Memory Foam Nightmares…Now what?

I don’t often write about truly personal issues. It seems to me that Facebook has taken the lead on sharing everything personal with the world at large. However, over the course of the past year, I have been dealing with a major problem and thought that in the interest of saving someone else from such a nightmare, I would air my mattress troubles out for the world to see.

Our mattress is old and my husband isn’t happy with it. However, if you haven’t noticed, things are expensive! One day he called me up and asked if it would be okay for him to spend around $130 on a “hypoallergenic” memory foam topper for our bed. It so happened that it was actually okay to spend that amount on that day, so I said “Sure!”. And so began the year of lacking sleep, not being able to breathe and drama, for me.

This topper was allowed to air out for two days as recommended and we put it on and it swallowed you whole. It actually didn’t smell as many people complain about with these memory foam things, and it wasn’t too terribly hot so I thought we’d be okay.

Guess what? I was wrong. Really, seriously, dangerously wrong.

After about two weeks, I had sinuses that simply wouldn’t clear up. You know the kind. You lay down and your only option is to be a mouth breather because your head is so full of stuff that there isn’t any chance you can breathe through your nose. Due to colds and seasonal allergies, this didn’t seem like it was going to be an ongoing issue for me. Just one of those blips in time that you take as part of the normal human condition and move on without a lot of thought.

A month into having this mattress pad, after sleeping in the recliner who knows how many times, and getting on the internet looking up symptoms for COPD and why I was getting heart palpitations and bronchial closures accompanied with incredible mental fog from not being able to sleep, I finally hit on problems with memory foam toppers. Oh my goodness. It was me to a “T”. My heart was flitting about, I couldn’t breathe, I had a cough and sinus drainage into my lungs, I felt like I had mild vertigo most of the time. What was the worst news to me was that many people took longer than six months to get over the symptoms from this “hypoallergenic” memory foam nightmare.

The really weird thing is that I am now allergic to another thing. Here’s my list of allergies, MSG, polyester, mold and now memory foam.

So, after removing the thing and putting it in the spare room because it is just difficult to throw $130 dollars away, I thought I would be on the upswing fairly soon. Ha! It didn’t happen. The heart palpitations slowed down after a month without the foam on the bed, but the sinus issue was ongoing. The vertigo feeling was lessened as well. But I still laid down and couldn’t breathe.

About four months after this, with the continuing sinus issues, I noticed black mold on the ceiling in the spare room where we have a plumbing chase. “Oh flipping wonderful!” So we opened the chase and fixed the little leak and let it dry out. Thinking that things would alright since we fixed the leak, we went on about our normal business. But I still couldn’t breathe.

Then we had an amazingly wet spring. Mold counts were out of this world on the allergen charts. I couldn’t breathe, I couldn’t sleep, I had no energy and felt like garbage ALL the time.

After countless more sleepless nights, while my husband slept soundly and unaffected by anything other than our crappy mattress, I actually had to use an inhaler to breathe a few times! Never had to do that before, and I was really upset about it, too.

So I bought a dehumidifier, he removed the entire plumbing chase and sprayed all remaining drywall with bleach solution to kill mold there, I researched air cleaners and got two of them to remove the mold from the air. And that actually helped!

Now, we are STILL looking for a mattress, and it’s next to impossible to find anything that doesn’t have latex or memory foam in it. For about $2,000 you can get a all cotton innerspring mattress, but there’s a delivery charge on top of that. Our current mattress is about 12 years old and it wasn’t top of the line at the time. But it doesn’t have memory foam! There are loads of mattresses out there that say they are “hypoallergenic”, but I flatly disbelieve those claims when they use latex or foam as major components in their construction.

So I found a cotton futon mattress that only had boric acid used in it because of federal regulations. I bought that, but the divets that hold it together are too deep and hit all the wrong spots. For my husband, it makes him feel like he’s been run over by a truck because it’s too hard. So we had to take that off and put the old standby back on the bed. So the quest continued…

In Europe, you can buy natural wool mattresses for around $1500. Then each year a guy needs to come out and refluff the mattress for you. And, thankfully, or unfortunately, we don’t live in Europe. Here, you can find some cotton with wool, but as I said, it’s a couple grand for those and you have exceptionally limited choices.

