... Proof that Monsanto is Evil--Scientific Fraud Repost

Monsanto Celebrates Approval of New Dicamba Herbicide and Fights Dirty to Silence Cancer Scientists

November 22, 2016 |

By Dr. Mercola

The promise that transgenic crops would lead to "greener" agriculture and less chemicals has not come to pass. Instead, more and more chemicals are being used on our food and the feed we raise our livestock on.

Since the introduction of transgenic crops two decades ago, herbicide-resistant weeds have become a serious problem. At least 35 weed species are now resistant to glyphosate, the primary ingredient in Monsanto's broad-spectrum herbicide Roundup.1

Studies2 have also linked glyphosate to increases in Sudden Death Syndrome (SDS), a deadly plant disease that causes plants to turn yellow and die — including crops that have never been sprayed with the herbicide but were planted in a field that received an application the previous season.

To stay on top of the resistant weed problem, farmers not only apply more pesticides, they also mix different pesticides together to prevent the weeds from adapting to a single formula. Newer genetically engineered (GE) seeds are also designed to resist even more toxic combinations. 

Alarming Levels of Glyphosate Found in Popular Foods

According to independent testing by The Detox Project, glyphosate is present at "alarming levels" in many popular processed foods.3,4

Scientists have found glyphosate can alter gene function in the livers and kidneys of rats at levels as low as 0.05 parts per billion (ppb). Meanwhile, Cheerios was found to contain more than 1,125 ppb of glyphosate, Doritos more than 481 ppb and Ritz crackers more than 270 ppb.

As noted by Dave Murphy, executive director of Food Democracy Now!:

"It's time for regulators at the EPA [Environmental Protection Agency] and the White House to stop playing politics with our food and start putting the wellbeing of the American public above the profits of chemical companies like Monsanto."

FDA Suspends Glyphosate Testing

Meanwhile, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has suspended testing for glyphosate residues in food, citing "disagreement and difficulties with establishing a standard methodology to use," along with "equipment issues."5 The agency is "unsure" when testing will resume.

According to FDA spokeswoman Megan McSeveney, preliminary results indicated there were "no violations of legal tolerance levels allowed for glyphosate" in the foods tested.

However, it's important to remember that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) significantly raised allowable levels of glyphosate in foods back in 2013, and evidence suggests the legal tolerance levels are likely far too high for safety.

Allowable levels in flax, soybean and canola were doubled, from 20 parts per million (ppm) to 40 ppm — just 10 ppm below the level at which Roundup may cause cell death, according to research published in 2011.

Permissible glyphosate levels in many other foods were raised to 15 to 25 times previous levels. Root and tuber vegetables, with the exception of sugar, got one of the largest boosts, with allowable residue limits being raised from 0.2 ppm to 6.0 ppm. The level for sweet potatoes was raised to 3 ppm.

Current Glyphosate Limits Are Probably Unsafe

As noted in The Detox Project's report on glyphosate, animal research shows that at 0.1 ppb, roundup altered genes in livers and kidneys and caused severe organ damage.

At 10 ppb, toxic effects were found in fish livers. At 700 ppb, which is the permitted level for glyphosate in U.S. tap water, kidney and liver alterations in rats occurred.

Compare that to the level of glyphosate found in General Mills' Cheerios: 1,125 ppb (which equates to 1.125 ppm). Also remember that that's just ONE food, and people eat a wide array of glyphosate-containing foods each day. As noted in the report:6

"[A]s a result of the combination of exposures through drinking water and a regular diet of processed food, total exposure is much greater than industry scientists and U.S. regulators ever anticipated.

With this new information, it's time for the EPA to dramatically reduce the acceptable daily intake level of glyphosate and ban the practice of pre-harvest spraying of all food crops, especially wheat, oats and barley, immediately."

Monsanto Dicamba Herbicide Gets the Green Light

The EPA recently approved Monsanto's latest weed killer, XtendiMax with VaporGrip Technology,7,8 which goes along with its Roundup Ready Xtend cotton and soybeans — GE plants designed to tolerate both glyphosate and dicamba.

With this approval, use of dicamba on cotton and soy fields is expected to jump from less than 1 million pounds to more than 25 million pounds annually!9 Previously, dicamba could only be used to kill weeds prior to planting. It was not permitted on growing crops.

The "VaporGrip" refers to chemical technology said to make the dicamba less prone to vaporization and drift — problems associated with older dicamba herbicides (and a reason why they are not permitted during growing season).

Monsanto has been sharply criticized for releasing dicamba-resistant seeds before receiving approval for the less drift-prone herbicide, as many farmers felt they had no choice but to illegally use older dicamba herbicides on the new seeds — a decision that turned out to have devastating consequences for their neighbors.10

As reported by Eco Watch:11

"Over the summer, such activities caused 10 states to report widespread damage on thousands of acres of non-target crops such as peaches, tomatoes, cantaloupes, watermelons, rice, cotton, peas, peanuts, alfalfa and soybeans.

And last month, a dicamba drift dispute between Arkansas farmers resulted in one farmer being shot to death."

