Thursday, August 8, 2013

Monday, July 15, 2013


If everybody believes something, it's probably wrong. 

We call that Conventional Wisdom.
In America, conventional wisdom that has mass acceptance is usually contrived: somebody paid for it. Examples:
  • Pharmaceuticals restore health
  • Vaccination brings immunity
  • The cure for cancer is just around the corner
  • When a child is sick, he needs immediate antibiotics
  • When a child has a fever he needs Tylenol
  • Hospitals are safe and clean.
  • America has the best health care in the world.
  • And many many more
This is a list of illusions, that have cost billions and billions to conjure up. Did you ever wonder why you never see the President speaking publicly unless he is reading? Or why most people in this country think generally the same about most of the above issues?
How This Set-Up Got Started
In Trust Us We're Experts, Stauber and Rampton pull together some compelling data describing the science of creating public opinion in America.
They trace modern public influence back to the early part of the last century, highlighting the work of guys like Edward L. Bernays, the Father of Spin. From his own amazing chronicle Propaganda, we learn how Edward L. Bernays took the ideas of his famous uncle Sigmund Freud himself, and applied them to the emerging science of mass persuasion.
The only difference was that instead of using these principles to uncover hidden themes in the human unconscious, the way Freudian psychology does, Bernays used these same ideas to mask agendas and to create illusions that deceive and misrepresent, for marketing purposes.
The Father Of Spin
Bernays dominated the PR industry until the 1940s, and was a significant force for another 40 years after that. (Tye) During all that time, Bernays took on hundreds of diverse assignments to create a public perception about some idea or product. A few examples:
  • As a neophyte with the Committee on Public Information, one of Bernays' first assignments was to help sell the First World War to the American public with the idea to "Make the World Safe for Democracy." (Ewen)
  • A few years later, Bernays set up a stunt to popularize the notion of women smoking cigarettes. In organizing the 1929 Easter Parade in New York City, Bernays showed himself as a force to be reckoned with.
  • He organized the Torches of Liberty Brigade in which suffragettes marched in the parade smoking cigarettes as a mark of women's liberation. Such publicity followed from that one event that from then on women have felt secure about destroying their own lungs in public, the same way that men have always done.
  • Bernays popularized the idea of bacon for breakfast.
  • Not one to turn down a challenge, he set up the advertising format along with the AMA that lasted for nearly 50 years proving that cigarettes are beneficial to health. Just look at ads in issues of Life or Time from the 40s and 50s.
Smoke And Mirrors
Bernay's job was to reframe an issue; to create a desired image that would put a particular product or concept in a desirable light. Bernays described the public as a 'herd that needed to be led.' And this herdlike thinking makes people "susceptible to leadership."
Bernays never deviated from his fundamental axiom to "control the masses without their knowing it." The best PR happens with the people unaware that they are being manipulated.
Stauber describes Bernays' rationale like this:
"the scientific manipulation of public opinion was necessary to overcome chaos and conflict in a democratic society." Trust Us p 42
These early mass persuaders postured themselves as performing a moral service for humanity in general - democracy was too good for people; they needed to be told what to think, because they were incapable of rational thought by themselves. Here's a paragraph from Bernays' Propaganda:
     "Those who manipulate the unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. We are governed, our minds molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested largely by men we have never heard of.
     This is a logical result of the way in which our democratic society is organized. Vast numbers of human beings must cooperate in this manner if they are to live together as a smoothly functioning society.
     In almost every act of our lives whether in the sphere of politics or business in our social conduct or our ethical thinking, we are dominated by the relatively small number of persons who understand the mental processes and social patterns of the masses. It is they who pull the wires that control the public mind."
Here Comes The Money
Once the possibilities of applying Freudian psychology to mass media were glimpsed, Bernays soon had more corporate clients than he could handle. Global corporations fell all over themselves courting the new Image Makers. There were dozens of goods and services and ideas to be sold to a susceptible public. Over the years, these players have had the money to make their images happen. A few examples:
Philip Morris Pfizer Union Carbide
Allstate Monsanto Eli Lilly
tobacco industry Ciba Geigy lead industry
Coors DuPont Chlorox
Shell Oil Standard Oil Procter & Gamble
Boeing General Motors Dow Chemical
General Mills Goodyear
The Players

Though world-famous within the PR industry, the companies have names we don't know, and for good reason.
The best PR goes unnoticed.
For decades they have created the opinions that most of us were raised with, on virtually any issue which has the remotest commercial value, including:
pharmaceutical drugs vaccines
medicine as a profession alternative medicine
fluoridation of city water chlorine
household cleaning products tobacco
dioxin global warming
leaded gasoline cancer research and treatment
pollution of the oceans forests and lumber
images of celebrities, including damage control crisis and disaster management
genetically modified foods aspartame
food additives; processed foods dental amalgams
Lesson #1
Bernays learned early on that the most effective way to create credibility for a product or an image was by "independent third-party" endorsement.
For example, if General Motors were to come out and say that global warming is a hoax thought up by some liberal tree-huggers, people would suspect GM's motives, since GM's fortune is made by selling automobiles.
If however some independent research institute with a very credible sounding name like the Global Climate Coalition comes out with a scientific report that says global warming is really a fiction, people begin to get confused and to have doubts about the original issue.
So that's exactly what Bernays did. With a policy inspired by genius, he set up "more institutes and foundations than Rockefeller and Carnegie combined." (Stauber p 45)
Quietly financed by the industries whose products were being evaluated, these "independent" research agencies would churn out "scientific" studies and press materials that could create any image their handlers wanted.
Such front groups are given high-sounding names like:
Temperature Research Foundation Manhattan Institute
International Food Information Council Center for Produce Quality
Consumer Alert Tobacco Institute Research Council
The Advancement of Sound Science Coalition Cato Institute
Air Hygiene Foundation
American Council on Science and Health
Industrial Health Federation Global Climate Coalition
International Food Information Council Alliance for Better Foods
Sound pretty legit don't they?
Canned News Releases
As Stauber explains, these organizations and hundreds of others like them are front groups whose sole mission is to advance the image of the global corporations who fund them, like those listed on page 2 above.
This is accomplished in part by an endless stream of 'press releases' announcing "breakthrough" research to every radio station and newspaper in the country. (Robbins) Many of these canned reports read like straight news, and indeed are purposely molded in the news format.
This saves journalists the trouble of researching the subjects on their own, especially on topics about which they know very little. Entire sections of the release or in the case of video news releases, the whole thing can be just lifted intact, with no editing, given the byline of the reporter or newspaper or TV station - and voilá! Instant news - copy and paste. Written by corporate PR firms.
Does this really happen? Every single day, since the 1920s when the idea of the News Release was first invented by Ivy Lee. (Stauber, p 22) Sometimes as many as half the stories appearing in an issue of the Wall St. Journal are based solely on such PR press releases.. (22)
These types of stories are mixed right in with legitimately researched stories. Unless you have done the research yourself, you won't be able to tell the difference.
The Language Of Spin
As 1920s spin pioneers like Ivy Lee and Edward Bernays gained more experience, they began to formulate rules and guidelines for creating public opinion. They learned quickly that mob psychology must focus on emotion, not facts. Since the mob is incapable of rational thought, motivation must be based not on logic but on presentation. Here are some of the axioms of the new science of PR:
  • technology is a religion unto itself
  • if people are incapable of rational thought, real democracy is dangerous
  • important decisions should be left to experts
  • when reframing issues, stay away from substance; create images
  • never state a clearly demonstrable lie
Words are very carefully chosen for their emotional impact. Here's an example. A front group called the International Food Information Council handles the public's natural aversion to genetically modified foods.
Trigger words are repeated all through the text. Now in the case of GM foods, the public is instinctively afraid of these experimental new creations which have suddenly popped up on our grocery shelves which are said to have DNA alterations.
The IFIC wants to reassure the public of the safety of GM foods, so it avoids words like:
Frankenfoods Hitler biotech
chemical DNA experiments
manipulate money safety
scientists radiation roulette
gene-splicing gene gun random
Instead, good PR for GM foods contains words like:

hybrids natural order beauty
choice bounty cross-breeding
diversity earth farmer
organic wholesome
It's basic Freudian/Tony Robbins word association. The fact that GM foods are not hybrids that have been subjected to the slow and careful scientific methods of real crossbreeding doesn't really matter. This is pseudoscience, not science. Form is everything and substance just a passing myth. (Trevanian)
Who do you think funds the International Food Information Council? Take a wild guess. Right - Monsanto, DuPont, Frito-Lay, Coca Cola, Nutrasweet - those in a position to make fortunes from GM foods. (Stauber p 20)

Characteristics Of Good Propaganda
As the science of mass control evolved, PR firms developed further guidelines for effective copy. Here are some of the gems:
  • dehumanize the attacked party by labeling and name calling
  • speak in glittering generalities using emotionally positive words
  • when covering something up, don't use plain English; stall for time; distract
  • get endorsements from celebrities, churches, sports figures, street people - anyone who has no expertise in the subject at hand
  • the 'plain folks' ruse: us billionaires are just like you
  • when minimizing outrage, don't say anything memorable, point out the benefits of what just happened, and avoid moral issues
Keep this list. Start watching for these techniques. Not hard to find - look at today's paper or tonight's TV news. See what they're doing; these guys are good!

Saturday, July 13, 2013

AIN'T NO REASON - Brett Dennen

Brett Dennen - Ain't No Reason

              A brief description of the video from Brett himself:

"It is our routines and our comforts that allow us to ignore social issues.  For some of us, it is our privilege to be ignorant. 

This video tells the story of social issues challenging our privileges and entering our routines making them impossible to ignore. Social injustice cannot be ignored when you are forced to deal with them. 

That is the idea behind this video.

What would happen if you were forced to deal with something that you may think has nothing to do with you? If suddenly the world's problems came into your own home? You would have to realize that you are connected to everything and everyone one earth."

The album, So Much More, is available now in digital and CD formats

Monday, July 8, 2013


Scientists at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute have found that when just 10 percent of the population holds an unshakable belief, their belief will always be adopted by the majority of the society. The scientists, who are members of the Social Cognitive Networks Academic Research Center (SCNARC) at Rensselaer, used computational and analytical methods to discover the tipping point where a minority belief becomes the majority opinion. The finding has implications for the study and influence of societal interactions ranging from the spread of innovations to the movement of political ideals.

"When the number of committed opinion holders is below 10 percent, there is no visible progress in the spread of ideas. It would literally take the amount of time comparable to the age of the universe for this size group to reach the majority," said SCNARC Director Boleslaw Szymanski, the Claire and Roland Schmitt Distinguished Professor at Rensselaer. "Once that number grows above 10 percent, the idea spreads like flame."

As an example, the ongoing events in Tunisia and Egypt appear to exhibit a similar process, according to Szymanski. "In those countries, dictators who were in power for decades were suddenly overthrown in just a few weeks."

The findings were published in the July 22, 2011, early online edition of the journal Physical Review E in an article titled "Social consensus through the influence of committed minorities."

An important aspect of the finding is that the percent of committed opinion holders required to shift majority opinion does not change significantly regardless of the type of network in which the opinion holders are working. In other words, the percentage of committed opinion holders required to influence a society remains at approximately 10 percent, regardless of how or where that opinion starts and spreads in the society.

To reach their conclusion, the scientists developed computer models of various types of social networks. One of the networks had each person connect to every other person in the network. The second model included certain individuals who were connected to a large number of people, making them opinion hubs or leaders. The final model gave every person in the model roughly the same number of connections. The initial state of each of the models was a sea of traditional-view holders. Each of these individuals held a view, but were also, importantly, open minded to other views.

Once the networks were built, the scientists then "sprinkled" in some true believers throughout each of the networks. These people were completely set in their views and unflappable in modifying those beliefs. As those true believers began to converse with those who held the traditional belief system, the tides gradually and then very abruptly began to shift.

"In general, people do not like to have an unpopular opinion and are always seeking to try locally to come to consensus. We set up this dynamic in each of our models," said SCNARC Research Associate and corresponding paper author Sameet Sreenivasan. To accomplish this, each of the individuals in the models "talked" to each other about their opinion. If the listener held the same opinions as the speaker, it reinforced the listener's belief. If the opinion was different, the listener considered it and moved on to talk to another person. If that person also held this new belief, the listener then adopted that belief.

"As agents of change start to convince more and more people, the situation begins to change," Sreenivasan said. "People begin to question their own views at first and then completely adopt the new view to spread it even further. If the true believers just influenced their neighbors, that wouldn't change anything within the larger system, as we saw with percentages less than 10."

The research has broad implications for understanding how opinion spreads. "There are clearly situations in which it helps to know how to efficiently spread some opinion or how to suppress a developing opinion," said Associate Professor of Physics and co-author of the paper Gyorgy Korniss. "Some examples might be the need to quickly convince a town to move before a hurricane or spread new information on the prevention of disease in a rural village."

The researchers are now looking for partners within the social sciences and other fields to compare their computational models to historical examples. They are also looking to study how the percentage might change when input into a model where the society is polarized. Instead of simply holding one traditional view, the society would instead hold two opposing viewpoints. An example of this polarization would be Democrat versus Republican.

The research was funded by the Army Research Laboratory (ARL) through SCNARC, part of the Network Science Collaborative Technology Alliance (NS-CTA), the Army Research Office (ARO), and the Office of Naval Research (ONR).

The research is part of a much larger body of work taking place under SCNARC at Rensselaer. The center joins researchers from a broad spectrum of fields -- including sociology, physics, computer science, and engineering -- in exploring social cognitive networks. The center studies the fundamentals of network structures and how those structures are altered by technology. The goal of the center is to develop a deeper understanding of networks and a firm scientific basis for the newly arising field of network science. More information on the launch of SCNARC can be found at

Szymanski, Sreenivasan, and Korniss were joined in the research by Professor of Mathematics Chjan Lim, and graduate students Jierui Xie (first author) and Weituo Zhang.


Friday, July 5, 2013



What you will see in this video is a scientific experiment performed live on camera. This is proof that corporations are pumping you full of deadly material, and that they are fully aware of doing so. 

The experiment done in this video is great for home-school projects.  Let the children learn.....we owe them that!

