Social Media will take sides. My post simply stopped because if this imbedded post. Get this: I didn't write it http://www.cbsnews.com/videos/obama-cannot-guarantee-social-security-checks/
I disabled tweeter, Facebook. Let them get rich on someone else's hard working. I'm tried of rules pressured by their paying customers (Political area is set up as its close to elections)
Cruz's wife takes leave from GOLDMAN SACH BANK
It was also well known in political circles that Cruz’s wife, Heidi, is an Wall Street investment banker and a longtime employee of Goldman Sachs, a firm that has come to symbolize—fairly or unfairly—the power and influence of Wall Street.
According to a March, 2015, article in USA Today, Heidi Cruz joined Goldman in 2005 and ran its Houston wealth-management unit, which, the report said, “handles portfolios for clients with an average net worth of $40 million.”
Last spring, she took an unpaid leave of absence from Goldman to work on her husband’s campaign. http://www.newyorker.com/news/john-cassidy/ted-cruzs-goldman-sachs-problem
 |
| A typical manipulative attorney? |
Was the whole "delegated" plan a set-up to destroy the ones running in the Republic party; the weed-outs the democratic party did want? It all feels and looks contrived.
It is hard to say this is an oversight. Cruz, he never tires of telling us, is a crack lawyer. The law is crystal-clear. Voters can surely draw the inference that he wanted to hide the loan. As the Times report noted, “Other campaigns have been investigated and fined for failing to make such disclosures, which are intended to inform voters and prevent candidates from receiving special treatment from lenders.” Saying this all got reported later when his seat was won is hardly an excuse. It’s evidence that Cruz was hiding the ball when it mattered to his election.
To me; the fact that he's using his power (republicans'- people's) system to stop Trump is deceptive, manipulation, and get-back attitude that's repulsive for a so called Christian. The other need the KKK money?
Adam Ambrose and UFO Abductions
| Is he another worlds spy, what gadgets does he carry around inside his body or, The brother. Can we continue to handle these encounters which are far advanced? Do we need a Star War defense. What they do is invasive, lambs folks for life, not to mention spying and taking over human's earth life, family and future. They should be shot down or destroy their robots (see Derrel Sims)! We need to get armed to defend ourselves using their hostages they come back for by setting up traps' form leagues with other advanced worlds. Jimmy Church welcomed Adam Ambrose, who revealed details about his alien encounters and abduction experiences. One of Ambrose's earliest recollections occurred when he was a toddler and beings took him aboard their craft. (and, in the womb) He described seeing a small room, like a pup tent, inside a larger room with a black grated floor with dim light shining through it. Ambrose remembered his brother there with him and possibly another toddler. We were instructed to play with toys while a tall grey in a light-colored garment observed us, he recalled. Ambrose disclosed he felt a familial bond with his abductor and suggested the alien must have somehow manipulated his emotions.   Ambrose described being taken from his bedroom into a craft above his house while he was in a dream state. He and his abductors, who appeared as balls of light, teleported into a neighbors house in a beam of light, Ambrose explained. They entered a woman's bedroom and communicated with her telepathically about taking her baby away for an examination, Ambrose reported. "They made an extraordinary effort to calm her down," he said. The greys put the mother into a state of suspended animation, placed the baby in a container, and teleported it through a beam of blue light onto their ship. They baby was eventually returned, he noted. He goes on with his story...Ambrose want to sell it. He has social media accounts. Related Material Adam Ambrose sent us several images depicting his alien encounters for his appearance on the 4/8/16 show. View them here. |
Dr Judy Wood : Evidence of breakthrough energy technology on 9/11
How much more we don't know? We don't need nukes or old fashion bombs today to destroy each other.
9-11 News: Why the Dust?_ Judy Wood
Judy D. Wood, The most innovative theorists yet, its new technology used in our world. Ms Wood's bio
1) WHAT happened, then
2) HOW it happened (e.g., what weapon), then
3) WHO did it. And only then can we address
4) WHY they did it (i.e. motive).
A new look at 9-11 and it's dust
https://youtu.be/MdagKYOlxEM (C2C)
https://youtu.be/vadSaWyiozg
https://youtu.be/Ji24VJaFIfo
https://youtu.be/ML8CJp9Ha14
https://youtu.be/b2cUFFG76bc
In the first half of C2C show, former professor of Mechanical Engineering at Clemson University, an advance annotative thinker: Dr. Judy Wood, updated her work detailing the physics of the destruction of WTC buildings on 9/11. She cites evidence of directed energy technology - not fire, thermite or bombs, or even planes for that matter. Observing the evidence from the perspective of a forensic engineer, "the buildings didn't burn up, nor did they slam to the ground; the majority of them turned to dust in midair." Using the new term "dustification" to describe the destruction process, she outlined how an energy technology was used to repel the binding forces of atomic matter.