Concerns Abound Over Monsanto's Dicamba Herbicide

The question is, will this Vapogrip Technology actually be enough to prevent a repeat of these kinds of crop disasters? As noted by weed scientist Aaron Hager, reduced-volatility does not eliminate the potential for drift.

Dicamba is so toxic, it doesn't take much to damage sensitive crops growing down-wind, and XtendiMax comes with very specific instructions for application that must be followed to a T in order to prevent problems.

Questions about its impact on biodiversity also abound. As noted by Nathan Donley, a Center for Biological Diversity scientist:12

"Once again the EPA is allowing for staggering increases in pesticide use that will undoubtedly harm our nation's most imperiled plants and animals. Iconic species like endangered whooping cranes are known to visit soybean fields, and now they'd be exposed to this toxic herbicide at levels they've never seen before …

Pesticide resistant superweeds are a serious threat to our farmers, and piling on more pesticides will just result in superweeds resistant to more pesticides. We can't fight evolution — it's a losing strategy … We can't spray our way out of this problem. We need to get off the pesticide treadmill."

Did Monsanto Engineer Dependency on Illegal Pesticide?

Why DID Monsanto release its dicamba-resistant seeds before receiving approval for XtendiMax? As mentioned, dicamba has so far been illegal for use during growing season (due to its high volatility and drift potential).

Some critics have suggested Monsanto may have released the dicamba-resistant seeds early in order to create an indisputable and urgent need for a dicamba herbicide to go with them, thereby increasing the chances of gaining approval of the controversial weed killer. As noted by The Depauw:13

"Since the release of Xtend [cotton and soybean seeds], thousands of acres of soybeans have been destroyed across Arkansas, Tennessee, and Missouri. Though Monsanto warns against the use of dicamba on its website, it does so directly below its description of its newly available dicamba-resistant soybeans.

Further proof that such a dependency was orchestrated is the fact that Monsanto has invested over $1 billion in the production of dicamba, though its use on genetically modified crops is still illegal.

If Monsanto truly did intend to create a dependency on a product that required an illegal pesticide, it arguably holds some moral responsibility for the death of Mike Wallace [Ed. Note: Arkansas farmer shot to death during a dispute over dicamba crop damage] and the economic hardship that other farmers have faced as a result of crop damage from dicamba drift."

Part of the blame must also fall on the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) however, since the dicamba-resistant seeds gained USDA approval even though dicamba was still illegal for use during growing season.

Update: Feds and States Probe Monsanto-Bayer Merger

A couple of months ago Monsanto accepted Bayer AG's $56 billion takeover offer.14,15,16 The merger would result in the largest seed and pesticide company in the world. With the merger of these two giants, 59 percent of the global seeds and 64 percent of the world's pesticides would be provided by four companies in total.17,18

Many called on anti-competition regulators to investigate the merger,19 and a federal antitrust probe is now in fact underway. Several U.S. state attorney generals are also expected to join. The planned merger of DuPont and Dow Chemical Co. is also being investigated. According to the St. Louis Post-Dispatch:20

"The involvement of the state attorneys general increases scrutiny of the mega-deals and will complicate what are already expected to be tough and lengthy reviews by U.S. antitrust enforcers … The states are concerned that the companies may raise pesticide and herbicide prices for farmers following a merger, and have less incentive to compete to introduce better and cheaper products …

While it is up to the Justice Department to decide whether to file a lawsuit to stop a merger, states provide information on how the mergers would affect their jurisdictions and conduct joint calls to gather data from the companies, as well as critics and supporters of the deals."

Monsanto Ramps Up Assault on Researchers

In other related news, Monsanto is ramping up its assault on the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) team of scientists that, last year, declared glyphosate a probable human carcinogen.21 Glyphosate, of course, is the active ingredient in Monsanto's flagship product, Roundup.

Believe it or not, Monsanto and CropLife America are now lobbying to strip the IARC of its U.S. funding. The IARC is a respected research arm of the World Health Organization (WHO), and the agency's research has been a deciding factor in the banning of many toxic substances that would otherwise continue to threaten human life and well-being.

Monsanto and its allies are also demanding the EPA "fully repudiate the IARC classification and green-light continued use of glyphosate herbicides," the Huffington Post reports.22 They already derailed public EPA meetings scheduled to take place in October, 2016, to examine the available science on glyphosate, by challenging the EPA's choice of scientists for the advisory panel. According to the Huffington Post:

"[I]ndustry ally U.S. Rep. Lamar Smith is taking EPA officials to task for engaging with IARC on glyphosate concerns, demanding that EPA instead rely on the "sound science" that the industry promotes. Smith, Chairman of the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology, accuses IARC of playing an "activist role" and EPA officials, of aiding that effort …

Monsanto, which is fending off lawsuits by people who claim Roundup gave them cancer, has also been demanding IARC members turn over documents related to their work. The company has labeled the IARC findings as "junk science," and claims the IARC members are part of an "unelected, undemocratic, foreign body."

The industry message to EPA is loud and clear: Independent research and international scientific findings should not take precedence over protection of a multi-billion-dollar agent like glyphosate. The public can only watch, wait, and hope that the EPA doesn't listen."