Blessings to ALL,


Monday, June 24, 2013


Decision questions validity of “constellation of injuries,” need for parents to admit guilt

An Illinois family fighting for custody of their children has received a refreshing decision from a state appeals court, which reviewed testimony from both the child-protection team and the family’s experts and concluded:
As vexing as this case appears, after a thorough, painstaking examination of the entire record, and in particular a detailed analysis of the expert testimony, we conclude that the trial judge’s finding of abuse and neglect cannot stand, and K. S. and Teresa G. have been thrust into a nightmare by well-intentioned, but misguided doctors and child protection specialists.
Like so many of these cases, this story started with a difficult birth:  The infant Y. entered the world precipitously, with the umbilical cord wrapped around his neck, on May 1, 2011. He was immediately whisked off for six hours of stabilization before being returned to his parents’ care.
Y.’s father took the month off work to be home with the family after Y’s birth. Both parents noticed that their son’s behavior was much different from that of his older sister two years earlier: He occasionally gave out “yelps” that lasted for several seconds, and he exhibited unusual facial expressions. From the court opinion:
On May 9, [the father's] sister came to stay with the family for a week. She too observed Y.’s unusual expressions, where he would look dazed with his eyes rolling up and side-to-side, which the family referred to as “drunk old man expression” or “dazed and confused.”
The parents reported their concerns at Y.’s well-baby appointment three weeks after his birth, and were advised to give him gripe water to fight indigestion.
When the child began vomiting during feedings at the age of four-and-half weeks, his mother called their doctor’s office, and at the advice of the on-call physician, she made an appointment for the following morning. The parents kept a close eye on him that afternoon, and they noticed slight twitching of his left hand and leg during a nap.
ToyOnBlanketThe twitching recurred the next day in the doctor’s office, where it was identified as seizure activity. The doctor sent the child and his parents by ambulance to the local children’s hospital, where his admission examinations reported no bruising, contusions, or other external injuries. All of his extremities showed a full range of motion, with no apparent pain.
A CT scan and MRI of the boy’s brain, however, revealed subdural hematoma and possible subarachnoid bleeding, as well as evidence of “restricted diffusion,” possibly reflecting a shortage of oxygen to the brain. A skeletal exam noted an abnormality on his left femur, near the knee, that might represent a healing fracture, for which the parents had no explanation.
During 9 days of hospitalization, Y. had a number of retinal examinations, with conflicting reports. For example:
On June 14, CMH resident Dr. Grace Wu examined Y. and found his retina to be attached and flat, with scattered retinal hemorrhages bilaterally and one small preretinal hemorrhage to his right eye. Dr. Wu also noted that the hemorrhages were greater in Y.’s right eye than his left. Supervising attending physician Dr. Yoon examined Y. immediately after Dr. Wu and noted bilateral, multilayer, retinal hemorrhages. Dr. Yoon noted the hemorrhages were too many to count and greater in the left eye than the right.
None of the ophthalmologists recorded either diagrams or photographs of Y.’s retinas, ordinarily a standard practice, making reconciliation of the different reports especially difficult.
Based on Y.’s “constellation of injuries,” the hospital contacted child protective services, who placed restrictions on the parents’ access to both children. Convinced that their son had an underlying medical condition, the parents arranged blood tests in July that measured the mother’s Vitamin D levels as “insufficient” (25 on a reference range of 30 to 100) and Y.’s levels as “deficient” (13 on a reference range of 30 to 100). Not only is Vitamin D essential for the formation of healthy bones, but lack of Vitamin D can also lead to clotting disorders:  The deficiency could explain both the bone abnormality and the subdural hematoma. These findings had no impact on the custody situation, however, or on the opinions of the doctors from the children’s hospital.
blanketEdgyThe parents brought in Stanford University neuroradiologist Dr. Patrick Barnes, who concluded from Y.’s imaging that his skeleton showed signs of rickets, the weakening of bones most often caused by a lack of Vitamin D. He also noted that Y. had more space than usual between his brain and his skull, a condition known as “benign external hydrocephalus” (BEH), which is commonly believed to make subdural bleeding more likely.
A second outside expert, neurosurgeon Dr. David M. Frim from the University of Chicago, concluded that both the subdural bleeding and the retinal hemorrhages could have resulted from the BEH:
After reviewing Y.’s brain images and medical records, Dr. Frim opined that Y. was born with BEH, that he likely sustained a hemorrhage during birth that caused him to be even more susceptible to additional hemorrhages and that these hemorrhages caused the seizures he exhibited when he was admitted to [the children's hospital] on June 6, 2011. Dr. Frim explained that blood from the subarachnoid space surrounding the brain can travel to the retinas causing retinal hemorrhaging.
Based on the opinion of the child protection team, however, the state pursued its efforts to strip the parents of custody. The Public Guardian’s office, appointed to represent the children, asked for a judicial declaration of abuse and neglect of both Y. and his older sister.
At the evidentiary hearing, Dr. Kristine Fortin, one of the first pediatricians in the country to pass the new “child protection” specialty exam, rejected the rickets diagnosis and said that low Vitamin D levels do not necessarily lead to rickets. She accepted the BEH diagnosis but not its relevance:
Dr. Fortin acknowledged that Dr. Frim diagnosed Y. with BEH, but opined that even though some of the medical community believes BEH predisposes children to subdural hemorrhages, BEH could not account for all of Y.’s injuries.
The “proponents” in the case (the state’s attorney and the Public Guardians) called a total of seven medical witnesses, including a pediatric neurologist, a pediatric radiologist, a pediatric neuroradiologist, a pediatric ophthalmologist, a hematologist, and a pediatric orthopedist, all of whom attributed Y’s injuries to abuse. While conceding that no one at the hospital had considered the BEH diagnosis, one doctor said he had never diagnosed a case in his career, and another disputed Frim’s definition of the condition. One of the two doctors who rejected the rickets diagnosis had seen only the initial set of x-rays, which were of poor quality.
scalesDr. Barnes and Dr. Frim testified for the parents, repeating their earlier diagnoses of BEH and rickets. Pediatric orthopedic surgeon Dr. Christopher Sullivan also testified, saying that the abnormality on Y.’s left leg was “a classic finding for irregular calcification of normal bone growth, or rickets,” and adding that an actual fracture would have caused the child pain, which should have been noticeable to the treating physicians.
The parents also called a number of lay witnesses who testified that the two of them had been responsible, loving parents to both children.
The trial judge in 2012 reached a hybrid conclusion, declaring the parents to be “fit, willing, and able to care for their children” but also finding that abuse had occurred. The court held that “to conclude that all three of these infrequent to rare conditions came together at the same time to explain the minor’s condition was not reasonable.”
Despite the abuse finding, the court returned the children to their parents, but the Public Guardian’s office appealed the decision. Then the parents cross appealed, which resulted in last week’s ruling.
The appellate court’s decision includes two promising points:  A challenge to the “constellation of injuries” theory, and an objection to the requirement by social services that the parents admit to abuse before the family could be reunited.
Regarding the constellation of injuries, the court wrote:
¶ 146 The expert witnesses called by the proponents testified that each of Y.’s injuries could occur from trauma. Instead of evaluating and weighing the evidence and expert testimony as to each alleged injury, the trial court allowed the proponents to elude their burden of proof by claiming that the “constellation” of Y.’s injuries created a preponderance of evidence that he was abused. This “constellation” of injuries theory allowed the trial court to conclude that Y. had been abused even though not one of his individual injuries within the constellation had been proven to be by abuse and where highly experienced and credentialed, nationally recognized doctors provided well-reasoned medical explanations, albeit rare ones, to explain each of his injuries.
¶ 147 The proponents offered no evidence that an injury is more likely to be caused by abuse merely because a second injury is alleged to exist, particularly where there are reasonable nonabuse explanations offered for each of the individual conditions. Not only did the proponents fail to provide authority supporting their “constellation” of injuries theory, but they failed to identify any specific facts showing it should apply to Y. The “constellation” theory invited the proponents’ experts to improperly rely on assumptions about injuries outside their respective specialties to rule out nonabuse explanations for the injury under their direct evaluation. In contrast, the parents offered nonabuse medical explanations supported by expert testimony from nationally recognized, highly qualified doctors in specific fields of expertise to explain the individual conditions suffered by Y. Accordingly, the trial court erred in disregarding the parents’ medical experts’ diagnoses because a single, uniform medical condition could not explain every medical finding Y. presented.
And on the subject of admitting to the abuse:
¶ 153 The proponents fail to present any persuasive evidence supporting their conclusion that “meaningful therapy” cannot and did not occur in light of the parents’ unwavering claims of innocence of the abuse allegations. The proponents offer no support for their suggestion that an acknowledgment of abuse is a per se requirement for therapy to be considered meaningful. To require that the parents must “acknowledge” the truth of a trial court’s nonfinal findings of fact to be deemed to have had “meaningful therapy” has no precedent. Instead, we find the support offered for the proponents’ position to be a misreading of case law in which parents failed to make actual progress in therapy and, thus, were deemed unable to care for their children as a result of having not participated in meaningful therapy, a significantly different factual scenario from the one presented here. We completely reject any notion that parents should be declared unable to care for their children merely because they persist in their own belief of innocence of wrongdoing, particularly here where their insistence is supported by the evidence.
FDCThe family in this case had the resources to bring in their own experts and hire a private attorney for the initial trial. The appeal was handled by the Family Defense Center (FDC), a non-profit organization based in Chicago that advocates for families in the child welfare system. FDC Executive Director Diane Redleaf credited both trial attorney Ellen Domph and lead appellate attorney Melissa Staas with “outstanding lawyering” in this case, noting, “While we are delighted by the results in this case and hope it will serve as a strong precedent for other families, we realize that many wrongly accused parents do not have the same access to the resources necessary to demonstrate their innocence.”
For the full appellate court opinion: In re Yohan K. & Marika K., 2013 IL App (1st) 123472 (June 19, 2013)


