I’m a Sober Bartender

Illustration by Sibel Ergener

Temptation might be all around me, but it’s what I was born to do

Thirty-seven-year-old Boston-based bartender Trevor Christian has been slinging drinks for nearly 10 years — and been sober for eight of them.

Don’t get me wrong: I love alcohol. It still plays a large role in my life, just not in my body. I don’t feel like I’m better than anyone else, or like I’ve figured it all out. I just can’t partake anymore. For good reason, too.

Trevor Christian mixing drinks

When I got evicted from my apartment in the mid-2000s, my kitchen was nothing but empty beer bottles, cigarette butts and broken glass. I was managing to blow enough of my salary on booze and drugs that I never made rent on time, even with the money I was stealing from work by faking cash returns and dipping into the safe.

Then things got really bad.

I moved into a house with five other people to cut down on living costs. I now had so much extra money that all I did was party. I stopped caring about work completely. And when I got fired, I did what any smart, reasonable person would do: I cashed in my 401k and went fucking nuts. Like a rock star, I only slept when I blacked out. And the corners of my jackets and sweatshirts were torn from being so fucking drunk that I couldn’t stand up; instead, I would push myself home against the side of a building. A lot of times, I would wake up in a park — sometimes soaking wet from the sprinklers that had been spraying me with water for God knows how long. Speaking of God, one morning, I even woke up on the stairs of a church.

Needless to say, I wasn’t happy. I’d blown through all my money, and my health was shit. In the morning, I couldn’t light up a cigarette until I chugged a beer because my hands were shaking so violently. I’d lost close to 50 pounds, the three things I consumed with any regularity being bananas, trail mix and a fuckload of booze. And my sweat was bright orange.

I admitted defeat on the phone with my dad. He said, “Just get to the airport. We’ll get you a ticket home.” I returned to Vermont a statistic: 30 years old, living in my parents’ basement, tail between my legs, no job, no car, no anything.

But I didn’t really change. I would say, “I’m just gonna have a six-pack.” Or: “I’m only gonna drink on the weekends.” Naturally, rock bottom soon followed. I don’t remember most of it — just being shaken awake by a total stranger in the front seat of a car that wasn’t mine but that I had driven into a telephone pole.

As conditions of the DUI that followed, I had to stop drinking. So I started going to meetings and hanging out with other recovering drunks in church basements. It sucked for the first couple of months. It was like ending a 10-year relationship with someone I saw every night until the wee hours. I wasn’t completely accepting of this lifestyle change, but it was either do AA, go to prison or die.

I got a job doing design, but after a few months, my brother, who’d been sober for about a year at that point, asked if I wanted to do some bar-backing at the place he managed. I’d told him I was interested once before; back then, though, he was like, “You need more time.” Now, he was comfortable with it — as was I.

My sponsor thought I was out of my mind. But he didn’t stop me. “I don’t approve of it, but I’m not going to hold you back,” he told me.

I was lucky that I was bar-backing and not bartending at first. That meant I wasn’t in immediate contact with alcohol. That smell, though! Whoa! It brought back some warm memories, and some pretty awful ones, too. But even with alcohol right under my nose, I could handle it.

I also was lucky that my brother and another bartender I worked with were sober. Their support was crucial to me getting comfortable being sober in an environment that preaches anything but sobriety — as well as getting comfortable in my own skin. I mean, I’m still a crazy asshole. That’s never gonna change. But now, that craziness isn’t totally out of control and capable of killing me…




Utopia Inc

Imagem relacionada

The Bray family reading bedtime stories at the Family of the Mystic Arts Commune. Photo by John Olson/LIFE Picture Collection/Getty

Most utopian communities are, like most start-ups, short-lived. What makes the difference between failure and success?

by Alexa Clay is a writer and researcher in pursuit of misfit subcultures. She is the co-author of The Misfit Economy (2015). Her writing has appeared in Wired, The Guardian and Vice, among others. 