IARC Scientists 'Stunned' But Not Backing Down

According to an IARC statement, while some of the working group members23 do feel "intimidated" by the threats, they reaffirm the integrity of their work. It's well worth noting that the IARC's scientists are considered elite independent experts, culled from well-respected institutions all over the world. Said Francesco Forastiere, head of occupational epidemiology at the Lazio Regional Health Service in Italy and IARC working group member:

"We were not expecting this strong reaction and what happened. We were doing our job. We understood there were other issues ... economic consequences. But none of us had a political agenda. We simply acted as scientists, evaluating the body of evidence, according to the IARC criteria."

EU Authorities Accused of Scientific Fraud

Meanwhile, in Germany another fight is brewing over glyphosate-related science. Peter Clausing, Ph.D., D.Sc., a former industry toxicologist who is now in the employ of Pesticide Action Network Germany, claims the German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR) and the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) committed scientific fraud when they contradicted the IARC, concluding that glyphosate is non-carcinogenic. According to GM Watch:24

"Clausing made this accusation in front of five judges at the Monsanto Tribunal, held in The Hague from 14–16 October. The background to this latest allegation of foul play by the EU authorities over glyphosate is the high-level dispute over whether or not the pesticide causes cancer.

In March 2015 the World Health Organization's cancer agency IARC concluded that glyphosate was a probable human carcinogen. BfR did not agree, stating that a classification for carcinogenicity is not "warranted" for glyphosate. EFSA sided with BfR, saying that 'glyphosate is unlikely to pose a carcinogenic hazard to humans and the evidence does not support classification with regard to its carcinogenic potential.'

But Clausing told the Monsanto Tribunal that BfR's and EFSA's statements are contradicted by evidence contained in BfR's own reports on glyphosate and the draft report submitted to the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) by the German Federal Institute for Occupational Safety and Health."

Scientific Integrity and Credibility Is on the Line

According to Clausing, BfR and EFSA included five mouse studies in their evaluation — all of which actually showed that male mice experienced a statistically significant increase in one or more types of cancer. Three of the studies showed a significant increase in malignant lymphoma. Two showed a clear dose-dependence.

Clausing also noted that these findings alone exceed the EU's criterion for the classification of glyphosate as a 1B carcinogen (substances presumed to have carcinogenic potential for humans), which would result in an automatic ban.

The only way to avoid a ban for a 1B carcinogen would be to prove that exposure is "negligible." But, as noted in the article, "The law does not allow industry and regulators to argue that the doses we are exposed to are below permitted levels and therefore safe." Clausing also showed that Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) guidelines for industry testing of chemicals had been violated.

"Interestingly, the IARC reviewed the available animal studies and concluded, like Clausing, that they showed that glyphosate caused an increase in cancer. Why the difference of opinion between IARC and the German authorities?

The answer is given in BfR's own report on IARC's findings. Unlike the German authorities, IARC applied the superior statistical analysis — the trend test. Also unlike the German authorities, IARC did not violate OECD guidelines by claiming that a second type of statistical analysis cancelled out the findings of the first," GM Watch writes.

On the whole, it appears BfR and EFSA are simply dancing to Monsanto's tune. It's become quite clear that Monsanto and its allies are ready to go to great lengths to save glyphosate — including trying to cut U.S. funding to a premier independent cancer research organization under WHO. But are BfR, EFSA and the EPA really going to undermine their own scientific credibility just to protect the profits of a chemical company? That's a serious question these agencies will ultimately have to make a decision on.

To Build a Safer Food System, Start Close to Home

The fact of the matter is that chemical cocktails are not a necessity for ample food production. Granted, many areas would now need serious intervention to improve and rebuild soil quality, which has been destroyed by decades of mechanized farming and chemicals, but it can be done.

Monsanto lauds its new dicamba herbicide as "the answer" to glyphosate-resistant weeds, completely ignoring the clear fact that this formulation will simply create weeds resistant to more than one chemical, thereby putting farmers at an even greater disadvantage! Not to mention the fact that more foods will now be contaminated with even more toxic pesticides.

The EU recently approved imports of Monsanto's Roundup Ready Xtend soybeans, so Europeans also need to beware of the potential for dicamba exposure through food. We simply must get off the pesticide treadmill. The health and well-being of our children and the environment depend on it.

As an individual, you can help steer the agricultural industry toward safer, more sustainable systems by growing your own foods and buying what you cannot grow from local farmers you trust. By far, processed foods are the most likely to contain GE ingredients, so avoiding processed foods of all kinds, including condiments, is one of the best ways to avoid them — and the toxic chemicals sprayed on these crops.

If everyone were to refuse to buy products containing GMOs, insisting on feeding their families pesticide-free, GMO-free foods, the food industry would have no choice but to respond. It's really just a matter of creating a massive trickle-down effect.

This is where your true power lies. Indeed, there's a way out of this mess, and it starts with each person making different purchasing choices for themselves and their families. 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, 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 Fund25 also provides a state-by-state review of raw milk laws.26 California residents can also find raw milk retailers using the store locator available at www.OrganicPastures.com.

• Spread the Word to
  Friends And Family
  By Sharing this Article.
• 14
  inShare

• 37

• 
  

  1

  
  

   Email
• 
  

  
  

  Print

[+] Sources and References

Process Note--keep it up?

