BARNEY FOLGER

Advanced Scientific Health (ASH) is an organization of researchers, dedicated to the education and implementation of the ever expanding orthomolecular health knowledge base founded on research and discoveries of Nobel Prize winning doctors and scientists. 

How it began:  In 1997, at the age of 53, land developer Barney Folger of Marietta, Georgia, was being scheduled for his fourth heart surgery since being diagnosed with heart disease in 1990. 

To fully understand what was going through Barney's mind after being told by his cardiologists that they needed to operate on his heart again, one must appreciate the months of agony associated with post-operative recovery. 

Rather than endure another heart surgery, Barney put his clothes back on and went home. The last words from his cardiologists after he fired them and walked out the door was, "You could die, Barney." 

Through his research he discovered the works of Nobel Laureate Dr. Linus Pauling, Nobel Laureate Otto Warburg, Dr. Keith Brewer and others. Their common thread was "Orthomolecular" medicine which is the study of health through nutrition at the cellular level. 

Orthomolecular protocol could be described as giving back to the body that with which it was born and the body will heal itself. Through that knowledge he found the cure for his heart disease. 

Barney is more alive than ever and desires to share his life changing discoveries with others. In 1999, when the internet was only a few years new and obviously something which would continue to grow, Barney realised his new findings deserved a place on the World Wide Web.

This is when through what many believe was a divine intervention, Barney Folger and Vickie Barker met.  Barney was referred to her through a mutual acquaintance as being someone learning how to do webpages, had a back ground in research and the natural health field. 

The next two years although not with out a few bumps in the road, proved successful.  Countless hours of research and coordination were rewarded all along the way.  The growing interest of those that were now using the science to recover their health helped with the motivation to keep going and new people were stepping up to offer their help as well.

Barney Folger founded Advanced Scientific Health (ASH) in October 2002. ASH Researchers reside in every state in the United States and in over 20 countries worldwide.  ASH Researchers share their research so more lives can be saved. 

"Through the study and implementation of "Orthomolecular" science, diseases such as Heart Disease, Cancer, Diabetes, Arthritis, Multiple Sclerosis, Parkinsons, to the common cold can be prevented simply by giving the body the nutrients it needs."

JACK ANDRAKA - Cancer Test

How Aaron Swartz paved way for Jack Andraka's revolutionary cancer test 

[excerpt from article]

(Jack Andraka's breakthrough pancreatic cancer test would have never come about were it not for access to online journals -- what Internet guru Aaron Swartz was promoting before his death. Andraka "religiously" used free online academic journals in the research because "in most online databases, articles cost about $35, and there are only about 10 pages.")

{That paragraph tells all.  My name is Vickie Barker, I've been an internet researcher since 1999.  Before that, I was many things.  But that time on the internet allowed me time to wake up.  What Jack Andraka is saying, among other things,is that facts and findings are there, they do exist, but it is very hard and expensive to retrieve the very limited information we could all benefit from.   It has been expensive and time consuming to verify what I have been learning over these past many years, but the evidence certainly supports the contention that We Have ALL Been Duped.}

Jack Andraka (Intel/ YouTube) 

Jack Andraka, the 15-year-old whiz kid behind a revolutionary new tool in cancer research, has many things in common with Aaron Swartz, the phenomenon at the center of a continuing online freedom debate in the US. 

Swartz was also just 15 when he helped co-develop RSS, a form of Web publication, that has enabled dissidents in China and the Middle East, North Africa region to circumvent censors. Andraka is on his way to revolutionizing the medical profession with a cost-effective, much less invasive test for early-stage pancreatic cancer and a number of other diseases (detailed in the video below).

“It'll be three to five years before it's on the market, both as a take home test and in doctor's offices,” the well-spoken high school student told The Vancouver Observer.

But Swartz and Andraka aren't only connected by their teenage prodigy.

Andraka used free online academic journals in the research that resulted in his invention.

“I used them religiously,” Andraka said, “Just because, in most online databases, articles cost about [US]$35, and there are only about 10 pages." 

“The public funds a lot of this research. Shouldn't the public have access to it?”

An online digital activist and developer, Aaron Swartz committed suicide earlier this month, weeks before the start of his trial, where he would face three decades in prison for allegedly “stealing” millions of pay-walled articles from Online academic service JSTOR to make them available to the public for free.

“I believe [Swartz's] actions were mostly justified,” Andraka said, “The public funded a lot of that research. It shouldn't be held inaccessible to the public.”

Swartz's best friend and colleague in many of his battles for free and open Internet access Ben Wikler agreed with Andraka.

