Accountability Now

Sorry...I didn't notice Columbus. I guess that balances it out. Its ridiculously apparent that Markam or any GTA area could handle another NHL team but we'll see if the mighty Leafs will allow it. I even heard Sacramento was looking to build a rink to attract an NHL team. Not sure if I agree with that spot but Seattle might work. They have a lot of WHL teams in that area who are supported very well. It could have been a different story if Phoenix had build their arena in the downtown or East Valley (where most of the snow birds are). Driving that hour or hour and half is just too much for a Tuesday night game.

I thought this too but I read the following stating: Here’s some fodder for the crowd that scoffs at global warming: Antarctic ice has grown more solid over the last 20 years. So says a video report by BBC science editor David Shukman, who notes that in Antarctica, “The bulk of the ice sheet is largely unchanged, or even getting slightly thicker.” But before the jeering gets too loud: The overall condition of all polar ice, is, you guessed it, melting. That takes into account considerable thawing in the Arctic, as well as in coastal areas of western Antarctica that buck the continent’s hardening trend. http://www.smartplanet.com/blog/bulletin/global-warming-antarctic-ice-growing-thicker/7056

As an Oilers fan follower....I am happy to see Detroit move over while we keep Columbus. It will be interesting to see how the skilled Wings will match up with some of the more gritty Eastern Conference teams. It sure should be less travel which is always nice. Do you really think that Quebec will get a team. I think that Bettman would rather die than have Phoenix move there esepcially since the NHL officially owns them now. At worst...they would move the team to Seattle area (in my opinion)

The idea of AGW has always been interesting for me in that I was once a strong denier and I have since move to being truly on the fence. I find it odd that Roy Baty used the ozone example as I have always understood that to be an environmental success story. They identified the problems of CFC...changed them to HCFCs and saw improvements. Unlike the ozone issue, AGW has to consider many factors that can and do cause global warming and not just a single direct cause. I understand that CO2 is viewed as the direct source but the various sources and sinks for the CO2 and their implication on the matter is still in question. There still exists the question of which comes first....temperature rise or C02 rise. There have been times in history when atmospheric CO2 was quite high and temperatures were low which gave deniers the proof they needed. However, the thought of a lag was then presented however it was very difficult to trend this lag and match it up. Research in the Antarctic however seems to be given some insight. http://news.ku.dk/all_news/2012/2012.7/rise_in_temperatures_and_co2/ It appears that the temperature and CO2 levels follow each other quite consistenly in the Antarctic and consitently lags by 200 years. This is important as it allows researchers to get a grip on what is natural and what is anthropogenic. Speaking of the Antarctic, other research (shown in the link below) suggests that due to the ozone depletion, the surface winds have drastically increased on the ocean surfaces and therefore increasing polar circulation. This affects global warming because the Southern Oceans provide 40% of the world's carbon sink. As such any disturbance in the this sink could cause major disruptions in the amount of carbon taken out of the atmosphere.http://www.climatecentral.org/news/ozone-holes-shifting-winds-may-be-sapping-major-carbon-sink-15530. The reality is that natural causes create these same winds so again...how much is man made? If this is true then perhaps the ozone depletion had more to do with global warming then we thought. And of course me being a fence sitter would suggest that the repair of the ozone layer may help restore this carbon sink and reduce the effects of AGW. Probably not though. It seems obvious that we should be looking to the oceans for the answer considering they take up 70% of the earth's area. Not to mention, one El Nino immediately and drastically changes global temperatures. http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/OceanCarbon/

If you have time....can you comment on why you think we have so many new allergic reations compared to 50 years ago? Take the IG(E) reaction to peanuts for example. When i was growing up there were no kids and now today we can't even send PB sandwiches to school anymore. What do you think has caused this change?

