The Human Race Could Be INFERTILE In 50 Years: ‘A Push For Depopulation’ Will Be ‘Global Crisis’

Male fertility is dipping, and fast. Humans are on course to be infertile in a mere 50 years. Sperm may prove to be the greatest casualty of modern life.

According to The Telegraph UK, last summer, scientists at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem found that male sperm counts had fallen by almost 60 percent in 40 years. In what was the largest study of its kind, they analyzed data from 43,000 men from North America, Europe, Australia, and New Zealand, taking in 185 studies from 1973 to 2011. Its lead author, Dr. Hagai Levine, decreed the result an “urgent wake-up call.”

Joe Joseph of The Daily Sheeple says it could have something to do with our over-radiated, over-vaccinated, and under-nourished culture, and he’s probably not far off. Dubbed “Spermageddon,” the results of this study could point to humanity’s extinction in the near future. Joseph says this isn’t just fear mongering.  This is something we should be concerned about.

“Interestingly enough, we started to see sperm counts start to fall shortly after Margaret Sanger and the real push for depopulation,” says Joseph. “Not only do we have sperm counts that are down 60% in the last 40 years, but then through social engineering, we have changed the way society works, the way it’s constructed, the way that people make ends meet. Now, mom and dad all have to work full time in order just to have that “American Dream” middle-class lifestyle; and even then, you’re struggling.”

We’ve become such a self-centered population that most have it engrained in their minds to not have children if they want annual vacations and the middle-class lifestyle. The birth rates reflect this self-centered mindset, says Joseph.  “This is a ticking time bomb…it’s been going on for some time and people have not been paying attention to it. I’m telling you, within my generation, from between now and my retirement…that retirement “age”…I’ll never retire…in that time, 25 years or so, watch. This is going to go from back burner stuff to a global crisis,” Joseph said.

“I think it’s time to rethink, as humanity, what’s important.” -Joe Joseph

Study: Nearly 40% of Canned Goods Still Contain Gender-Bending BPA Chemical

Bisphenol A, or BPA, is an endocrine disrupting chemical that is ubiquitous within our society. It was removed from baby bottles, sippy cups, and most cans of baby formula a number of years ago. But a recent study found that a lot of food packaging still contains the gender-bending substance.

Recently, the Center for Environmental Health tested more than 250 cans purchased at supermarkets and dollar stores for BPA in California, Idaho, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oregon, Rhode Island, and Virginia. Most of the cans were purchased at Kroger, Albertsons/Safeway, Dollar Tree and 99 Cents Only.

Nearly 40% of the containers were found to contain the chemical. And while that’s less than 2 years ago, when it was 67%, it’s not exactly a small amount. [1]

The study found that 36% of Albertson’s, and 33% of Kroger’s “private label” food cans tested positive for BPA.

Charles Margulis of the Center for Environmental Health said:

“It’s still much too high. We need to get it down to zero.” [2]

BPA is used in the lining of cans, and some research indicates that low levels of it can seep into food.

According to the FDA, the current levels of BPA in food are safe. However, California recently added the substance to its Proposition 65 list as a chemical known to cause reproductive toxicity.

Margulis said:

“BPA is known to cause birth defects, and it’s also linked to breast cancer, obesity, and many other serious health problems.”

Those facing the greatest health risks from BPA exposure may be low-income citizens who often rely on canned foods. The study revealed that more than half of the cans purchased at 99 Cents Only contained BPA. Past studies show that low-come communities have higher levels of BPA in their bodies than the rest of the population. [1]

Margulis commented:

“In many areas, dollar stores are the only places can go for fruits and vegetables.” [2]

Read: Are You Living in a Food Desert?

His advice is simple: buy fresh organic produce whenever possible.

BPA Facts

Source: Chemical & Engineering News

BPA is a synthetic hormone which mimics the female hormone estrogen, earning the chemical its reputation as a “gender-bender.” It has been associated with infertility, breast and reproductive system changes, and early puberty. [3]

Aside from hormonal and reproductive problems, BPA may also cause obesity, diabetes, behavioral changes in children, and resistance to chemotherapy treatments.