“Poor and rich people pay taxes for the research that goes into these journals. Only those wealthy enough to pay for subscriptions or go to universities can reap the fruits of their funding... It reinforces fundamental social inequalities,” Wikler said, on the phone from Brooklyn.

Wikler's Canadian counterparts also say that publicly funded research are inherently the property of the public.

“Academic articles are created with public funds, within the public university system,” said open Internet advocate OpenMedia.ca's managing director Reilly Yeo.

“Most writers of these articles are never paid directly for their services. Academic articles should definitely be freely available - that's how we'll see the full potential of the Internet to level the playing field for access to knowledge.”

Footing the bill for book smarts

Still, some of the media published in the aftermath of Swartz's suicide has observed that service's like JSTOR's are labor and cost intensive, and that it is financially implausible to tear down pay walls.

JSTOR spokesperson Heidi McGregor told VO the company's total expenses for 2012 were $52.6 million, garnering a total revenue of $53.2 million. 

JSTOR is part of ITHAKA, a larger non-profit academic services organization that, McGregor estimated, employs between 250 to 300 people. 

“It's very important to understand there are a range of ways to cover costs [with academic journal databases] depending on what kind of organization you are and what you're trying to do,” McGregor said.

“Certain resource providers can underwrite costs through advertising, government funding or authors paying the price themselves – That happens in science. Authors are paying to make content available on the supply side, rather than on the demand side.”

But that's not the case for JSTOR.

“One thing to keep in mind is that JSTOR is more akin to a library or archive than a publisher. The notion that the content has been paid for is not really true. We have to cover costs in the same way that a library incurs costs. A library buys a book. They have a responsibility to create a catalogue. They pay to preserve the book and make sure that their copies are in shape,” she said.

Depending on JSTOR's agreement with the publishers who supply the work it catalogues, JSTOR may pay “25 cents on the dollar with our publishers. Whether they share funds with their authors depends on their agreement,” McGregor explained. 

McGregor feels people fail to understand how cost-intensive services like JSTOR are. 

“People like to talk about the concepts of things, but don't understand what it means to implement them.” 

Still, the JSTOR service is working to make more of its work open to the public.

“We are opening up articles today,” McGregor said, noting that with funding from libraries around the globe, there are half a million articles that unsubscribed users can register and read. A user can check a hand full out each week “in the same way they can check books out of a library,” she said.

Yet Wikler remains unconvinced that JSTOR can't offer articles free of charge for the public.

“I know there are a tangle of contracts and provisions and laws. That's all just a speck in the face of making human knowledge available to everybody,” he said. 

“When JSTOR launched in 1995, putting academic articles on the Net was a controversial proposition that they made headway on. In 2013, there shouldn't be any reason why academic articles shouldn't be for free. We should make sure that every person on Earth has access to the intellectual heritage of human kind.” 

Pondering new business models, Wikler suggested that “universities could make a consortium. The Obama administration could stipulate that research should be free after a certain period of time. Researchers could also start stipulating that there work be made available openly to the public.”

The legacy of two prodigies

“My research should serve as a testament to free online research (...) It was hard to get what I needed without the costs. People should take note and because of this project, we should make a move toward more inexpensive or free Online research,” Andraka said.

Wikler attempted to speak about his late friend's intent.

“Aaron would want all the Jack Andrakas to carry this torch forward now (…) He'd also say, don't accept the lie that the world has to be the way it is now,” Wikler said.

“I would love for JSTOR to be the biggest open research advocate. If they were lobbying for funding to get pay walls taken down, the world would applaud them (...) Aaron believed anyone could do what he did -- that if people thought seriously about their moral obligations, anyone could change the world. He'd want Andraka to do this for the rest of his life and others to follow suit. ” 

SMART METERS

American Academy of Environmental Medicine

Calls for Immediate Caution regarding Smart Meter Installation

Electromagnetic and Radiofrequency Fields Effect on Human Health

For over 50 years, the American Academy of Environmental Medicine (AAEM) has been studying and treating the effects of the environment on human health. In the last 20 years, our physicians began seeing patients who reported that electric power lines, televisions and other electrical devices caused a wide variety of symptoms. By the mid 1990's, it became clear that patients were adversely affected by electromagnetic fields and becoming more electrically sensitive. In the last five years with the advent of wireless devices, there has been a massive increase in radiofrequency (RF) exposure from wireless devices as well as reports of hypersensitivity and diseases related to electromagnetic field and RF exposure. Multiple studies correlate RF exposure with diseases such as cancer, neurological disease, reproductive disorders, immune dysfunction, and electromagnetic hypersensitivity.