At 16, Martin Winiecki dropped out of school and left his home in the German city of Dresden to live full-time at , a 300-acre intentional community in the rolling hills of southwestern Portugal. His mother and father – a doctor and a professor of mathematics – were reluctant to let him go. ‘It was quite a shock for them,’ Winiecki remembers. Born in 1990, just a few months after the collapse of the Berlin wall, Winiecki came of age in a society in limbo. The atmosphere of the former GDR still clung to people. ‘It was a culture that was so formal. So obligation-oriented. That had no heart. No love,’ Winiecki explained. At the same time, in Winiecki’s eyes, the capitalist alternative was creating a ‘system of deep economic injustice – of winners and losers’. Neither story encompassed a humanity he wanted part of. Tamera offered an alternative.

Founded by the psychoanalyst and sociologist Dieter Duhm in Germany in 1978 and re-founded in Portugal in 1995, Tamera aspired to dissolve the trauma of human relationships. Duhm, heavily influenced by Marxism and psychoanalysis, came to see material emancipation and interpersonal transformation as part of the same project. Duhm had been deeply disillusioned by communes where he’d spent time in the 1960s and ’70s, and which seemed to reproduce many of the same tyrannies that people were trying to escape: egoism, power struggles, envy, mistrust and fear, while practices of sexual freedom often engendered jealousy and pain. In Duhm’s eyes, communes had failed to create a viable model for a new society. In Tamera, he hoped to begin a social experiment that allowed for deep interpersonal healing.

Communitarian experiments such as Tamera are nothing new, although its longevity – almost 40 years – is unusual. Generally,  intentional communities fail at a rate slightly higher than that of most start-ups. Only a handful of communities founded in the US during the 19th century’s ‘golden age of communities’ lasted beyond a century; most folded in a matter of months. This golden age birthed more than 100 experimental communities, with more than 100,000 members who, according to the historian Mark Holloway in Heavens on Earth (1951), sought to differentiate themselves from society by creating ‘ideal commonwealths’. The largest surge in communitarian ‘start-ups’ occurred during the 1840s and 1890s, coinciding with periods of economic depression. But it would be a mistake to see intentional communities merely as a knee-jerk response to hard times.

In historic terms, a broader discontent with industrial society has led to people flocking to communes, utopias and spiritual settlements, from eco-villages and ‘back to the land’ style settlements designed to create sustainable lifestyles and a stronger relationship to nature, to communities founded with spiritual or idealist visions for transforming human character and creating new blueprints of society. Of course, the ‘cult’ label is never far behind. Many intentional communities have had to fight their own public-relations battles in the wake of negative or sensational publicity.

But regardless of our suspicions, our appetite for communitarian living might even be evolutionarily hard-wired. Some sociologists have gone as far as to suggest that we are mal-adapted in modern society, and that ‘tribal’ forms of life are more viable. Theories of neo-tribalism suggest that instead of mass society, human nature is best suited to small, caring groups. The anthropologist Robin Dunbar at the University of Oxford claims that humans can comfortably maintain no more than 150 stable relationships, which suggests that communitarian living might not be so much of an ‘outlier’ or ‘experiment’. From an evolutionary perspective, modern society itself might be the anomaly. As the cultural critic Daniel Quinn writes in The Story of B (1996), for 3 million years the tribal life worked for us: ‘It worked for people the way nests worked for birds, the way webs work for spiders, the way burrows work for moles … That doesn’t make it lovable, it makes it viable.’

Why then do utopian communities so often fail? Interestingly, attrition rates for intentional communities are not all that different from many other types of human endeavour. The failure rate for start-ups is around 90 per cent, and the longevity of most companies is dismal: of the Fortune 500 companies listed in 1955, more than 88 per cent are gone; meanwhile, S&P companies have an average lifespan of just 15 years. Can we really expect more longevity from experimental communities? And if not, what can we learn from an audit of these experiments? What have been the key factors undermining communitarian living?