We looked into possibly making our own mattress, but that is a pretty daunting task as well. Not only do you have to grow most of your own food now to know you aren’t eating disgusting things that aren’t food, but now you have to make your own mattresses as well? Sheesh.

It seems to me that there may be a plot afoot to take good, healthy natural sleep out of the human equation in this country. Like “Too bad for those of you who drive cars that cost less than these mattresses!” Maybe there is room in the market place for someone inclined to make non toxic mattresses available to those who don’t have Swiss bank accounts?

What we are thinking of doing is taking the cotton futon mattress I found and removing buttons that hold the upholstery together and then buying a down topper and a wool topper for the thing. If this works, we should come in around $700 for a mattress that doesn’t kill you with “hypoallergenic” chemicals.

I’ll let you know if it works. Of course we have to get another $400 in line to try it, but that will happen in time. Meanwhile, I hope you sleep well, and whatever you do, do NOT buy a memory foam topper! I might wish that on the federal government, but I wouldn’t wish it on anyone decent at all.




Genetically Edited Dairy Cows? Patented, of course

I just found this article below this morning. After reading it all the way through, I think the greatest danger here is the patenting. What is interesting to me is that they are not talking about inserting genes from other species into the cattle DNA, but removing a segment of the natural DNA and inserting a segment from polled cattle directly into it. You can achieve this through breeding the old fashioned way, which I think will prove to be less likely to cause unforeseen problems that may not be apparent immediately. Anyway, I thought it was intriguing and wanted to make sure that more people saw it. Happy to hear your thoughts!

(link to original article:

On the Horns of the GMO Dilemma

Can genome-editing technology revive the idea of genetically modified livestock?


Four years ago, Scott Fahrenkrug saw an ABC News segment about the dehorning of dairy cows, a painful procedure that makes the animals safer to handle. The shaky undercover video showed a black-and-white Holstein heifer moaning and bucking as a farmhand burned off its horns with a hot iron.

Fahrenkrug, a molecular geneticist then at the University of Minnesota, thought he had a way to solve the problem. He could create cows without horns. He could save farmers money. And by eliminating the dairy industry’s most unpleasant secret, he might even score a public relations success for genetic engineering.

The technology Fahrenkrug believes could do all this is called genome editing (see “Genome Surgery” and “Genome Editing”). A fast, precise new way of altering DNA, it’s been sweeping through biotechnology labs. Researchers have used it to change the genes of mice, zebrafish, and monkeys, and it is being tested as way to treat human diseases like HIV (see “Can Gene Therapy Cure HIV?”).

With livestock, gene editing offers some extraordinary possibilities. At his startup, Recombinetics, located in St. Paul, Minnesota, Fahrenkrug thinks he can create blue-ribbon dairy bulls possessing traits not normally found in those breeds but present in other cattle, such as lack of horns or resistance to particular diseases. Such “molecular breeding,” he says, would achieve the same effects as nature might, only much faster. In short, an animal could be edited to have the very best genes its species can offer.

That could upend the global livestock industry. Companies could patent these animals just as they do genetically modified soybeans or corn. Entrepreneurs are also ready to challenge the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, which has never approved a GMO food animal. They say gene editing shouldn’t be regulated if it’s used to merely swap around traits within a species. “We’re talking about genes that already exist in a species we already eat,” says Fahrenkrug.

The use of the technology remains experimental and far from the food chain. But some large  breeding companies are starting to invest. “There may be an opportunity for a different public acceptance dialogue and different regulations,” says Jonathan Lightner, R&D chief of the U.K. company Genus, which is the world’s largest breeder of pigs and cattle and has paid for some of Recombinetics’ laboratory research. “This isn’t a glowing fish. It’s a cow that doesn’t have to have its horns cut off.”

GMO Bust

To date, GMO food animals have been a complete bust. After the first mice genetically engineered with viral DNA appeared in the 1970s, a parade of other modified animals followed, including sheep that grow extra wool thanks to a mouse gene, goats whose udders made spider silk, and salmon that mature twice as quickly as normal. But such transgenics—animals incorporating genes from other species—mostly never made it off experimental farms.