 I continue to be surprised and disappointed at the difficulty people have understanding the Simple Explanation.  This frustration has morphed into a general inability to get my point across in even the smallest circumstances of daily life. I'm toying the idea of shutting entirely up.

What I want to know is this: would anyone notice if I never posted again?

How Do Bacteria Drive Our Behavior? A Simple Explanation

Gut Bacteria
(photo credit: Scimat Scimat via Getty Images)

Each creature's personal microbiome can be thought of as its inner ecology, and this microbiome is inextricably linked to the health of its host. While we've known for a long time that bacteria can cause illness and death, scientists have only lately begun to realize that bacteria are also absolutely necessary for health, as our body relies upon the activity of "friendly" bacteria to fulfill basic metabolic functions. Our own bodies even produce chemicals whose only purpose is to feed bacteria, that's how necessary they are to our survival. 

It is now believed that 84% of our body's immune system function occurs in the intestinal tract, directly driven by our gut bacteria. According to mercola.com, key areas of health affected by the microbiome include:

Behavior. A study published in Neurogastroenterology & Motility found that mice lacking in gut bacteria behave differently from normal mice, engaging in what would be referred to as "high-risk behavior." This altered behavior was accompanied by neurochemical changes in the mouse brain.

In fact, your gut serves as your second brain. It produces more of the neurotransmitter serotonin, which is known to have a positive influence on your mood, than your brain does.

Gene expression. A probiotic-rich beverage has been shown to influence the activity of hundreds of your genes to help them express in a positive, disease-fighting way. This makes your gut health a very powerful variable of epigenetics, a cutting-edge field of medicine showing that your lifestyle plays a significant role in your genetic expression.

Diabetes. According to a study from Denmark, bacterial population in the gut of diabetics differs from non-diabetics. According to the authors, the results of their study indicate that type 2 diabetes in humans is linked to compositional changes in intestinal microbiota.

A healthy diet – low in sugar and grains; high in whole raw foods and fermented foods – allows your beneficial gut bacteria to flourish.

Autism. Establishment of normal gut flora in the first 20 days or so of life is critical in appropriate maturation of your baby's immune system. Hence, babies with abnormal gut flora have compromised immune systems and are particularly at risk for developing ADHD, learning disabilities, and autism, especially if they are vaccinated before restoring balance to their gut flora.

Obesity. Probiotics may help fight obesity. Restoring your gut flora is therefore a crucial consideration if you're struggling to lose weight. (mercola.com)

In terms of the "Simple Explanation," the microbiome is one fractal level down from multi-celled organisms like ourselves. The microbiome isn't exactly part of our own "Whoville," because their DNA is different than ours. The relationship is very much like a coral reef, where our Whoville is the coral and the bacteria are the little life forms that live on and in the reef.

In May of 2014, NBC News reported that researchers at Arizona State University had discovered significant differences in bacterial metabolites between children with autism and those without.  They found that seven of 56 metabolites examined were significantly altered in fecal samples from autistic children. Most of the seven metabolites worked as neurotransmitters or controlled neurotransmitter biosynthesis. Study researcher Dae-Wook Kang hypothesizes that the neurotransmitter-related metabolites affect gut-to-brain communication and alter brain function. 

credit: Science News for Students; 5-22-2015

Recent research on mice microbes demonstrates that it is the bacteria that establish the all-important blood/brain barrier that protects our brains from invasive chemicals. In mice raised without bacteria, the missing blood/brain barrier allows unwanted chemicals to accumulate in the brain. (Science News for Students; 5-22-2015) This gives us yet another concrete example of bacteria working on behalf of the host organism's optimal functioning.

Carrying the implications of current research a little further, it makes evolutionary sense for our bacteria to affect our behavior. Bacteria not only affect our moods, they affect the food we reach for to consume. 

When the bacteria is hungry for sugar, we reach for the sugar to feed them. We are carriers for the bacteria. We are their servants. We eat on their behalf, and the food we eat is influenced by the particular mix of bacteria we carry in our guts. "Unfriendly" gut bacteria uniformly prefer a sugary, low-fiber environment. "Friendly" bacteria, on other hand, need a high-fiber environment in which to thrive; eating plant fibers lines our gut with an ideal matrix for the growth of friendly bacteria. Sugar consumption, on the other hand, causes a relative decrease in friendly bacteria and an increase in unfriendly bacteria. The unfriendly bacteria in your gut pressure you to eat sweets so they can survive. No wonder it is so hard to resist sweets! It's your will-power against all of theirs!

Source: http://pathogens.plosjournals.org/perlserv/?request=cover-legend&volume=2&issue=2
Toxoplasma gondii, an obligate intracellular human parasite, has a unique cytoskeletal apparatus that is probably used for invading host cells and for parasite replication. Shown here are images of T. gondii constructing daughter scaffolds within the mother cell. Cyan: YFP-α-Tubulin; yellow: mRFP-TgMORN1 (see Hu et al.).
Credit: Image provided by Ke Hu and John Murray.