The electromagnetic wave spectrum is divided into ionizing radiation such as ultraviolet and X-rays and non-ionizing radiation such as radiofrequency (RF), which includes WiFi, cell phones, and Smart Meter wireless communication. It has long been recognized that ionizing radiation can have a negative impact on health. However, the effects of non-ionizing radiation on human health recently have been seen. Discussions and research of non-ionizing radiation effects centers around thermal and non-thermal effects. According to the FCC and other regulatory agencies, only thermal effects are relevant regarding health implications and consequently, exposure limits are based on thermal effects only.¹

While it was practical to regulate thermal bioeffects, it was also stated that non-thermal effects are not well understood and no conclusive scientific evidence points to non-thermal based negative health effects.¹ Further arguments are made with respect to RF exposure from WiFi, cell towers and smart meters that due to distance, exposure to these wavelengths are negligible.² However, many in vitro, in vivo and epidemiological studies demonstrate that significant harmful biological effects occur from non-thermal RF exposure and satisfy Hill's criteria of causality.³ Genetic damage, reproductive defects, cancer, neurological degeneration and nervous system dysfunction, immune system dysfunction, cognitive effects, protein and peptide damage, kidney damage, and developmental effects have all been reported in the peer-reviewed scientific literature.

Genotoxic effects from RF exposure, including studies of non-thermal levels of exposure, consistently and specifically show chromosomal instability, altered gene expression, gene mutations, DNA fragmentation and DNA structural breaks.^4-11 A statistically significant dose response effect was demonstrated by Maschevich et al. , who reported a linear increase in aneuploidy as a function of the Specific Absorption Rate(SAR) of RF exposure.¹¹ Genotoxic effects are documented to occur in neurons, blood lymphocytes, sperm, red blood cells, epithelial cells, hematopoietic tissue, lung cells and bone marrow. Adverse developmental effects due to non-thermal RF exposure have been shown with decreased litter size in mice from RF exposure well below safety standards.¹² The World Health Organization has classified RF emissions as a group 2 B carcinogen.¹³ Cellular telephone use in rural areas was also shown to be associated with an increased risk for malignant brain tumors. ¹⁴

The fact that RF exposure causes neurological damage has been documented repeatedly. Increased blood-brain barrier permeability and oxidative damage, which are associated with brain cancer and neurodegenerative diseases, have been found.^4,7,15-17 Nittby et al. demonstrated a statistically significant dose-response effect between non-thermal RF exposure and occurrence of albumin leak across the blood-brain barrier.¹⁵ Changes associated with degenerative neurological diseases such as Alzheimer's, Parkinson's and Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS) have been reported.^4,10 Other neurological and cognitive disorders such as headaches, dizziness, tremors, decreased memory and attention, autonomic nervous system dysfunction, decreased reaction times, sleep disturbances and visual disruption have been reported to be statistically significant in multiple epidemiological studies with RF exposure occurring non-locally.^18-21

Nephrotoxic effects from RF exposure also have been reported. A dose response effect was observed by Ingole and Ghosh in which RF exposure resulted in mild to extensive degenerative changes in chick embryo kidneys based on duration of RF exposure.²⁴ RF emissions have also been shown to cause isomeric changes in amino acids that can result in nephrotoxicity as well as hepatotoxicity.²⁵

Electromagnetic field (EMF) hypersensitivity has been documented in controlled and double blind studies with exposure to various EMF frequencies. Rea et al. demonstrated that under double blind placebo controlled conditions, 100% of subjects showed reproducible reactions to that frequency to which they were most sensitive.²² Pulsed electromagnetic frequencies were shown to consistently provoke neurological symptoms in a blinded subject while exposure to continuous frequencies did not.²³

Although these studies clearly show causality and disprove the claim that health effects from RF exposure are uncertain, there is another mechanism that proves electromagnetic frequencies, including radiofrequencies, can negatively impact human health. Government agencies and industry set safety standards based on the narrow scope of Newtonian or "classical" physics reasoning that the effects of atoms and molecules are confined in space and time. This model supports the theory that a mechanical force acts on a physical object and thus, long-range exposure to EMF and RF cannot have an impact on health if no significant heating occurs. However, this is an incomplete model. A quantum physics model is necessary to fully understand and appreciate how and why EMF and RF fields are harmful to humans.^26,27 In quantum physics and quantum field theory, matter can behave as a particle or as a wave with wave-like properties. Matter and electromagnetic fields encompass quantum fields that fluctuate in space and time. These interactions can have long-range effects which cannot be shielded, are non-linear and by their quantum nature have uncertainty. Living systems, including the human body, interact with the magnetic vector potential component of an electromagnetic field such as the field near a toroidal coil.^26,28,29 The magnetic vector potential is the coupling pathway between biological systems and electromagnetic fields.^26,27 Once a patient's specific threshold of intensity has been exceeded, it is the frequency which triggers the patient's reactions.