Saturday, June 22, 2013


An exponentially increasing number of people now understand that a small group have eternally controlled the law and the land.  In so doing they were able to extract the commercial energy and life force of many of the people for their private gain. 

Contrary to popular belief, The Powers That Be (TPTB) used this power to orchestrate our world for their benefit and not for the betterment of humanity or to improve the lives of ordinary people. 

Now that this and the nuances of the control system are known to the world, it is upon us to seek new ways to improve our lives, the plight of humanity and our world. 

The AnnyBelle Foundation continues to expand an outreach providing options, resources and access to benefits and various solutions that otherwise may not be known to the general population.

Monday, June 17, 2013


Symphony of the Soil Trailer 

 Symphony of the Soil is a 104-minute documentary feature film that explores the complexity and mystery of soil. Filmed on four continents and sharing the voices of some of the world's most esteemed soil scientists, farmers and activists, the film portrays soil as a protagonist of our planetary story. Using a captivating mix of art and science, the film shows that soil is a complex living organism, the foundation of life on earth. Yet most people are soil-blind and "treat soil like dirt." 

Through the knowledge and wisdom revealed in this film, we can come to respect, even revere, this miraculous substance, and appreciate that treating the soil right can help solve some of our most pressing environmental problems. In addition to the feature film, there are several short films, Sonatas of the Soil, that delve deeply into soil-related topics, and several short clips, Grace Notes, that are available to stream on the film's website.

Produced and Directed by Deborah Koons Garcia

LOGLINE: Symphony of the Soil explores the evolution and importance of soil in today's world.

TAGLINE: Discover the life beneath your feet.

Sunday, June 16, 2013


Plants are finally turning Monsanto’s dreams into nightmares.

Nature has a funny way of always coming on top and the Amaranth plant is a perfect example. Amaranth is showing the biotech giant you can’t mess with nature without consequences.

A Superstar of the Plant Kingdom

Approximately 60 species are recognized and each plant produces about 12,000 seeds per year, with the leaves containing an abundance of vitamins and minerals. It has been proposed as an inexpensive native crop that could be cultivated by indigenous people in rural areas for several reasons:

– It is easily harvested.

– Its seeds are a good source of protein. Compared to other grains, amaranth is unusually rich in the essential amino acid lysine and some dieticians have argued that amaranth protein in higher than that of cow’s milk and far richer than soy.

-The seeds of Amaranthus species contain about thirty percent more protein than cereals like rice, sorghum and rye.

-It is easy to cook. As befits its weedy life history, amaranth grains grow very rapidly and their large seedheads can weigh up to 1 kilogram and contain a half-million seeds in three species of amaranth.


The Amaranth is a plant well known to our ancestors, since the Incas considered it a sacred plant. Ancient amaranth grains were cultivated on a large scale in ancient Mexico, Guatemala, and Peru. In a 1977 article in Science, amaranth was described as “the crop of the future.”

Amaranth Is Fighting the GMO Battle Like No Other

Besides the incredible nutritional benefits which nature has bestowed upon the human race with Amaranth, it appears it also knows how to fight GMO manipulation.

Studies began documenting weed resistance several years ago but the problem continues to mount, with The New York Times warning of the “Rise of the Superweeds” analogous to that of the ‘superbugs’ in medicine. But nature only does what its designed to do.

Kept as a very secretive incident, in 2004 the first farmers noticed that some of amaranth seedlings were resistant to Monsanto’s Roundup ready technology as they generously generously sprayed their soybean plants.

It turns out the amaranth seed received a resistance gene for Roundup.

Since then, the phenomenon has spread to other states: South Carolina, and northern Arkansas, and Missouri Tenesse.

“There’s no question, we have a lot of problems in the Southeast,” York said. “For us, the horse is already out of the barn. For the Mid-South, you don’t want to go down this path we’re on right now.”

On July 25, 2005, the Guardian published an article by Paul Brown, who revealed that the modified genes were passed to the natural plants, creating a seed resistant to herbicides.

It was is confirmed by experts at CEH (center for ecology and hydrology), and the finding contradicting claims of Monsanto and pro-GM scientists who always claimed that hybridization between a genetically modified plant, and natural plant was impossible.

“The epicenter of glyphosate-resistant Palmer pigweed is Macon County, Ga. That site is now 70 percent to 80 percent resistant and over 10,000 acres were abandoned in 2007,” said Bob Nichols with Cotton Incorporated.