Opponents of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) gathered millions of signatures to stop “frankenfoods,” and the FDA has held off approving such animals as food. AquaBounty Technologies, the company that made the fast-growing transgenic salmon, has spent 18 years and $70 million trying to get the fish cleared. Two years ago, the University of Guelph, in Ontario, euthanized its herd of “enviropigs,” engineered with an E. coli gene so they pooped less phosphorus, after giving up hope of convincing regulators.

Genome editing can also be used to create transgenic animals. But cows edited to be hornless would not have DNA from a different species, just DNA from a different breed of cattle. That is what entrepreneurs hope will create a regulatory loophole. The FDA’s regulations on genetically engineered animals, issued in 2009, didn’t anticipate gene editing and, in Fahrenkrug’s opinion, may not cover it.

In response to questions from MIT Technology Review, the FDA agreed that its rules “addressed the technology at the time.” But the agency says it reserves the right to regulate gene editing, too. “We are carefully considering the appropriate regulatory approach for products made using this technology but have not reached any decisions,” said agency spokeswoman Theresa Eisenman.

To make hornless dairy cows, Fahrenkrug says, he looked up the genetic sequence that naturally causes Angus cattle, a beef variety, to lack horns. Following nature’s no-horns recipe, he used a gene-editing method called TALENs in his lab to introduce it into skin cells from a horned Holstein bull. In total, he deleted 10 DNA letters and, in their place, added 212. Some of those cells were then turned into embryos through cloning and used to impregnate several cows. Fahrenkrug is expecting the first of several hornless calves to be born within a few weeks. He declined to say where they were being kept, citing the risk of sabotage by animal-rights or anti-GMO activists.

Scared to Death

Any genetic tinkering with the food supply could arouse opposition, but Fahrenkrug hopes the vision of a hornless cow could make people see things his way. Animal-rights campaigners hate GMOs. But they hate dehorning more. Farmers do it only because they have to. Douglas Keeth, an investor in Recombinetics, says his great-grandmother was gored to death by a dairy cow. “When I was a young man working on a farm, we’d dehorn cattle with mechanical means. You do 100 steers and, well, it’s a bloody mess,” he says. “You wouldn’t want to show that on TV.”

Although not all cattle have horns, most Holsteins do. According to the Holstein Association USA, all 30 of the top-rated Holstein bulls in the U.S. have horns. Semen from these champion bulls, which are prized for fathering offspring that produce titanic amounts of milk, is frozen and shipped around the globe. After more than a century of selective breeding, the average dairy cow in the U.S. produces 23,000 pounds of milk a year (compared with about 5,000 pounds for an ordinary cow).

With Holsteins smashing milk records, any effort to mix in useful new traits by mating is challenging. That’s because crossing a record milker with a lesser animal will dilute its pedigree, says Lightner, whose company shipped $177 million worth of frozen bull semen last year. It can take several generations of crosses to make a true milk champion again.

Gene editing, by contrast, is fast and precise. Last year, working with the Roslin Institute and Texas A&M University, Fahrenkrug easily created Brazilian Lenore cattle with increased muscle mass. He did that by adding to Lenore embryos a muscle-boosting mutation that occurs naturally in breeds like Belgian Blues, though it had never before been seen in rangy, heat-tolerant Lenores. The edit consists of deleting 11 DNA letters from a single gene, thereby cutting production of a muscle-regulating protein called myostatin. Lightner says such feats are why Genus has started underwriting gene-editing research. “We haven’t realized the opportunity for genetic engineering in animals to any degree,” he says. “But these new approaches that let us move traits around could be transformational.”

Fahrenkrug’s ideas have grabbed the attention of dairy farmers, too. The technology “is very cool,” says Tom Lawlor, head of R&D for the Holstein Association USA. But he says milk producers are afraid of genetic engineering. “The technology definitely looks promising and seems to work, but we would enter into it slowly as opposed to rapidly for fear the consumer would get the wrong idea,” he says. “We get scared to death, because our product is milk, and it’s wholesome.”