Long range EMF or RF forces can act over large distances setting a biological system oscillating in phase with the frequency of the electromagnetic field so it adapts with consequences to other body systems. This also may produce an electromagnetic frequency imprint into the living system that can be long lasting.^26,27,30 Research using objective instrumentation has shown that even passive resonant circuits can imprint a frequency into water and biological systems.³¹ These quantum electrodynamic effects do exist and may explain the adverse health effects seen with EMF and RF exposure. These EMF and RF quantum field effects have not been adequately studied and are not fully understood regarding human health.

Because of the well documented studies showing adverse effects on health and the not fully understood quantum field effect, AAEM calls for exercising precaution with regard to EMF, RF and general frequency exposure. In an era when all society relies on the benefits of electronics, we must find ideas and technologies that do not disturb bodily function. It is clear that the human body uses electricity from the chemical bond to the nerve impulse and obviously this orderly sequence can be disturbed by an individual-specific electromagnetic frequency environment. Neighbors and whole communities are already exercising precaution, demanding abstention from wireless in their homes and businesses.


Furthermore, the AAEM asks for:

• An immediate caution on Smart Meter installation due to potentially harmful RF exposure.
  
• Accommodation for health considerations regarding EMF and RF exposure, including exposure to wireless Smart Meter technology.
  
• Independent studies to further understand the health effects from EMF and RF exposure.
  
• Recognition that electromagnetic hypersensitivity is a growing problem worldwide.
  
• Understanding and control of this electrical environmental bombardment for the protection of society.
  
• Consideration and independent research regarding the quantum effects of EMF and RF on human health.
  
• Use of safer technology, including for Smart Meters, such as hard-wiring, fiber optics or other non-harmful methods of data transmission.

Submitted by: Amy L. Dean, DO, William J. Rea, MD, Cyril W. Smith, PhD, Alvis L. Barrier, MD

Bibliography: Electromagnetic and Radiofrequency Fields Effect on Human Health

1. California Council on Science and Technology. (Internet). (2011). Health Impacts of Radiofrequency Exposure from Smart Meters. Available from: http://www.ccst.us/publications/2011/2011smartA.pdf
   
2. Electric Power Research Institute. (Internet). (2011). Radio-Frequency Exposure Levels from Smart Meters: A Case Study of One Model. Available from: https://www.nvenergy.com/NVEnergize/documents/EPRI_1022270_caseStudy.pdf
   
3. Hill, AB. The Environment and Disease: Association or Causation? Proceedings of the Royal Society of Medicine. 1965; 58: 295-300.
   
4. Xu S, Zhou Z, Zhang L, et al. Exposure to 1800 MHZ radiofrequency radiation induces oxidative damage to mitochondrial DNA in primary cultured neurons. Brain Research. 2010; 1311: 189-196.
   
5. Phillips JL, Singh NP, Lai H. Electromagnetic fields and DNA damage. Pathophysiology. 2009; 16: 79-88.
   
6. Ruediger HW. Genotoxic effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields. Pathophysiology. 2009; 16(2): 89-102.
   
7. Zhao T, Zou S, Knapp P. Exposure to cell phone radiation up-regulates apoptosis genes in primary cultures of neurons and astrocytes. Neurosci Lett. 2007; 412(1): 34-38.
   
8. Lee S, Johnson D, Dunbar K. 2.45 GHz radiofrequency fields alter gene expression on cultured human cells. FEBS Letters. 2005; 579: 4829-4836.
   
9. Demsia G, Vlastos D, Matthopoulos DP. Effect of 910-MHz electromagnetic field on rat bone marrow. The Scientific World Journal. 2004; 4(S2): 48-54.
   
10. Lai H, Singh NP. Magnetic-field-induced DNA strand breaks in brain cells of the rat. Environmental Health Perspectives. 2004; 112(6): 687-694. Available from: http://ehp03.niehs.nih.gov/article/info:doi/10.1289/ehp.6355
    
11. Mashevich M, Foldman D, Kesar, et al. Exposure of human peripheral blood lymphocytes to electromagnetic fields associated with cellular phones leads to chromosomal instability. Bioelectromagnetics. 2003; 24: 82-90.
    