Palmer amaranth is suspected to be resistant on 300,000 acres in 20 counties in Georgia; 130,000 acres in nine counties in South Carolina; 200,000 acres in 22 counties in North Carolina.

Resistant weeds to Roundup ready are making rethink their strategies and forcing them to go back to being weed managers.

“It only takes one successful crossing over millions of possibilities. Once it is created, the new plant has a huge selective advantage and multiplies rapidly. The powerful herbicide used here, based on glyphosate and ammonium exerted on plants enormous pressure which further increased the speed of adaptation,” said British geneticist Brian Johnson, specializing in issues related to agriculture.

It seems Monsanto may have long ago anticipated the inevitable failure of the devious combo of genetically modified seeds plus Roundup. The company started experimenting with a ‘souped-up’ Roundup over 10 years ago, to manage the problem of superweeds. Not that this is today any consolation to the farmers who are suffering from the expense of buying costly products that do not work, leaving them with lower crop yields.

Indeed, Monsanto’s own website includes instructions encouraging farmers to mix glyphosate and older (i.e., leftover) herbicides such as 2,4-D, a herbicide which was banned in Sweden, Denmark and Norway over its links to cancer, reproductive harm and mental impairment. 2,4-D is also well known for being a component of Agent Orange, a toxin used in chemical warfare in Vietnam in the 1960s. Imagine that, Agent Orange finally coming home to fight the superweeds: a dark sequel to Vietnam in the making?

The only solution some farmers have left is pulling amaranth plants by hand. Since the plant is rooted very deeply, it makes it almost impossible to achieve this solution.

More and more U.S. farmers are forgoing the use of GMO plants, first because there expensive increases yearly, and the cost is required in agriculture and elsewhere, and finally because the effectiveness of GMOs is questionable in light of what is happening around the world and a consequence to GM seed planting.

GMO seeds are simply disappearing from catalogs as morefarmers now returning to traditional farming.

“The amaranth is a kind of boomerang returned by nature Monsanto,” said Sylvie Simon. “It neutralizes the predator and settled in places where it can feed humanity in times of famine. It supports most climates, as well as areas dry monsoon and tropical highland regions and has no problems with either insects or diseases with so will never need chemical products.”


Friday, June 14, 2013


Prozac Turns Minnows Into Killers

Fish swimming in water with a trace of the anti-depressant Prozac did not adopt a cheery disposition.  Instead, they became edgy, aggressive and some even killed their mates.

The fish were subjected to traces of the drug by a research group at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee that examined how environmental exposure to the medication altered the behavior of fathead minnows, a common fish found throughout the Midwest.

Lead researcher Rebecca Klapper says that this experimental setup could actually be a reflection of the fishes' reality. 

The human body does not absorb medications 100 percent, so a trace amount is excreted in urine. Water treatment centers are unable to completely filter out all of those contaminant and can trickle down and affect the wildlife. Klapper sees the minnows as a way to gauge the long-term effects of Prozac in humans. 
"It's not just an environmental question but a human question as well," she tells ABC News. 

Changes in the minnows' reproductive behavior were seen in as low concentrations as 1 microgram per liter, equal to a single dose of Prozac dissolved in over 5,000 gallons of water. 
"They spent more time in their nest than they did interacting with the females," Klapper says. At higher concentrations, that behavior switched from disinterest to outright aggression with the male fish started to attack and sometimes killing their mates. 

Similar effects have been seen in humans who take the antidepressant. Common Prozac side effects include a decrease in sex drive, impotence, or difficulty having an orgasm, according to WebMD and  [More effects on here]

Fathead minnows are small fish, the biggest ones measuring only a couple of inches long. Their small size could be a factor in how they react to low levels of Prozac. However, Klapper believes that the concentrations used in this experiment, as well as the levels seen in the environment, could also impact larger species of fish. 

"Fish don't clear the medication as quickly as other animals," she says, which can lead to a possible build up of Prozac ultimately changing the fish's behavior.

Source: Good Morning America


Monday, June 3, 2013


Plant a Tree

Trees — by Kristof Nordin May 27, 2013

Imagine the type of world we could see
If instead of saying ‘pray,’ we said, ‘plant a tree’.
With this one little change so much more could be done
To protect all living things found under the sun.

We could ‘plant a tree’ for our troops sent away into war
So when they return they’d come home to find more.
We could ‘plant a tree’ at our churches with our husband or wife
To praise the Creator through a celebration of life.

We could ‘plant a tree’ for the needy and for those with no food
We could even plant in public without seeming rude.
The government would not have to introduce rules,
And most likely we could ‘plant a tree’ at our schools.

If we took it to task to ‘plant trees’ for the poorest,
We would all soon be reaping the wealth of a forest.
We could plant freely with those of all religions and creeds,
The improvement of earth would be based on these deeds.

We could plant with our neighbours, our family, and friends,
And ‘plant a tree’ with our enemies to help make amends.
If we ‘plant a tree’ for the sick to show them we care,
We would also be healing the soil, water, and air.

We could ‘plant a tree’ to observe when two people wed,
And plant one with our kids each night before bed.
Throughout the history of the whole human race
We find respect for the ‘tree’ has always had a place.

The great Ash of the Norse was their tree of the World,
And on a tree in the Garden is where the serpent once curled.
It was in groves of Oaks that the Druid priests wandered,
And under the Bodhi where the great Buddha pondered.

In the Bible it’s clear that we have all that we need:
‘All the trees with their fruits and plants yielding seed’.
Despite all these lessons that the past has taught
Now days, it seems, we cut our trees without thought.

This is confirmed by the Koran, for in it we read:
‘Many are the marvels of earth, yet we pay them no heed’.
We all have a duty, no matter what nation
To perform our part in protecting Creation.

Just think what we’d have if we had picked up a spade
Every time each one of us bowed our heads and prayed.

Thursday, May 30, 2013


 The active ingredient in OxyContin is oxycodone but OxyContin (a brand name derived from "oxycodone continuous") has a time-release mechanism, which means the drug is released in the body over a period of time and patients have to take the drug less often. Regular oxycodone is an immediate-release drug, an opiod narcotic painkiller used to treat moderate to severe pain.
Oxycodone is 14-hydroxydihydrocodeinone, a white odorless crystalline powder which is derived from the opium alkaloid (See below), thebaine. * The substance obtained by air-drying the juice from the unripe capsule of the poppy, Papaver somniferum. It contains a number of important alkaloids, such as morphine, codeine, heroin, and papaverine. The growing and transportation of the poppy as well as the manufacture of drugs from the juice are controlled by national and international laws. 


 Those now trying to stop taking Oxycodone are finding it extremely hard.  The withdrawals can be more than some people can take.  Doctors are jumping on a new drug  they are offering their patients to help with the Oxycodone addictions.  Many times the side effects of this new drug called Suboxone can be just as bad as the initial drug itself.  Caution is ADVISED:

Suboxone Side Effects

Generic name: buprenorphine / naloxone
Note: This document contains side effect information about buprenorphine / naloxone. Some of the dosage forms listed on this page may not apply to the brand name Suboxone.
Some side effects of Suboxone may not be reported. Always consult your doctor or healthcare specialist for medical advice. You may also report side effects to the FDA.