Conventional breeding has also become far more precise thanks to DNA tests. By July of this year, an international collaboration calling itself the “1,000 Bull Genomes Project” had decoded the DNA of 234 dairy bulls, including Swiss Fleckviehs, Holsteins, and Jerseys. Breeders can now accurately size up an animal’s genes at birth. One result is that a few hornless bulls are already approaching top-ranked status. That leaves Lawlor unsure if there’s much of a need for gene editing.

Patented Cattle

In January, Fahrenkrug filed a patent application laying claim to any animal whose genes are edited to remove their horns. The threat of cattle patents has alarmed some farmers already distressed by seed patents. “They could take semen from my bull, gene-edit it, patent it, and the farmer will get totally screwed,” says Roy MacGregor, who breeds hornless cattle in Peterborough, Ontario. “They should not be allowed to.”

Anti-GMO campaigners also won’t have to look far for reasons to criticize gene editing. There are easy targets, like a strategy Fahrenkrug conceived to prevent cattle from reaching sexual maturity. That may make it quicker to fatten them for slaughter. It would also allow gene-editing companies to keep selling animals without the risk of “uncontrolled breeding of the animals by the buyers,” asanother of Recombinetics’ patent applications puts it.

It’s possible, even probable, that cautious regulators, activists, and commercial challenges will keep products from gene-edited animals off supermarket shelves for years. Maybe forever. But what’s not slowing down is the advance of gene-editing technology. “People will say to me, ‘You realize this changes everything, don’t you?’ Because it does,” says Fahrenkrug. “The genome is information. And this is information technology. We have gone from being able to read the genome to being able to write it.”


Recount on “Right to Farm”

As expected, there will be a recount on this extremely close, and deeply controversial, amendment to the Missouri Constitution. Here’s a press release about this:

August 27th, 2014

JEFFERSON CITY – Missouri’s Food for America, the Missouri Farmers Union, and the Missouri Rural Crisis Center, the central opponents to Amendment 1, the deceptive “Right to Farm Amendment,” are officially calling for a recount of the August 5th primary election results. The Amendment narrowly passed by 2490 votes, out of nearly 1 million cast, a margin of .25%.

Former Senator Wes Shoemyer, of Monroe County, the President of Missouri’s Food For America has been a vocal opponent of Amendment since it’s approval by the legislature. “We are talking about less than a quarter of percent of all votes cast” said Shoemyer. “With such a close margin, we owe it, not just to all the volunteers and organizations who put in countless hours fighting for Missouri’s family farmers, but also to the 497,091 people who voted “no” on August 5th.”

“Right now, we are at a statistical tie. Missouri voters deserve a fully transparent and accountable recount process that guarantees that every vote has been counted and that the integrity of the democratic process has been upheld,” said Rhonda Perry, a farmer from Howard County and Program Director of the Missouri Rural Crisis Center.

“With the future of Missouri’s farmland and rural economy at stake, we ought to be sure every vote was counted correctly,” said Richard Oswald, President of the Missouri Farmers Union. “With such a close outcome, a change in just 1 or 2 votes per precinct could sway the outcome.”

Excellent News from Mexico on Monsanto Soy

As most everyone knows, Amendment 1, Missouri’s MegaAg Protection Racket, or Monsanto Protection Act, barely passed. It’s my understanding that there is going to be a recount on that amendment to Missouri’s Constitution. Personally, I think there needs to be more than a recount, but I will save that for another day.

Despite the assertions that Monsanto and genetically modified organisms in general are gaining “world wide acceptance”, the truth is that many nations are doing all they can to ban these abominations of nature. Below is an article about Mexico and Monsanto’s Round Up Ready Soy…A little “Yeah!” for those who want to eat clean food.

Just one small comment here. I find it increasingly odd that I am often in agreement on a topic with organizations that are so far left of where I am politically. In the case I am addressing at the moment, that group is Greenpeace. To be clear, I am a massive proponent of private property owner’s rights. Staunchly opposed to corporations posing as “individuals” and against consolidation, contraction and restriction of access to markets for farmers growing real food. I am not a “greenie weenie”, but I do believe that we were put here by our Creator to be stewards of the land and His creation and not to rape, pillage and plunder the creation. We certainly are not called to change the genetic structure of life and create abominations of natural species by mutating them in a lab.