Perhaps the irony is that many of the administrative and managerial forces that individuals are running away from within mainstream society are exactly the organisational tools that would make intentional communities more resilient: that regardless of how much intentional communities with utopian aims seek to step to one side of worldly affairs, they succeed or fail for the very same pragmatic reasons that other human enterprises – notably businesses and start-ups – succeed or fail…




Does Everything Cause Cancer Nowadays?

by Pedro Aquila, Staff Writer,Waking Times

When a person attempts conversation about how something causes cancer, they are often met with the dismissive response “but everything causes cancer.” They are right, in a way. Almost everything does cause cancer, yet it is possible to avoid.

This article can be a resource for avoiding carcinogens, endocrine disruptors, and health damaging chemicals. It only scratches the surface, but this should be a perfect introduction for someone who is unaware that many things are too toxic to tolerate.

1. Chemicals in Food

A. GM, pesticide contaminated soy is linked to endocrine disruption and cancer

As you may have heard, the pesticide RoundUp or glyphosate is an enemy to public health in several ways, but did you know many soy products are contaminated with it, and can cause endocrine disruption and cancer?

Genetically modified soybeans are grown in great abundance, and the result is cheap, plentiful soybean oil. The soybean oil is put into just about every processed food product you can think of, and it often contains the pesticide it is genetically modified to be resistant to.

Have you ever heard of doctors prescribing anti-depressants, referencing a “chemical imbalance” as the cause of depression? Well endocrine disruption, hormonal imbalance from chemicals, is one true cause of “chemical depression,” so avoiding them can be a critical decision in securing emotional health.

What’s more, the small amounts of glyphosate found in soy products interact with a phytoestrogen in soybeans, creating a reaction that has a more potent endocrine disrupting effect.

A 2013 paper published in the journal Food and Chemical Toxicology says:

“Glyphosate-based herbicides are widely used for soybean cultivation, and our results also found that there was an additive estrogenic effect between glyphosate and genistein, a phytoestrogen in soybeans. However, these additive effects of glyphosate contamination in soybeans need further animal study.”

B. Artificial Coffee Creamers

This article could choose any number of processed foods to expose the toxicity of. Let’s just choose one: artificial coffee creamer.

This is an artificial creamer sold under the brand “Ambiance.”

It contains these chemicals.

“Corn syrup solids” are in the same vein of unhealthy as high fructose corn syrup, partially hydrogenated soybean oil is one of those health damaging soy products, dipotassium phosphate is a common additive to coffee creamer that is linked to health problems written about in academic papers, and the list goes on.

2. Body Care Products

A. Aluminum in Deodorant

Breast and skin cancer, Alzheimer’s, endocrine disruption, and other health problems are strongly linked to the use of “body care” products. For example, aluminum compounds in antiperspirant/deodorant are linked to Alzheimer’s. Endocrine disruptors are even ending up in water supplies.

The way body care products can cause health problems is well summarized in a 2009 paper titled, “Underarm antiperspirants/deodorants and breast cancer”:

“An extensive number of cosmetic products are applied topically on and around the human breast on a daily basis, often multiple times a day, including not only underarm anti-perspirant/deodorant products but also body lotions, body sprays, moisturising creams, breast firming/enhancing creams and suncare products. These products are not rinsed off but left on the skin, allowing for continuous dermal exposure, absorption and deposition into underlying tissues, which may be further increased by abrasions in the skin created by shaving [2,3,57]. The extent to which chemicals absorbed by this route escape metabolism remains unknown, but they would certainly escape the systemic metabolism to which orally derived chemicals would be subjected [57].”

An article by Dr. Edward Group offers an alternative to toxic deodorants:

“Aluminum-free deodorants should consist of essential oils and all natural ingredients. Aluminum free alone may not be enough as some aluminum-free deodorants are still high risk, according to the Environmental Working Group, and can contain chemicals like triclosan and propylene glycol. Triclosan is perhaps a more fierce endocrine disruptor than propylene glycol, so try to avoid it. This article contains a recipe for making your own deodorant using natural ingredients like baking soda and coconut oil.”