First off I would like to thank you for your well written and informative post. It is clear that you have a lot of experience and insight on this topic. I appreciate you taking the time to post it. I do have a few questions and comments: I may have been a bit misleading in saying its a gut based system when I should have said 'largely' a gut based system. I am not a researcher myself but from the doctors I have followed on this we find quotes like the following: "Intestinal microbiota, or gut flora, and the gut barrier determine gut health. Inside the gut are about 100 trillion live microorganisms that promote normal GI function, protect the body from infection, and regulate metabolism and the mucosal immune system. In fact, they comprise more than 75% of the immune system" http://www.todaysdietitian.com/newarchives/060112p58.shtml I know about 5 years ago when I first told my GP about leaky gut and the possibiltiy of a compromised immune system, he laughed and told me he had never heard anything about it. Last month, he unknowingly contradicted himself by telling me all about leaky gut!! I think its like you said, none of the day to day doctors are up to speed and involved in the research. Most doctors/nurses have a full work load just getting through their daily patients. I do feel that the ties to the gut are new and developing faster than before which is why we see all these allergen alternatives. I agree that Sears and Mercola are not researchers, rather they are spokesmen for a subset of medical researchers who have a hypothesis that is yet to be proven. It doesn't mean its false though. I believe some (not all) of the hypotheses presented are being starting to be researched more and more. In particular I follow the work being done with autism related to gastrointestinal issues and their relation to immune systems. Again...years ago anyone (including Sears and Mercola) suggesting things like leaky gut were considered to be cranks. Now mainstream medicine is all over it especially looking a lot closer at IG(G) allergies and their effects on chronic symptoms. Are there cranks out there? Absolutely. But not all people that have an idea should be considered cranks just because it doesn't coincide with western medicine. Furthermore, a scientific fact is an idea that has been proven over and over again until we accept it as fact. There are no absolute truths....just what we as humans accpet to be true. As such its ok to think outside the box to challenge our beleif in what we consider to be fact. The reality is that we have so many things like autism, allergies and other autoimmune diseases that are on a drastic rise and there are no answers. Until we have answers, we must keep asking questions! For years our conventional system was looking at these as just neurological or just gastrointestinal or just limited to whatever part the symptom is from. However, the new approach takes into account the complexity of the muliple systems and their affects on each other. (ie the immune system being largely gut based). Anyway...thanks again for your insight. It was a good read and appreciated on my end.