How to Reduce BPA Exposure

It’s virtually impossible to completely avoid BPA, but there are things you can do to reduce your family’s exposure:

• Purchase baby formula in plastic, glass, or other non-metal containers. Choose powdered formula whenever possible, since the packaging contains less BPA, and the powder is diluted with fresh water. If you must buy your baby liquid formula, look for brands sold in plastic or glass containers, or one’s that explicitly say “BPA Free.”

• Look for canned food labeled BPA-free, or buy food packed in glass jars or waxed cardboard cartons.

• Repurpose old baby bottles, cups, dishes, and food containers marked with the letters “PC,” for polycarbonate, or recycling label #7. Not all #7 polycarbonates contain BPA, but some of them do.

• Never microwave food in plastic containers.

As much as 40% of store receipts may be coated in BPA as well, according to the Environmental Working Group. The chemical can rub off on hands or food items, and may be absorbed through the skin.

Source: Forbes

You can also limit your exposure to BPA through store receipts:

• Say no to paper receipts when possible.


• Keep receipts in an envelope.


• Never give a child a receipt to hold or play with.


• Wash your hands before preparing and eating food after handling a receipt.


• Don’t recycle receipts and other thermal paper. BPA residues contaminate recycled paper.

Sources:

[1] Center for Environmental Health

[2] CBS News

[3] Environmental Working Group

Chemical & Engineering News

Forbes

---

---

About Mike Barrett:
	Mike is the co-founder, editor, and researcher behind Natural Society. Studying the work of top natural health activists, and writing special reports for top 10 alternative health websites, Mike has written hundreds of articles and pages on how to obtain optimum wellness through natural health.

Bill Gates’ New Population Control Microchip Due for Launch in 2018

Bill Gates is due to launch his new population control microchip in 2018
[image: Neon Nettle]

By: Jay Greenberg, Neon Nettle | 

Multi-billionaire Bill Gates has developed a new microchip, along with researchers at MIT, that will allow for adjustments to be made to a person’s hormone levels via remote control, in a bid to reduce the planet’s population.

The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation has been working in conjunction with a small Massachusetts startup to develop the “digital pill” that will enable women’s fertility to be switched on or off, remotely, with the touch of a button.

The new “digital version of the contraceptive” pill will be tested in Africa this year where the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation has spent years developing vaccination and family planning programs.

Following testing, the microchips are due to be rolled out globally in 2018 with “every woman in America” replacing their regular contraceptive pill with the new remote-controlled chips, according to Gates.

According to the Guardian, the chip is implanted under the skin and releases small doses of the contraceptive hormone levonorgestrel on a daily basis, with enough capacity to last 16 years.

About the same size as a Scrabble tile, it houses a series of micro-reservoirs covered by an ultra-thin titanium and platinum seal.The hormone is released by passing a small electric current from an internal battery through the seal, which melts it temporarily, allowing a 30 microgram dose of levonorgestrel to seep out each day. And it can be simply switched off by a wireless remote, avoiding the clinical procedures needed to deactivate other contraceptive implants.

“The ability to turn the device on and off provides a certain convenience factor for those who are planning their family,” says MIT’s Dr. Robert Farra, adding that “the idea of using a thin membrane like an electric fuse was the most challenging and the most creative problem we had to solve.”

But just as hackers can spoof wifi remotes to operate neighbors’ garage doors and flip their TV channels, could a remote-controlled contraceptive open the floodgates for a new form of ovarian hacking?“Someone across the room cannot reprogramme your implant,” says Farra.

“Communication with the implant has to occur at skin contact-level distance. Then we have secure encryption. That prevents someone from trying to interpret or intervene between the communications.”

The idea for micro-dispensing chips was first developed in the 1990s by Professor Robert Langer at MIT, the founder of innumerable biotech companies and holder of more than 800 patents, known in the industry as “the most cited engineer in history”. His lab caught the attention of Bill Gates in 2012, during his search for a revolution in birth control (which has already spawned plans for a graphene condom), and Langer subsequently leased the technology to Microchips, a company already working on a micro-dosing implant for osteoporosis.