She didn't speculate as to who was behind the act, or the specific construction of their device, but noted that planes can't turn a building into dust in mid-air. The airplane issue is irrelevant except to get people to argue and serve as a diversion as to what really happened to the buildings, she contended. Wood compared the directed energy technology to the force of a tornado, or what a tornado might do if it was weaponized.
The directed energy technology also bears similarities to the work of Tesla, and scientist/inventor John Hutchison, who has demonstrated levitation and dematerialization effects, she added. The evidence indicates a magnetic-electrogravitic nuclear reaction like what you would see in cold fusion, rather than a bomb, she continued.
Wood believes the collapse of Building 7 was also accomplished with the covert technology, as it occurred with virtually no sound (related video). For more, view her WTC 'Cliff Notes.'
--------------------------
1) WHAT happened, then
2) HOW it happened (e.g., what weapon), then
3) WHO did it. And only then can we address
4) WHY they did it (i.e. motive).
A new look at 9-11 and it's dust
https://youtu.be/MdagKYOlxEM (C2C)
https://youtu.be/vadSaWyiozg
https://youtu.be/Ji24VJaFIfo
https://youtu.be/ML8CJp9Ha14
https://youtu.be/b2cUFFG76bc
She didn't speculate as to who was behind the act, or the specific construction of their device, but noted that planes can't turn a building into dust in mid-air. The airplane issue is irrelevant except to get people to argue and serve as a diversion as to what really happened to the buildings, she contended. Wood compared the directed energy technology to the force of a tornado, or what a tornado might do if it was weaponized.
The directed energy technology also bears similarities to the work of Tesla, and scientist/inventor John Hutchison, who has demonstrated levitation and dematerialization effects, she added. The evidence indicates a magnetic-electrogravitic nuclear reaction like what you would see in cold fusion, rather than a bomb, she continued.
Wood believes the collapse of Building 7 was also accomplished with the covert technology, as it occurred with virtually no sound (related video). For more, view her WTC 'Cliff Notes.'
--------------------------
Brain Eating Vaccines: The History and Facts
My forte' are parasite, anti fungals in all body's and causes all diseases. I'm pleased when other get it.
A Cure to Diabetes is on the Way.
Cells Could Provide Lasting Diabetes Treatments
Researchers have crafted what may be a powerful weapon in the fight against diabetes: A new line of insulin-producing cells that has been shown to reverse diabetes in mice within forty days. Scientists hope that these cells may someday do the same in humans.
The new cells, called “Stage 7” or “S7” for their seven-step production process, are the product of a study by researchers at the University of British Columbia and the pharmaceutical company Janssen. S7 cells are made to mimic human beta cells, which are damaged or destroyed in patients with diabetes. Healthy beta cells produce insulin and help regulate blood sugar; S7 cells are grown from human embryonic stem cells and are programmed to do the same.
Human embryonic stem cells, like those used to produce the S7 line, show great promise for producing beta cell replacements. Just last week, another team of researchers led by Dr. Douglas Melton at Harvard University announced their own line of insulin-producing cells, also produced from human embryonic stem cells. Like S7 cells, the Harvard team’s cells produce insulin in response to high blood sugar and can reverse diabetes symptoms in mice.
The hope is that cells like these could be injected into diabetic patients, restoring normal beta cell function. Timothy Kieffer, head of the diabetes research group at University of British Columbia and a co-author of the S7 cell study, said that treatment with these cells could be curative, though other researchers caution that additional work has to be done before that’s the case.
Cellular transplantation has already been shown to effectively combat diabetes. Since the late 1980s, beta cells extracted from cadaver pancreases have been used to normalize blood sugar in diabetics. But these treatments are not an option for many patients. In addition to the challenges of establishing a treatment program, Weir said, “there aren’t enough pancreatic donors to even scratch the surface.” These transplanted cells also tend to stop working over time, said Dr. David Nathan, the director of the Diabetes Center and Clinical Research Center at Massachusetts General Hospital. Whole organ pancreatic transplants usually last longer and have been increasingly successful in recent years, Nathan says. But both organ and cell transplants from cadavers require immunosuppressive treatments, which can cause tumors, skin cancers, and weakened immune systems.
Beta cells grown from stem cells could solve some of these problems. It is possible that stem cells could be developed to reduce or eliminate the need for immunosuppression, Nathan said. Plus, their supply is theoretically unlimited. “If you can make them in a test tube, in a dish, whatever—well, that gets rid of the problem of donor pancreases,” Nathan said. While S7 cells are most efficient when made from human embryonic stem cells, they can also be made using induced pluripotent stem cells, which are reprogrammed adult cells. This, Weir noted, could eliminate “ethical issues” involved with embryonic stem cell use.
Kieffer believes that a stem cell-based treatment would also be superior to insulin supplementation, the current standard of treatment for type 1 diabetes. In type 1 diabetes, which Kieffer’s research targets, beta cells are destroyed by an autoimmune attack, and patients require external insulin to survive. Even with advanced treatment options like insulin pumps, Weir said, it is challenging to keep blood sugar in a normal range. “And if you push hard enough to drive the blood sugar down, you end up getting into trouble with insulin reactions,” Weir said. “The blood sugar goes too low and that’s dangerous.”
But S7 cells have some challenges to overcome before they can replace current treatments. For one, it can be difficult to control the development of stem cells, Nathan pointed out. Kieffer agreed that more research is needed to mature the cells, which are still not identical to human beta cells because they react more slowly to sugar and don’t release as much insulin. Kieffer’s collaborators are also working to scale up production of the S7 line. Meanwhile, the Harvard study uses a protocol that already seems to allow relatively large-scale development of insulin-producing cells.
There are also other challenges to treating type 1 diabetes with cells like S7 because of the autoimmune nature of the disease. If beta cell transplants are injected into type 1 diabetics, Weir said, “those cells are still going to be subject to the immune problem that killed the cells in the first place.” Kieffer said that the “next hurdle” for his team is to see if S7 cells will work inside devices that prevent immune attack.
These “immunobarrier” devices are essentially capsules that contain implanted stem cells, allowing the exchange of nutrients and insulin while blocking attacking immune cells. Nathan and Weir expressed reservations about these devices. Nathan wondered if they can be designed to allow sufficient blood flow and nutrients to all the cells inside, while Weir questioned whether there could be a device large enough to hold the number of cells needed to control the disease. Still, in August, the company Viacyte started clinical trials with such a device, using a line of cells less developed than S7. “We’ll have to wait and see,” Weir said.
Because of the autoimmunity problem inherent in type 1 diabetes, Weir says that it may be easier to use beta cell transplantations to treat type 2 diabetes instead. Up to 95% of diabetic patients have this form of the disease, which involves no autoimmunity. Instead, in type 2, beta cells “wear out” such that the body stops responding to insulin.
“You can take a type 2 diabetic and give them insulin injections and normalize the sugar if you do it carefully,” Weir said. “So, a beta cell transplant is just the same thing as giving an insulin injection.” He feels the effects of such treatment could be profound. “You can put cells in and normalize the blood sugar for years,” he said. “So if you want to call that a cure, I’d go along with that.” Nathan disagrees: because type 2 diabetics have some pancreatic function, it can be simpler and easier to treat their symptoms. Because of this, he believes that cellular transplantations will mostly be useful to combat type 1 diabetes.
Nathan doesn’t think that beta cell transplantations are an “appropriate clinical option”—yet. “The balance between risk and benefit isn’t quite right,” he says. Still, he hopes that someday, a cellular treatment will be advanced enough to safely and effectively treat this disease. “To cure type 1 diabetes would be a godsend,” he says. “To actually do a single procedure that essentially takes away the disease at low risk would be great.”
Though several questions must be answered before they start curing patients, S7 cells are a promising step in the fight against a disease that affects 347 million people worldwide. The field is moving quickly towards its goal; as Kieffer writes, “I am very optimistic that we are narrowing down on a cure for diabetes.”
The new cells, called “Stage 7” or “S7” for their seven-step production process, are the product of a study by researchers at the University of British Columbia and the pharmaceutical company Janssen. S7 cells are made to mimic human beta cells, which are damaged or destroyed in patients with diabetes. Healthy beta cells produce insulin and help regulate blood sugar; S7 cells are grown from human embryonic stem cells and are programmed to do the same.
A microscopic view of beta cells derived from stem cells
“The advance that they have made is that they’ve got better cells in the test tube, cells that have more insulin and can secrete insulin in response to glucose,” said Dr. Gordon Weir, a physician and researcher at Joslin Diabetes Center and Harvard Medical School. “People haven’t been able to do that before.”Human embryonic stem cells, like those used to produce the S7 line, show great promise for producing beta cell replacements. Just last week, another team of researchers led by Dr. Douglas Melton at Harvard University announced their own line of insulin-producing cells, also produced from human embryonic stem cells. Like S7 cells, the Harvard team’s cells produce insulin in response to high blood sugar and can reverse diabetes symptoms in mice.
The hope is that cells like these could be injected into diabetic patients, restoring normal beta cell function. Timothy Kieffer, head of the diabetes research group at University of British Columbia and a co-author of the S7 cell study, said that treatment with these cells could be curative, though other researchers caution that additional work has to be done before that’s the case.
Cellular transplantation has already been shown to effectively combat diabetes. Since the late 1980s, beta cells extracted from cadaver pancreases have been used to normalize blood sugar in diabetics. But these treatments are not an option for many patients. In addition to the challenges of establishing a treatment program, Weir said, “there aren’t enough pancreatic donors to even scratch the surface.” These transplanted cells also tend to stop working over time, said Dr. David Nathan, the director of the Diabetes Center and Clinical Research Center at Massachusetts General Hospital. Whole organ pancreatic transplants usually last longer and have been increasingly successful in recent years, Nathan says. But both organ and cell transplants from cadavers require immunosuppressive treatments, which can cause tumors, skin cancers, and weakened immune systems.
Beta cells grown from stem cells could solve some of these problems. It is possible that stem cells could be developed to reduce or eliminate the need for immunosuppression, Nathan said. Plus, their supply is theoretically unlimited. “If you can make them in a test tube, in a dish, whatever—well, that gets rid of the problem of donor pancreases,” Nathan said. While S7 cells are most efficient when made from human embryonic stem cells, they can also be made using induced pluripotent stem cells, which are reprogrammed adult cells. This, Weir noted, could eliminate “ethical issues” involved with embryonic stem cell use.
Kieffer believes that a stem cell-based treatment would also be superior to insulin supplementation, the current standard of treatment for type 1 diabetes. In type 1 diabetes, which Kieffer’s research targets, beta cells are destroyed by an autoimmune attack, and patients require external insulin to survive. Even with advanced treatment options like insulin pumps, Weir said, it is challenging to keep blood sugar in a normal range. “And if you push hard enough to drive the blood sugar down, you end up getting into trouble with insulin reactions,” Weir said. “The blood sugar goes too low and that’s dangerous.”
But S7 cells have some challenges to overcome before they can replace current treatments. For one, it can be difficult to control the development of stem cells, Nathan pointed out. Kieffer agreed that more research is needed to mature the cells, which are still not identical to human beta cells because they react more slowly to sugar and don’t release as much insulin. Kieffer’s collaborators are also working to scale up production of the S7 line. Meanwhile, the Harvard study uses a protocol that already seems to allow relatively large-scale development of insulin-producing cells.
There are also other challenges to treating type 1 diabetes with cells like S7 because of the autoimmune nature of the disease. If beta cell transplants are injected into type 1 diabetics, Weir said, “those cells are still going to be subject to the immune problem that killed the cells in the first place.” Kieffer said that the “next hurdle” for his team is to see if S7 cells will work inside devices that prevent immune attack.
These “immunobarrier” devices are essentially capsules that contain implanted stem cells, allowing the exchange of nutrients and insulin while blocking attacking immune cells. Nathan and Weir expressed reservations about these devices. Nathan wondered if they can be designed to allow sufficient blood flow and nutrients to all the cells inside, while Weir questioned whether there could be a device large enough to hold the number of cells needed to control the disease. Still, in August, the company Viacyte started clinical trials with such a device, using a line of cells less developed than S7. “We’ll have to wait and see,” Weir said.
Because of the autoimmunity problem inherent in type 1 diabetes, Weir says that it may be easier to use beta cell transplantations to treat type 2 diabetes instead. Up to 95% of diabetic patients have this form of the disease, which involves no autoimmunity. Instead, in type 2, beta cells “wear out” such that the body stops responding to insulin.
“You can take a type 2 diabetic and give them insulin injections and normalize the sugar if you do it carefully,” Weir said. “So, a beta cell transplant is just the same thing as giving an insulin injection.” He feels the effects of such treatment could be profound. “You can put cells in and normalize the blood sugar for years,” he said. “So if you want to call that a cure, I’d go along with that.” Nathan disagrees: because type 2 diabetics have some pancreatic function, it can be simpler and easier to treat their symptoms. Because of this, he believes that cellular transplantations will mostly be useful to combat type 1 diabetes.
Nathan doesn’t think that beta cell transplantations are an “appropriate clinical option”—yet. “The balance between risk and benefit isn’t quite right,” he says. Still, he hopes that someday, a cellular treatment will be advanced enough to safely and effectively treat this disease. “To cure type 1 diabetes would be a godsend,” he says. “To actually do a single procedure that essentially takes away the disease at low risk would be great.”
Though several questions must be answered before they start curing patients, S7 cells are a promising step in the fight against a disease that affects 347 million people worldwide. The field is moving quickly towards its goal; as Kieffer writes, “I am very optimistic that we are narrowing down on a cure for diabetes.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)