For the Consumer

Applies to buprenorphine / naloxone: sublingual film, sublingual tablet
Get emergency medical help if you have any of these signs of an allergic reaction while taking buprenorphine / naloxone: hives; difficult breathing; swelling of your face, lips, tongue, or throat.
Like other narcotic medicines, buprenorphine can slow your breathing. Death may occur if breathing becomes too weak.
Call your doctor at once or seek emergency medical attention if you have:
  • extreme drowsiness;
  • loss of coordination, weakness or limp feeling;
  • blurred vision, slurred speech, thinking problems;
  • weak or shallow breathing;
  • nausea, upper stomach pain, itching, loss of appetite, dark urine, clay-colored stools, jaundice (yellowing of the skin or eyes);
  • pounding heartbeats or fluttering in your chest; or
  • withdrawal symptoms--diarrhea, vomiting, shaking or shivering, runny nose, watery eyes, muscle pain, and feeling very hot or cold.
Common side effects may include:
  • headache, mild dizziness;
  • numbness or tingling;
  • drowsiness, or sleep problems (insomnia);
  • stomach pain, vomiting, constipation;
  • redness, pain, or numbness in your mouth;
  • feeling drunk; or
  • trouble concentrating.
This is not a complete list of side effects and others may occur. Call your doctor for medical advice about side effects.  Source: DRUGS.COM


I am going thru the same thing. I was taking up to 500mg of Roxy's per day. I almost lost everything including my life. Just recently I got a Staph infection in my hip which required emergency surgery to save my life. After I decided to come forward and get help my Dr had me taking 4mg of Suboxone 4 times a day or half a film 4 times a day. I was a Zombie! I had extreme headaches and would fall asleep if I sat still for a second. I lost my sex drive, energy levels were so low I didn't want to get out of bed and for a father of two and a husband of an amazing wife I had to make a change. I took my detox into my hands and lowered my dosage to 2mg 4 times a day then 2 mg 2 times a day then as needed when I had bad cravings so I wouldn't use. I am still having a really hard time staying sober even though I almost lost my life to Staph which was related to bad needle practices. Thankfully I didn't catch any other life altering diseases, like AIDS oh HEP A or B and many other possible diseases. My heart goes out to you. Good luck and stay the course. Send me a personnel message if anyone would like to chat and help each other thru this very tuff time.
Support Points: 30
White Belt in Support
Groups: Oxycodone

By GripIt-RipIt on Sat, 08-25-12, 19:05
I am like you two, in one body. I had a near fatal dirt bike accident in October 2010. Been on pain killers ever since. Started out with a little MS Contin and Norco for BT, but you know the story...tolerance...increase...tolerance...increase, but i was always using my RX up too quickly and going in early. I eventually tried almost every opiate in the book, MS Contin, Norco, Fentanyl patch, Percs, vics, dilaudid, roxies 15, and ultimately Roxy 30's. I would take 20 or more a day! Long story short, over the course of about 18 months I developed an addiction the completely controlled me. Every day, every thought, every minute, was based on my pills. I am sure you can relate. How i differ is that i finally just threw in the towel. My wife knew the whole time and it was slowly killing us. I gave in, and checked in. Told my boss on Aug 2nd and i was in detox facility the next day. Took the suboxone schedule for five days and went home. They only used suboxone to get me threw the acute withdrawal, which was [cannot even decribe how miserable]. the Post Acute phase is what i am dealing with know, like you, depression, fatigue, insomnia, etc. again, you can relate. I will say, i have forced myself to eat right, walk at least 20 minutes each morning, and drink plenty of fluids. It has really helped shorten this phase for me because i have read it can take many weeks or even months to get back to "normal". Normal for me is high i thought. But now i know normal is coming because each day i get a bit better. I can function again and actually accomplish things around the house without a handful of oxy. It's inspiring to think how bad i felt a week ago, or two weeks ago. What i am trying to say is to hang in there, its a war not a battle. Each day is a battle, you just have to win one at a time and the war will be over soon.
Never let good enough, be good enough.
Support Points: 225
Aqua Belt in SupportYellow Belt in SupportWhite Belt in Support

By fitness4life on Sun, 08-26-12, 17:27
I done a lot of research and talked to my doctor about the supplement 5-HTP. I started taking it and felt better soon after (couple of days). low serotonin levels is linked to depression, lack of motivation, strong sugar and carbohydrate cravings. the supplement is a serotonin precursor. I just take 50mgs per day about a hour after taking the suboxone. if you are already taking an antidepressant then it's a good idea to talk to your doctor first. Taking the two together could cause Serotonin Syndrome, which is very serious. I'm not as fatigued as i once was but i'm still lacking motivation on a daily basis. my doctor did increase the suboxone to 6mgs a day vs 4. that has helped BUT i cannot take all 6mgs at once. it makes me pretty sick and very tired. I still get pretty tired if i sit down for longer than 10 minutes. it's just weird for me considering I was very energetic and peppy before i started using. I do feel like i am in a much better place mentally than even a few weeks ago. Physically i'm finally getting stronger and more fit. I have to work out in the early evening to avoid being tired during the afternoons.
If i had only known the consequences of taking perks/roxies. it's crazy how quick one's tolerance builds up and a full blown addiction is in your face. I wish you guys the best of luck with your recovery!
Support Points: 160
Yellow Belt in SupportWhite Belt in Support

By tashalynn23 on Mon, 10-08-12, 12:43
Can you take the 5htp while pregnant? I have been using for about three years and my story is very similar to all of yours. I recently found out I am pregnant and immediately went to the doctor to get on suboxone. I get very bad headaches, but overall I feel better because now I dont have to spend all of my time figuring out where i can get more pills from,and i dont feel the guilt I felt at first for using while pregnant. I actually lowered the dosage i am taking on my own because the headaches were so terrible. And as for not having energy, it is very hard to tell if it is because of the pregnancy or the suboxone. honestly i dont feel normal but i am pretty sure i dont know what normal is after spending so many years high on pills. it takes a long time to regain what has been destroyed or lost...
Support Points: 30
White Belt in Support
Groups: Smoking, Suboxone

By clean4good on Thu, 10-11-12, 10:30
FITNESS4LIFE == I experienced a little bit of "all the above". I am on a Lexapro which has been helpful I belive during my recovery. I do not believe in the "quick fix" of a 5 day run with the Suboxone. Personally I would suggest more outpatient follow up therapy with Suboxone. The Suboxone does not give us the same Euphoric "high" as narcotics but it does make you feel better. I have noticed when missing a dose by mistake that I felt down, emotional, tired, and unmotivated. The medication was still in my system, I by no means was in "withdrawl" but still felt blah. Sounds like to me you are suffering from some depression and definately withdrawl. Stay focused get out there and find a good doctor who is approved to prescribe Suboxone and take your recovery slowly and seriously. It is certain that a long term treatment plan is more effective then the short term "quick fix". Quick fix will work for some but I tend to lean toward the majority and the facts. The last thing you want is to relapse back into taking narcs to "take the edge off" the withdrawls. I have rambled on here with my personal opinions, I hope this is helpful, if not for you, for me, and perhaps for someone else. Part of our treatment is getting on here and talking about our experiences good, bad, and indifferent. * I am not a physician and do not suggest any of this as medical advice, simmply from person in recovery to another*
Support Points: 50
White Belt in Support
Groups: Suboxone