Sweet victory for Mexico beekeepers as Monsanto loses GM permit

Evidence convinced judge of threat posed to honey production in Yucatán – but firm will almost certainly appeal against ruling



MDG : Monsanto GM soya impact on honey bees protest in Yucatan Peninsula in mexico
Greenpeace activists and Mayans form a human chain to spell out the words ‘ma ogm’, which translates as ‘no gmo’ (genetically modified organisms). Photograph: Arturo Rocha/Greenpeace

A small group of beekeepers in Mexico has inflicted a blow on biotech giant Monsanto, which has halted the company’s ambitions to plant thousands of hectares of soybeans genetically modified to resist the company’s pesticide Roundup.

A district judge in the state of Yucatán last month overturned a permit issued to Monsanto by Mexico’s agriculture ministry, Sagarpa, and environmental protection agency, Semarnat, in June 2012 that allowed commercial planting of Roundup-ready soybeans.

The permit authorised Monsanto to plant its seeds in seven states, over more than 253,000 hectares (625,000 acres), despite protests from thousands of Mayan farmers and beekeepers, Greenpeace, the Mexican National Commission for the Knowledge and Use of Biodiversity, the National Commission of Natural Protected Areas and the National Institute of Ecology.

In withdrawing the permit, the judge was convinced by the scientific evidence presented about the threats posed by GM soy crops to honey production in the Yucatán peninsula, which includes Campeche, Quintana Roo and Yucatán states. Co-existence between honey production and GM soybeans is not possible, the judge ruled.

Mexico is the world’s six biggest producer and third largest exporter of honey. About 25,000 families on the Yucatán peninsula depend on honey production. This tropical region produces about 40% of the country’s honey, almost all of which is exported to the EU. This is not small change: in 2011, the EU imported $54m (£32m) worth of Mexican honey.

The concerns are multiple. Roundup-ready crops – soybeans, corn, canola, sugar beets, cotton and alfalfa – have been manipulated to be resistant to glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup.

Some argue that glyphosate poses a risk to human and animal health, a claim that Monsanto and other agribusinesses reject.

In addition to health risks, environmental damage to soil, water and bee colonies – which are dwindling fast – have been attributed glyphosate use, threatening food and water security across the globe.

GM crops could devastate the important European export market for Mexican beekeepers, where the sale of honey containing pollen derived from GM crops has been restricted since a landmark decision in 2011 by the European court of justice.

The ruling barred honey derived from a GM crop unapproved for human consumption – which includes some soy and other animal feeds – from sale in the EU. Honey with more than 0.9% of GM pollen (from an approved GM food) must be labelled as containing GM ingredients and cannot be marketed as an organic product. Some countries, including Germany, reject honey that contains any GM pollen.

small study conducted in Campeche, where about 10,000 hectares of GM soybeans were planted after the permit was approved in 2012, found GM pollen in some honey samples destined for the European market. This, say the authors, threatens the local honey industry and contradicts the position taken by Sagarpa and industry groups that soybeans are not visited or pollinated by bees searching for food because they can self-pollinate.

The Monsanto ruling was commended by the respected national newspaper La Jornada, which accused the Mexican government of ignoring widespread concerns over GM and forcing those opponents to fight it out in court with powerful multinational companies. The government’s stated ambition of eliminating hunger is incompatible with its decisions to increasingly allow multinational companies such as Monsanto to introduce GM crops, the paper’s editorial concluded.

Central to the ruling was the Mexican constitution, specifically the government’s obligation to fully consult indigenous communities before making any major decision about what happens, including what is grown, on their territory. The judge ordered planting to stop and gave Sagarpa six months to carry out full and proper consultations with indigenous farmers – which it should have done before the permit was granted in 2012.

It was this same omission that led to an almost identical ruling by a district judge in Campeche in March 2014.

These two judgments have set a precedent that will help farmers, campaigners and environmentalists take local legal action against the rollout of GM soy and corn, which the federal government is sanctioning without consultation and against experts’ advice.

But this is a high-stakes game to play, in which indigenous communities are being forced to fight their own government and multinational corporations with multimillion-dollar legal departments, simply to have their constitutional rights honoured and protect their traditional ways of farming and living.