I see what you are saying. He did ask if if this was just a hunch. Its definitely not just me coming up with this idea but other doctors who are far more informed that I who I choose to follow. Having said that...no I don't have any proof of the increased vaccination schedule causing harm. Just logic suggesting that increasing the amount of heavy metals into the blood MAY cause some issues. It is well documented that aluminum is a toxin and causes bone and brain diseases. As per the CDC (http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxfaqs/tf.asp?id=190&tid=34) "Some people with kidney disease store a lot of aluminum in their bodies and sometimes develop bone or brain diseases which may be caused by the excess aluminum. Some studies show that people exposed to high levels of aluminum may develop Alzheimer's disease, but other studies have not found this to be true. We do not know for certain whether aluminum causes Alzheimer's disease." The people I have seen discussing the high values are not the ones that you or Wayward Son would probably listen to anyway but here is their take on aluninum in vaccines (http://thinktwice.com/aluminum.pdf) Having said this, I am not saying the amount of alumnium is unsafe for the majority of people. Rather I am saying there is a small subset of people who can't handle the high dose of alumnium directly injected into their blood. Even the CDC quote above states that some people can't eliminate aluminum efficiently. $6 billion per year still makes it a multi billion dollar industry. No? As I said above, many of the Dan doctors are researching the effects of environmental toxins. Here is an example: A Micro device for Immune Profiling of Children with Autism. In connection with the requirement to predict how a given child will react to vaccination, there is an urgent need to develop technologies that enable multiplexed analysis of blood based on a small input of blood to ensure the compliance of small children and families. The project will design a miniature blood analysis system to distinguish early in life the immune patterns that could predict immune function and response to exogenous antigens, such as vaccines, using a small sample volume of whole blood. A microarray will be developed that is comprised of antibodies that will be used to capture and enumerate CD4 and CD8 T-cells, quantify T-cell secreted cytokines, and detect serum immunoglobulins. A miniature device will be designed that will allow researchers to perform differential multiparametric blood analysis on samples obtained from subjects compared to typically developing controls. Overall, the goal is to characterize and validate a novel technology for immune profiling of children with autism and healthy controls. In the future, the technology may be used prior to vaccination to determine immune competence of infants, and if necessary, to alter vaccination protocols. (PI: Alexander Revzin, Ph.D. UC Davis Department of Biomedical Engineering. Davis, CA.) You can NOT discount "acute" anecdotal evidence like what I described above. The type where the person takes a needle and they have an immediate reaction. The example I gave above about the person losing feeling in their arm after the vaccine....that happend the SAME day. Not a week, month or year later. You can NOT discount that something went wrong. There are other personal accounts of incidents where neurotypical kids get a vaccine and the next day don't speak. Must have been something they ate...right? Make sure Mom doesn't make that sandwich again! What you are trying to do with your 'smoking' example is show that you can't accept chronic cases for anectodal evidence. I agree with that and I try to avoid those stories when making judgements. How do I argue with Family Guy....I'm a big fan. However, no BS on my end. I don't need to convince you (or me) of anything. You have clearly missed my entire point. I am NOT antivaccines. I am not anti western medicine. I am saying there is a subset of children who have issues with removing toxins from their bodies and that more work needs to be done to decipher which kids these are BEFORE we stick a bunch of needles in them. Once we single these kids out then we can develop a better plan to vaccinate either with non-metal based vaccines (if available) or vaccinate with the normal ones and provide chelation treatment to assist in metal removal. (Yes...chelation...that is done in western medicine using drugs. Oh my!) I am not looking at natural cures as I am fully aware of what vaccines and science have done for mankinds. I am suggesting that we use the science that we have to look deeper and make things better. Its amazing how this issue polarizes this as "us" versus "them". Why can't people accept that science can always do better and look at better ways and challenge themselves. Or do you think its best to keep our heads in the sand and accept these issues as collateral damage? I will see your Family guy quote and raise you with a Simpons quote: "Actually, I've been working on a plan. During the exam, I'll hide under some coats, and hope that somehow everything will work out." Homer Simpson

Agreed!

I agree. I'm not talking about avoiding the vaccines...I'm talking about delaying them IF AND ONLY IF you are proven to have issues with your liver of kidneys. Its kind of like we thought penacillan was the wonder drug for all...until we found out that some were allergic to it.