By msrobin315 on Sat, 10-20-12, 21:49
I have been on suboxone 8mg 4 times a day for almost 2 yrs....I will say I think I have just covered up one addiction with another.....idk....
Support Points: 30
White Belt in Support

By fitness4life on Tue, 11-27-12, 19:34
I just posted my tapering experience on another thread. I thought i was rambling on mine, lol...I'm doing so much better. In short, my dose was way too high. I have lowered from 6mg to 2.5mgs in the last ten days. My taper plan is pretty simple and i've read many success stories from folks who used a similar plan. I've felt BETTER with each drop. NO side effects whatsoever. Here's the thing, we all have different body chemistry, there is no set taper protocol for everyone. It really needs to be tailored by your body and how your feeling mentally and physically. Im glad that i sought out treatment but i tell ya, Sub really effected my health way too much. I had every and any side effect possible from it. My body has always been very sensitive and i have no idea how i done my doc for the amount of time i did. looking back, i wasn't even using to get high but to stay out of withdrawal. oh well, here i am feeling much better with every dose i drop. Attitude plays a huge part in this. Try your best to be positive, if you feel like youre taking too much Sub, your ready for a drop. worse case scenario, you'll have to take a small amount if you did drop too fast. but i've read and am going by the no more than 20-25% reduction every 4-7 days, 2 weeks, or 1 month). I've dropped every 4th day and haven't had a bad day yet. there are too many horror stories out there, educate yourself about the med, and just listen to your body. Again, i feel better and better on a lower dose.
Support Points: 160
Yellow Belt in SupportWhite Belt in Support

By ablake29 on Thu, 03-14-13, 10:45
Hey fitness4life, I too, was VERY active in my health and fitness before my addiction occurred. I was playing roller derby, starting to get into power lifting, jogging daily, and wanted to be a parent. Damn injuries and genetics and choices. Even as an educated social worker, I developed an addiction to pain meds. I was put on Suboxone and have been on it for nearly two years now. I attempted once before to titrate and was successful with my schedule but then hurt myself again and needed pain medication support. So instead of pain meds, my doctor increased the Subs. I am now actively working on decreasing my dosage, again. But to respond to your questions/inquiry...I have also felt that fatigue and loss or lack of self motivation. I use to have vigor for life. Now I just want to play on the computer and watch tv. I work very hard to keep myself accountable to personal and daily goals. I want to feel successful so I make sure my goals are obtainable and reasonable. Even if it is just one thing. Anyhow, I just read one of the responses here, about 5htp. So I am going to try that. Also, I have had HORRIBLY STRONG cravings for sugar and carbs and nicotine. I am hoping and praying that as I decrease and titrate from Suboxone these other cravings will too, decrease. As an aspiring power lifter, sugar and nicotine was not part of my life...when i think back to who I was before the addiction, I feel hopeful that that person is still me. I have been extremely curious to know if others have experienced these intense cravings and feelings....?
Support Points: 10
Groups: None

By strong on Sat, 03-30-13, 16:06
I have been taking 1 1/2 a day now for a year and now my Dr.has lowered me to 1 one day and 1 and a half the next. He gave me two weeks two weeks for change but ever since the first chance I have kept a headache, no energy and j6st ill. I think I am moving down to fast has anyone else had this problem. My Dr. said everyone has done fine with this but not everyone's the same.
Support Points: 35
White Belt in Support
Groups: None

By Fayth68 on Sat, 04-13-13, 11:48
I started on Suboxone 4 weeks ago after taking pain pills for 7 years for health problems. I am sure I took almost all of them out there. I went through a week and a half of withdrawl before starting the Suboxone. I take 4 milligrams in the a.m., 2 milligrams in the afternoon and 2 milligrams at night. I have been lucky. Suboxone has really been a big help. Right now I don't have any cravings. I attended a daily 4 hour counseling session for 4 1/2 weeks. Now I go once a week and attend NA and AA meetings 4-5 times a week. The Suboxone has also helped to manage my pain better than the pain pills. I concentrate on one hour at a time.
Nobody can make you feel inferior without your consent
~Eleanor Roosevelt~

By BHMelvin on Thu, 04-18-13, 10:07
I started taking suboxone about 3 years ago. Prior to that I had an addiction to percocet due to multiple surgeries and problems with severe headaches. Initially, suboxone seemed to be a good answer for me as it took away my cravings for percocet and allowed me to have a more normal life. But, the longer I took it the more I noticed my personality changing. I use to be a very motivated person. I have 3 graduate degrees and was very involved in my profession. Since suboxone, I have become very depressed and have little interest in anything. I have quit my job and barely make it out of the house. The only thing I want to do is lay on the couch and read or watch tv. I am very unhappy and miss my old self. I also have a lot of problems with anxiety. I started out at 16 mg of suboxone and have titrated down to 7 mg, but don't feel much better. I am finally biting the bullet and going to detox and rehab. I feel like this is my last chance. I can't stand my life and want my old self back.
Support Points: 10
Groups: None

By Johnsit99 on Sun, 04-21-13, 12:06
I've been on the subs for 4 months. I have experienced The sweating at night an lack of motivation for a while now. Has anyone actually been succeful on this therapy. I just wanna read one success story. Good luck to all of Yao.
Support Points: 10
Groups: None

By mrubano on Sat, 05-11-13, 08:10
Suboxone has been a lifesaver for me and many others.
Yes, the dosage needs to be correct. The doctors tend to give more mgs than needed, but that is better than not enough.
After 4 months, you are at a place where you can SLOWLY cut you dosage.
For me, too much sub kept me from sleeping and gave me palpitations.
Again, for me, taking sub multiple times a day was no good, never slept, and sweat when sleeping. Now, I take when I wake up, and thats it. If I take even a small dose after noon, I don't sleep well.
What was your DOC (drug of choice)?
and, how much sub are you doing each day, and how often?
Here to help!
Support Points: 140
Yellow Belt in SupportWhite Belt in Support
Groups: Herpes, Suboxone

By Fayth68 on Sat, 05-04-13, 09:39
In my situation when I was on pain medicine I had no motivation, I hardly slept and my depression was terrible. With the Suboxone I now have energy and motivation and I am sleeping like a baby.
I think it affects everyone differently.
Maybe doseages need to be adjusted to fine out which doseage is right for you.
Nobody can make you feel inferior without your consent
~Eleanor Roosevelt~

By mrubano on Sat, 05-11-13, 08:14
OH, I just saw your previous posts.
You should try taking your daily dose at once, in the morning.
After 4 months, you are not sweating from detox from the oxy, it's the sub.
The 1/2 life of sub is so long that once a day is fine.
Actually, most doctors are starting to tell their patients to dose once a day.
Good Luck,
Support Points: 140
Yellow Belt in SupportWhite Belt in Support
Groups: Herpes, Suboxone