So while a third victory in Chiapas, where a similar case is pending, could soon follow, this is almost certainly only round one. Monsanto will probably appeal against the decision to a higher court.

The North American Free Trade Agreement, criticised by some for crippling small-scale Mexican farming, is not on the side of the beekeepers. This David and Goliath battle is about so much more than honey.


A Few Thoughts on Ferguson…And Wait Until October?

Officer Friendly?

The unrest of the past week is likely a prelude of what’s coming in America. Our police have been increasingly militarized and are not “serving and protecting” as they are sworn to do. Instead, because of seizure laws and revenue scams they are largely extorting and intimidating the general populace, black, white, red, brown or any color of skin.

While there is an overwhelming amount of information and footage out there about this incident, it still looks like we have to wait for all of the evidence to be correlated, and for the forensics to be complete and interpreted and rebutted before we can know the facts behind the clinical evidence of the death of Michael Brown.

A few things deeply bother me, and I’m going to go ahead and put them out there for whatever it’s worth. Not much, I know, but these are truly aggravating things to me, and it simply seems like we could very well be being played because of them.

First of all, according to the original report, Michael Brown was pulled into the car by the cop? That, as Judge Judy would say, doesn’t make any sense at all. If you’re 6′ 4″ and someone reaches out to pull you into a car, they aren’t going to be able to it. Your instinct, unless you want to hug the person, is to pull back. And if you’re a police officer, the last thing you’re going to do is try to pull a big guy into the car on top of you, especially by the neck. If the officer was pulling him, he could possibly have pulled his arm and tried to use the door as a lever to subdue Brown, but that is the only potential I can see for the officer pulling Brown into the car.

Then the delay in releasing information in at least two areas, but more likely three. Not releasing the shooting officer’s name for days only adds to the distrust of the system and to the intimation that the police are covering things up. Not releasing the convenience store strong arm robbery tape for SIX days while the city is blowing up is simply unconscionable. And again, it leads to deeper distrust. While I can’t do it, I know that there are people who are completely capable of creating video that looks like the real thing when it isn’t. Is it possible that this is the case with the strong arm robbery video? Maybe. Then again, maybe not.

One has to wonder, why was this officer in a car alone? In the earliest video immediately following the shooting that I can find, there is another officer on the scene. It reportedly begins about 30 seconds after the shooting occurred. There is a cut in the video and then there is crime scene tape up, but when did the other officer arrive on the scene? And Wilson, who was reportedly hit hard enough to break the orbital socket under his eye during the struggle in the car, doesn’t make any move to indicate that his head is hurting in any way. Does this make any sense? It took ten days to get the orbital socket injury out. Three days to report that the officer was treated at a hospital after the shooting. Just who is the other officer with Wilson in this video? Was he Wilson’s partner? If so, where was he during all this and who is he? Likely, he isn’t Wilson’s partner, but then how did he get there so quickly? Or was that 30 second assertion inaccurate and it’s more like 2 to 5 minutes? It’s messed up.

The thing that I find most distressing is that people refer to a caller on a local radio show that says she is a friend of Darren Wilson as a “witness”. I even heard media refer to “Josie” as a witness. That is deeply disturbing. A friend of someone who was present at a scene can only relate hearsay, and giving an attitude of import to that person’s account is beyond irresponsible. And then a tweet from someone saying 12 witnesses have confirmed the officer’s side of the story becomes proof that the officer was justified in his actions? What kind of critical thinking is being employed by the media here?

Now, a grand jury has been convened to decide whether or not to indict Officer Darren Wilson for the shooting death of Michael Brown. But the Prosecutor is saying there won’t be any decision made until October. How is that timely? More importantly, how is it justified? What exactly are the officials trying to accomplish by releasing information in a very slow fashion and only reacting in quick and decisive ways with shows of force? It looks to me like holding off the decision of the grand jury is only going to increase tensions and create more distrust.