B. Chemical sunscreen can cause endocrine disruption and cancer

You may have heard of sunscreen actually causing skin cancer and hormone disruption.

Oxybenzone is a main ingredient in many sunscreens. Luckily there are alternatives.

Two different types of sunscreen are well summarized by Wellness Mama:

“There are two ways that a sunscreen can protect the skin from sun damage: with a mineral barrier or a chemical one.

Mineral sunscreens typically include ingredients like zinc oxide or titanium dioxide, which create a physical barrier to protect the skin from the sun.

Chemical sunscreens use one or more chemicals including oxybenzone, avobenzone, octisalate, octocrylene, homosalate and octinoxate.”

In one case, a woman who blogged about the value of body care products and sunscreen actually ended up with skin cancer. An ABC headline reads: “Woman ‘Shocked’ to Develop Skin Cancer Despite Sunscreen Vigilance.”

From that article:

“Annie Tomlin is an expert beauty editor who is known for telling her millions of readers about the importance of sunscreen, so when a red patch appeared on her hairline and wouldn’t go away, she knew something wasn’t right.

“As it grew and grew I thought, ‘this isn’t normal,’” she said.

A biopsy revealed that Tomlin had basal cell carcinoma. It’s the most common kind of skin cancer. Tomlin said she was “shocked” by the diagnosis in November.”I’m religious about sun protection. I wore it every day as a kid,” she said.”…


About the Author

Pedro Aquila is a staff writer for Waking Times.

This article (Does Everything Cause Cancer Nowadays?) was originally created and published by Waking Times and is printed here under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Pedro Aquila and WakingTimes.com. It may be re-posted freely with proper attribution.







Guide To Flying With Marijuana

Like most Americans, I dread and detest the act of traveling at Thanksgiving time; like most Americans, I subject myself to this ordeal every year just the same. In 2015, at least the routine was more merciful than usual: Get north from San Francisco to Portland. Easy—a short domestic flight, no customs; a quick trip of a few days over a long weekend, no need for a checked bag. No problem.

Since life is short and our precious time on the mortal coil is best spent anywhere else than in virtual captivity at an airport, I arrived at SFO with the usual efficiency, allotting just enough time to sprint through security and make it to the gate for the final boarding call. I was on schedule to do just this, when, shoeless, belt-less, my pockets empty and my arms over my head in surrender, I glimpsed my carry-on bag slide off of the security conveyor belt and into the hands of a TSA officer.

“Is this yours?” the officer asked me.

Let’s take a step back. The year before, Oregon voters legalized recreational cannabis. Portland’s retail dispensaries had just opened for business. The plan for the trip included the requisite pilgrimage to Stumptown coffee as well as a tour of the city’s cannabis offerings. I’d heard the weed was just fine, and I was eager to try some.

But I live in California. The outdoor harvest was in. So of course I packed a few glass jars filled with the finest Humboldt and Mendocino have to offer. Arriving empty-handed, with nothing to share after the Thanksgiving feast, would be rude. But since I pack as efficiently as I travel, these jars weren’t stashed anywhere discrete—they were right on top. This saved the TSA officer the trouble of digging through my collection of t-shirts and hoodies to find them.

Thus, the dance began.

“What’s this?” she asked.

“That… is medical cannabis,” I said, a shot of adrenaline-fueled anxiety putting just the slightest hairline crack into my confidence.

I was prepared for this. You see, for the better part of a decade, I’ve flown with marijuana nearly everywhere I go. I do this for a variety of reasons, chief of which is that I can. (Second and third-place reasons are, I’d rather not patronize a black-market dealer where I’m going if it’s an illegal state, and I’d rather bring the weed I have than spend money on more otherwise.) And not once have I ever had any trouble—even when TSA looked through my belongings and found some weed.

If you’re reading this, you can, too.

Many, many people do it, whether they’re growers flying to international Cannabis Cups or normal civilians.

It’s remarkably easy, and requires little more than common sense and abiding by a few rules. Here’s how.