Langer says that the implant will be available by 2018, once the coming trials are complete, and that the device will be “competitively priced” in a bid to ensure it replaces conventional contraception.

Bill Gates recently caused controversy after he spoke out about the immigration crisis in Europe saying that the continent will be “devastated by African refugees” unless severe and immediate action is taken to reduce the population in Africa.

This has left many questioning Gates’ motives behind his vaccination programs after the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation had previously been accused of secretly sterilizing millions of women in Africa by doctors in Kenya after abortion drugs were discovered in Tetanus vaccines.

The program, which is funded by Bill Gates, has been accused of conducting a mass depopulation experiment on the people of Kenya without their consent.

Read more at: http://www.neonnettle.com/features/1046-bill-gates-new-population-control-microchip-due-for-launch-in-2018
© Neon Nettle

How Soy Affects Reproductive Health

Soy milk, tofu, and meat substitutes are all the rage in the vegan and vegetarian community. These products provide all essential amino acids, making soy one of the few complete plant proteins on the planet. Despite soy’s high nutrient content, there are some dangers to soy that typically go unnoticed. Not only does soy contain nutritive inhibitors that prevent nutrient absorption, some research suggests that the plant may hinder thyroid health, especially in the presence of iodine deficiency. ^[1]

The Harmful Effects of Soy on Male Reproductive Health

Animal tests have previously suggested a chemical in soy can damage the male reproductive organs. This can directly impact fertility later in life, as research indicates that the phytoestrogens in soy may be a potent endocrine disruptor. ^[2] There is no evidence to suggest soy has this same effect on humans. Asia, for example, is known for its soy consumption, and reports on decreased fertility or other reproductive issues have yet to materialize.

However, researchers in the United States found that soy’s effects on rats were so severe that further testing was needed to ensure it was safe for human consumption. Scientists at the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health fed pregnant rats a diet laced with genistein, a chemical found in soy. There is concern that this chemical may harm the male fetus, possibly affecting future reproduction. ^[3]

Further Research

According to a report in New Scientist magazine, scientists found that male rats exposed to high levels of genistein in the womb grew up to have larger prostate glands and smaller testes. ^[4] The rats had normal sperm counts and would behave as if they wanted to mate when placed with females. The effects were just as severe in males that did not eat genistein after weaning. They suggested that this indicated exposure in the womb and during breast feeding has the biggest impact.

The scientists also found that male rats exposed to genistein had a slightly large thymus gland, an organ that produces immune cells. This contradicts previous studies which suggested it has the opposite effect on the thymus gland. To add to the confusion, the scientists also found that moderate levels of genistein had an even bigger effect on males rats than large doses. The researchers said their findings had caused them concern.

What You Can Do

Soy is a subsidized ingredient, and the United States is the biggest producer of soybeans on the planet. Because of this, soy is in practically every processed food product from potato chips and cereal, to butter replacement and packaged tuna. In order to avoid soy at all costs, it is wise to purchase all whole foods, preparing your own meals and snacks at home. If you must purchase processed foods for convenience, choose organic and always look at the ingredients list. Fermented forms of soy, like natto and tempeh, are actually healthier and encouraged.

What are your thoughts on soy? Do you avoid it? Please share with us your thoughts in the comments!

References:

1. Doerge DR, Sheehan DM. Goitrogenic and estrogenic activity of soy isoflavones. Environ Health Perspect. 2002 Jun;110 Suppl 3:349-53.


2. Cederroth CR, Auger J, Zimmermann C, Eustache F, Nef S. Soy, phyto-oestrogens and male reproductive function: a review. In J Androl. 2002 Apr;33(2):304-16. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2605.2009.01011.x.


3. G. H. Degen, P. Janning, P. Diel, H. Michna, H. M. Bolt. Transplacental transfer of the phytoestrogen daidzein in DA/Han rats. Archives of Toxicology. February 2002, Volume 76, Issue 1, pp 23-29.