By StraightCashWavy on Fri, 05-10-13, 00:23
dude be careful with suboxone...all you need is like 2-3 strips(pills)..let me explain why..
1)Suboxone is 100 times stronger than smack
2)It can be ADDICTING (so please use it to get off and not to substitute one habit for another)
3)If you take it for more than a week you will get suboxone withdrawals (which last 7-14 days) trust me i know what im talking about dont take this as a joke you will suffer...
A lot of people i know who took subs for too long actually went through "suboxone withdrawal" which took a very long to go away due to a VERY LONG HALF-LIFE...most of them went back to H because instead of suffering for 2 weeks from suboxone withdrawal they could just suffer for 3-5 days coming of H cold turkey.
1)12-24 hours after your last dose of H.
2)Take 1st strip of Suboxone and cut it in 2pcs.(1 half in the morning....another half at night) DONT TAKE THE WHOLE THING 8mg is too much!!! DONT LISTEN TO WHAT DOCS ARE SAYING, THEY JUST WANT YOUR MONEY!!!
3)Next day..take your 2nd strip and cut it into 4 pieces..this should last you 2 DAYS...1 pc in the AM 1 in the pm.
4)After you finished your 2nd strip...3rd strip should be cut into 6 pieces, and that should last you 3 days..same pattern as last 2 strips you took (1 in the am and 1 in the pm)
5)After you finished your 3 strips you should be feeling ok..little to no dope sickness...
hope all of you guys get better stay off this evil drug its only going to ruin your life and everyone who is around you.
Support Points: 30
White Belt in Support
Groups: None

By Shell81 on Sun, 05-12-13, 22:08
I have a couple questions since u really seem to know what ur talking about ... I was on and off Vicodin for about 7-8 years bc of back pain and gallbladder disease pain ( I have no ins so haven't been able to really address those issues) my previous doc decided to put me on tramadol so that I wasn't on a narc .. Well I had been on that for the past three years and towards the end I got very little pain relief from the tram but did develope an addiction to it ( my doc also told me tramadol was not addictive ) NOT TRUE !!! I tried to get off of the tram cold turkey and the wd was horrible , worse than anytime I got off opiates .. Anyway I went to a doc to help me get off the tram , he suggested suboxone , he said bc I wasn't on a narcotic that he wants to do a 30 sub program and then have me off of it .. Since I have started the subs ( besides the first day in the doc office) I have had migraines everyday , usually eccedrine would take care of that ( I do suffer from migraines to begin with) my stomach has hurt , felt almost bloated and gassy , also nauseated .. I am going to mention this to my doc but now I'm really worried about when the 30 days is up and I have to get off the subs , I assume he is going to tapper me off but I saw how bad it was when my husband tried to get off thenm ( he was on subs for a much longer time , had gotten addicted to pain meds and u know how the story goes , went from pills to dope ) but anyway I'm freaked out that when it's time to get off the subs for me it will be bad , my husband ended up having to go back on the subs bc even after 3 weeks he was still having horrible withdraw , couldn't work , do anything , he couldn't function .. Any suggestions on how I should do it , should I try to get off them sooner than the 30 days ? Any suggestions r greatly appreciated .. Thanks so much
Support Points: 60
White Belt in Support

By mrubano on Mon, 05-13-13, 06:19
Hello Shel81,
First of all, if your dose of suboxone is too high, that may facilitate the headaches. Also, most doctors are suggesting that the patient takes the subs once a day, not 3 times a day like it used to be. The 1/2 life of suboxone is very long, no need to take multiple times a day.
You are correct when saying that coming off the subs is very difficult. I tried for a long time and failed.
Personally, I have succumb to the fact that I will be on Suboxone indefinitely. In all actuality, what's wrong with that? It is better than going back to the street drugs, BY FAR!!
There are reasons to be on pain meds... to be out of pain! That is why the make pain meds.
My wife has a bad back, really bad. Without pain meds she would be on disability. Obviously, she is addicted to pain meds. She is considering going on buprenorphine (Subutex)for pain. She has tried my suboxone and it worked well for pain. She like the fact that it is 1 pill or strip a day.
You may want to consider going on buprenorphine.
Subutex is just buprenorphine, no naloxone, so the pain relief is supposed to be better than suboxone, which contains naloxone.
Keep in mind, after years of taking pain meds your brain changes. It stops producing the endorphins that make us happy.
When I was off all meds I was very depressed. I went almost a year perfectly clean. But in that year, I don't think I smiled once. I was on pain meds for 20 years, I damaged my brain.
I found a wonderful doctor through <-- Great site, and very accurate.
Even my doctor said, don't fix what aint broken! If you doing well on the subs, don't change it. What's the alternative?
Allot of folks say that the doctors want to keep you on the subs so they earn money. That is not the case with my doctor. He is my GP too. As long as I stay clean,which I have, and intend to, I only have to see him every 4 months at $100. I am going to ask him to put me on buprenorphine because of the cost difference. Now that suboxone is finally generic, my meds are down to $180 a month (from $425), but generic Subutex, which is buprenorphine would cost me $80 a month ( )<-- another GREAT site)
My point is... maybe the years on the meds has also affected your brain. If you are still in pain, you may want to try buprenorphine. It would act as a dual purpose for you. If it makes your life better, why wouldn't you?
Granted, you will be addicted to the buprenorphine, but I don't see that as a bad thing. I know some folks do.
Suboxone has changed my life for the better, by far!! There are always narcotics in my house because of my wife and I don't even think of taking one because of the suboxone. I have never taken another narcotic since the first day I started the subs. It's been 2 years this past April 18th.
Support Points: 140
Yellow Belt in SupportWhite Belt in Support
Groups: Herpes, Suboxone

By Edeisel on Mon, 05-13-13, 07:50
Let me start by saying I have learned all these lessons te hard way. Lesson one: I stayed on Suboxone for a year straight just like my Dr told me. The only problem is that Suboxone is one of the most power narcotics known to man. So I went from taking 12 30mg Roxys per day to a damn Suboxone junky. My advice to anyone that gets on Suboxone make sure you only stay on them for 3 to 4 days only!!!!! The detox from Suboxone is way worse the coming off Roxys. By the way your dr will over dose you. Take half of what they tell you to take. Lesson 2: if you really want to come off dope then don't just get Suboxone to help with the days where you can't find dope or don't have any money to buy dope. I started using subs when I either ran out of money or dope. Which is the worst thing to do. Now you can get high and don't get sick. That lasted for around six months. I felt so empty and alone even though I have a wife an two kids I felt like I didn't belong. I still am getting shit from wife about my past mistakes. All you can do is move on and hope that you haven't lost all your family and friends along the way. I still think about getting high alot. I don't know if that will ever go away. But you will start feeling better when all these chemicals are out of your body. Good luck
Support Points: 30
White Belt in Support
Groups: Oxycodone

By ltLOVE63 on Tue, 05-21-13, 22:27
Excellent advice.... Doctor's are highly over dosing Suboxone.. A addict has no problems letting you know if they think they need more... People REALLY NEED to realize that Suboxone should ONLY be used for help weening off... OR you'll find yourself in the same situation you started with IF NOT WORSE..
Support Points: 10

Support Someone

Follow on: