Cyborg | Designer-Babies | Futurism | Futurist | Immortality | Longevity | Nanotechnology | Post-Human | Singularity | Transhuman

Nazi eugenics – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 Eugenics  Comments Off on Nazi eugenics – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Aug 152015
 

Nazi eugenics were Nazi Germany’s racially based social policies that placed the biological improvement of the Aryan race or Germanic “bermenschen” master race through eugenics at the center of Nazi ideology.[1] Those humans targeted were largely living in private and state-operated institutions, identified as “life unworthy of life” (German: Lebensunwertes Leben), including but not limited to prisoners, degenerate, dissident, people with congenital cognitive and physical disabilities (including feebleminded, epileptic, schizophrenic, manic-depressive, cerebral palsy, neuroatypicals, muscular dystrophy, deaf, blind) (German: erbkranken), homosexual, idle, insane, and the weak, for elimination from the chain of heredity. More than 400,000 people were sterilized against their will, while more than 300,000 were killed under Action T4, a euthanasia program.[2][3][4]

After the eugenics movement was well established in the United States, it was spread to Germany. California eugenicists began producing literature promoting eugenics and sterilization and sending it overseas to German scientists and medical professionals.[5] By 1933, California had subjected more people to forceful sterilization than all other U.S. states combined. The forced sterilization program engineered by the Nazis was partly inspired by California’s.[6]

In 1927, The Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Anthropology (KWIA), an organization which concentrated on physical and social anthropology as well as human genetics, was founded in Berlin with significant financial support from the American philanthropic group, the Rockefeller Foundation.[7] German professor of medicine, anthropology and eugenics, Eugen Fischer, was the director of this organization, a man whose work helped provide the scientific basis for the Nazis’ eugenic policies.[8][9] The Rockefeller Foundation even funded some of the research conducted by Josef Mengele before he went to Auschwitz.[5][10]

Upon returning from Germany in 1934, where more than 5,000 people per month were being forcibly sterilized, the California eugenics leader C. M. Goethe bragged to a colleague:

“You will be interested to know that your work has played a powerful part in shaping the opinions of the group of intellectuals who are behind Hitler in this epoch-making program. Everywhere I sensed that their opinions have been tremendously stimulated by American thought . . . I want you, my dear friend, to carry this thought with you for the rest of your life, that you have really jolted into action a great government of 60 million people.”[11]

Eugenics researcher Harry H. Laughlin often bragged that his Model Eugenic Sterilization laws had been implemented in the 1935 Nuremberg racial hygiene laws.[12] In 1936, Laughlin was invited to an award ceremony at Heidelberg University in Germany (scheduled on the anniversary of Hitler’s 1934 purge of Jews from the Heidelberg faculty), to receive an honorary doctorate for his work on the “science of racial cleansing”. Due to financial limitations, Laughlin was unable to attend the ceremony and had to pick it up from the Rockefeller Institute. Afterwards, he proudly shared the award with his colleagues, remarking that he felt that it symbolized the “common understanding of German and American scientists of the nature of eugenics.”[13]

Adolf Hitler read racial hygiene tracts during his imprisonment in Landsberg Prison.[14]

Hitler believed the nation had become weak, corrupted by the infusion of degenerate elements into its bloodstream.[15]

The racialism and idea of competition, termed social Darwinism in 1944, were discussed by European scientists and also in the Vienna press during the 1920s. Where Hitler picked up the ideas is uncertain. The theory of evolution had been generally accepted in Germany at the time but this sort of extremism was rare.[16]

In his Second Book, which was unpublished during the Nazi era, Hitler praised Sparta, (using ideas perhaps borrowed from Ernst Haeckel),[17] adding that he considered Sparta to be the first “Vlkisch State”. He endorsed what he perceived to be an early eugenics treatment of deformed children:

“Sparta must be regarded as the first Vlkisch State. The exposure of the sick, weak, deformed children, in short, their destruction, was more decent and in truth a thousand times more humane than the wretched insanity of our day which preserves the most pathological subject, and indeed at any price, and yet takes the life of a hundred thousand healthy children in consequence of birth control or through abortions, in order subsequently to breed a race of degenerates burdened with illnesses”.[18][19]

In organizing their eugenics program the Nazis were inspired by the United States’ programs of forced sterilization, especially on the eugenics laws that had been enacted in California.[20]

The Law for the Prevention of Hereditarily Diseased Offspring, enacted on July 14, 1933, allowed the compulsory sterilisation of any citizen who the opinion of a Genetic Health Court” suffered from a list of alleged genetic disorders and required physicians to register every case of hereditary illness known to them, except in women over 45 years of age.[21] Physicians could be fined for failing to comply.

In 1934, the first year of the Law’s operation, nearly 4,000 persons appealed against the decisions of sterilization authorities. A total of 3,559 of the appeals failed. By the end of the Nazi regime, over 200 Hereditary Health Courts (Erbgesundheitsgerichte) were created, and under their rulings over 400,000 persons were sterilized against their will.[22]

The Hadamar Clinic was a mental hospital in the German town of Hadamar used by the Nazi-controlled German government as the site of Action T4. The Kaiser Wilhelm Institute of Anthropology, Human Heredity, and Eugenics was founded in 1927. Hartheim Euthanasia Centre was also part of the euthanasia programme where the Nazis killed individuals they deemed disabled. The first method used involved transporting patients by buses in which the engine exhaust gases were passed into the interior of the buses, and so killed the passengers. Gas chambers were developed later and used pure carbon monoxide gas to kill the patients.[citation needed] In its early years, and during the Nazi era, the Clinic was strongly associated with theories of eugenics and racial hygiene advocated by its leading theorists Fritz Lenz and Eugen Fischer, and by its director Otmar von Verschuer. Under Fischer, the sterilization of so-called Rhineland Bastards was undertaken. Grafeneck Castle was one of Nazi Germany’s killing centers, and today it is a memorial place dedicated to the victims of the Action T4.[23]

The Law for Simplification of the Health System of July 1934 created Information Centers for Genetic and Racial Hygiene, as well as Health Offices. The law also described procedures for ‘denunciation’ and ‘evaluation’ of persons, who were then sent to a Genetic Health Court where sterilization was decided.[24]

Information to determine who was considered ‘genetically sick’ was gathered from routine information supplied by people to doctor’s offices and welfare departments. Standardized questionnaires had been designed by Nazi officials with the help of Dehomag (a subsidiary of IBM in the 1930s), so that the information could be encoded easily onto Hollerith punch cards for fast sorting and counting.[25]

In Hamburg, doctors gave information into a Central Health Passport Archive (circa 1934), under something called the ‘Health-Related Total Observation of Life’. This file was to contain reports from doctors, but also courts, insurance companies, sports clubs, the Hitler Youth, the military, the labor service, colleges, etc. Any institution that gave information would get information back in return. In 1940, the Reich Interior Ministry tried to impose a Hamburg-style system on the whole Reich.[26]

After the Nazis passed the Nuremberg Laws in 1935, it became compulsory for both marriage partners to be tested for hereditary diseases in order to preserve the perceived racial purity of the Aryan race. Everyone was encouraged to carefully evaluate his or her prospective marriage partner eugenically during courtship. Members of the SS were cautioned to carefully interview prospective marriage partners to make sure they had no family history of hereditary disease or insanity, but to do this carefully so as not to hurt the feelings of the prospective fiancee and, if it became necessary to reject her for eugenic reasons, to do it tactfully and not cause her any offense.[27]

Excerpt from:

Nazi eugenics – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

THE Margaret Sanger

 Eugenics  Comments Off on THE Margaret Sanger
Aug 152015
 

Abortion clinics were originally set up with the intention of slowing the population growth of Afro-Americans and others racial groups considered mentally or otherwise inferior.

Margaret Sanger’s Planned Parenthood is the major force behind the abortion and pro-choice/abortion movement in America. If you are proud of being pro-choice, you should know more about the most responsible person for the pro-abortion-rights movement and abortion industry in the 20th century.

“Lothrop Stoddard was on the board of directors (of Margaret Sanger’s Population Association of America) for years…. He had an interview with Adolf Hitler and was very impressed. His book, The Rising Tide of Color Against White World Supremacy, was written while he served on Sanger’s board. Havelock Ellis, one of Sanger’s extra-marital lovers, reviewed this..book favorably in The Birth Control Review”.

At a March,1925 international birth control gathering in New York City, a speaker warned of the menace posed by the “black” and “yellow” peril. The man was not a Nazi or Klansman; he was Dr. S. Adolphus Knopf, a member of Margaret Sanger’s American Birth Control League (ABCL), which along with other groups eventually became known as Planned Parenthood.

Margaret Sanger’s beliefs about social works of charity are revealing: She criticized the success– not failure– of charity… She called for the halt to the medical care being given to slum mothers, and decried the expense to the taxpayers of monies being spent on the deaf, blind and dependent. She condemned foreign missionaries for reducing the infant mortality rates in developing countries, and declared charity to be more evil than for the assistance it provided to the poor and needy. Sanger’s thinking moved to fascism in an elitist attitude that presumes to judge who is worthy to live and to die.

“Planned Parenthood is the largest abortion provider in America. 78% of their clinics are in minority communities. Blacks make up 12% of the population, but 35% of the abortions in America. Are they being targeted? Isn’t that genocide? We are the only minority in America that is on the decline in population. If the current trend continues, by 2038 the black vote will be insignificant. Did you know that the founder of Planned Parenthood, Margaret Sanger, was a devout racist who created the Negro Project designed to sterilize unknowing black women and others she deemed as undesirables of society? The founder of Planned Parenthood said, “Colored people are like human weeds and are to be exterminated.” Is her vision being fulfilled today?” quoted from blackgenocide.org

Adolf Hitler – Fuehrer of Nazi Germany “The demand that defective people be prevented from propagating equally defective offspring. . . represents the most humane act of mankind.” Mein Kampf, vol. 1, ch. 10 from Hitler and Eugenics

Margaret Sanger – Founder of Planned Parenthood “. . .we prefer the policy of immediate sterilizarion, of making sure that parenthood is ‘ absolutely prohibited ‘ to the feeble-minded.” The Pivot of Civilization, p102

“Can two walk together, except they be agreed?” Amos 3:3

Now: The preborn child is often targeted for death if tests show that it may have a physical or mental handicap. The American eugenics program has no central sponsor but does have several large advocacy groups, including Planned Parenthood, NARAL (National Abortion Rights Action League) and the National Abortion Federation.

“In the past few years there has been a frantic effort on the part of Planned Parenthood ideologues to revise their own history. Much of the effort has been waged in an attempt to distance the organization and it’s founder, Margaret Sanger, from charges of radical racial bigotry. Mike Richmond draws from a selection of authors to demonstrate that Sanger and Planned Parenthood are rooted in eugenics, and have earned a despised place in history along with Adolf Hitler and the German Third Reich were.” from “Life Advocate, Jan.-Feb., 1998, Vol. XII, Number 10,

Another link between Margaret Sanger, American Eugenicist and Adolf Hitler, Eugenics practitioner: “The leaders in the German sterilization movement state repeatedly that their legislation was formulated after careful study of the California experiment as reported by Mr. Gosney and Dr. [Paul] Popenoe. It would have been impossible, they say, to undertake such a venture involving some 1 million people without drawing heavily upon previous experience elsewhere.” Who is Dr. Paul Popenoe? He was a leader in the U.S. eugenics movement and wrote (1933) the article ‘Eugenic Sterilization’ in the journal (BCR) that Margaret Sanger started. How many Americans did Dr. Popenoe estimate should be subjected to sterilization? Between five million and ten million Americans. “The situation [in the U.S.A] will grow worse instead of better if steps are not taken to control the reproduction of mentally handicapped. Eugenic sterilization represents one such step that is practicable, humanitarian, and certain in its results.”

from

First, put into action President Wilson’s fourteen points, upon which terms Germany and Austria surrendered to the Allies in 1918.

Second, have Congress set up a special department for the study of population problems and appoint a Parliament of Population, the directors representing the various branches of science: this body to direct and control the population through birth rates and immigration, and to direct its distribution over the country according to national needs consistent with taste, fitness and interest of individuals. The main objects of the Population Congress would be:

a. to raise the level and increase the general intelligence of population.

b. to increase the population slowly by keeping the birth rate at its present level of fifteen per thousand, decreasing the death rate below its present mark of 11 per thousand.

c. to keep the doors of immigration closed to the entrance of certain aliens whose condition is known to be detrimental to the stamina of the race, such as feebleminded, idiots, morons, insane, syphilitic, epileptic, criminal, professional prostitutes, and others in this class barred by the immigration laws of 1924.

d. to apply a stern and rigid policy of sterilization and segregation to that grade of population whose progeny is tainted, or whose inheritance is such that objectionable traits may be transmitted to offspring.

e. to insure the country against future burdens of maintenance for numerous offspring as may be born of feebleminded parents, by pensioning all persons with transmissible disease who voluntarily consent to sterilization.

f. to give certain dysgenic groups in our population their ( another Pro-Choice) choice of segregation or sterilization.

g. to apportion farm lands and homesteads for these segregated persons (sounds like a return to the plantation for a life of slavery) where they would be taught to work under competent instructors for the period of their entire lives.

The first step would thus be to control the intake and output of morons, mental defectives, epileptics.

The second step would be to take an inventory of the secondary group such as illiterates, paupers, unemployables, criminals, prostitutes, dope-fiends; classify them in special departments under government medical protection, and segregate them on farms and open spaces as long as necessary for the strengthening and development of moral conduct.

Having corralled this enormous part of our population and placed it on a basis of health instead of punishment, it is safe to say that fifteen or twenty millions of our population would then be organized into soldiers of defense—defending the unborn against their own disabilities.

The third step would be to give special attention to the mothers’ health, to see that women who are suffering from tuberculosis, heart or kidney disease, toxic goitre, gonorrhea, or any disease where the condition of pregnancy disturbs their health are placed under public health nurses to instruct them in practical, scientific methods of contraception in order to safeguard their lives—thus reducing maternal mortality.

The above steps may seem to place emphasis on a health program instead of on tariffs, moratoriums and debts, but I believe that national health is the first essential factor in any program for universal peace.

With the future citizen safeguarded from hereditary taints, with five million mental and moral degenerates (Sanger was known for her attitudes on free sex, adultery and abortion. Under this provision, Ms. Sanger’s sexual profligacy and pro-abortion – murder of the unborn- would have placed Sanger, herself, into this category) segregated, with ten million women and ten million children receiving adequate care, we could then turn our attention to the basic needs for international peace.

There would then be a definite effort to make population increase slowly and at a specified rate, in order to accommodate and adjust increasing numbers to the best social and economic system.

In the meantime we should organize and join an International League of Low Birth Rate Nations to secure and maintain World Peace.

“Summary of address before the New History Society”, January 17th, New York City

Highlights in red inserted by website author.

Margaret Sanger, Sterilization, and the Swastika by Mike Richmond Good assessment of Sanger’s beliefs and the affect of her influence

See the article here:

THE Margaret Sanger

Eugenics in Virginia: Buck v. Bell and Forced …

 Eugenics  Comments Off on Eugenics in Virginia: Buck v. Bell and Forced …
Aug 042015
 

Photograph of Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes. Courtesy of the Library of Congress. [1.1] Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. in Buck v. Bell

It is better for all the world, if instead of waiting to execute degenerate offspring for crime or to let them starve for their imbecility, society can prevent those who are manifestly unfit from continuing their kind Three generations of imbeciles are enough. ~Oliver Wendell Holmes

Writing for the majority in the Supreme Courts affirmative decision of the Buck v. Bell landmark case, Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. described Charlottesville native Carrie Buck as the probable potential parent of socially inadequate offspring, likewise afflicted stating that her welfare and that of society will be promoted by her sterilization.

Current scholarship shows that Carrie Bucks sterilization relied on a false diagnosis premised on the now discredited science of eugenics. It is likely that Carries mother, Emma Buck, was committed to a state institution because she was considered sexually promiscuous, that the same diagnosis was made about Carrie when she became an unwed mother at the age of 17 due to being raped, and that her daughter Vivian was diagnosed as not quite normal at the age of six months largely in support of the legal effort to sterilize Carrie.

2004 Claude Moore Health Sciences Library

Read the original post:

Eugenics in Virginia: Buck v. Bell and Forced …

Eugenics in the United States – Wikipedia, the free …

 Eugenics  Comments Off on Eugenics in the United States – Wikipedia, the free …
Jul 212015
 

Eugenics, the social movement claiming to improve the genetic features of human populations through selective breeding and sterilization,[1] based on the idea that it is possible to distinguish between superior and inferior elements of society,[2] played a significant role in the history and culture of the United States prior to its involvement in World War II.[3]

Eugenics was practised in the United States many years before eugenics programs in Nazi Germany[4] and U.S. programs provided much of the inspiration for the latter.[5][6][7] Stefan Khl has documented the consensus between Nazi race policies and those of eugenicists in other countries, including the United States, and points out that eugenicists understood Nazi policies and measures as the realization of their goals and demands.[5]

During the Progressive Era of the late 19th and early 20th century, eugenics was considered[by whom?] a method of preserving and improving the dominant groups in the population; it is now generally associated with racist and nativist elements[citation needed] (as the movement was to some extent a reaction to a change in emigration from Europe) rather than scientific genetics.

The American eugenics movement was rooted in the biological determinist ideas of Sir Francis Galton, which originated in the 1880s. Galton studied the upper classes of Britain, and arrived at the conclusion that their social positions were due to a superior genetic makeup.[8] Early proponents of eugenics believed that, through selective breeding, the human species should direct its own evolution. They tended to believe in the genetic superiority of Nordic, Germanic and Anglo-Saxon peoples; supported strict immigration and anti-miscegenation laws; and supported the forcible sterilization of the poor, disabled and “immoral”.[9] Eugenics was also supported by African Americans intellectuals such as W. E. B. Du Bois, Thomas Wyatt Turner, and many academics at Tuskegee University, Howard University, and Hampton University; however they believed the best blacks were as good as the best whites and The Talented Tenth” of all races should mix.[10] W. E. B. Du Bois believed only fit blacks should procreate to eradicate the races heritage of moral iniquity.”[10][11]

The American eugenics movement received extensive funding from various corporate foundations including the Carnegie Institution, Rockefeller Foundation, and the Harriman railroad fortune.[6] In 1906 J.H. Kellogg provided funding to help found the Race Betterment Foundation in Battle Creek, Michigan.[8] The Eugenics Record Office (ERO) was founded in Cold Spring Harbor, New York in 1911 by the renowned biologist Charles B. Davenport, using money from both the Harriman railroad fortune and the Carnegie Institution. As late as the 1920s, the ERO was one of the leading organizations in the American eugenics movement.[8][12] In years to come, the ERO collected a mass of family pedigrees and concluded that those who were unfit came from economically and socially poor backgrounds. Eugenicists such as Davenport, the psychologist Henry H. Goddard, Harry H. Laughlin, and the conservationist Madison Grant (all well respected in their time) began to lobby for various solutions to the problem of the “unfit”. Davenport favored immigration restriction and sterilization as primary methods; Goddard favored segregation in his The Kallikak Family; Grant favored all of the above and more, even entertaining the idea of extermination.[13] The Eugenics Record Office later became the Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory.

Eugenics was widely accepted in the U.S. academic community.[6] By 1928 there were 376 separate university courses in some of the United States’ leading schools, enrolling more than 20,000 students, which included eugenics in the curriculum.[14] It did, however, have scientific detractors (notably, Thomas Hunt Morgan, one of the few Mendelians to explicitly criticize eugenics), though most of these focused more on what they considered the crude methodology of eugenicists, and the characterization of almost every human characteristic as being hereditary, rather than the idea of eugenics itself.[15]

By 1910, there was a large and dynamic network of scientists, reformers and professionals engaged in national eugenics projects and actively promoting eugenic legislation. The American Breeders Association was the first eugenic body in the U.S., established in 1906 under the direction of biologist Charles B. Davenport. The ABA was formed specifically to investigate and report on heredity in the human race, and emphasize the value of superior blood and the menace to society of inferior blood.” Membership included Alexander Graham Bell, Stanford president David Starr Jordan and Luther Burbank.[16][17] The American Association for the Study and Prevention of Infant Mortality was one of the first organizations to begin investigating infant mortality rates in terms of eugenics.[18] They promoted government intervention in attempts to promote the health of future citizens.[19][verification needed]

Several feminist reformers advocated an agenda of eugenic legal reform. The National Federation of Womens Clubs, the Womans Christian Temperance Union, and the National League of Women Voters were among the variety of state and local feminist organization that at some point lobbied for eugenic reforms.[20]

One of the most prominent feminists to champion the eugenic agenda was Margaret Sanger, the leader of the American birth control movement. Margaret Sanger saw birth control as a means to prevent unwanted children from being born into a disadvantaged life, and incorporated the language of eugenics to advance the movement.[21][22] Sanger also sought to discourage the reproduction of persons who, it was believed, would pass on mental disease or serious physical defect. She advocated sterilization in cases where the subject was unable to use birth control.[21] Unlike other eugenicists, she rejected euthanasia.[23] For Sanger, it was individual women and not the state who should determine whether or not to have a child.[24][25]

In the Deep South, womens associations played an important role in rallying support for eugenic legal reform. Eugenicists recognized the political and social influence of southern clubwomen in their communities, and used them to help implement eugenics across the region.[26] Between 1915 and 1920, federated womens clubs in every state of the Deep South had a critical role in establishing public eugenic institutions that were segregated by sex.[27] For example, the Legislative Committee of the Florida State Federation of Womens Clubs successfully lobbied to institute a eugenic institution for the mentally retarded that was segregated by sex.[28] Their aim was to separate mentally retarded men and women to prevent them from breeding more feebleminded” individuals.

See the original post:

Eugenics in the United States – Wikipedia, the free …

Worrying about online privacy

 Fourth Amendment  Comments Off on Worrying about online privacy
Mar 292015
 

The Fourth Amendment of the US Constitution protects Americans against unreasonable searches and seizures of either self or property by government officials. When the government oversteps its authority, those responsible must be held accountable for their actions. With few exceptions, however, government surveillance focuses on protecting life, property and the American way. Private surveillance, on the other hand, is governed by no laws, and is conducted for self-interest and profit. In volume, stealth and intrusiveness, the private sector far surpasses anything the government has attempted or even contemplated doing. Yet, while Americans regularly read or hear about the National Security Agency (NSA) and Central Intelligence Agencys (CIA) intrusion into their lives, not many seem to be accusing private companies like Walmart or the Ford Motor Company of spying on people. It comes down to whether Americans trust companies like Verizon, Target, and Google to respect their privacy more than they trust the US government. The intelligence communitys focus is on foreign threats and activities overseas. The CIA and NSA operate under strict rules and regulations, including a ban against collecting information on Americans. The current policy states that signals intelligence shall be collected exclusively where there is a foreign intelligence or counterintelligence purpose to support national and departmental missions and not for any other purposes. The private sector, on the other hand, focuses on the bottom line and operates unfettered. Google a resort in Mexico, and see how ads for that destination continue to pop up every time you open your Internet browser. And that is only the tip of the iceberg. You cant imagine all the things going on behind the scenes that you arent able to see. Government surveillance, of course, increases when a known terrorist or other enemy of the United States contacts an American citizen. Following 9/11, NSA analysts were given limited access to the bad guys communication links to the United States. Even then, however, the privacy of American citizens remained a top priority. Going forward, if a known terrorist communicates with an American citizen, I suspect most Americans would feel more comfortable knowing someone is watching their back. Having spent more than 40 years as an intelligence officer, I know first-hand that the US intelligence community has made its share of mistakes (being dead wrong about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and condoning torture spring readily to mind). And I continue to believe in the necessity of strict congressional oversight and restrictions, which separate the US intelligence community from other intelligence organizations like the KGB. This oversight is critical for an intelligence community serving a democratic country. It is true that the US intelligence community has at times been overzealous in protecting against terrorist threats and others who could do the United States harm, but not because it was seeking to pry into the private affairs of American citizens. For me, the NSA and Drug Enforcement Administrations (DEA) bulk collection and storage programs fall into the overzealous category. I am aware of the argument that more is better, but when weighed against privacy rights and the questionable predictive value of these materials, these arguments dont make sense. As in other areas, the Intelligence Community tends to overstate its capability to predict future events. I suspect the efforts to stop or disrupt terrorist attacks are on par with law enforcements (rather poor) record on stopping premeditated murders, kidnappings, and the spread of illegal drugs. For me, the larger problem is the massive effort by private companies to collect every bit of data they can about me: my health, what I buy, what I eat, where I shop, who I talk to, and on and on. All of this is done not only without my permission, but also without my knowledge and it is legal. Of course, I dont want the government snooping around in my private affairs any more than you do. Yet, if it is in the nations security interest and my privacy remains protected, access to my metadata doesnt seem like too much for my government to ask of me. The writer is the former head of the Bureau of Intelligence and Research (INR), US State Department. (In partnership with The Mark News)

See original here:
Worrying about online privacy

Liberty University Hosts Simulated BioTerror Attack

 Liberty  Comments Off on Liberty University Hosts Simulated BioTerror Attack
Mar 292015
 

Lynchburg, VA- A group of students at Liberty University learned how you would respond to a bioterror attack Saturday morning.

The demonstration involved the State Police and was at the Vines Center. The students learned that there’s a whole lot to responding to a bioterrorist attack.

The Virginia State Police Counter Terrorism & Criminal Interdiction Unit led the demonstration.

“We’ve heard not only from the news media ,but from throughout the world, there are attacks on Christians, there are attacks throughout the world. And we’re trying to prepare not only our students but local law enforcement agencies about how to handle a bioterrorist attack,” said Dr. James Mcclintok, the director of Forensic Science at Liberty University.

This simulated fog represents a dangerous micro-organism contaminating the air.

“Everyone’s afraid of a biological weapons attack, but no one really knows how to respond if it occurs of what to do, they’re just be wide-spread panic. So the more education there is for the public, the greater the chance lives will be saved if one of these events does occur,” said student Samuel Giovanucci, a Strategic Intelligence Major.

Liberty University students first needed to learn how to properly test it.

“It could potentially cause harm to us, our health and cause illness or even death. So we’re looking at the release of a biological agent and then our students will identify that agent for identification purposes,” said Mcclintok.

Students signed up to participate, some working on forensics, criminology, or biology classes, others just wanted to learn more and be prepared.

“Trying to prepare our students when they enter the working environment, how to be better prepared for such an attack,” said Mcclintok.

The rest is here:
Liberty University Hosts Simulated BioTerror Attack

Dr. Beth-Ann Lesnikoski – Women’s Health and Healing of the Palm Beaches – Video

 Beaches  Comments Off on Dr. Beth-Ann Lesnikoski – Women’s Health and Healing of the Palm Beaches – Video
Mar 192015
 



Dr. Beth-Ann Lesnikoski – Women's Health and Healing of the Palm Beaches
Dr. Beth-Ann Lesnikoski specializes in Breast Surgery at Women's Health and Healing of the Palm Beaches in Lake Worth, FL. For more information, please visit http://www.womenshealthandhealingpb.com.

By: HCA EF

Read this article:
Dr. Beth-Ann Lesnikoski – Women’s Health and Healing of the Palm Beaches – Video

3 Signs Your SEO Campaign Is Dying and How to Fix It

 SEO  Comments Off on 3 Signs Your SEO Campaign Is Dying and How to Fix It
Mar 162015
 

SEO is a long-term strategy to gain more visibility and more traffic for your online brand, but accurately measuring the effectiveness of that strategy can be challenging. Many of the benefits of SEO, such as increased brand visibility, are qualitative and therefore hard to measure, and even objective metrics like inbound traffic can be subject to random variation and become difficult to interpret.

After youve maintained an SEO strategy for more than a few months, however, you should have enough information to form meaningful conclusions from your data. Most importantly, youll be able to check in regularly to see if there are any red flags that signal something is wrong with your campaign. These red flags can be hard to spot initially, but if you know what to look for, you should have no problem detecting them and taking corrective action immediately.

Organic traffic is a metric referring to the number of people who found your site through search engines, and its one of the best metrics we have to measure the effectiveness of an SEO campaign. To measure your organic traffic, log into Google Analytics and click on “Acquisitions.” Here, youll see a breakdown of how many visits your site received from organic sources, referrals, social media, and direct visits.

You can click into the organic visits to gain some extra details on the sources of your organic traffic, but the main number is the one were most concerned with. Keep an eye on it on a monthly if not weekly basis. While you should be seeing some long-term growth patterns, what you really want to look for is any sharp drop. For example, if youre used to seeing 1,000 hits a week and that inexplicably drops to 200, you might have a major problem on your hands.

Like I mentioned, the goal here is to see long-term growth. If you check back on a consistent basis, month after month, you should see an overall pattern toward increased traffic. That being said, organic search behavior is anything but predictable, and random factors beyond your or Googles control could artificially leave you with a tough month or a brief stagnation. If you notice one month in particular doesnt result in growth, dont panic.

However, if your campaign remains stagnant for two months or more, you might have a serious problem. What you want to see is steady, measurable growth in organic visits if youre hovering around the same figures or if you start to see a decline, consider it a red flag. There are instances where multiple months of consistent traffic dont necessarily mean your SEO campaign is failing, but you dont want to take the gamble by keeping things the same for another month.

Keyword rankings arent nearly as important as they used to be. There was a time when keywords meant everything to SEO, and getting one to rank highly meant you had found success. Today, keywords are less pivotal; since Google deciphers user queries based on intent, rather than keyword phrases, your ranks are much more fluid. Its far more important to have relevant, quality content than it is to have content based around certain keywords.

However, your rankings are still a valuable metric to measure because they can indicate the health of your campaign. Keep a handful of keywords as your targets to measure, and check your ranking on them every once in a while (once a month for most campaigns, or once a week for more aggressive campaigns). If you notice your rankings falling on a majority of those keywords, this is a red flag for your campaign.

Lets imagine that youve found one of these red flags. What does that mean for your campaign? It means something is off in your strategy, and its interfering with your ability to increase your search visibility. It can be difficult to track down the exact cause of this downturn, especially since it could be multiple factors working together, but its important to identify the source.

Are you writing your content with one or a handful of keywords at the forefront? Are you recycling content or using old topics just so you can push more content on your site? If so, you could be over-optimizing, which could be leading to lower ranks. Write fresh, original content on new topics on a regular basis instead.

Read the rest here:
3 Signs Your SEO Campaign Is Dying and How to Fix It

Seagulls have a negative effect on Goderich's beaches

 Beaches  Comments Off on Seagulls have a negative effect on Goderich's beaches
Mar 132015
 

Seagulls have been identified as the main cause of elevated levels of E.coli at Goderichs beaches.

Erica Clark of the Huron County Health Unit informed town councillors at the March 9 meeting microbial source tracking results showed that the birds are causing beach closures in town.

Clark said while there is regular water testing of local beaches for E.coli, that method does not indicate what is causing the contamination.

Last summer, the health unit performed microbial source tracking, a field that provides information on sources of fecal pollution, in six areas of Goderich beach waters.

They tested for six species humans, cattle, dogs, Canadian geese, seagulls and other birds.

Clark said seagulls were found to be the only major contributing factor to elevated levels of E.coli.

However, she did note that the other species cant be totally ruled out on such a small sample of testing.

According to Clark, the levels of E.coli at Goderichs beaches has been increasing over the past eight years.

The beaches to the north and south of Goderich have good water quality, which Clark said likely indicates the sources of fecal pollution are localized to Goderich.

Clark presented council with three possible choices on how to deal with seagulls.

See the article here:
Seagulls have a negative effect on Goderich's beaches

Wonkblog: How the First Amendment is undermining the FDAs power to regulate drugs

 Misc  Comments Off on Wonkblog: How the First Amendment is undermining the FDAs power to regulate drugs
Mar 112015
 

The Food and Drug Administration is proposing to allow pharmaceutical companies to contradict official safety warnings in sales presentations to customers.

While an FDA warning about a drugs dangers can scare off buyers, the new proposal would allow the companies to present customers with information that undermines official warnings as long as it comes from a peer-reviewed journal article.

The proposal is supported by pharmaceutical manufacturers, who argue that the policy would allow them to give doctors and hospitals the benefits of the latest research.

But the proposal is drawing an avalanche of criticism from public health advocates who argue that because individual studies can differwidelyin their results, a drug company could easily mislead customers – and possibly endanger patients – by presenting only a selection of new research.

The proposal seriously undermines FDA authority, Sidney M. Wolfe, founder of Public Citizens Health Research Group wrote Wednesdayto the agency. Its main supporters are drug companies and their associations, all of which would benefit from being allowed and encouraged to sell more drugs by making them seem safer than FDA has judged them to be.

Under the proposal, FDA would not object to the distribution of new risk information that rebuts, mitigates, or refines risk information in the approved labeling. The studies must be well-designed and at least as informative as the data sources that the FDA used in generating the official warning.

For example, under the proposal a drug-maker could present evidence that the severity or frequency of a side effect is less than what is suggested by the FDA-approved label. Or it could question whether the drug causes the side effect at all.

Exactly what drug-makers can tell customers about their products has been the subject of regulation and sometimes – when the side effect has led to heart attacks, cancer, or suicide – billion-dollar penalties. But the industry has pushed back in recent years, arguing that under First Amendment, the government cannot curtail their right to disseminate information.

The proposal seems bound to increase drug sales because it is explicitly geared toward undermining the FDA warnings, rather than enhancing them, critics said. The proposal allows the dissemination of information that rebuts or mitigates the risk identified by the FDA, or information that “refines” the risk as long as it does not indicate greater seriousness of the risk.

In a letter to the FDA, the chief pharmaceutical lobbying group, PhRMA said while FDA has an important role in evaluating the safety and efficacy of new medicines…we also must recognize the critical need for healthcare professionals to receive the most current, accurate, and comprehensive scientific information.

Visit link:
Wonkblog: How the First Amendment is undermining the FDAs power to regulate drugs

The First Amendment as we know it today didnt exist until the 60s

 Misc  Comments Off on The First Amendment as we know it today didnt exist until the 60s
Mar 102015
 

Reading the First Amendment isnt easy. Consider the text:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Neither the Words nor the History Helps Much

The words themselves arent much help. Reading the first word, Congress, literally would leave the president, the military, fifty governors, and your local cops free to ignore our most important set of constitutional protections. Reading the fourth and fifth words, no law, literally would wind up protecting horrible verbal assaults like threats, fraud, extortion, and blackmail. The three most important words in the First Amendmentthe freedom of the words that introduce, modify, and describe the crucial protections of speech, press, and assembly, simply cannot be read literally. The phrase the freedom of is a legal concept that has no intrinsic meaning. Someone must decide what should or should not be placed within the protective legal cocoon. Finally, the majestic abstractions in the First Amendment, like establishment of religion, free exercise thereof, peaceful assembly, and petition for a redress of grievances do not carry a single literal meaning. In the end, each of the abstractions protects only the behavior we think it should protect.

So much for the literal text.

History (or whats sometimes called originalism these days) is even worse as a firm guide to reading the First Amendment. The truth is that the First Amendment as we know it today didnt exist before Justice William Brennan Jr. and the rest of the Warren Court invented it in the 1960s. In fact, history turns out to be the worst place to look for a robust First Amendment. Thomas Jefferson thought free speech was a pretty good idea, but the ink wasnt dry on the First Amendment before President Adams locked up seventeen of the twenty newspaper editors who opposed his reelection in 1800. One of the jailed editors was Benjamin Franklins nephew Benjamin Franklin Bache. He died in jail. Despite the newly enacted First Amendment, not only did the federal courts remain silent in the face of Adamss massive exercise in government censorship; they often initiated the prosecutions. Matthew Lyon, Vermonts only Jeffersonian member of Congress, was jailed for four months and fined $1,000 for criticizing the president in his newspaper. Lyon had the last word, though. He was released just in time to cast Vermonts swing vote for Thomas Jefferson when the presidential election of 1800 was thrown into the House, helping to seal Adamss defeat.

The nineteenth and early twentieth centuries were free-speech disasters. Before the Civil War, antislavery newspapers were torched throughout the North. All criticism of slavery was banned in the South. Slaves were even forbidden to learn to read. During the Civil War, President Lincoln held opponents of the war in military custody for speaking out against it. After the Civil War, labor leaders went to jail in droves for picketing and striking for higher wages. Labor unions were treated as unlawful conspiracies. Radical opponents of World War I were sentenced to ten-year prison terms and eventually deported to the Soviet Unionfor leafleting. In 1920, Eugene Debs polled more than one million votes for president from his prison cell in the Atlanta federal penitentiary, where he was serving a ten-year jail term for giving a speech in 1917 praising draft resisters. Released in 1921, Debs, his health broken, was banned from voting or running for office; he died in 1926. After World War II, fear of communism translated into jail or deportation for thousands of political radicals guilty of saying the wrong thing or joining the wrong group, culminating in 1951 with the Supreme Courts affirmance of multiyear jail terms for the leadership of the American Communist Party, despite its status as a lawful political party.

So much for history, unless you want to erase the First Amendment.

* * *

A Tale of Two Readings

Link:
The First Amendment as we know it today didnt exist until the 60s

Medical SEO – Medical Advertising Agencies – Medical Marketing Agency – Health Advertising – Video

 SEO  Comments Off on Medical SEO – Medical Advertising Agencies – Medical Marketing Agency – Health Advertising – Video
Mar 092015
 



Medical SEO – Medical Advertising Agencies – Medical Marketing Agency – Health Advertising
Medical SEO – Medical Advertising Agencies – Medical Marketing Agency – Healthcare Marketing Trends – Health Advertising – Medicine Pro.

By: Medicine Pro – Healthcare Marketing Agency – Medical Videos – Medical Marketing

More here:
Medical SEO – Medical Advertising Agencies – Medical Marketing Agency – Health Advertising – Video

Activating genes on demand: Possible?

 Regenerative Medicine  Comments Off on Activating genes on demand: Possible?
Mar 062015
 

When it comes to gene expression — the process by which our DNA provides the recipe used to direct the synthesis of proteins and other molecules that we need for development and survival — scientists have so far studied one single gene at a time. A new approach developed by Harvard geneticist George Church, Ph.D., can help uncover how tandem gene circuits dictate life processes, such as the healthy development of tissue or the triggering of a particular disease, and can also be used for directing precision stem cell differentiation for regenerative medicine and growing organ transplants.

The findings, reported by Church and his team of researchers at the Wyss Institute for Biologically Inspired Engineering at Harvard University and Harvard Medical School in Nature Methods, show promise that precision gene therapies could be developed to prevent and treat disease on a highly customizable, personalized level, which is crucial given the fact that diseases develop among diverse pathways among genetically-varied individuals. Wyss Core Faculty member Jim Collins, Ph.D., was also a co-author on the paper. Collins is also the Henri Termeer Professor of Medical Engineering & Science and Professor in the Department of Biological Engineering at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

The approach leverages the Cas9 protein, which has already been employed as a Swiss Army knife for genome engineering, in a novel way. The Cas9 protein can be programmed to bind and cleave any desired section of DNA — but now Church’s new approach activates the genes Cas9 binds to rather than cleaving them, triggering them to activate transcription to express or repress desired genetic traits. And by engineering the Cas9 to be fused to a triple-pronged transcription factor, Church and his team can robustly manipulate single or multiple genes to control gene expression.

“In terms of genetic engineering, the more knobs you can twist to exert control over the expression of genetic traits, the better,” said Church, a Wyss Core Faculty member who is also Professor of Genetics at Harvard Medical School and Professor of Health Sciences and Technology at Harvard and MIT. “This new work represents a major, entirely new class of knobs that we could use to control multiple genes and therefore influence whether or not specific genetics traits are expressed and to what extent — we could essentially dial gene expression up or down with great precision.”

Such a capability could lead to gene therapies that would mitigate age-related degeneration and the onset of disease; in the study, Church and his team demonstrated the ability to manipulate gene expression in yeast, flies, mouse and human cell cultures.

“We envision using this approach to investigate and create comprehensive libraries that document which gene circuits control a wide range of gene expression,” said one of the study’s lead authors Alejandro Chavez, Ph.D., Postdoctoral Fellow at the Wyss Institute. Jonathan Schieman, Ph.D, of the Wyss Institute and Harvard Medical School, and Suhani Vora, of the Wyss Institute, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and Harvard Medical School, are also lead co-authors on the study.

The new Cas9 approach could also potentially target and activate sections of the genome made up of genes that are not directly responsible for transcription, and which previously were poorly understood. These sections, which comprise up to 90% of the genome in humans, have previously been considered to be useless DNA “dark matter” by geneticists. In contrast to translated DNA, which contains recipes of genetic information used to express traits, this DNA dark matter contains transcribed genes which act in mysterious ways, with several of these genes often having influence in tandem.

But now, that DNA dark matter could be accessed using Cas9, allowing scientists to document which non-translated genes can be activated in tandem to influence gene expression. Furthermore, these non-translated genes could also be turned into a docking station of sorts. By using Cas9 to target and bind gene circuits to these sections, scientists could introduce synthetic loops of genes to a genome, therefore triggering entirely new or altered gene expressions.

The ability to manipulate multiple genes in tandem so precisely also has big implications for advancing stem cell engineering for development of transplant organs and regenerative therapies.

“In order to grow organs from stem cells, our understanding of developmental biology needs to increase rapidly,” said Church. “This multivariate approach allows us to quickly churn through and analyze large numbers of gene combinations to identify developmental pathways much faster than has been previously capable.”

See the original post:
Activating genes on demand: Possible?

Health advisories lifted for 3 Hillsborough Beaches, issued for 1

 Beaches  Comments Off on Health advisories lifted for 3 Hillsborough Beaches, issued for 1
Feb 262015
 

Health advisories were lifted Wednesday for three Hillsborough County beaches and issued for one based on criteria for bacteria levels recommended by the Environmental Protection Agency.

Based on sampling done this week, a health advisory issued on Feb. 18 was lifted for Cypress Point Beach, Bahia Beach and Picnic Island Beach.

I new advisory was issued for Davis Island because samples were above thresholds for enterococci bacteria. Another sample will be taken on March 2.

The beach should be considered unsafe for swimming, according to the Hillsborough County Health Department.

The health department has been conducting coastal quality monitoring at nine sites once every two weeks since August 2000 and weekly since August 2002 through the states Healthy Beaches Monitoring Program.

Enterococci bacteria is typically found in the intestinal tracts of humans and animals and may cause human disease, infections, or rashes. It is an indication of fecal pollution, which may come from stormwater runoff, pets and wildlife, and human sewage, the department said.

For more information, visit http://www.floridahealth.gov/environmental-health/beach-water-quality/index.html.

Read more from the original source:
Health advisories lifted for 3 Hillsborough Beaches, issued for 1

Walk in Freedom and Health(Session 3)-Kim Foster at Malachi Family Ministries, Wichita, KS – Video

 Freedom  Comments Off on Walk in Freedom and Health(Session 3)-Kim Foster at Malachi Family Ministries, Wichita, KS – Video
Feb 242015
 



Walk in Freedom and Health(Session 3)-Kim Foster at Malachi Family Ministries, Wichita, KS
Learn to deal with fear. We cannot be in faith and fear at the same time concerning the same thing. A person's body and their actions will line up with their thoughts. What a person believes…

By: Kim Foster

Excerpt from:
Walk in Freedom and Health(Session 3)-Kim Foster at Malachi Family Ministries, Wichita, KS – Video

Health Free Speech Petition and Litigation – Video

 Free Speech  Comments Off on Health Free Speech Petition and Litigation – Video
Feb 122015
 



Health Free Speech Petition and Litigation
Gary Franchi interviews Ralph Fucetola JD about the Health Freedom of Speech litigation and petition http://tinyurl.com/FreeHealthSpeech.

By: NaturalSolutions

See the original post:
Health Free Speech Petition and Litigation – Video

Health advisories issued for 2 Hillsborough beaches, lifted for one

 Beaches  Comments Off on Health advisories issued for 2 Hillsborough beaches, lifted for one
Jan 282015
 

Health advisories were issued Tuesday for beaches at Ben T. Davis and Picnic Island based on criteria for bacteria recommended by the Environmental Protection Agency.

Samples taken Monday were above thresholds for enterococci bacteria, the Hillsborough County Health Department said.

The beaches should be considered unsafe for swimming, the department said.

Meanwhile, a similar health advisory for the beach at E.G. Simmons Park in Ruskin was lifted Tuesday.

Tests showed enterococci bacteria in the water at the beach has returned to acceptable levels, according to a release from the health department.

The advisory was put in place on Feb. 13.

The health department has been conducting coastal quality monitoring at nine sites once every two weeks since August 2000 and weekly since August 2002 through the states Healthy Beaches Monitoring Program.

Enterococci bacteria is typically found in the intestinal tracts of humans and animals and may cause human disease, infections, or rashes. It is an indication of fecal pollution, which may come from stormwater runoff, pets and wildlife, and human sewage, the department said.

The rest is here:
Health advisories issued for 2 Hillsborough beaches, lifted for one

Freedom: the fruit of obeying God

 Freedom  Comments Off on Freedom: the fruit of obeying God
Jan 272015
 

The desire for freedom is natural, especially if we feel boxed in by personal circumstances or social customs. Perhaps it is forced observance of stringent traditions or a domineering family member that makes us think were unable to fulfill our potential or be ourselves.

What kind of freedom are we yearning for? Isnt it the freedom to express our God-given identity, unencumbered by social status, personal history, gender, opinions of family members, or tradition? This freedom isnt found in disobedience or licentiousness, in doing whatever one wants, or living for oneself alone. The freedom to progress and be who we really are is found through obeying God, our creator, the divine Principle of the universe.

Often its not people or traditions themselves that harm us. Rather it is our mistaken belief that something can keep good from us. There is Gods promise in the Bible, If ye be willing and obedient, ye shall eat the good of the land (Isaiah 1:19). We might think of the good of the land as the freedom to live our own spiritual individuality.

To be obedient to God is to be who we really are. We are obedient to God, Truth, by expressing honesty and integrity. We are obedient to divine Mind as we give thought to what we do, expressing our native intelligence. We are obedient to God as Love when we show compassion toward others. Mary Baker Eddy, the Discoverer and Founder of Christian Science, says in Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures: God creates and governs the universe, including man. The universe is filled with spiritual ideas, which He evolves, and they are obedient to the Mind that makes them (p. 295).

Obeying the Ten Commandments and Christ Jesus corollary teachings in the Sermon on the Mount leads to freedom from limits imposed on us. To express love, honesty, humility, confidence in Gods supremacy, peaceableness, and so forth, is to express something of our true nature and to find release from the fear of being dominated. The customs of society may not change, but the individual who listens for Gods guidance gains an independence from human pressures, because God guides us to do what is right in every situation.

Christ Jesus left a remarkable record for those who wish to be free to express their true individuality. His obedience to God gave him a freedom that others had never known. For example, he healed sickness in obedience to Gods law and in opposition to false, physical laws. He even healed people on the Sabbath despite narrow Pharisaical religious codes. He was free from superstition because he served the God of the Bible, the true God, whose presence allows no place for little gods formed in human thought. Even when Jesus was faced with difficult circumstances, his obedience to God gave him the freedom of dominion. After he had calmed a storm at sea it was said, even the winds and the sea obey him (Matthew 8:27). His obedience to God eventually gave him the ultimate freedom the freedom from death.

The way he obeyed God and the way we can obey God is no mystery. Jesus lived in obedience to the laws of God as they are explained in the Bible. What did that involve? He had one God and didnt believe that there could be any other power or Life than the one infinite creator, good. And he loved his fellow beings.

The person who puts God first in daily life is putting unselfishness, lovingkindness, spiritual understanding, willingness to serve, before selfish interests. These qualities lived in family life or in business or wherever we feel caged in bring a change for the better. We free ourselves and by example help others. By living our true Godlike individuality we are in obedience to divine law. And Gods law is supreme in every situation. Through heartfelt obedience to God we can begin to find our freedom. And to obey God is as natural as for a flower to turn toward the light.

Reprinted from the Jan. 7, 1986, issue of The Christian Science Monitor.

Excerpt from:
Freedom: the fruit of obeying God

Clean beaches the priority after diesel oil spill – Video

 Beaches  Comments Off on Clean beaches the priority after diesel oil spill – Video
Jan 252015
 



Clean beaches the priority after diesel oil spill
The U.S. Coast Guard and officials from the Dept. of Health are closely monitoring the surrounding beaches for diesel oil spills.

By: KHON2 News

See the article here:
Clean beaches the priority after diesel oil spill – Video

Dr. Melanie Bone – Womens Health and Healing of the Palm Beaches – Video

 Beaches  Comments Off on Dr. Melanie Bone – Womens Health and Healing of the Palm Beaches – Video
Jan 242015
 



Dr. Melanie Bone – Womens Health and Healing of the Palm Beaches
Dr. Melanie Bone specializes in Obstetrics and Gynecology at Women's Health and Healing of the Palm Beaches in Atlantis, FL. For more information, please visit …

By: HCA EF

Go here to see the original:
Dr. Melanie Bone – Womens Health and Healing of the Palm Beaches – Video




Pierre Teilhard De Chardin | Designer Children | Prometheism | Euvolution | Transhumanism