned to effectively maintain and enhance (and sometimes end) social relationships through the ether. Maybe they will be more engaged with and attached to their social groups than older adults who are still learning to keep in touch in the modern era.
Also See:
The Wonderful World of Cell Phones!
(Part 1)
21 July 2008

Wednesday, July 23, 2014

We Need to Secure the Border Between USA and Mexico!

Zack Interview-Security on the border between USA and Mexico
Holocaust on the Border - GBTV  

Recession? ... Depression? ... What is Going On? (Part 7)

Recession Graduates Grind Away With Low Pay as U.S. Mends
By Steve Matthews and Jeanna Smialek
July 23, 2014
Nickole Gambrill is still paying the price for graduating college at the wrong time.
She and other students who earned diplomas in the aftermath of the deepest U.S. recession since the 1930s are experiencing an earnings hangover that could last a lifetime, even as the labor market heals.
Gambrill accepted the first paralegal job she could get after finishing classes at Towson University in Maryland in December 2010, when the unemployment rate was 9.4 percent.
"I’ve been here for three years, but I still consider myself entry-level," said the 27-year-old from Baltimore, who makes about $44,000 annually. "Your raises and income are based off of your original salary. If it were a better economy, I would have started off at a higher salary."
Many of the estimated 3.37 million graduates earning baccalaureate degrees in those two years accepted positions they were overqualified for out of desperation. Those entering the workforce in the shadow of the recession were 2.2 percent of an approximately 154 million-member labor force competing for fewer jobs and now may have eroded skills and sparse resumes. As the labor market improves, new graduates may outshine them.
College students during their graduation ceremony on May 17, 2013 in College Park, Maryland.
"If you come out now, it really is a much better world, you’ll have much better success," said Anthony Carnevale, director of the Georgetown University Center on Education and the Workforce in Washington, who said those who got diplomas closer to the recession will experience lasting disadvantages. "The employer looks at the one who just graduated and the one that’s five steps back, and they think the new one is better."
Recent Graduates
Recent college graduates "were and continue to be hit hard," during and after the recession, two researchers for the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco wrote in a study dated July 21. They experienced low wage growth across almost all occupations compared with other full-time workers. While the pattern is consistent with the period after the 2001 slump, "earnings growth following the most recent recession has been held down longer than in the past, which reflects the depth and severity of the recession," they said.
That reality is haunting a segment of millennials, the 82 million people born between 1981 and about 2000. Full-time 25-to 34-year-old workers saw income erode to a median of $38,000 in 2012 from $38,760 in 2007, based on National Center for Education Statistics data. Salaries for bachelor’s degree-or-higher grads fell to $49,950 from $52,990 in 2007.
Many of these recession grads are stuck -- either unemployed, working part-time or in jobs that don’t require the education they have -- and lack skills or opportunities to switch to higher-earning positions or bargain for more pay.
Joblessness Down
Joblessness for 25 to 34-year-olds is down from 10.6 percent in October 2009. Yet at 6.5 percent in June, it’s still higher than total unemployment, which fell to a six-year low of 6.1 percent, and the age group’s 4.9 percent level when the 18-month recession started in December 2007.
Pay penalties from entering a difficult labor market are long-lasting, research from prior contractions shows. Earnings shortfalls have persisted for 15 years, University of Maryland at College Park researcher Shu Lin Wee reported in a December paper. That’s because early years are critical to lifetime income growth, with half of gains between 18 and 46 occurring by age 30 as workers switch jobs and climb corporate career ladders.
The effects of graduating during a stock-market shock for Stanford Business School graduates have lasted about 20 years, Paul Oyer, an economist at the California university reported in a 2008 paper. For the 2007-2009 recession, "the hit will be significant on average," he said.
‘Long-Term Scarring’  
"The evidence indicates long-term scarring, not just short-term effects that go away as soon as the recession ends," said Jesse Rothstein, a former Labor Department chief economist now at the University of California at Berkeley.
Ben Henderson has experienced the cost firsthand. After graduating from Winthrop University in Rock Hill, South Carolina, with a bachelor’s degree in business in May 2009, he searched for months, only to land work as a substitute teacher paying $9.53 an hour with no benefits near Tampa, Florida.