We know, for example, that toxoplasma gondii bacteria influences the behavior of infected mice. When a mouse's brain is infected with this bacteria, the mouse is compulsively driven to engage in risky behavior in the presence of cats. This is because the toxoplasma gondii can only reproduce in the guts of cats. Therefore, infected mice must be eaten by cats in order for the bacteria to reproduce. The bacteria drive the mice to be eaten by cats!

According to the University of Cornell, "The life cycle of Toxoplasma gondii is complex and involves two types of host—definitive and intermediate. Cats, both wild and domestic, are the only definitive hosts forToxoplasma gondii. This means that the parasite can only produce oocysts (eggs) when infecting a cat. When a cat ingests an infected prey (or other infected raw meat) the parasite is released into the cat’s digestive tract. The organisms then multiply in the wall of the small intestine and produce oocysts during what is known as the intraintestinal infection cycle."   (http://www.vet.cornell.edu/fhc/Health_Information/brochure_toxo.cfm)

We know the toxoplasma gondii drive the mice to be eaten by the cats. This is undisputable. This is a clear example of the host organism working on behalf of the bacteria. The Simple Explanation of this phenomenon is that the governing Unit of Consciousness of each hungry bacterial colony, the collective bacterial "hive mind,"  exerts the influence of their collective will on the host's decision-making mechanism. They carry a big vote, in other words, that may or may not be at odds with the host body's own will. 

Would it be entirely out of the realm of possibility for bacteria to have been responsible for human-scale historical trends? How about the bacteria's need for refined sugar driving the slave-trade that labored on their behalf in the sugar plantations? Chew on that one for a while!

More Slinky Torus Magic

By now you realize that you can make a torus model using a toy Slinky. You pull the two ends together and secure them to each other to make a donut.

Torus model made from Slinky toy

Yesterday I was showing a friend how, if you stack two such Slinky tori one upon the other, they fall through one another without interference. Take a look at this short video of me pushing one Slinky through another.

What puzzles me is how neatly the curved tines of the two objects pass through each other without becoming tangled.  Try it yourself! Take any two Slinkys of any size and replicate. Great fun!

How Trees Talk to Each Other -- A TED Talk by Suzanne Simard

This TED talk by Suzanne Simard, delivered at the June, 2016 TED Summit, is a wonderful description of the scientific basis for recognizing the communication and "Golden Rule" -type interdependence of the forest ecosystem.  How could you not define this as conscious awareness?

Here's the talk:

Simple Pledge of Assistance

One of my readers has been working on a new Pledge of Allegiance for school children to recite. His version was kind of long and bulky, so I've shortened it up to make it more practical and to reflect the Simple Explanation values.  What do you think? Can you help write a better pledge? Do you think something like this would be helpful for others?

(to be recited in a circle while holding hands)

“I Pledge Allegiance to the Principles of the United States of America, that all people are endowed with certain unalienable rights, and that among those rights are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

I will join hands with my neighbor to build a safer, more caring world dedicated to achieving life, liberty, and happiness for all. 

We are each responsible for the health of our planet and we will work together to clean her air, her water, and her soil so that all creatures may thrive.

I am grateful for my parents and the love they have given me. 

I am grateful for my teachers and their efforts to help me learn. 

I am grateful for my fellow students who inspire me to learn.”

Process Note

It's been awhile since I posted to the Simple Explanation blog. Many reasons for this; most too difficult to articulate. 

That's me in the middle between my brothers, soon after our return stateside from Japan, 1958.

To catch you up a bit, you know we sold the bed and breakfast and moved to the San Diego area. The sale and the move were unhappy changes for me, and I did not adapt well to the new environment. To me, San Diego is an unsustainable biofilm clinging to the narrow rim betwixt desert and sea. Too many organisms, too few resources, too little space.

In an attempt to right the ship, we have returned to southern Oregon, to Jacksonville, a town just minutes from our previous Ashland location. We have purchased a lovely historic home within walking distance to town. I told my husband if we bought this house and moved back to Oregon, all would be forgiven. I'm working on that part now.

Simple Explanation's new home in Jacksonville, Oregon

My husband classifies us as "retired," and he isn't keen on returning to hostelry. So, as a compromise, I'll be hosting just a couple of rooms through airbnb. 
Please visit my airbnb listing and come pay us a visit! I can help you write or finish a book, if you want. Or we could just talk philosophy. Or maybe just listen to the crickets. 

I've also been grieving the death of my six cats and two dogs. Our animals had all turned elderly about the same time, and they have passed away, one after the other, continually, over the past five years. We did not have any human children, so I have been greatly attached to my pets and I miss them terribly. It is one of the principles of the Simple Explanation that "love is love, no matter the object of attachment." 

Anyway, this is the most upbeat post I could manage... Hope to write more on the Simple Explanation next time...

Here is a poem I wrote when Zoey passed on, which I have now edited to include Franny's passing.

Zoey

 Franny

When the Old Dog Dies

cyd ropp

When the old dog dies

I will no longer have to step carefully over her sleeping form

As I rise from bed and feel my way to the toilet in the dark.

When the old dog dies

I can take the ratty old blanket from off the couch

where we sit for hours watching classic movies and eating popcorn.

When the old dog dies

No one will insist I go for walks twice every day

And no one will pull me out the door into rain, into snow, into blistering August heat.