Mercola and Sears are just some of the outspoken doctors on this matter. There are a growing number of researchers and physicians that can have done great research on this matter but of course until you are considered a nut job until you do the double blind placebo study that western medicine says you have to have. I understand the need for it but you can't discount common sense or anecodotal evidence either. I personally know people who after vaccines have lost feeling in their arms and the treatment....chelation. I can agree that some of these guys (Mercola included) can be a bit overboard but it somewhat balances out the rest of mainstream medicine who doesn't even look at this topic. The fact is there are metals in these things and we know that metals are toxins. If we turn a blind eye to this then what does that say about our ability to improve the system. Telling parents what they want to hear? You most likely are aware of the DAN doctors who are main stream doctors and have devoted their lives to this. But are you familiar with the fact that the majority of DAN doctors are parents themselves who have now devoted their lives and research to this stuff after seeing their loved ones affected by vaccines and more imporatnly by their recovery through non-western based protocols. I personally know this too. My nephew was diagnosed with Austism and underwent this 'radical' treatment supported by anti-science which involved chelation. Main stream doctors stated that he would most likely live in a group home and one year after an intense biomedical treatement he was deemed neurotypical. Is our case an exception? Maybe...but we are seeing more and more expections as the years go on especially consideirng the number of autoimmune disorders (autism, allergies, ADD, etc) are all increasing at drastic rates. We are also seeing more cases being solved or aided by biomedical intervention. The fear mongering from main stream medicine won't even allow for the thought of this because it risks people from not getting vaccines which I agree is not a good thing. The fact is that vaccines are good for the general population and the vast majority of kids can handle the heavy metals. But we need to do more reseach to find out who is ok to get these vaccines before just sticking a bunch of needles in these kids. Addressing this fact straight up will allow people to address their concerns and for us to get the majority of the people vaccinated. The others who don't have the ability to take the normal schedule will have to delay vaccines or look at other means. I know you have a busy week so sometime when you are not so busy, I would like to know what your interpretation of the immune system is. The doctors I have followed claim the immune system to be a gut based system that is affected by bacteria (good and bad), nutrition, and toxins arriving in the system. These guys understand the multiple related systems that are tied into the immune system including liver function, digestion and sleep. Does this view differ from what you feel is correct? To be honest I have found their view of the immune system to be quite developed. I love how anyone who offers a different opinion than what is stated by western medicine is quickly labeled a crank. Those cranks doing accupuncture for thousands of years were always laughed at. It is now being offered as treatment plans for various ailments by western medicine now. Or how about those cranks that that thought bacteria was the cause of ulcers and not stress? The reality is that western medicine should NEVER feel comforatable in their ways. They should always be willing to listen and debate the issues and not hide behind statements like cranks and quacks. If the facts line up...then you have nothing to worry about.

All I was doing was using that site to show that the number of vaccines have increased dramatically since the late 80s. If you don't beleive that chart then you can see the same info on the CDC website. http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/vacc-timeline.htm The number of vaccines have increased and as such the rate at which kids get the vaccines increased dramatically. You're right. Vaccines have used alumninum for 90 years and it was fine when kids were only getting a few shots here and there. After the 90s, they increased the number of vaccines and therefore the amount of alumninum directly injected (sometimes in a very short time). You are also right in that alumnium did not replace thiomersal as a presevative however the vaccines they used to replace the thiomersal ones contained high amounts of aluminum. http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2011/09/21/could-this-be-the-most-dangerous-aspect-of-vaccines.aspx The argument about injesting far more alumninum is misleading. We may in fact injest that much aluminum however only 1% of the ingested amount is absorbed into our bodies with the rest going out in the stool. However, 100% of the injected alumninum in vacciness directly enters the body and needs to be eliminated by the kidneys. If a child has properly functioning kidneys...then no problem. But for those who don't....big problem. http://vaccines-rvb.blogspot.ca/2008/09/difference-between-ingested-and_11.html In this post, you see the point about ingestion where Dr. Sears says "The toxic dose of aluminum for an adult is 350 mcg or .350 mg. A certain brand of OTC extra strength antacid tablets contains 160 mg of aluminum hydroxide in each tablet, and the directions say to take 2-4 tablets up to four times a day. So there has to be a difference between ingested and injected aluminum or else a single antacid tablet would be toxic" I couldn't access your link as you need a username/password however I trust your quote. Seems a little high. I believe they said 1 in 5 people were affected by H1N1. So with 35M people in Canada that would mean that 7M would have been affected and by your number 700K would have had neurological complications. I'm not sure but wouldn't we have heard about this? I need to see more on this before ceding to the 10%. 1. You're right. The officical definition of pandemic is widespread over a large area. The word pandemic carries the connotation of grave implications and considering only 18,000 people died compared to the normal 30,000 or so from normal flu has to put this 'pandemic' in context. Such seasonal flus carry the same criteria to be called a pandemic but they don't get called such because they are not as serious as what 'pandemic' should infer. 2. GSK was the major supplier that I was aware of here in Canada. Not sure about worldwide though. http://www.cbc.ca/news/health/story/2009/08/06/swine-flu-vaccine.html