Five years later, after moving from one part-time job to another while also pursuing coaching positions, Henderson, 27, earns $11.81 an hour as an assistant testing coordinator for an area high school. His checkered work history is a barrier from better-paying work.
"The running joke is they won’t hire you if you don’t have experience and you can’t get experience if they won’t hire you," he said. "Obviously, this is not the plan you made."
Gambrill, though she has found steady work, has reached a similar conclusion.
Experience Required
"People want you to have a certain amount of education, a certain amount of experience, but you really aren’t paid what you’re worth," she said. What’s more, "once you have experience in a certain industry, it’s really hard to change your career."
Tough economics have caused young people to delay big purchases. Just 36.2 percent of households under age 35 owned a home as of the first quarter, down from 41.3 percent in the first quarter of 2008, Census data show.
Graduates who start on the wrong foot have fewer "training and promotion opportunities, resulting in a lasting disadvantage," said Joseph Altonji, who co-wrote the Yale paper. Those who are unemployed or take jobs that don’t match their education can suffer skills depreciation, he added.
Permanent Effects
As of 2012, about 44 percent of recent grads worked in roles that don’t usually require a bachelor’s degree, up 10 percentage points from 2001, Federal Reserve Bank of New YorkHYPERLINK "" researchers reported in January. They warned that such underemployment may cause "permanent negative effects on wages."
Some graduates fare especially badly. Sixty percent or more of liberal arts and communications majors were unemployed or underemployed in 2009-2011. By contrast, three-quarters of engineering, education and health-care students held jobs matching their skills.
Just 33 percent of leisure and hospitality graduates found work requiring their degree in that period -- the least of any group in the New York Fed report.
There’s a cultural tendency to blame young people who get a poor start in the workforce, said Heather Boushey, chief economist at the Washington Center for Equitable Growth, an inequality-focused research group. "You’re seeing some of that around the millennials: ‘They’re so difficult in the workforce. They only want jobs where they can find fulfillment,’ when really they just want jobs," she said.
‘Lifetime Impacts’
Graduating in the aftermath of a recession "does have these lifetime impacts," she said. Compounding the situation is the level of student debt. College loans "combined with underemployment and high unemployment among today’s graduates is a fairly toxic combination."
Dana Katz, 27, is watching peers from Pennsylvania State University’s School of Hospitality Management in State College pay the price for graduating with the Class of 2009.
"I have a lot of friends, countless kids who I graduated with, who should have been put into a better place out of school because they were really promising, but there was nothing available," said Katz, who works at Kimpton Hotels in Washington as an assistant director of finance. "Kids got put into a bad place to start, and it’s been reflected in their career path."
Job-market healing is under way, so the Class of 2014 may fare better than their predecessors. Today’s graduates "are entering into a stronger labor market, full stop," said Heidi Shierholz, an economist at the Economic Policy Institute in Washington.
Opportunities look brighter for Abigail Estevez, 22, and her classmates. She graduated from Penn State in December 2013 and landed a spot in the management-training program at the Waldorf Astoria in New York, turning down other offers. Many of her friends are in similar jobs.
"Right now, the market is fairly strong," Estevez said. "I definitely think I’m in a good place."
To contact the reporters on this story: Steve Matthews in Atlanta at; Jeanna Smialek in Washington at
To contact the editors responsible for this story: Chris Wellisz at; Carlos Torres at Gail DeGeorge, Melinda Grenier

California DIY, shipping container tiny home and a cargo trailer bedroom  
Home Sweet Home in Freight Shipping Containers
Micro-units are advertised under different euphemisms, one-bedroom unit, junior one-bedroom apartment, compact living space, efficiency units

July 23, 2014
While the world is sizzling and percolating in conflicts and wars, and U.S. is roiling in manufactured crisis after crisis, real or imagined emergencies, overwhelmed by the constant invasion of illegal immigrants, The Washington Post writes on the front page, "Thinking inside the box on D.C. housing costs," living in repurposed dinged freight shipping containers. Two days before, Deborah K. Dietsch featured "Thinking big in a small way." (Michael Laris, July 21, 2014)
It is understandable how a damaged shipping container may be an appealing substitute for shelter to a broke student, a homeless person, or a third world shanty-town dweller, but Americans have plenty of housing space and resources to shelter its citizens.