12. Magras IN, Xenos TD. RF radiation-induced changes in the prenatal development of mice. Bioelectromagnetics. 1997; 18:455-461.
    
13. Ban R, Grosse Y, Lauby-Secretan B, et al. Carcinogenicity of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields. The Lancet Oncology. 2011; 12(7): 624-626. Available from: http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanonc/article/PIIS1470-2045(11)70147-4/fulltext?_eventId=login
    
14. Hardell L, Carlberg M, Hansson Mild K. Use of cellular telephones and brain tumour risk in urban and rural areas. Occup. Environ. Med. 2005; 62: 390-394.
    
15. Nittby H, Brun A, Eberhardt J, et al. Increased blood-brain barrier permeability in mammalian brain 7 days after exposure to the radiation from a GSM-900 mobile phone. Pathophysiology. 2009; 16: 103-112.
    
16. Awad SM, Hassan NS. Health Risks of electromagnetic radiation from mobile phone on brain of rats. J. Appl. Sci. Res. 2008; 4(12): 1994-2000.
    
17. Leszczynski D, Joenvaara S. Non-thermal activation of the hsp27/p38MAPK stress pathway by mobile phone radiation in human endothelial cells: Molecular mechanism for cancer - and blood-brain barrier - related effects. Differentiation. 2002; 70: 120-129.
    
18. Santini R, Santini P, Danze JM, et al. Study of the health of people living in the vicinity of mobile phone base stations: 1. Influences of distance and sex. Pathol Biol. 2002; 50: 369-373.
    
19. Abdel-Rassoul G, Abou El-Fateh O, Abou Salem M, et al. Neurobehavioral effects among inhabitants around mobile phone base stations. Neurotox. 2007; 28(2): 434-440.
    
20. Hutter HP, Moshammer H, Wallner P, Kundi M. Subjective symptoms, sleeping problems, and cognitive performance in subjects living near mobile phone base stations. Occup. Environ. Med. 2006; 63: 307-313.
    
21. Kolodynski AA, Kolodynska VV. Motor and psychological functions of school children living in the area of the Skrunda Radio Location Station in Latvia. Sci. Total Environ. 1996; 180: 87-93.
    
22. Rea WJ, Pan Y, Fenyves EJ, et al. Electromagnetic field sensitivity. Journal of Bioelectricity. 1991; 10(1 &2): 243-256.
    
23. McCarty DE, Carrubba S, Chesson AL, et al. Electromagnetic hypersensitivity: Evidence for a novel neurological syndrome. Int. J. Neurosci. 2011; 121(12): 670-676.
    
24. Ingole IV, Ghosh SK. Cell phone radiation and developing tissues in chick embryo - a light microscopic study of kidneys. J. Anat. Soc. India. 2006; 55(2): 19-23.
    
25. Lubec G, Wolf C. Bartosch B. Amino acid isomerisation and microwave exposure. Lancet. 1989; 334: 1392-1393.
    
26. Smith CW. Quanta and coherence effects in water and living systems. Journal of Alternative and Complimentary Medicine. 2004; 10(1): 69-78.
    
27. Smith CW (2008) Fröhlich's Interpretation of Biology through Theoretical Physics. In: Hyland GJ and Rowlands P (Eds.) Herbert Fröhlich FRS: A physicist ahead of his time. Liverpool: University of Liverpool, 2nd edition, pp 107-154.
    
28. Del Giudice E, Doglia S, Milani M, et al. Magnetic flux quantization and Josephson behavior in living systems. Physica Scripta. 1989; 40: 786-791.
    
29. Tonomura A, Osakabe N, Matsuda T, et al. Evidence for Aharonov-Bohm effect with magnetic field completely shielded from electron wave. Phys. Rev. Let. 1986; 56(8):792-75.
    
30. Del Giudice E, De Ninno A, Fleischmann, et al. Coherent quantum electrodynamics in living matter. Electromagn. Biol. Med. 2005; 24: 199-210.
    
31. Cardella C, de Magistris L, Florio E, Smith C. Permanent changes in the physic-chemical properties of water following exposure to resonant circuits. Journal of Scientific Exploration. 2001; 15(4): 501-518.

The AAEM’s position paper on electromagnetic and radiofrequency fields can be found at:http://aaemonline.org/emf_rf_position.html

AAEM is an international association of physicians and other professionals dedicated to addressing the clinical aspects of environmental health. More information is available at: www.aaemonline.org.


 Source: Army of LifeSavers