http://www.smartvax.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=66 Look at the chart....the US had three vaccines prior to 1988. After this point they add 7 all before the age of 1? I'm not saying these aren't good vaccines but I am suggesting that we should be looking at delaying some of these especially for those with poor mitochondrial function or poor liver function. Most if not all of these vaccines contain high heavy metal counts used a preservative. The only part of the vaccines that I'm worried about is the heavy metals used for preservatives. They replaced mercury to try and prove it wasn't the trigger for all the issues around vaccines however what did they replace it with? Aluminum...another heavy metal. The people people affected by this have poor liver function and can't remove these heavy metals which wreaks havoc on various systems including brain function. Can you cite this? They delayed the pandemic because they knew it was a moderate strain. Ultimately it became a risk management thing when they realized what it could do...not what it would do. I can appreciate the concern and certainly wouldn't want their job! I don't blame the WHO for calling it a pandemic even though it wasn't. They obviously had time to get an earful from those involved including the pharmaceutical reps. Interestingly enough, shortly after this event the laws changed on how doctors and pharmaceutical reps can do business. No more behind the scenes trips, dinners or other incentives! As for GSK...other could have done it but didn't. You don't think GSK had the most motive considering their share position?

First and foremost I believe that vaccinnes have done wonderful things for humans however I do think western medicine has taken it too far. The number of vaccinnes for children have increased a fair amount and worse yet the schedule in which they get them is shortened (ie more vaccinnes over a shorter time). I think that science is starting to see the effects of heavy metals (vaccine preservative) and the issues it can cause. Obviously for most people these issues are minimal to non-exististent but I don't know how I feel when the swine flu vaccine says that 1 in 10,000 people may suffer neurological disorders from getting the vaccine. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pandemrix Personally, I would rather take my chances with the bug but that is my choice. I'm not overly knowledgable on the vaccine issue but I did pay particular notice to the Swine flu pandemic of 2009. In particular I found it very interesting that the producer of the vaccine (Glaxosmithkline) was suffering from its lowest stock value in 12 years in May of 2009 and then voila...there is a pandemic for which they have the cure...thus rocketing their stock back to above normal values. http://ca.finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=GSK#symbol=gsk;range=my;compare=;indicator=volume;charttype=area;crosshair=on;ohlcvalues=0;logscale=off;source=undefined; A bit conspiracy theory....sure. However it makes you wonder who actually pushes the buttons to say a pandemic is warranted or not. Pharmaceuticals is after all a multi billion dollar industry.

The treaties for FN within provinces are still with the Federal goverment however I think the FN negotiate with the provinces for resource sharing.

It sounds like Victoria is finally getting a wastewater plant but ironcially it also carries some opposition to this plan. Some scientist are stating that if the material is screened properly (which Victoria does) that the organic matter is better taken care of in the natural ecosystem. If our wastewater was only human waste then I would agree with them however how much other stuff gets put down the drains too? http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/07/23/scientist-pooh-poohs-victorias-780m-plan-for-new-sewage-plant/

I'm with you on this one Jerry. The Alberta goverment needs to stop basing its revenues on the high end and get back to proper budgeting. The talk of adding a PST would only be a short term solution to fix the blunder they made by overestimating oil revenues.

Please cite where this figure is used. My figure is real....it cost over $1B to build the mine site. I think you are exaggerating yours. In Canada we call it democracy...you know...majority rules. However I fully understand that FN don't always run democratic processes such that the band makes most if not all final decisions. In this case the band leaders decided to go ahead with it. So either way...those 15% of the people just don't get their way! As for rights, they did have the right to vote...and they do have the right to collect the compensation from the mine...and of course they do have the right to leave the reserve if they feel they aren't being treated fairly. So yes...definitely the same rights as everyone else on the reserve. Giving up all rights.... "the said Indians do hereby cede, release, surrender and yield up to the government of the Dominion of Canada, for His Majesty the King and His successors for ever, all their rights titles and privileges whatsoever, to the lands included within the following limits, that is to say: That portion or tract of land lying and being in the province of Ontario, bounded on the south by the height of land and the northern boundaries of the territory ceded by the Robinson-Superior Treaty of 1850, and the Robinson-Huron Treaty of 1850, and bounded on the east and north by the boundaries of the said province of Ontario as defined by law, and on the west by a part of the eastern boundary of the territory ceded by the Northwest Angle Treaty No. 3; the said land containing an area of ninety thousand square miles, more or less" For use of mining.... "And, whereas, the said Indians have been notified and informed by His Majesty's said commission that it is His desire to open for settlement, immigration, trade, travel, mining, lumbering, and such other purposes as to His Majesty may seem meet, a tract of country, bounded and described as hereinafter mentioned, and to obtain the consent thereto of His Indian subjects inhabiting the said tract, and to make a treaty and arrange with them, so that there may be peace and good-will between them and His Majesty's other subjects, and that His Indian people may know and be assured of what allowances they are to count upon and receive from His Majesty's bounty and benevolence." There are two agreements here. De Beers Impact Agreement and Treaty 9. I don't know how long the De Beers agreement is for but I believe they estimated the mine to be around for 10 years. The Treaty is around for ever or until both parties shut it down. Is anyone alive from then? I'm assuming that you mean from Treaty 9 and not the De Beers deal which was signed in 2005 (and most certainly has the signing people still alive). As for Treaty 9, Attawapiskat entered the deal in 1930 via Schedule C. Anyone born in 1930 would be 82-83 years old so the younger ones could be. Anyone signing the deal is probably gone unless they were in their 20s when they signed it. Are you saying that because those people are no longer around that the Treaty is not valid? I'm not really following your question. You are suggesting that Treaty 9 has not been adhered to. Please cite some examples to educate me. Has the government broken the Treaty for those involved in Attawapiskat? Is that why they were blocking ice roads? Again...you need to ready Treaty 9 where it specifically says the governments intentions are to use the land for mining and other purposes. Is that not clear enough? First...all the land is government land...even the reserves. Second....the development of this said mine was approved by the band. So how the hell is it a violation of the treaty? I'm seriously doubting your credibilty here. Perhaps you are talking about other mines or other developments other than De Beers...which let me remind you is what we are talking about.

The Feds owned Petro Canada until 2009 when Suncor took over. Not sure why it sold but they were doing it for a while.

Pawns Jacee! Just because we did it peacefully does not mean they weren't conquered! They were a means to the end. Sharing? Just because we let them hunt on our land doesn't mean we share it. I let my buddies use my house in Scottsdale but I still own it. It's the way it is Jacee!

Fair enough. I just hope it's a true and fair resolution which is based on the intent of the deal and not on fear of native response.

Oh that's right....the conspiracy theories and tales of the downtrodden. I think I remember reading a book on that. The bottom line is the White man came and conquered however rather than spending $20m like the Americans did, the Brits chose a far more inefficient and long plaguing way that only cost them 800k. Bad choice in my opinion. The Natives were pawns in the battle between Britain and the Americans especially once the French pulled out if the game. They were nothing more than pawns so stop romantacising it to be any more by telling stories of folk takes and legends passed on at the fire.

Unresolved? Unanticipated? These issues neither of those. The people with the disputes are mad because they didn't get paid what they feel was a fair portion for their trap lines and for encroachment on burial grounds. They just want more. A change order in a normal business contract is when something comes up that is truly unanticipated. They knew about the trap lines and the burial grounds years ago when they signed the deal. There is no room for a change order especially when the reason is greed.

Ok.

You clearly didn't read what I said. I said these people shouldn't be talking with De Beers, they should be talking with the band who voted 85% to accept the deal. Ask the band leaders where their money is.

So are you saying Britain should be dealing with this?