We are so well-off that we even house generously people who break our laws every day when crossing our no-longer-enforced border. Why force Americans into tight and ridiculous spaces when we have so much land? Environmentalists are afraid that we are destroying the planet with our very existence. If they crowd all humanity into as tight and dense urban areas as possible, animals can roam free and land can be rewilded and reclaimed for the creatures we displaced with our civilization, roads, and undeserved mobility.
These tiny spaces are expensive but they give the occupants a false sense of saving money and the planet by not using a car, walking or biking everywhere, just like the zoning environmentalists have been pushing for a while now, high density, and high rise living, five minutes from work, school, shopping, and play while the metro is nearby. Absolute heaven if you want to live like a rat in an 8-by-40-foot box! Who would not enjoy living in "lovingly repurposed steel husks" that have been previously "sloshing across oceans on mammoth container ships?"
A demolished student house will be the location in D.C. of 18 shipping containers to make "eye catching" rentals. Citing Ayn Rand’s novel, "The Fountainhead," the owners are compared to the rebellious architect in the novel who fights against "evil" conformists.
After container doors are replaced by windows and mirrored wardrobe in each container/bedroom, the residents no longer feel confined and claustrophobic. Cut steel panels will make room for the kitchen and living room when the containers are joined. The containers cost $2,000 but the rent price is not divulged. The project is slated to be completed by August.
The builders dream to "float hundreds of sea container apartments on a barge in the Potomac and creating a homeless village on the river to serve Georgetown." The zoning officials are skeptical, they must see if "code will allow them." But zoning codes can be changed to accommodate the environmentalist agenda.
Renting micro-dwellings in the 144-unit building called Harper for $2,500 a month for a one-bedroom, 400 square foot apartment and a parking space enticed many. Because it is so small, residents would want to go out, to get rid of claustrophobia. "This location couldn’t be more perfect for the socializing lifestyle," says Leah Wald. Renting the average 375 square foot hotel room by the day can cost you about the same and the maid is free.
The micro-units are advertised under different euphemisms, one-bedroom unit, junior one-bedroom apartment, compact living space, efficiency units, but the square footage is anywhere from 350-400 square feet. A 600 square ft. studio rents for $3,350 a month.
The nine-story, 218-unit called the Drake, will open in September. Lots of glass and amenities such as oak floors, stainless steel kitchens, and Bosch appliances are supposed to compensate for the lack of space.
The Wharf apartments which are slated to open in 2017 will have 501 micro-units, 171 will be 325-354 sq. ft., highlighting a Murphy bed, with a "built-in shelf for storage when the bed is stored vertically against the wall." The kitchen on wheels can be used as table or as a desk. "The units are designed like the inside of a boat." It seems perfect for anybody who hates cleaning and does not mind living in a glamorized jail cell.
More micro-dwelling units are going up in D.C., Latham Hotel (2016), Patterson Mansion (2016), Blagden Alley building (2016), and WeWork apartments in Crystal City (2015).
The 200 square ft. aPodments in Sammamish, Washington rent for $600-900 per month. There are no elevators and no parking spaces. Resident Judi Green, who rents a 10 by 10 ft. loft cubicle, must climb six flights of stairs, and "shares the kitchen with seven other tenants on the second floor." The micro-housing units increase the population density of the area greatly.
In countries like Japan, where land is very scarce and expensive, tiny dwellings are popular. It is not the case in the United States where land is plentiful. Unfortunately, millions of acres of our land have been locked to human habitation and set aside for conservation.
Across the country, Sustainable Urbanism, Sustainable Development, Equitable Communities are government plans to change the counties’ desired low density character and scale to high-density crime-ridden slums. Social engineering is being imposed on entire neighborhoods.
Alley pods are placed between townhouses and in suburbs micro-residential units are built between single family homes, destroying their property values. These people have worked their entire lives to buy a single family home.
The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) will dismantle local zoning and force people to move into certain areas in order to achieve what they consider "racial, economic, and ethnic diversity." Multiple illegal immigrant families purchase or rent one single home creating a third world nightmare for the single family neighbors who must live next door.
"Nationalizing neighborhoods" on a grand scale is done for "our own good and to achieve utopia." By obliterating zoning regulations, we will have neighborhoods by government fiat quota. (Rush Limbaugh monologue, September 12, 2013)
Rush Limbaugh pointed out that "HUD’s power grab is based on the mistaken belief that zoning and discrimination are the same, zoning is disguised discrimination." Introducing 200 square ft. pods between single family homes is "social justice."
The progressives’ social engineering projects implemented around the world are not aimed at just destroying national sovereignty, language, and cultural identity. They are now engaged in a massive replacement of rural areas and "suburban sprawl" with high density, high rise urban dwellings in the name of green environmentalism, saving the planet from the destruction of manufactured man-made global warming/climate change.
Listen to Dr. Paugh on Butler on Business, every Wednesday to Thursday at 10:49 AM EST
Dr. Ileana Johnson Paugh, (Romanian Conservative) is a freelance writer (Canada Free Press, Romanian Conservative,, author, radio commentator (Silvio Canto Jr. Blogtalk Radio, Butler on Business, The Liberty Express, Free Market Radio, and Republic Broadcasting Network), and speaker. Her book, "Echoes of Communism, is available at Amazon in paperback and Kindle. Short essays describe health care, education, poverty, religion, social engineering, and confiscation of property. A second book, "Liberty on Life Support," is also available at Amazon in paperback and Kindle. A third book, "U.N. Agenda 21: Environmental Piracy," is a best seller at under Globalism, Politics, and Environmental Policy.
Her commentaries reflect American Exceptionalism, the economy, immigration, and education.Visit her website,
Dr. Johnson can be reached at:
Carved out of shipping containers, these LEGO-like, stackable apartments offer all the amenities of home. Or more, since they are bigger, and brighter, than the typical Manhattan studio. It’s the FEMA trailer of the future, built with the Dwell reader in mind. — New York Observer

Container City, designed by Nicholas Lacey, overlooks the Trinity Buoy Wharf in London and provides 37 studio apartments for area artists. The project was completed in 2 phases, using 50 shipping containers, and boasts an intriguing, Lego-like design.
How poverty influences a child's brain development
The Globe and Mail
Published Friday, Jan. 25 2013
At first impression, the two groups of children were hard to tell apart: just regular kindergarten kids from different neighbourhoods in Kamloops, B.C. Yet, when they visited a mobile lab as part of population study he collaborated on, Clyde Hertzman remembers how their young brains revealed a striking contrast.
Both groups were asked to focus their attention on a series of sounds while researchers monitored their neural activity. Not only did one group tend to have a harder time with the task, Dr. Hertzman recalls, it " had a systematically different pattern of brain responses to the test."
How could children drawn from a city of just 85,000 people end up with wiring that was essentially different? They had grown up with any number of genetic and environmental influences affecting their brain development and behaviour, but one variable stood out: affluence. Those who did not perform as well tended to be from the poorer of the two neighbourhoods. Somehow their socio-economic status was showing up in the architecture of their thoughts.
The result was a particularly vivid example of something scientists who specialize in early childhood development have seen again and again. Kids from communities that are underresourced and subject to economic stress think differently than their wealthier counterparts in ways that can ultimately affect behaviour.
Five years later, Dr. Hertzman – who teaches at the University of British Columbia’s School of Population and Public Health and was Canada’s health researcher of the year in 2010 – is part of a rapid evolution of the field that has grown from merely recording the demographics of cognitive disparities to building a bottom-up understanding of the molecular changes that cause them.
The change has gathered momentum in recent months, fuelled by a bounty of new findings that bolster the long-observed link between social environment and development with a newly emerging biological perspective.
It also underscores the stunning human cost of what is called the "socio-economic gradient." Only 3 to 4 per cent of Canadian children are born with inherited differences that will limit their physical, emotional or intellectual growth, yet an average of 25 to 30 per cent exhibit some level of developmental vulnerability that could include a cognitive "deficit."
In some communities, the figure may reach 70 per cent, and by adolescence, the resulting deficits can translate into a range of mental-health issues, substance abuse and diminished opportunities for education and employment.
The Royal Society of Canada and the Canadian Academy of Health Sciences issued a report in November that surveys the new research on how socio-economic factors can affect someone’s biological makeup – and warning of "dire consequences for the individual and society" if nothing is done. The report concludes by calling for a broad strategy of investment in early childhood.
"If a society wants to ensure the best trajectory for its children, its policy focus should be on those early years," says Alan Bernstein, president of the Canadian Institute for Advanced Research (CIFAR), which supports several leading scientists in the field.
A key feature of the emerging connection between brain and poverty is stress. While economic status does not necessarily spell bad news for a given child’s development, it tends to dovetail with parental stress and family stability in a way that can strongly shape how a young brain experiences the world.
At the extreme end, low socio-economic status and the stress that underlies it can mean higher incidences of physical and emotional abuse. But it can also lead to a broader, more subtle type of social adversity – parents or caregivers have less time, or are less inclined, to nurture their children.
The potential risk is illuminated by a proliferation of genetic studies that, by comparing the DNA, uncover hidden variants that could affect how children develop in response to adversity.
But genes are hardly the development dictators they are sometimes made out to be. Instead, the quality of the nurturing environment, often through the presence or absence of stress, can determine whether a genetic difference actually matters.
"The genes, in a sense, are listening to the environment," says Marla Sokolowski, who specializes in genetics and behavioural neurology at the University of Toronto.
Researchers have long recognized that not everyone abused or neglected as a child goes on to have problems. In some cases, genes can buffer against environmental effects and allow the brain to develop normally; in others, those that might otherwise be silent are triggered by adversity in early childhood and so influence brain development.
As an analog for more complex human behaviour, Prof. Sokolowski studies fruit flies that naturally carry one of two possible variants of a gene that affects food-foraging habits. The genes, dubbed "rover" and "sitter," will either lead a fly to wander around a food source or stay put and feed. Fruit flies that are genetically predisposed to be rovers nevertheless become sitters if they are nutritionally deprived during development. The effect of the scarcity is to ramp down the activity of the rover gene, thereby maximizing food intake over other kinds of behaviour.
At McGill University, a powerful set of studies by behavioural scientist Michael Meaney and his colleagues has been especially important at showing how the interplay of genes and social environment can program the behaviour of mammals.
Mother rats who lick and groom their babies less often tend to produce offspring more sensitive to stress. The effect is thought to be "epigenetic" – the underlying DNA sequence of the baby rats is unchanged, but a cascade of biochemical signals triggered by the grooming affects the activity of a gene that is crucial for regulating stress response.
The experiments suggest how the social adversity that can come with low socio-economic status may work on human children, Prof. Sokolowski says, by reducing the signals of key genes that guide brain development "like a dimmer switch." This, in turn, affects cognition and behaviour with consequences that can reverberate through a lifetime.
Such vulnerability may showcase a fundamental weakness in the way our brains work. It may even be evolution’s way of preparing brains for the environments they are growing up in.
"The brain is not fragile; the brain is adaptive," Dr. Herztman says. "The question is whether or not those adaptations will allow you to cope with the world you are then going to live in."
Thus, a developing brain that has been influenced by a stressful or chaotic social environment at an early age may lead to a child with serious attention issues in the classroom years later.
But a behaviour pattern that is perceived as a deficit in the school setting may be there precisely because the child, as an infant, was shaped by social circumstances to pay more attention to distractions that could warn of sudden danger.
"It’s a kind of vigilance – the brain is searching for threatening stimuli to thwart," Dr. Hertzman says. But the epigenetic fine-tuning comes at a cost, he adds, because the brain is less able to concentrate on high-order functions, such as math or reading.
"The problem is that the developmental signals and the demands of modern society become a mismatch."
Symptoms of such cognitive disorders as attention deficit and hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) are not restricted to children of low socio-economic status, of course, and do not always relate to parenting. However, evidence that the environment plays a role in the prevalence of such symptoms is reinforced by studies that track individuals over the course of their lives.
One such study, based in Wisconsin, has followed more than 500 children from the second trimester of pregnancy through high-school graduation.
Those who were in preschool at a time when their parents reported high levels of economic and social stress bear the scars of that stress in the form of epigenetic marks on their DNA. These marks will persist for life, inhibiting genes that might otherwise be more active.
Thomas Boyce, a professor of pediatrics at UBC, has collaborated with the team behind the Wisconsin study, and says its findings could guide strategies to head off the negative impact of cognitive differences even before it becomes apparent.
Prof. Boyce (who leads with Prof. Sokolowski a long-running program in experience-based brain and biological development sponsored by CIFAR) and his colleagues at UBC are currently studying children from different socio-economic backgrounds in the Vancouver area.
To find epigenetic changes, they will compare their subjects’ genetic profiles at ages 8 to 10 with DNA from blood spots banked when they were newborns. These changes can be correlated with cognitive perform- ance and environmental stress.
"The whole idea behind pursuing these epigenetic markers is to develop better indicators of how a child is doing before problems become salient," Dr. Boyce says.
Amedeo D’Angiulli, a developmental cognitive neuroscientist at Carleton University in Ottawa, welcomes the new tools that enable direct eavesdropping on the brain-gene dialogue.
He is also keen to test measures that may aid children with attention and focus issues, and counterbalance some of the effects of growing up on the low end of the socio-economic spectrum.
In one study, being conducted with the Leading Note Foundation, which teaches music to children in underserved communities, Dr. D’Angiulli will track cognitive function and stress levels as youngsters embark on an intense period of musical training and performance.
He suspects the program can bolster the brain. Children’s "short-term memory improves, their focus improves, and it’s reinforced because they’re doing it as an ensemble," he says.
Ultimately, the research points to what many early childhood education advocates have long maintained: Directing resources toward the social and cognitive health of young minds can help to counter the long-term costs of economic disparity.
"All of the new insights we’re getting into how the interactions of genes and environment drive development reinforce the importance of a society that helps families," says Dr. Hertzman, who points to data showing a link between a population’s mental health and its economic output.
"If we were to invest according to what the biology of brain development is telling us, there would be a lot more investment in children early on."
Editor's note: A study of the cognitive performance of children in Kamloops, B.C., mentioned in a story on Saturday, was led by Dr. Amedeo D’Angiulli, who was then Canada Research Chair in early childhood education and development at Thompson Rivers University in Kamloops. Unclear information about the study appeared in an earlier version of this article. This online version has been corrected.
Follow Ivan Semeniuk on Twitter: @ivansemeniuk
Also See:
Food Shortage, Then Anarchy!
25 July 2012
Disasters Happen! Be Prepared!
(Part 1)
31 March 2011
(Part 2)
30 August 2012
The Collapse of the Entire World’s Economic System has Begun!
18 March 2013
Economic Collapse! How Did We Get Here?
(Part 2)
28 September 2013
Are We Facing a Global Financial Crisis?
31 May 2011
Financial Crunch! Economic Collapse! (Part 1)
31 July 2008
(Part 2)
20 November 2008
(Part 3)
25 January 2009
(Part 4)
17 April 2009
(Part 5)
23 June 2009
(Part 6)
23 August 2009
(Part 7)
30 November 2009
(Part 8)
23 February 2010
(Part 9)
28 August 2010
(Part 10)
13 January 2011
(Part 11)
29 April 2011
(Part 12)
28 July 2011
(Part 13)
04 April 2012
(Part 15)
02 November 2012
Recession? ... Depression? ... What is Going On?
(Part 1)
06 October 2008
(Part 2)
02 February 2009
(Part 3)
19 April 2009
(Part 4)
02 August 2009
(Part 5)
17 September 2010
(Part 6)
17 September 2010
Jobs, Jobs, Where are the Jobs?
(Part 1)
20 April 2010
The Poor - Prosperity Creates Poverty! 
(Part 1) 
(Part 2)
13 November 2013
How Do We Eradicate Poverty?
27 November 2012