4. Michael Le Page. Would-be mums told to avoid soya. New Scientist.

Conspiracy Theory Confirmed: Secret Docs Show Gov’t Covered Up Cell Phone Cancer Risks for Years

After years hidden from the public, California Department of Public Health officials have finally released a draft document outlining health concerns stemming from cellphone radiation — including multiple cancers and infertility.

“We have evidence of brain tumors and other head and neck tumors. We also have evidence of sperm damage in males, infertility in females,” explained Joel Moskowitz of U.C. Berkeley’s School of Public Health, who sued the state in 2016 under the California Public Records Act to obtain the information.

Although the Department of Public Health ultimately chose not to publish the document — both pages have since been emblazoned with “Draft and Not for Public Release” — its content is of critical import to cellphone users around the planet.

San Francisco affiliate ABC7 reports, “Moskowitz says there’s been a lot of pressure from the wireless industry to keep any kind of negative report on cellphones hidden from the public,” and, he notes,

“[T]hey’ve done a very good job at it, essentially following the same playbook that the tobacco industry used.”

Moskowitz’ conclusion seems apt. Despite the matter-of-fact tone with which the nature of cellphone health threats is presented, the document — appropriately titled “Cell Phones and Health” — reads more like a checklist for phone usage.

Following several simple guidelines parsed out by health officials could help prevent the development of brain and other cancers, as well as other afflictions. In fact, basic protocols like holding the phone at a distance, switching to speakerphone, or, most preferably, using headphones for conversations can all help reduce risk.

And CDPH’s Division of Environmental and Occupational Disease Control believes sufficient reason exists to be concerned, as the document states,

“Cell phones, like other electronic devices, emit a kind of energy called radiofrequency EMFs (electromagnetic fields). Health officials are concerned about possible health effects from cell phone EMFs because some recent studies suggest that long-term cell phone use may increase the risk of brain cancer and other health problems […]

“Several studies have found that people with certain kinds of brain cancer were more likely to have used cell phones for 10 years or more. Most of the cancers were on the same side of the head that people usually held their phones. Although the chance of developing brain cancer is very small, these studies suggest that regular cell phone use increases the risk of developing some kinds of brain cancer. Some studies have also linked exposure to EMFs from cell phones to fertility problems. As more studies are done and we learn about possible risks for cancer and other health problems linked to cell phone use, the recommendations on this fact sheet may change.”

Where the government chose a painfully neutral tone to discuss the gravity of possible side effects, others have been warning about the perils of cellphones for years.

“People need to know, people are unaware that cellphones as they are used now are not safe,” Ellie Marks of the California Brain Tumor Association, told ABC7.

Environmental Working Group (EWG) eight years ago released its own set of guidelines for safer cellphone operation, as well as a review of studies on cellphone radiation, including one from the “World Health Organization that linked cell phone radiation to brain cancer, and other studies that linked cell phone radiation to diminished sperm count and sperm damage.”

EWB reports officials from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention deny succumbing to pressure from the mobile phone industry — but nonetheless, the information in the health document could have been put to better use with a full, public release. As EWB continues,

“In human epidemiological studies, cell phone use has been linked to an increased risk of brain and salivary gland cancers. Studies from teams of scientists in several nations have raised troubling questions about possible associations between heavy cell phone use and altered brain metabolism, sleep disturbance, and even diminished sperm count and sperm damage. In 2011, the World Health Organization declared cell phone radiation a possible carcinogen.

READ MORE:  After Mentioning Hillary"s Health, Dr. Drew Got "Scary, Creepy" Calls from "Mafia" CNN, Told to Retract Comments

“Animal studies support the findings in people. A multi-year study from the U.S. National Toxicology Program found that male rats exposed to radio-frequency radiation from before birth through two years of age had a greater chance of being diagnosed with a brain cancer called malignant glioma, as well as developing a tumor found on the heart. The radiation levels to which the rats were exposed included levels that current cell phones are allowed to emit.”

EWB emphasizes more research and study must occur before the extent of risks from cellphones can be fully assessed, but cautioned sufficient evidence has been found in previous studies to be trepidatious about current FCC rules regarding the ubiquitous devices.

In the meantime, CDC and California health officials continue calling for further research — without releasing guidelines that offer at least minimal guidance for the least risky use of a cellphone.

“This could have perhaps saved some lives if it had been published by the department seven years ago,” Moskowitz lamented. “It’s disconcerting it has taken so long to issue this. And still, they are making it clear this isn’t their official position.”

CDPH cell phone document April 2014

A Scientific First: Lab-Grown Eggs Produce Healthy Mice

The birth of baby mice made from eggs grown in a lab has sparked an ethical debate over whether the technique should ever be offered for humans by fertility clinics.

The experiment is a step up (or down, depending on how you look at it) from creating human organs from stem cells, which scientists at the University of Edinburgh successfully did for the first time in 2014.

Scientists created early-stage mouse eggs via 2 different experiments, 1 using stem cells, and 1 using skin cells from a mouse’s tail. These eggs were nurtured in the lab until they matured to the point that they could be fertilized by mouse sperm. [1]

Hundreds of embryos were made and implanted in female mice, leading to the birth of nearly a dozen healthy mouse pups. [2]

It will be many years before the procedure can be used in humans, but already researchers are looking to improve the process and make it safe enough to treat infertility, a problem affecting 1 in 6 couples.

Technologically speaking, it may someday be possible for fertility clinics to make viable eggs from the skin cells of an infertile woman.

The Experiments

According to Katsuhiko Hayashi at Japan’s Kyushu University, he and his colleagues first created some of the eggs from embryonic stem cells, and later from the skin tissue.

Out of 300 eggs, only 11 pregnancies ended in normal births. That’s just 3% of the embryos. [1]

Before the same process can be used to create human eggs and, later, human babies, scientists will have to overcome 2 major hurdles: the high failure rate, and potential risks to the young. [2]

When the team tested the artificial eggs made from stem cells, they found unusual patterns of gene expression in many of them, which suggests they did not develop the same way as normal eggs. Yet, more than 75% of the eggs made in the lab had the correct number of chromosomes. [1]

Creating mouse eggs in a petri dish is complicated work, and the team had to use ovary cells that support egg growth, Hayashi said. Originally, the scientists had reprogrammed stem cells to produce primordial germ cells, which give rise to eggs. However, they had to implant those cells into mice to finish developing into eggs in the ovary.

It’s not known how support cells in ovaries stimulate egg development. It may require something made by support cells or physical contact with them in order to fully mature.

Since scientists are not yet able to reproduce the supporting cells in a lab, so they need to get them from embryos. That could be another hurdle when trying to replicate the experiment in humans.

The (Far Off) Future

Azim Surani, a stem cell scientist at the Gurdon Institute at Cambridge University, who was not involved in the latest work, explained that it’s never too early to consider how this might be used to impregnate human females. [2]

He said:

“Ethically, this issue has yet to be discussed fully by scientists and society. This indeed is the right time to start a debate and involve the wider public in these discussions, long before, and in case, the procedure becomes feasible in humans.”

Some researchers warn that taking a crack at recreating a human embryo in the lab is a sure-fire way to omit important factors that have yet to be understood. Each lab-based manipulation introduces possible abnormalities, which make it a challenge to determine what factors are playing a crucial role. [1]

The report appears online in the October 17 edition of the journal Nature.

Yes, it will be years before lab-made eggs can be implanted in humans, but this takes humanity another step closer to creating “designer babies,” and the science behind this frightening prospect is developing rapidly.

In early 2016, scientists in Britain were cleared to start editing the genes of human embryos. Right now, the experiment is for the purpose of research. In the future, however, it could be used to create humans with certain genetic advantages over people born into the world with the help of nothing but nature.

And, just last month, scientists announced that the world’s first 3-parent baby was born in April.

Sources:

[1] Science Magazine (Featured image source)

[2] The Guardian

[3] Business Insider

---

---

About Julie Fidler:
	Julie Fidler is a freelance writer, legal blogger, and the author of Adventures in Holy Matrimony: For Better or the Absolute Worst. She lives in Pennsylvania with her husband and two ridiculously spoiled cats. She occasionally pontificates on her blog.