Clearly, the issues brought to light by this shooting are deep seated and far reaching. The police are way over militarized. People are more than angry at the entire system, and largely, they have a perfect right to be angry. How they express it and deal with it is another issue entirely. Destroying other people and their property is actually criminal and not a path that we should follow. Yet that is too often what the police are seen doing as well in their position as revenue collectors and enforcers. Just do a search on youtube for police brutality videos and you will be stunned and unhappy with the results.

It’s clear that many in America simply view police as government sanctioned rival gangs. Now they have MRAPs and tanks and more. You can see what your county has acquired by clicking on this New York Times article and the interactive map included there.

To sum up most of America’s feelings on police, it isn’t that we don’t like cops, we just feel better when they aren’t around.

In case anyone is wondering, we also feel better when there isn’t rioting and looting.

Federal Reserve Official Says Bail-Ins Coming Soon

Just to be clear, I do not have a crystal ball, but I have previously published documents and articles that clearly indicate this is an option here in the US. Some are saying this is scheduled for Septemeber 2nd of this year. Please, if you are blessed enough to have any money in the banks, hedge against this and buy hard assets. This isn’t good, and there is precedent for it:


U.S. Preparing Bank Bail-Ins – Fed Vice Chair Fischer
Federal Reserve Vice Chairman Stanley Fischer delivered his first speech on the U.S. and global economy in Stockholm, Sweden yesterday.


Fischer headed Israel’s central bank from 2005 through 2013 and is now number two at the Federal Reserve in the U.S. after Janet Yellen.



In a speech entitled, The Great Recession: Moving Ahead, given at an event sponsored by the Swedish Ministry of Finance, Fischer said that the economic recovery has been and remains “disappointing.”


“The recession that began in the United States in December 2007 ended in June 2009. But the Great Recession is a near-worldwide phenomenon, with the consequences of which many advanced economies–among them Sweden–continue to struggle. Its depth and breadth appear to have changed the economic environment in many ways and to have left the road ahead unclear.”


Speaking about the steps that have been taken internationally in order to “strengthen the financial system” and to reduce the “probability of future financial crisis,” Fischer said that the U.S. was preparing proposals for bank bail-ins for “systemically important banks.”


Additional steps have been taken in some countries. For example, in the United States, capital ratios and liquidity buffers at the largest banks are up considerably, and their reliance on short-term wholesale funding has declined considerably. Work on the use of the resolution mechanisms set out in the Dodd-Frank Act, based on the principle of a single point of entry–though less advanced than the work on capital and liquidity ratios–holds the promise of making it possible to resolve banks in difficulty at no direct cost to the taxpayer.


As part of this approach, the United States is preparing a proposal to require systemically important banks to issue bail-inable long-term debt that will enable insolvent banks to recapitalize themselves in resolution without calling on government funding–this cushion is known as a “gone concern” buffer.”


Fischer’s comments that the U.S. is “preparing a proposal” for bail-ins is at odds with Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) and Bank of England officials who have said that bail-in legislation could be used today.


The U.S. already has in place plans for bail-ins in the event of banks failing. Indeed, the U.S. has conducted simulation exercises with the U.K. in 2013 and again this year.


On October 12 2013, Art Murton, the FDIC official in charge of planning for resolutions, and the Bank of England’s Deputy Governor Paul Tucker, both confirmed that the U.S. system is ready to handle a big-bank collapse.


The Bank of England’s Tucker, who has worked with U.S. regulators on the cross-border hurdles to taking down an international bank said that “U.S. authorities could do it today — and I mean today.”


There is speculation that were Yellen to retire early Fischer would be anointed as the new Federal Reserve Chairman.


Fischer who previously was chief economist at the World Bank, also makes it clear that he expects ultra loose monetary policies to continue in the U.S. which will be bullish for gold and silver.


See our important guide to coming bail-ins here Protecting Your Savings in the Coming Bail-In Era


Preppers and Patriots Expo This Weekend!

If you’re anywhere in the area, you definitely need to come to the Expo to get great information, products and network with people that get it!

Don’t Miss The Preppers & Patriots Expo LIVE August 16 & 17, 2014

Plan Now To Attend

Preppers & Patriots Expo

2 Days That Can Save Your Life

August 16 – 17, 2014

at the

Double Tree by Hilton Hotel in Springfield, Missouri

9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. both days

Tickets Prices For the Entire Weekend:

  • $10 per person in advance

  • $15 per person at the door

Explore Self-Reliance

Don’t just survive, THRIVE! Strengthen family bonds through self-sufficiency, stay alive, and live a better life!