When the old dog is gone

I can eat my meals in peace and quiet

And not have to share bites off the edges of my toast.

When the old dog dies

I can take the beach towels off the car seats and vacuum out all the fur and return the the van from a rolling dog house

Fit for human passengers again.

When the dog finally dies

I can put fancy cheeses in the refrigerator drawer that now houses two pounds of raw, four-meat canine blend from the butcher shop and and a variety of half-chewed bones.

When the dog is gone

I can go to the mall all afternoon and maybe even take in a movie

Without wondering how she is doing home alone.

When the old dog has gone

I won’t have to search for missing shoes

she has carried from the closet and stashed in odd piles about the house.

After the old dog dies

I can sleep until noon if I want to

And no one will jab me with a cold, wet nose over and over and over again until I give up and get out of bed.

After the old dog is gone

I can get dressed in peace

Without her barking and dancing in happy circles as if my life’s purpose was to take her out for a stroll or a ride in the car.

How much quieter, roomier, cleaner the house will seem without her constantly by my side.

The Heart Has A Mind of Its Own, reprint

Here's a reprint of an excellent article on the brain-heart connection. I'm also embedding a 45 minute youtube video on the same topic called 

"Pure Science Specials - Of Hearts and Minds."

******************************************

Modern Research Reveals Your Heart Does Have a Mind of Its Own

March 05, 2016 

By Dr. Mercola

In the film “Of Hearts and Minds,” science documentary filmmaker David Malone explores the human heart, juxtaposing the modern scientific view of the heart as a mere pump, versus its long history as a symbol of love and the center of innate wisdom and human character.

The film starts off in an operating room where open heart surgery is taking place, and Malone interviews Consultant Surgeon Francis Wells, who talks about the mechanistic and bioelectrical workings of the heart.

On the other side, there’s the poetic view of the heart as a source organ of love, with an intelligence all its own. In Wells’ view, the heart is a pump, and nothing more.

You can replace your heart with an artificial one, and it won’t affect your ability to love. Yet the idea that your heart is somehow an emotional organ remains.

The Heart — An Organ of Truth and Emotion

Sayings like “I love you with all my heart,” and “my heart swelled with joy,” or the reference to someone being “broken-hearted” or “cold hearted” — how much of this poetic language is based on something real?

Are these kinds of sayings references to something biologically true, stated in poetic terms?

This is the question Malone seeks to answer in this film, and the reason he thinks the answer may be important is because he believes the way we see our heart is a reflection of how we view ourselves as human beings.

The ancient Egyptians saw the heart as an organ of truth. And indeed, your heart does seem to be able to tell you the truth about how you feel and what you think is right or wrong. When you lie, for example, your heart rate tends to speed up.

As the film goes on, Malone scours the latest science, to find out whether ourfeelings and emotions really come from our brains, or whether they might actually originate in our hearts.

For starters, Leonardo Da Vinci discovered how the blood flowed through the heart, and how the swirling vortexes within the heart’s chambers worked withthe heart, opening and closing the valves with each heart beat — a far cry from the mechanistic view of the heart as a simple single-stroke pump.

Da Vinci’s drawings and experiments reveal a harmonic beauty — as much a piece of art as a machine.

The ‘Brain’ Within Your Heart

David Paterson, Ph.D. a professor at Oxford University, straddles the two areas of the brain and the heart. His work shows that your brain is not the sole source of your emotions, but indeed, your heart and brain work together in producing emotions.

Your heart actually contains neurons, similar to those in your brain, and your heart and brain are closely connected, creating a symbiotic emotional whole. As explained in the film:

“When your heart receives signals from the brain via the sympathetic nerves, it pumps faster. And when it receives signals through the parasympathetic nerves, it slows down. “

While this seems to support the view that the heart simply follows the orders of the brain, the reality is far more complex. Because your heart also contains thousands of specialized neurons, predominantly located around the right ventricle surface, forming a complex network. Why did nature put them there?

Neurons are what allow your brain to form thoughts. So what are they doing around the right ventricle of your heart? While much about the neurons in your heart is still unknown, one thing is sure — the “brain” in your heart communicates back and forth with the brain in your head. It’s a two-way street.

The Neurons in Your Heart Makes Decisions Too

In the film, Professor Paterson shows a piece of heart tissue from a rabbit — not the whole heart, just a piece of the right ventricle, where the neurons are clustered.

Kept in a tank with nutrients and a steady flow of oxygen, this suspended piece of heart tissue beats all by itself, even though it’s not attached to a living organism, and there’s no actual blood pumping through it.

By sending an electrical impulse into this tissue via an electrode, Professor Patterson demonstrates how the heart tissue immediately slows its contractions; a “decision” made by the neurons in the tissue in response to the stimulation.

This elegant little experiment shows that it’s the neurons in your heart that decide how the heart will behave, not the neurons in your brain. What Professor Patterson is finding again shifts our view of the heart back toward its more poetic and philosophical origins.

As Malone says:

“The heart is a pump that does respond when the brain asks it to, but it is not enslaved to the brain. Its relationship to the brain is more like a marriage ... with each dependent on the other. It seems science is now restoring to the heart something that rightfully belongs to it: Our emotions.”

Intense Negative Emotions Puts Your Heart Health at Risk

The interplay between your brain and heart can be seen when looking at how your emotional and mental outlook colors your health — especially your heart health. Intense anger, for example, boosts your heart attack risk five-fold, and your stroke risk three-fold.

Intense grief after the loss of a loved one also raises your risk of having a heart attack. The day immediately following your loss, your risk of a heart attack goes up by 21 times, and remains six times higher than normal for several weeks.1

Research also shows that people exposed to traumatic experiences, for example, combat veterans, New Orleans residents who went through Hurricane Katrina, and Greeks struggling through financial turmoil, have higher rates of cardiac problems than the general population.

In one such study,2 which involved nearly 208,000 veterans aged 46 to 74, 35 percent of those diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) developed insulin resistance in two years, compared to only 19 percent of those not diagnosed with PTSD.

PTSD sufferers also had higher rates of metabolic syndrome — a collection of risk factors that raise your risk of heart disease, such as high body fat, cholesterol, blood pressure, and blood sugar levels. More than half (about 53 percent) of veterans with PTSD had several of these symptoms, compared to 37 percent of those not suffering with PTSD.

A Positive Outlook Reduces Your Heart Attack Risk

If negative emotions have the potential to harm your heart, it would stand to reason that positive emotions may heal it, and this indeed seems to be the case. In a study3 of nearly 1,500 people with an increased risk of early-onset coronary artery disease, those who reported being cheerful, relaxed, satisfied with life, and full of energy had a one-third reduction in coronary events like a heart attack.

Those with the highest risk of coronary events enjoyed an even greater risk reduction of nearly 50 percent. This was true even when other heart disease risk factors, such as smoking, age, and diabetes, were taken into account. Separate research has similarly found that:

·         Positive psychological well-being is associated with a consistent reduced risk of coronary heart disease (CHD)4

·         Emotional vitality may protect against risk of CHD in men and women5

·         Cheerful heart disease patients live longer than pessimistic heart patients 6

·         Very optimistic people have lower risks of dying from any cause, as well as lower risks of dying from heart disease, compared to highly pessimistic people7

Yes, Your Heart Also Affects Your Mind

In one test, Malone is shown a series of images of neutral and frightened faces, some synced in time to his heartbeat, and others not synced to his heart. Interestingly, when the frightened faces were shown in sync with his heartbeat, he perceived them as being more intensely frightened than when shown out of sync with his heartbeat.

What this test showed was that how his mind processed the perception of fear was affected by his heart. When his brain processed the image in sync with his heart, there was a greater “resonance” in the emotional output.

By looking at the brain scans taken during the test, the researchers are able to pinpoint the precise brain region affected by the heart, namely the amygdala — an area known to be associated with threat perception. Your amygdala processes fear in combination with the signaling from your heart. This brain-heart connection is also at work when you experience feelings of compassion and empathizing with other people’s emotional states.

As Malone says, “it is our heart working in tandem with our brain that allows us to feel for others ... It is ultimately what makes us human... Compassion is the heart’s gift to the rational mind.”

A Simple Explanation of Transfigural Mathematics and Natural Inclusionality

A few days ago a comment on one of my articles, Yearning for the Pleroma , opened my eyes to a line of published thought I should have heard about by now but hadn't. I deeply appreciate this reader for taking the time to leave me the following:

Your example of paper being the ground reminds me of this youtube video by Dr Rayner:[http://youtu.be/yVa7FUIA3W8]  

and

Here's one of Dr Rayner's papers. Essentially, for him (and me) Space itself all around and within is the infinite inductive source...but I need others to examine this. There is relation to Toridal model. [https://www.bestthinking.com/articles/science/math/logic/transfigural-approach-to-evolutionary-origin] 

The first link, to this short video by Dr Rayner, presents an easy-enough introduction to the concept of natural inclusionality. And, yes, the paper model used in Rayner's nifty little demonstration is conceptually the same as the paper used as the ground in my own posters of Gnostic cosmology. 

In my drawings of Gnostic cosmology, the paper itself is likened to the ground state of the Universe (aka God the Father) and the drawings on the paper are the figures differentiating out of, but staying one with, the Father.

I am glad the commenter asked about its possible relation to toroidal models, because the Simple Explanation's toroidal cosmology turns out to be closely aligned with the natural inclusionality model and what they call transfigural math.

Here's the simplest definition of natural inclusionality I could find on the Inclusional Research Forum and Learning Space:  

"The co-creative, fluid dynamic transformation of all through all in receptive spatial context"

The idea behind natural inclusionality is that nature is not divided into the neat, straight-sided and artificially bounded spaces that conventional mathematics and logic depend upon for their formulae to work. Nature is interwoven and interdependent, and it rarely stops moving long enough to take a traditional measurement of singular characteristics. The solution provided by inclusionality is to view nature as a fluid state, with all objects and subjects included within the same fluid flow. Once you are able to shift your perspective to see this fluidity, you recognize "a naturally continuous dynamic geometry of fluid flow, in which spatial and informational phases are mutually inclusive, not mutually exclusive" (Shakunle, L.O. and Alan D.M. Rayner, 2016). 

Transfigural geometry is a "post-Euclidean" geometry "based on the logic of 'the included middle,' 'inclusionality', whereby material 'content' is a dynamic local inclusion of non-local spatial context and vice versa" (Ibid.). For those of you who enjoy reading logic and math, the paper cited here goes into detail regarding the logic of transfigural geometry and its ability to describe and better represent the dynamic interplay of material objects as natural energy flow. At its simplest, transfigural geometry is represented by the figure below:

This figure is called the "superchannel" of transfigural geometry. It represents a line that has been transformed from discrete points to local spheres of non-local spatial influence, called 'zeroids'. (Shakunle, L.O. and Alan D.M. Rayner, 2008)

Readers of this Simple Explanation blog will recognize the above figure as a variant of my own toroidal doodles -- 

in which the "superchannel" depicted by Shakunle is formed through the interplay of infinitely nested toruses.

Now, let's look at some quotes from Shakunle and Rayner and translate them into Simple Explanation terms. That way, if you are already familiar with transfigural math and natural inclusionality you will see how it relates to the Simple Explanation's toroidal cosmology. I'll highlight the quotes and their Simple Explanations, and link them to the original Simple blog articles for fuller explanations.  

"At the philosophical core of transfigural mathematics is the recognition of two distinct but mutually inclusive and co-creative kinds of dynamic influence at work in the cosmos: figural and transfigural. Figural influence is energetic, resistive and brings local distinctiveness--but never complete discreteness--to natural, variable viscous flow-form. Transfigural influence is non-resistive, spatial and present everywhere, without limit" (Shakunle, Rayner).

In Simple Explanation terms, the figural is the stuff of our universe--the aggregations that bubble up, combine, and form Units of Consciousness that distribute themselves at larger and smaller scales throughout creation.

Transfigural refers to the "meta" level consciousness that forms the conscious ground that underlies and transcends our universe and its material and electromagnetic components--what the Simple Explanation refers to as the Universal Unit of Consciousness, the universal womb.

"Transfigural influence can be thought of implicitly as spreading radially, from 'zero identity centres' (called 'zeroids' in transfigural mathematics) distributed everywhere, although this radial influence cannot be manifested explicitly without figural influence" (Shakunle, Rayner).

The Simple Explanation cosmology sites these "zeroids" as the singular point at the center of the torus. As the Universal Unit of Consciousness brings information flowing inward, toward the center of the torus, passing through the shared middles of every thing, past the point of here and now, and then as history downward and back around again to become future potential.  At the same time, information passing through the shared middles explodes inward into our physical reality, bringing coherence, form, and consciousness into every thing in the universe.

"The underlying dynamic geometry of natural flow form and transfigural mathematics is hence primarily non-linear and space-including... Through the interplay of inseparable transfigural and figural, radial and tangential dynamic influence, spiral, linear and annular form emerges fluidly from primarily spherical form as a local figural inclusion of non-local transfigural influence" (Shakunle, Rayner).

I, of course, would amend their primarily spherical forms to read primarily toroidal forms, which contain within themselves both conventional and non-Euclidean geometries, and which otherwise fully satisfies the spherical requirement of natural flow form.

At this point, transfigural math and natural inclusionality take an interesting turn toward talk of gravity, love, and creative potential:

"Transfigural space is not only gravitational but it is also a dynamic presence of love and creative potential" (Shakunle, Rayner).

One-in-Other as a flow translates therefore to One knowing what it is through others, alongside One, and through these others, to and through All with All also reaching inside One. This also translates to the origins of human identity, the place of the person in society and the world, and how human beings are in Nature and Nature in them and how all are included in Space, a common habitat that includes them. The middle, in this transfigural outlook, is not only included but every fluid logic number which is distinct, flows in what comes before and after it that also flow in it..." (Shakunle, Rayner).

A Simple Explanation cosmology proposes that there is a Unit of Consciousness attached to every piece of material of our universe, and it is this inherent consciousness arising from the One consciousness of the shared middle that has an attractive quality that pulls it toward others in search of aggregation into larger and larger forms. We call that attractive quality "gravity" when it relates to physical matter, and we call that attraction "love" when it relates to Units of Consciousness.

"Samedifference--Its Sustaining Spirit:

In the oppositional logic of OR, it is lose, out, win, remain. There are no such grounds for conflict in samedifference. Underlying samedifference is the spirit of sharing: giving, receiving, and passing on in a natural flow of energy. There is no mutually exclusive game of winners and losers. In samedifference, the greatest pleasure comes from bringing joy to the heart of the other through sharing in the gift and promise of life as it waxes and wanes, like a child belonging in the community of a village that belongs in the community of the world and ultimately limitless cosmos that is its home."

As is the case with transfigural math and natural inclusionality, the Simple Explanation cosmology inevitably leads one to embrace others in love. We call this The Simple Golden Rule: Your job is to reach out to others with love, aid, and information for the betterment of all.

I hope this article hasn't muddied the waters in my attempt to relate these two different ways of looking at the unity of our universe. I urge you to read my book, A Simple Explanation of Absolutely Everything, for the clearest, most logical exposition. Feel free to leave a Comment and I'll do my best to give a simple answer.