The youngest of the cabinet-level federal departments, Homeland Security’s Transit Security Administration is in the job of looking for things that might lead to a reprise of 9/11, fear of which is what’s led us to take off our shoes, empty our pockets and be subjected to Donald Trump-level sexual assault all for the thin veneer of safety.

Since it was natives of trusted U.S. ally Saudi Arabia armed with box-cutters that got us into this mess, not Lebanese blond hash, TSA has acted (for once) appropriately. In other words: They are not there to look for drugs.

Our officers are focused on security and are not searching specifically for substances that aren’t a threat to the aircraft,” TSA spokesman Bruce Anderson confirmed to HIGH TIMES in an email.

Now. If you’re trafficking in pounds, or more likely, if your rolling bag is full of $50,000 in cash on either end of such a trafficking jaunt, you may find yourself greeted at the gate by law enforcement, who TSA can (and does) call if they do discover drugs during a screening.

But who does the TSA call? If you’re packing weed, they won’t call the FBI or the DEA. They call the law enforcement agency responsible for patrolling the airport. They call the local cops—who enforce local law, not federal law.

It’s a common misconception that airports are beholden to federal law. But it’s also a common mistake to believe that just because marijuana is legal in the state where you’re boarding, the same holds true at the airport.


Perhaps the single most important rule of all is to know the rules. This means knowing more than simply if cannabis is legal or not in your state of origin and destination. You need to know the rules of the airport.

In Denver, for example, the airport has declared all possession of marijuana to be illegal. If you’re caught with cannabis, they won’t jail you or fine you, but they will make you throw your weed out.

In Portland, police will check your boarding pass before letting you go. If you’re flying to somewhere else within state lines—which evidently is a thing—you’re free to board, weed in hand. If you’re flying somewhere else, even to a state where cannabis is also legal, you’ll be asked to go back through security and dispense with the weed somehow.

In San Francisco, you’re allowed to board with an ounce—but if you have your medical cannabis recommendation, you’re allowed to board with eight ounces.

In other words, airports are for the most part just as permissive as the states in which they’re located. This has led to a general air of “who gives a fuck” at security, at least in legal states…




Pope warns of third world war caused by water scarcity

Pope Francis attends a religious ceremony at the Vatican on February 25, 2017 (Photo by AFP).

Pope Francis attends a religious ceremony at the Vatican on February 25, 2017 (Photo by AFP).

Pope Francis has warned against the ramifications of aggravating water scarcity across the globe, saying that the crisis could lead to a third world war.

“The right to water is essential for the survival of persons and decisive for the future of humanity,” Pope Francis said during a meeting with international experts participating in a ‘Dialogue on Water’ at the Pontifical Academy of Sciences on Friday.

“All people have a right to safe drinking water. I ask [myself] if in this piecemeal third world war that we are living through, are we not going toward a great world war for water?” he said.

Pope Francis pointed to the latest figures on water published by the United Nations and said that the world should not remain indifferent to the issue.

“Every day, a thousand children die of illness linked to water and contaminated water is consumed by millions of people every day… This situation must be stopped and reversed. Fortunately, this is not impossible, but it is urgent,” the pontiff said.

A report released by the UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) this month warns that “groundwater sources are being depleted rapidly,” and described “water scarcities” as one of the key global problems.

“Mankind’s future ability to feed itself is in jeopardy due to intensifying pressures on natural resources, mounting inequality, and the fallout from a changing climate,” it said.

According to a 2016 UN report, nearly 663 million people “lack ready access to improved sources of drinking water, while the number of people without reliable access to water of good enough quality to be safe for human consumption is at least 1.8 billion.”  



Glyphosate Contaminants In Processed Brand Name Foods


By Catherine J. Frompovich

Glyphosate is the main chemical active in several brands of agricultural and corporate farming herbicides used in the growing fields; in GMO seed crop cultures; and in what’s called “preharvest staging” [1]. That’s when the herbicide is sprayed several days [3 to 5 days] prior to crop harvest to “ensure” seed heads mature evenly. Some consider that process acts as a “desiccant.”