Attend This Event To Make Sure You & Your Family Will Be Prepared for:

MAN-MADE DISASTERS:    Terrorist threats, social collapse, nuclear reactor

NATURAL DISASTERS:  Tornadoes, Earthquakes, Pandemic

ECONOMIC COLLAPSE:   Do you have cash, gold, silver, barter items?

SPEAKERS –  18 Presentations Over 2 Days

Break-Out Sessions

Learn from the experts!

Speakers List to be Added Soon

For Vendor / Sponsor Information:

Contact Mike at: (417) 264-2435 or


Speaker Schedule Preppers and Patriots Expo Saturday and Sunday

Speaker Schedule Preppers and Patriots Expo Aug 16, 2014
Saturday – Theater 1

9am     Mike Knox, White Harvest Seed Company – GMO v. Heirloom Seeds and Why          

10am   Ike Skelton – Agenda 21

11am    Doug Brethower – Wood Gas Energy, Biomass and the Wood Gas Pickup Truck

12pm  Dr. Bones and Nurse Amy – Survival Medicine When There Is No Doctor

1pm     John Moore The Liberty Man – Climate Change and What the Govt  Does Not Want You to Know

2pm     Joyce Riley, Radio Host of “The Power Hour” – Veterans Healthcare

3pm     Vince Finelli, Radio Host of “USAPrepares” – How Deep Do The Lies Go?

4pm     Michael Evans, Radio Host “” – Restoring Freedom/Firearms for Preppers

5pm     Beth Ann Schoeneberg, Radio Host of “Common Sense Coalition” – Become a Citizen Activist

Theater 2

9 am SwissAmerica – Precious Metals in a Crisis 

10 am Mike Brown – Steam Engines for Home Energy

11 am Joe Dixon – Morningland Dairy

12 noon Allen Busiek – Prepping 101 Intro to Prepping: Why Prepare / What to Prepare For / Different Approaches to Prepping / Getting Started Allen appeared on the TV show Doomsday Preppers.

1 pm Lynette Pate – Organic Guru The Monsanto Project

2 pm Essential Oils – Dr. Norfleet

3 pm Dr. Jim Cesar – How to Suture Wounds

4 pm EFS Energy Company – Solar Power

5 pm EFS Energy Company – Wind Power


Speaker Schedule Preppers and Patriots Expo Aug 17, 2014 
Sunday – Theater 1

9 am Dave Lohr – Survival in the Wilderness 

10am Doreen Hanes – Agenda 21 

11am Tim Stark CSPOA – Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association

Last 15 minutes of talk Oathkeepers Reaffirmation of the Oath Ceremony

12pm Ozarks Refuse – Why the Ozarks Is The Perfect Bugout Location Jerry Diamond

1pm Dr. Bones and Nurse Amy – Survival Medicine When There Is No Doctor

2pm Lens Pense -Gardening Revolution 

3pm Forest Gardening Chris Allen

4pm. Common Core Dangers – Dr. Mary Byrne

5pm Police Chief Kevin Jotz, LAPD Retired – Defend Yourself Against Cops

Theater 2

9 am Lynette Pate – The Monsanto Project

10 am Native American Church – Coming Changes and How to React

11 am Dawn McPherson – When There is No Pharmacy PART 1

12 noon Dawn McPherson – When There is No Pharmacy PART 2

1 pm Bob Anderson – Author of The Survivalist novels

2 pm Mike Brown – Defending Yourself Against Health Nazis

3 pm SwissAmerica – Precious Metals in a Crisis

4 pm Allen Busiek Prepper Groups – Part 1 – Why Join (or Form) a Group / Types of Groups / Possible Benefits / Organizational Hurdles / Potential Downsides 

5 pm Allen Busiek Prepper Groups – Part 2 – Why Join (or Form) a Group / Types of Groups / Possible Benefits / Organizational Hurdles / Potential Downsides


Previous Older Entries Next Newer Entries


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 88 other followers