The more commonly-used herbicide is Roundup® manufactured by Monsanto. In GMO farming, there is Roundup Ready® seeds, which are totally different from heirloom or non-GMO seeds. One specific difference is GMO seeds have patents on them, meaning something has been done to modify the seed from the parent or original plant strain produced by Nature.

Recently on an Internet talk show, I heard a professor talking about the non-browning apple, i.e., the apple’s protein is turned off to make the GMO-non-browning apple not brown when cut and exposed to air, as a normal apple does.

Well, the question I, as a natural nutritionist, have is: If the protein (0.3 gram or 1% of Daily Value) [3] in the GMO non-browning apple is turned off, does that mean the apple protein is not functional within that GMO apple as a nutrient for human nutrition? Has a scientific nutritional analysis proven that factually one way or the other? Or does science indicate that protein is viable as human nutrition? Because, if not, that would make a real nutritional difference in the GMO non-browning apple!

Furthermore, what’s called the “equivalence factor” of GMO phoods really is this, in my opinion: GMO plants have ‘things’ either inserted or turned off or modified (allowing patents to be issued making food seeds/plants corporate property subject to legal redress) from original parent plants, therefore, GMOs are NOT equivalent to the original plant food, regardless of what GMO science claims!

The fact food crop seeds or plants have “patents” should be the prime exclusionary criterion difference, in my opinion, since historical and heirloom foods/seeds/plants did not, and do not, have patents! That’s why the U.S. FDA is out to lunch on GMO phood science, I say, and all GMO phoods legally must be labeled correctly to comply with truth in advertising laws in the USA.

Then there’s the inconvenient ‘byproduct’ of corporate farming; it’s glyphosate residues in processed foods, which has been confirmed scientifically by Food Democracy Now, The Detox Project and their 29-page report “Glyphosate: UNSAFE ON ANY PLATE”[2].

Below are two charts showing the glyphosate food testing results in parts per billion (ppb) FDN had performed, and the results are nothing short of stunning! Cheerios, which moms routinely give to toddlers as “finger food,” contain 1,125.3 ppb!


Going down the list we see what I call ‘corporate food sin’ in brand names like General Mills, Kellogg’s, Nabisco, PepsiCo, Campbell Soup Company, Little Debbie, Lucy’s, Whole Foods, and Back to Nature! The really sad news, in my opinion, is brand names originally associated with previously ‘healthy type food’ before corporate buy outs apparently have chemically contaminated brands like Annie’s and Kashi because ‘corporate-brands parents’ don’t keep tight control over chemical-free food processing and production, in my opinion.more…




The Media Can No Longer Hide The Truth About Fukushima; The Entire World Is In Danger

Fukushima Earthquake


We first want to thank Fox News for FINALLY reporting on a subject that has been highly censored by the mainstream media for the past 5+ years, the situation in Fukushima, Japan is completely out of control. While Fox News recently reported that radiation levels at Fukushima were now at ‘unimaginable levels’ more than 5 years after the disastrous earthquake and tsunami struck, as Steve Quayle asked in an SQNote he left while linking to that story, why has the mainstream media been silent all of this time?

(Article by Stefan Stanford from Allnewspipeline.com)

We’ve long believed that ‘reality’ has a way of ‘awakening’ everybody and the stories recently coming across the wire over at ENENews have been mind-numbing the last few weeks to say the least. You can hear the Fox News report on Fukushima in the 1st video below while in the 2nd video, Mike Adams over at Natural News gives us a new update on the ‘Fukushima radiation apocalypse’ that has been steadily spewing poisons into our atmosphere for almost 6 years now with hardly a peep from the MSM.

In the most recent stories from ENENews, on February 5th they reported the heartbreaking news that a record high number of whale deaths had recently been reported surrounding the Hawaiian Islands with the sick and starving animals allegedly a ‘mystery’ to experts. Reporting that rotting carcasses were scattered throughout the islands, how can so-called experts NOT know that Fukushima poisons flowing into our oceans for years are most likely to blame?









As Adams tells us in his video, the sustainability of all life throughout the Northern hemisphere is in danger and the entire MSM up until now has been in a complete blackout mode except for this recent reports. Do CNN, MSNBC and the rest of them think that if they DON’T report upon Fukushima, what’s happening to the fish and our oceans is ‘fake news’? Do they think that because we can’t actually SEE the radiation, it’s not really there? The MSM’s failure to report upon Fukushima may be the final straw that not only breaks the camel’s back but puts that camel out of our misery.

For the past several years, we’ve reported horror story after horror story of sea life dying all across the Pacific Ocean and up and down the entire West coast, from Alaska to California. Also documented in great detail over the past several years by ENENews, with mass animal deaths all across the world being kept track of by End Times Prophecy, it’s clear that the mainstream media has completely failed the American public on Fukushima.

Another recent story over at ENENews reports on Fox News’ sudden admission that Fukushima is out of control, highlighting a few phrases used by Fox in their report that shows just how completely out of touch the MSM has been with reality over the past 5+ years. Their story also brings to light :

Fox News, Feb 8, 2017 (emphasis added): Adam Housley, who reported from the area in 2011 following the catastrophic triple-meltdown, said this morning that new fuel leaks have been discovered… He said that critics, including the U.S. military in 2011, have long questioned whether Tokyo Electric Power Co. (TEPCO) and officials have been providing accurate information on the severity of the radiation… He added that critics are now questioning whether the radiation has been this severe all along.

Fox News video transcript excerpts, Feb 8, 2017: “Experts believe melted fuel is leaking inside the plant almost daily… No one knew [in 2011] of the growing threat which today only continues to get worse… Wow, this is a crazy story… What some people are saying is, ‘ Has it been this bad since the beginning?’”


Quite surprisingly after all of their years of silence, the Washington Post actually finally reported on Fukushima on February 8th in a story in which they asked: “Could the radiation level be even higher? Possibly. The 530 sievert reading was recorded some distance from the melted fuel, so in reality it could be 10 times higher than recorded” said Hideyuki Ban, co-director of Citizens’ Nuclear Information Center.

Imagine that… ten times higher than the ‘unimaginable levels’ already detected. Is this why the MSM is finally reporting upon Fukushima? As a commenter on the Washington Post story wisely mentions, we’re watching a run-a-way train speeding completely out of control and experts have admitted, there is really no way to stop it… and least not in the next several decades.

Devastating to our oceans and therefore our food chain, we read in the new SQAlert seen below that most Americans are completely clueless to what is happening to the Pacific Ocean and up and down the West Coast of America.


Regarding this forever-lied-about Fukushima tonnage released daily, the problem is two-fold— 1) only a small (yet growing) number of dumbed-down, Facebook and Twitter-absorbed, McDonald’s food-engorging people are even AWARE…..yes, after five years…..of how serious Fukushima is. It is because the mainstream media doesn’t breathe a word about it. 2) the second issue is RAMPANT APATHY, RESIGNATION, AND DENIAL. I sent the bleak and depressing coast-of-Chile sardine kill photos to friends everywhere and not even ONE (we are talking about people your age and mine….about 65….highly successful and intelligent) wrote me back with perhaps a query as to whether it MUST BE radiation from Fukushima or if it MIGHT HOPEFULLY BE El Nino algae “red bloom” choking off oxygen.



And the ignorance of the American people in itself is the work of the MSM, neglecting to report upon what could be the most important health story in America and the northern hemisphere today – a story that up until now, has flown completely under the MSM radar. So why would the MSM ‘black out’ Fukushima for nearly 6 years and why are they suddenly reporting upon what’s happening there now?

In the new story from Mike Adams over at Natural News he reports “there are times when I’m convinced humanity is a suicidal cult of complete idiots whose only real achievement is figuring out increasingly obscene ways to distract themselves from reality.” Adams points out that while most of the nation was fixated on the Super Bowl and Lady Gaga, the Fukushima disaster got much worse…and the MSM remained silent…