WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:02.400 Sounds like we got a glitch on the disc. 00:00:02.400 --> 00:00:05.800 I have to look at that for next month, otherwise we're going to hear that again. 00:00:05.800 --> 00:00:09.700 Okay, so welcome to this evening's Ask Your Ab Doctor. 00:00:09.700 --> 00:00:10.700 My name is Andrew Murray. 00:00:10.700 --> 00:00:12.400 My name is Sarah Johanneson Murray. 00:00:12.400 --> 00:00:17.800 For those of you who perhaps have listened to the show, which run every third Friday of the month from 7 to 8 p.m., 00:00:17.800 --> 00:00:25.000 we're both licensed naturopathic doctors who were educated in England and came to California, 00:00:25.000 --> 00:00:32.800 where the land of the free, home of the brave, we practice herbal medicine and nutritional counseling, 00:00:32.800 --> 00:00:34.800 have a clinic in Garboville. 00:00:34.800 --> 00:00:37.200 Actually, you know what? We don't have a clinic in Garboville. 00:00:37.200 --> 00:00:42.600 That was closed last month, so it was taken over and I'm actually doing a lot more consulting from home, 00:00:42.600 --> 00:00:44.800 so it's actually working out a lot better for most people. 00:00:44.800 --> 00:00:54.000 Anyway, the number, if you live here, for the call-in from 7.30 until 8 o'clock is 923-3911. 00:00:54.000 --> 00:00:59.600 We get a lot of people calling from all over the States most shows, so there's an 800 number. 00:00:59.600 --> 00:01:03.600 It's 800-568-3723. 00:01:03.600 --> 00:01:09.000 You can listen to us on the web, KMED.org, and there's a new temporary call-in number. 00:01:09.000 --> 00:01:13.600 So I'm not too sure if that 923-3911 is still active or not. It's not, is it? 00:01:13.600 --> 00:01:15.000 Well, maybe not. Okay. 00:01:15.000 --> 00:01:20.200 Well, folks, there's another temporary call-in number if you're in the 707 area code. 00:01:20.200 --> 00:01:25.000 That's 383-9007. 00:01:25.000 --> 00:01:30.600 So for people that are listening to the show, calls are welcome from 7.30 to 8 p.m. 00:01:30.600 --> 00:01:35.200 If people want to contact us outside of the show, Monday through Friday, 00:01:35.200 --> 00:01:40.000 either go call us on toll-free number 1-888-WBM-ERB, 00:01:40.000 --> 00:01:45.200 or if you want to email either of us, Andrew or Sarah, either Andrew or Sarah, 00:01:45.200 --> 00:01:47.800 at westernbotanicalmedicine.com. 00:01:47.800 --> 00:01:52.400 If you want to shoot us questions and stuff like that, we've got the time and we'll certainly answer you. 00:01:52.400 --> 00:01:56.800 Okay. So this month, I wanted to continue from last month's topic 00:01:56.800 --> 00:02:00.800 because we barely had time to get into the meat of it. 00:02:00.800 --> 00:02:07.600 And last month's topic was a subject, the precautionary principle, 00:02:07.600 --> 00:02:17.600 and this is something that Dr. Peat was enlightening me to in terms of what I found out to be a directive in law 00:02:17.600 --> 00:02:22.800 in Europe, whereas that directive is not in place in the States. 00:02:22.800 --> 00:02:27.600 And there's certainly political and economic reasons for it, 00:02:27.600 --> 00:02:36.800 but some of the topics that we'll bring out later on in the show will be pertinent to the fact that in this country, 00:02:36.800 --> 00:02:41.600 it's not enshrined in law, but in the European Union, it is. 00:02:41.600 --> 00:02:45.000 So reiterate the opening of last month's discussion. 00:02:45.000 --> 00:02:51.000 As I said, the precautionary principle as applied to medicines and foods can be seen in Europe, 00:02:51.000 --> 00:02:55.400 where it's codified into law, but purposely not here in the US. 00:02:55.400 --> 00:03:01.000 And whilst this is not a political show, but rather a humanitarian and altruistic venture, 00:03:01.000 --> 00:03:06.600 the politics of nations with their attendant controlling vested interests and lobbyists, 00:03:06.600 --> 00:03:09.200 they most definitely are up for examination. 00:03:09.200 --> 00:03:15.600 A regular phrase which bears worthy cautionary advice is, "If you want to know more, follow the money," 00:03:15.600 --> 00:03:17.000 and we've all heard that. 00:03:17.000 --> 00:03:24.800 As I stated last month, the World Charter for Nature, adopted by the UN General Assembly in 1982, 00:03:24.800 --> 00:03:28.600 was the first international endorsement of the precautionary principle, 00:03:28.600 --> 00:03:34.000 and the principle was implemented in an international treaty as early as the '87 Montreal Protocol, 00:03:34.000 --> 00:03:41.000 and among other international treaties and declarations, is reflected in the '92 Rio Declaration on the Environment and Development. 00:03:41.000 --> 00:03:44.600 This was signed at the UN Conference on Environment and Development. 00:03:44.600 --> 00:03:51.200 Now, the United States has opposed the use of the term "principle" because this term has special connotations in legal language, 00:03:51.200 --> 00:03:55.000 due to the fact that a principle of law is a source of law. 00:03:55.000 --> 00:03:59.000 And this is the legal status of the precautionary principle in the European Union, though, 00:03:59.000 --> 00:04:03.400 and whilst I'm not a supporter of the Union due to its unelected bureaucracy, 00:04:03.400 --> 00:04:06.200 there's nothing wrong with international dialogue and trade, 00:04:06.200 --> 00:04:14.200 with countries agreeing with one another on creative policies whilst retaining their own unique cultures, language, and borders, 00:04:14.200 --> 00:04:19.200 and ultimately learning from mistakes and moving forward with better models. 00:04:19.200 --> 00:04:24.000 Later in the show here, I wanted to explore the nature of both Chris Busby's article, 00:04:24.000 --> 00:04:29.000 and a recent article was shown from Dr. Ernest J. Sternglass, 00:04:29.000 --> 00:04:36.400 and the relation to the whistleblowing on the dangers of the nuclear industry and the government control of data and disinformation. 00:04:36.400 --> 00:04:43.800 I know in the election cycle that we've just gone through, the mainstream media certainly had a lot to say about disinformation, 00:04:43.800 --> 00:04:52.200 and there was quite a war waged by both sides in terms of disinformation, or "information," so we're all familiar with that term. 00:04:52.200 --> 00:04:59.200 So as I mentioned last month, Chris Busby's article and the invocation in Europe of the Euratom Suicide Clause, 00:04:59.200 --> 00:05:04.200 which we'll talk about later, needs to be closely followed, as there are legal ramifications in Europe 00:05:04.200 --> 00:05:08.600 which can force the hand of willfully corrupt officials and institutions, 00:05:08.600 --> 00:05:14.200 and this is in regard to accurate reporting on radiation leakage, etc., from these power stations. 00:05:14.200 --> 00:05:22.200 On a side note, I am pleased to hear that clean, coal-burning, zero-emission power stations are going to be supported once more, 00:05:22.200 --> 00:05:27.200 and that energy independence and lower energy costs can be a reality for us here in the US. 00:05:27.200 --> 00:05:36.200 We've previously discussed the disinformation surrounding the lie of global warming and the real reason it was being pushed globally as carbon taxation, 00:05:36.200 --> 00:05:42.200 designed to enslave us all with another "life tax," just like the lie that with Obamacare you can keep your doctor 00:05:42.200 --> 00:05:45.200 and there's no penalty for not getting health insurance. 00:05:45.200 --> 00:05:53.200 Anyway, so Chris Busby's invocation of the Euratom Suicide Clause looks to pose a credible threat to the nuclear industry, 00:05:53.200 --> 00:05:59.200 and Dr. Sternglass's publications clearly show the reality that no radiation exposure is safe. 00:05:59.200 --> 00:06:01.200 So, Dr. Peat, are you with us? 00:06:01.200 --> 00:06:02.200 Yes. 00:06:02.200 --> 00:06:07.200 And thanks so much for giving your time, as you have been doing for some time now, every third Friday of the month. 00:06:07.200 --> 00:06:09.200 We really appreciate you being here. 00:06:09.200 --> 00:06:20.200 So in terms of this precautionary principle, just to briefly wrap from last month so we can continue with the other topics of Sternglass's publication, 00:06:20.200 --> 00:06:28.200 Busby's publication, and then get into some of the issues surrounding things like GMO and nanotech, 00:06:28.200 --> 00:06:31.200 as how safe are they and how they've gotten to where they've got. 00:06:31.200 --> 00:06:40.200 Could you briefly go through the process again of the precautionary principle, how it applies, 00:06:40.200 --> 00:06:47.200 and then that will help people understand perhaps how in Europe, where it doesn't apply, how things have maybe been managed differently, 00:06:47.200 --> 00:06:57.200 and then we can look at the bureaucracy and the economic and political involvement or interests that stand to be gained from these people. 00:06:57.200 --> 00:07:10.200 The principle really is nothing but saying that common sense should be incorporated into public policy, that it's better to be safe than sorry. 00:07:10.200 --> 00:07:30.200 But it's really hard to appreciate why that is so controversial, that you should know something about the probable effects of any action you take. 00:07:30.200 --> 00:07:41.200 I was just reading about the first big hydrogen bomb test that the US made in the Pacific. 00:07:41.200 --> 00:07:48.200 The very first atomic bomb explosion, some of the people, some of the physicists working on it, 00:07:48.200 --> 00:07:59.200 had said that they had calculated there was a certain probability that the bomb might start a chain reaction in the atmosphere and destroy the world. 00:07:59.200 --> 00:08:03.200 They went ahead with it because they said that was a small probability. 00:08:03.200 --> 00:08:05.200 That was pretty good to put it out there. 00:08:05.200 --> 00:08:21.200 When they were designing the first hydrogen bomb, to make a portable device, instead of having refrigerated hydrogen gas, 00:08:21.200 --> 00:08:35.200 they used lithium hydride or lithium deuteride as the source of the fusible deuterium. 00:08:35.200 --> 00:08:47.200 They were calculating that they would get a five megaton explosion from the amount of deuterium present in the lithium compound. 00:08:47.200 --> 00:08:58.200 It didn't occur to them that the lithium itself might undergo fission and provide more fusible material. 00:08:58.200 --> 00:09:02.200 In fact, that's what happened. 00:09:02.200 --> 00:09:13.200 The lithium itself entered into the nuclear reaction and produced a 15 megaton explosion, three times bigger than they calculated. 00:09:13.200 --> 00:09:26.200 It killed a fisherman, irradiated, sickened people on the Japanese fishing boat, 00:09:26.200 --> 00:09:33.200 and burned a lot of the sailors and military people who were watching it. 00:09:33.200 --> 00:09:43.200 Just because they were so confident that they were good engineers and good physicists, 00:09:43.200 --> 00:09:50.200 they didn't even think about the simple physical chemistry involved. 00:09:50.200 --> 00:10:02.200 That whole process of simple ignorance is something that you have to take into account when you're working with anything dangerous. 00:10:02.200 --> 00:10:08.200 But far beyond that is the ulterior motive. 00:10:08.200 --> 00:10:21.200 If they have some big goal that they're after, it isn't simply a matter of not investigating the dangers, 00:10:21.200 --> 00:10:29.200 but of actually falsifying the known effects, the known probable effects. 00:10:29.200 --> 00:10:36.200 That's where the precautionary principle opens up something much bigger. 00:10:36.200 --> 00:10:46.200 The fact that the government has controlled scientific information so drastically over the last 60 or 70 years, 00:10:46.200 --> 00:10:55.200 that even if you do try to apply the precautionary principle without the information you need, 00:10:55.200 --> 00:11:02.200 it's impossible to take precautions that will save lives in the future. 00:11:02.200 --> 00:11:10.200 Okay, now are you saying because in the States here this precautionary principle does not apply, 00:11:10.200 --> 00:11:17.200 that it certainly gives a wider doorway through which this kind of procedure can get through, 00:11:17.200 --> 00:11:25.200 rather than being held accountable financially for reparation through the courts? 00:11:25.200 --> 00:11:31.200 Yeah, that is one possible solution to it. 00:11:31.200 --> 00:11:41.200 If the information ever comes out that they really knew that they were killing people, then they could be held responsible. 00:11:41.200 --> 00:11:50.200 Because I guess we're skipping ahead a little bit when I think about vaccine damaged children as a pretty recent revelation. 00:11:50.200 --> 00:11:57.200 You know, and Dr. Andrew Wakefield being exonerated and it being brought to full public attention 00:11:57.200 --> 00:12:02.200 that vaccines really have damaged a lot of children. 00:12:02.200 --> 00:12:07.200 Well, that's direct. I mean, that's the government directly giving the indemnity. 00:12:07.200 --> 00:12:14.200 Yeah, no, I'm just saying where that kind of thing has existed in this country, 00:12:14.200 --> 00:12:22.200 there isn't any real, there isn't the same simplistic recourse through law for reparation like there would be in Europe, 00:12:22.200 --> 00:12:25.200 for example, where they apply the precautionary principle in law. 00:12:25.200 --> 00:12:34.200 But documents have come out that the insiders in the Center for Disease Control knew the dangers 00:12:34.200 --> 00:12:37.200 and didn't want to make public. 00:12:37.200 --> 00:12:45.200 Right. Yeah. Okay, so that's very different. That's willful or culpable damage or involvement then. 00:12:45.200 --> 00:12:49.200 And what are you referring to that the CDC did? 00:12:49.200 --> 00:13:01.200 The insiders knew the research showing the risks of vaccinations as they knew the risks of radiation, 00:13:01.200 --> 00:13:11.200 not just risk, the actual cause of cancer, premature birth, brain damage. 00:13:11.200 --> 00:13:17.200 When they are finally forced to admit that there is some damage, 00:13:17.200 --> 00:13:30.200 they traditionally have falsified the quantities of toxins or the intensity of the damage to be expected. 00:13:30.200 --> 00:13:41.200 In the story that Chris Busby is telling, the government falsified the Hiroshima, Nagasaki damage, 00:13:41.200 --> 00:13:50.200 over a hundredfold shrinkage of the actual damage produced over the years. 00:13:50.200 --> 00:13:56.200 So is this because the corporations are lobbying the government? 00:13:56.200 --> 00:14:01.200 Well, or owning the government. The lobbying reaches the point where they don't. 00:14:01.200 --> 00:14:07.200 It's not just lobbying. They actually own it. Yeah. And so then they get to make up the rules. 00:14:07.200 --> 00:14:16.200 Yeah. The people working for the government are assured that if they do favors for the industry, 00:14:16.200 --> 00:14:22.200 they can quit their job in a few years and go to work for the corporations for 10 times as much money. 00:14:22.200 --> 00:14:28.200 So it's slightly delayed bribery. Right. Internal gratification. 00:14:28.200 --> 00:14:33.200 All right. So in terms of exploring this precautionary principle, 00:14:33.200 --> 00:14:40.200 how do you think we can develop a safe innovations and without stifling progress 00:14:40.200 --> 00:14:45.200 or bring to market new ideas in a timely fashion without overregulation or bureaucracy, 00:14:45.200 --> 00:14:54.200 which is another factor that I believe this incoming administration has made a campaign point of stating. 00:14:54.200 --> 00:15:03.200 He wants to reduce regulations, wants to reduce paperwork, wants to make it easier to bring products to market. 00:15:03.200 --> 00:15:06.200 So what's the best way forward with this? 00:15:06.200 --> 00:15:13.200 Just imagining that he does not want to do anything that is dangerous and that he's not in it for money. 00:15:13.200 --> 00:15:20.200 With his kind of ethos, how does this play out safely? 00:15:20.200 --> 00:15:26.200 Information has to be available to the public. 00:15:26.200 --> 00:15:35.200 And that involves alternative scientific opinion being publishable. 00:15:35.200 --> 00:15:43.200 But when the journals are controlled by the industry, the what's available, for example, 00:15:43.200 --> 00:15:49.200 the interference by Monsanto with articles that have been critical, 00:15:49.200 --> 00:15:57.200 either stopping their publication or pressuring for the elimination, 00:15:57.200 --> 00:16:04.200 the retraction of already published articles. And in the case of health physics and radiation, 00:16:04.200 --> 00:16:14.200 the main journal, Journal of Health Physics, is really a house organ of the nuclear industry. 00:16:14.200 --> 00:16:21.200 The articles that are published are just outrageously favorable radiation, 00:16:21.200 --> 00:16:25.200 claiming that it's actually good for people to be irradiated. 00:16:25.200 --> 00:16:29.200 So there's a lot of collusion basically between the industry and government. 00:16:29.200 --> 00:16:30.200 And science. 00:16:30.200 --> 00:16:31.200 And science, yeah. 00:16:31.200 --> 00:16:33.200 It's all a ruse. 00:16:33.200 --> 00:16:38.200 Because a lot of the, and we've mentioned this many times about clinical trials being skewed, 00:16:38.200 --> 00:16:42.200 data being hidden, and then they brought out last month, didn't they, 00:16:42.200 --> 00:16:48.200 that Glaxo's kind of record settlement of three billion in compensation 00:16:48.200 --> 00:16:52.200 as a relatively small part of their income. 00:16:52.200 --> 00:17:00.200 And so it's really not in the interests of these companies to be so prudent 00:17:00.200 --> 00:17:10.200 because either the reparation is not high in contrast to the gross income of the business 00:17:10.200 --> 00:17:15.200 compared to what it would be if they had to make it safe and/or not produce it. 00:17:15.200 --> 00:17:21.200 And then there's all the lobbying that goes on between government and big corporations 00:17:21.200 --> 00:17:24.200 that, like you said, is very much an inside job. 00:17:24.200 --> 00:17:30.200 And if there isn't any truth in publication or a movement to provide the truth, 00:17:30.200 --> 00:17:33.200 and again, we have said this many times, that the Internet, I believe, 00:17:33.200 --> 00:17:40.200 is really making a difference to the world population's perception of what is true 00:17:40.200 --> 00:17:45.200 because there is plenty of information you can find in any argument. 00:17:45.200 --> 00:17:50.200 And ultimately, you know what, you begin to see what is the truthful side of what you might read. 00:17:50.200 --> 00:17:52.200 Well, that's getting changed too. 00:17:52.200 --> 00:17:55.200 I mean you try to find something on YouTube and you can hardly find it 00:17:55.200 --> 00:18:00.200 because there are advertising sites that try to tell you what they want to tell you 00:18:00.200 --> 00:18:03.200 or show you the part of the show they want you to see, not the whole thing. 00:18:03.200 --> 00:18:08.200 It's very much like what you said, and you have said it quite a few times in different parts of the show, 00:18:08.200 --> 00:18:13.200 when you used to read abstracts in the library of original research, 00:18:13.200 --> 00:18:16.200 it was all well and good because it was original research and there it was, 00:18:16.200 --> 00:18:18.200 but they started removing it from the libraries. 00:18:18.200 --> 00:18:23.200 And now you have a hard time finding it on a web search 00:18:23.200 --> 00:18:28.200 because those abstracts either haven't been reproduced or what you might find now, 00:18:28.200 --> 00:18:33.200 you're being directed to by certain algorithms that are now becoming fairly commonplace 00:18:33.200 --> 00:18:38.200 within Google's search terms or as we've heard about Facebook censoring now 00:18:38.200 --> 00:18:44.200 and they're using fairly complicated algorithms to produce the results they want. 00:18:44.200 --> 00:18:54.200 Everyone seems to trust PubMed, but years ago the librarian posted a notice for students 00:18:54.200 --> 00:18:58.200 to be aware that PubMed is not a science database. 00:18:58.200 --> 00:19:03.200 Meaning it's controlled by industry? 00:19:03.200 --> 00:19:05.200 Yes, it's an industry database. 00:19:05.200 --> 00:19:08.200 It's a government, military. 00:19:08.200 --> 00:19:17.200 I compared some articles that were listed in biological abstracts or chemical abstracts 00:19:17.200 --> 00:19:23.200 and then looked them up in the index Medicus or PubMed 00:19:23.200 --> 00:19:26.200 and the good articles were simply deleted. 00:19:26.200 --> 00:19:37.200 I would find a conventional mainstream idea article right next to it, a very good article. 00:19:37.200 --> 00:19:42.200 The bad article would be listed in PubMed, the good article wouldn't be. 00:19:42.200 --> 00:19:46.200 Now you said biological abstracts and the other one that you mentioned? 00:19:46.200 --> 00:19:47.200 Chemical abstracts. 00:19:47.200 --> 00:19:48.200 Chemical abstracts. 00:19:48.200 --> 00:19:52.200 So these are both searchable databases that anyone can look at now if they want to. 00:19:52.200 --> 00:19:54.200 They're very expensive to use. 00:19:54.200 --> 00:19:58.200 Are they a pay per publication type subscription? 00:19:58.200 --> 00:20:02.200 You can't subscribe and then have access to the library? 00:20:02.200 --> 00:20:11.200 If you get your library to subscribe and then are a member of the library, a staff or student, 00:20:11.200 --> 00:20:14.200 that's the only practical way to get in. 00:20:14.200 --> 00:20:17.200 And the library is unfortunately becoming a thing of the past, aren't they? 00:20:17.200 --> 00:20:19.200 Shame. 00:20:19.200 --> 00:20:23.200 Okay, well you're listening to Ask Herb Doctor on KMED Galbraithville 91.1 FM 00:20:23.200 --> 00:20:26.200 from 7.30 to the end of the show at 8 o'clock. 00:20:26.200 --> 00:20:29.200 You're invited to call in with any questions either related or unrelated 00:20:29.200 --> 00:20:34.200 to this month's continuing subject of the precautionary principle in food and medicine. 00:20:34.200 --> 00:20:42.200 The number if you live in the area, there's a temporary call-in number, 707-383-9007. 00:20:42.200 --> 00:20:51.200 Or if you're outside the 707 number, there's an 800 number which is 1-800-568-3723. 00:20:51.200 --> 00:21:00.200 So Dr. Peat, in terms of the-- I'm trying to think what is the best way of making this crooked road straight again 00:21:00.200 --> 00:21:03.200 in terms of-- it's always a case of just follow the money. 00:21:03.200 --> 00:21:07.200 If you want to know where something is going, follow the money because that's the only thing 00:21:07.200 --> 00:21:12.200 that people are ever really pursuing in business is the financial gain 00:21:12.200 --> 00:21:19.200 unless obviously they are PhD students who are doing theses and doing research 00:21:19.200 --> 00:21:23.200 that's hopefully not being tampered with or they're not being steered in a certain direction. 00:21:23.200 --> 00:21:29.200 Well, abstract should have-- I mean, fully referenced scientific publications should have the funding 00:21:29.200 --> 00:21:34.200 listed at the bottom and that gives you a cue to follow the money. 00:21:34.200 --> 00:21:42.200 So what would be the best way in terms of getting a system in place where we could free up the bureaucracy 00:21:42.200 --> 00:21:46.200 and the paperwork which is so apparent in Europe and the European Union? 00:21:46.200 --> 00:21:52.200 It's a complete mess and very difficult to do anything because of the bureaucratic nightmare of legislation. 00:21:52.200 --> 00:22:03.200 How do we get by the safety aspects of anything that is either food or medicine or devices that people use 00:22:03.200 --> 00:22:12.200 so that there can be a freely true open market and bringing product to market in a good time 00:22:12.200 --> 00:22:21.200 and having a mechanism in place where there is a disincentive to be dishonest and/or dangerous? 00:22:21.200 --> 00:22:42.200 Even though it would be nice to be able to use the courts and to have Congress enforce open information laws, 00:22:42.200 --> 00:22:54.200 in what they release under the Freedom of Information Act, if anyone has had an experience with trying to get information 00:22:54.200 --> 00:23:05.200 out of the FDA, for example, they first stall and then they censor what they send you, 00:23:05.200 --> 00:23:14.200 blocking out the essential parts or just saying that the information is no longer available. 00:23:14.200 --> 00:23:24.200 It would be nice if Congress could actually create a freedom of information that worked, 00:23:24.200 --> 00:23:36.200 but since that's fairly well proven not to work, I think it has to be something parallel. 00:23:36.200 --> 00:23:45.200 Using the internet for communication, for example, I think people have to create alternative institutions 00:23:45.200 --> 00:23:59.200 to sort of like WikiLeaks of science and consumer information, in which information that is more likely to be factual 00:23:59.200 --> 00:24:04.200 is made available to the general public. 00:24:04.200 --> 00:24:09.200 It makes me think about the First Amendment and the Freedom of Speech Association 00:24:09.200 --> 00:24:16.200 and how glaringly obviously important that is in terms of having a society that is not afraid to speak out. 00:24:16.200 --> 00:24:22.200 That obviously is something that is so suppressed in China, probably still in parts of Russia, 00:24:22.200 --> 00:24:28.200 and other stroke communist, stroke socialist dictatorships or tyrannies. 00:24:28.200 --> 00:24:33.200 When people feel that there is nothing to be lost by being truthful, 00:24:33.200 --> 00:24:38.200 then amongst the people the decision can be arrived that we don't want this anymore, 00:24:38.200 --> 00:24:44.200 this is not good, we don't agree with it, and that should bear out in a government response 00:24:44.200 --> 00:24:49.200 as a government is for the people, by the people, right, not to be telling the people what to do, 00:24:49.200 --> 00:24:51.200 but actually working for the people. 00:24:51.200 --> 00:24:58.200 So I think the whole dishonesty side of most of what goes on or can go on, 00:24:58.200 --> 00:25:03.200 I don't want to paint everybody with the same brush, but just to say that money totally is, 00:25:03.200 --> 00:25:07.200 truly the root or the love of money is totally the root of all evil. 00:25:07.200 --> 00:25:15.200 If there was more honesty and transparency that would itself cause more trustworthy business 00:25:15.200 --> 00:25:24.200 and more products that were for our good, that didn't have the same propensity to be dangerous. 00:25:24.200 --> 00:25:32.200 So getting on to both these two articles, one is Chris Busby's Euratom Clause. 00:25:32.200 --> 00:25:38.200 I just wanted to mention this is an excellent full report outlining the cover-up 00:25:38.200 --> 00:25:44.200 and the misinformation tactics used by government to hide the fact that the death of survivors 00:25:44.200 --> 00:25:49.200 of Hiroshima and Nagasaki is still ongoing and killing tens of thousands every year 00:25:49.200 --> 00:25:54.200 through cancers and genetic defects directly caused by radiation exposure 00:25:54.200 --> 00:25:59.200 and how this massive cover-up was done by the US government of all things 00:25:59.200 --> 00:26:05.200 in order to keep and maintain the illusion that nuclear weapons were a good thing 00:26:05.200 --> 00:26:10.200 and that we could use them tactically, wasn't a problem, but it was a very quick way 00:26:10.200 --> 00:26:16.200 to really bring a rapid close to a conflict because of its devastating effects 00:26:16.200 --> 00:26:22.200 when actually the truth behind that is so completely polar opposite. 00:26:22.200 --> 00:26:29.200 And then another publication by Dr. Ernest Sternglass, his work on no exposure 00:26:29.200 --> 00:26:32.200 as the only safe approach to radiation. 00:26:32.200 --> 00:26:36.200 For our listeners, his work can be seen by typing the search term 00:26:36.200 --> 00:26:40.200 "Nuclear Witness Dr. Ernest J. Sternglass" 00:26:40.200 --> 00:26:56.200 and you'll get a full list of publications at http://radiation.org/reading/ajsternglasspubs.html 00:26:56.200 --> 00:27:03.200 So I wanted just to bring out a couple of things that are just obviously out there 00:27:03.200 --> 00:27:07.200 as part and parcel of factual reporting. 00:27:07.200 --> 00:27:12.200 The UPI has stated now there's skyrocketing cancer cases in Fukushima. 00:27:12.200 --> 00:27:17.200 Associated Press have come out with an article alarming cancer rates after nuclear disaster. 00:27:17.200 --> 00:27:22.200 The Times has published child cancers up 5000% in Fukushima 00:27:22.200 --> 00:27:26.200 and then radiation doses may be considerably higher than estimated. 00:27:26.200 --> 00:27:31.200 Another thing closer to home here, before we get into some more of the things 00:27:31.200 --> 00:27:33.200 that you might want to bring out about Sternglass, 00:27:33.200 --> 00:27:38.200 I know there was an interesting part of his history there where there was an interesting discussion here 00:27:38.200 --> 00:27:41.200 with Albert Einstein as part of the article. 00:27:41.200 --> 00:27:45.200 But the spike in animal deformities on the West Coast soon after Fukushima 00:27:45.200 --> 00:27:49.200 and then hundreds of baby cows with distorted legs and other malformations. 00:27:49.200 --> 00:27:55.200 And just in February 2017 here, dead whales with a record high number of deaths in Hawaii 00:27:55.200 --> 00:27:58.200 and carcasses scattered throughout the islands in the Pacific 00:27:58.200 --> 00:28:02.200 with sick and starving animals a mystery to experts. 00:28:02.200 --> 00:28:07.200 Possible health effects in parentheses from Fukushima radiation off the coast blamed. 00:28:07.200 --> 00:28:12.200 And then also Fukushima's environmental catastrophe has only just begun 00:28:12.200 --> 00:28:15.200 with a massive increase in radiation being continually leaked into the Pacific 00:28:15.200 --> 00:28:20.200 being disclosed by TEPCO surprisingly in the last month. 00:28:20.200 --> 00:28:26.200 So in terms of the nuclear industry and the precautionary principle, 00:28:26.200 --> 00:28:31.200 I think Busby's got it right if he can get this to court safely 00:28:31.200 --> 00:28:36.200 and/or the European Union doesn't just dissolve like it sure looks like it's going to dissolve 00:28:36.200 --> 00:28:39.200 sometime soon here. 00:28:39.200 --> 00:28:46.200 How on earth can we really continue to defend nuclear energy 00:28:46.200 --> 00:28:52.200 in the presence of technologies like clean coal that were being rapidly shut down 00:28:52.200 --> 00:28:57.200 and made far too expensive to operate by the Obama administration 00:28:57.200 --> 00:29:01.200 in the light of it being a global warming issue 00:29:01.200 --> 00:29:05.200 when actually global warming is a huge misinformation campaign 00:29:05.200 --> 00:29:10.200 all based on carbon taxation as a form of lifelong taxation? 00:29:10.200 --> 00:29:16.200 Do you remember when the Three Mile Island reactor melted down? 00:29:16.200 --> 00:29:21.200 The public really started turning against nuclear energy 00:29:21.200 --> 00:29:26.200 because of the fear of a huge meltdown. 00:29:26.200 --> 00:29:31.200 Sternglass got in great trouble. 00:29:31.200 --> 00:29:38.200 The industry defamed him beginning even before that around 1970. 00:29:38.200 --> 00:29:43.200 They started saying he was totally uninformed and so on 00:29:43.200 --> 00:29:49.200 because he had the actual inside information showing that the government 00:29:49.200 --> 00:29:58.200 was underestimating, under-declaring the amount of radiation being released 00:29:58.200 --> 00:30:02.200 by hundreds of millions of times. 00:30:02.200 --> 00:30:12.200 Actually, more than a million times more was being released than the government claimed or admitted. 00:30:12.200 --> 00:30:20.200 And the nuclear industry, professionally, they taught everyone who worked in the nuclear industry 00:30:20.200 --> 00:30:30.200 that people like Sternglass and Goffman and Alice Stewart were simply incompetent. 00:30:30.200 --> 00:30:33.200 Even Linus Pauling was in trouble. 00:30:33.200 --> 00:30:40.200 He couldn't do the normal professional things because he was ostracized 00:30:40.200 --> 00:30:50.200 by other chemists and physicists because of his opposition to testing bombs in the atmosphere and so on. 00:30:50.200 --> 00:30:59.200 Part of the article of Sternglass is they mentioned the US Army's readiness 00:30:59.200 --> 00:31:07.200 to commit all of these underground explosions, and they were going to do hundreds of them, 00:31:07.200 --> 00:31:11.200 to create caverns in which they could store natural gas. 00:31:11.200 --> 00:31:14.200 And they started that. I think they did one. 00:31:14.200 --> 00:31:19.200 And the fallout from this was so great and the contamination was so great 00:31:19.200 --> 00:31:23.200 that it unfortunately couldn't be covered up. 00:31:23.200 --> 00:31:27.200 And I know they kind of had to stop that being pushed forward, 00:31:27.200 --> 00:31:32.200 but they were fully ready to commit hundreds of nuclear explosions 00:31:32.200 --> 00:31:37.200 to this one project up on the East Coast. 00:31:37.200 --> 00:31:47.200 That whole idea of atoms for peace, such as digging canals and producing natural gas release and so on, 00:31:47.200 --> 00:31:50.200 all of that was knowingly fraudulent. 00:31:50.200 --> 00:31:55.200 It wasn't just a failure to observe the precautionary principle. 00:31:55.200 --> 00:32:07.200 They knew they had the information right from the 1940s that small amounts of radiation caused infant deformities, 00:32:07.200 --> 00:32:14.200 stopped brain growth in the utero, caused birth defects of a great variety, 00:32:14.200 --> 00:32:16.200 but especially brain damage. 00:32:16.200 --> 00:32:28.200 They knew what it would do, but for their own purposes to be able to wage nuclear war, 00:32:28.200 --> 00:32:35.200 they promoted this idea that the bombs had a peaceful use, 00:32:35.200 --> 00:32:41.200 and that extended to the idea of producing cheap power 00:32:41.200 --> 00:32:47.200 without counting the cost of mining the uranium and processing it 00:32:47.200 --> 00:32:58.200 and killing the miners by breathing the radon and ingesting uranium and so on. 00:32:58.200 --> 00:33:10.200 The military created a myth of free energy and peaceful uses of the bombs. 00:33:10.200 --> 00:33:19.200 Because of the public turning against nuclear power in 1978 as a result of Three Mile Island, 00:33:19.200 --> 00:33:26.200 a process started in the Pentagon in which they had to revise, 00:33:26.200 --> 00:33:32.200 come out with something more scary than nuclear power. 00:33:32.200 --> 00:33:41.200 Just at the beginning of 1980, just a few months after Three Mile Island, 00:33:41.200 --> 00:33:49.200 they reversed a trend of predicting a new ice age, 00:33:49.200 --> 00:33:56.200 which had been the data from the late 1940s until 1979. 00:33:56.200 --> 00:33:59.200 They were predicting planetary cooling. 00:33:59.200 --> 00:34:08.200 But the Pentagon and the CIA came up with this idea of planetary warming a few months after the Three Mile Island. 00:34:08.200 --> 00:34:12.200 The nuclear power industry told them to do that, right? 00:34:12.200 --> 00:34:21.200 Yeah. Well, the military too, because they need the nuclear power as a source of fuel for the bombs. 00:34:21.200 --> 00:34:31.200 And so they invented planetary warming, totally reversing the preceding 30 years of climate study 00:34:31.200 --> 00:34:36.200 as a way to say there's something worse than nuclear power. 00:34:36.200 --> 00:34:45.200 If we don't use this clean, cheap energy, nuclear power will overheat the planet. 00:34:45.200 --> 00:34:47.200 And polar bears will die. 00:34:47.200 --> 00:34:54.200 And we won't take into consideration how many women, children and men die from radiation poisoning. 00:34:54.200 --> 00:35:03.200 Yeah. And then when Chernobyl exploded and the nuclear industry in this country, 00:35:03.200 --> 00:35:11.200 ever since then, 1986 to the present, have insisted that only a few dozen people were killed 00:35:11.200 --> 00:35:16.200 as a result of the Chernobyl meltdown. 00:35:16.200 --> 00:35:25.200 And the Russians who were best informed on the whole process of Chernobyl and the cleanup 00:35:25.200 --> 00:35:32.200 calculated that when they did the study, it's been about 10 years now, I think, 00:35:32.200 --> 00:35:43.200 up until that point, 985,000 premature deaths from cancer had already occurred from Chernobyl alone. 00:35:43.200 --> 00:35:49.200 And cancer is only one of the causes of death from radiation. 00:35:49.200 --> 00:35:59.200 So if you have a million people versus 30 deaths from the U.S. industry's perspective, 00:35:59.200 --> 00:36:06.200 that's again a hundred thousand fold difference. 00:36:06.200 --> 00:36:13.200 Well, again, I just want to say that it's very obvious to me, I mean, I'm only 51, 00:36:13.200 --> 00:36:21.200 so I haven't been around that long, but it's very obvious to me that there are cyclic events that happen. 00:36:21.200 --> 00:36:30.200 And I think it's analogous to the polyunsaturated fats that we first met you and talked to you with in 2007, 00:36:30.200 --> 00:36:38.200 that you were espousing polyunsaturated as really very bad, very damaging, very oxidizable, 00:36:38.200 --> 00:36:43.200 lipofuscin being a problem, thyroid suppression being a problem. 00:36:43.200 --> 00:36:48.200 And you've been saying that for a long time, you know, probably two or three decades. 00:36:48.200 --> 00:36:56.200 And only just maybe in the last year or two years has that revelation become a little bit more mainstream. 00:36:56.200 --> 00:37:07.200 Actually, my interest in that grew out of my interest in the radiation industry issue in the 1950s, 00:37:07.200 --> 00:37:19.200 because those are the fats that most break down and become toxic under the influence of radiation. 00:37:19.200 --> 00:37:28.200 And excess of polyunsaturated fats produces the same kind of damage that radiation injury does. 00:37:28.200 --> 00:37:37.200 And my interest in estrogen relates to that, because estrogen and ionizing radiation synergize. 00:37:37.200 --> 00:37:42.200 Each one produces the same sort of damage to the organism. 00:37:42.200 --> 00:37:48.200 And both of those converge on the polyunsaturated fats in the tissues. 00:37:48.200 --> 00:38:00.200 So really, the government has participated in obscuring simple biological or chemical processes in the organism, 00:38:00.200 --> 00:38:08.200 because each one impinges on some ulterior motive that the government and industry has. 00:38:08.200 --> 00:38:09.200 Absolutely good. 00:38:09.200 --> 00:38:14.200 Well, we have a couple of callers, but I just wanted to finish up by saying that that is coming around full circle now, 00:38:14.200 --> 00:38:18.200 where we see saturated fats being portrayed as actually very useful now, 00:38:18.200 --> 00:38:22.200 and polyunsaturated fats now being maligned the way it should have been. 00:38:22.200 --> 00:38:25.200 And we're talking about radiation now. 00:38:25.200 --> 00:38:30.200 We've done quite a few shows on radiation damage, and it's just up to people to be able to hear this, 00:38:30.200 --> 00:38:36.200 and get it into their minds, get it into their consciousness that we are the people, our voices do matter. 00:38:36.200 --> 00:38:40.200 All we have to do is just stand up and just say, "We don't want this." 00:38:40.200 --> 00:38:42.200 There are other alternatives that are much better and much safer, 00:38:42.200 --> 00:38:44.200 but it takes a free society to do that. 00:38:44.200 --> 00:38:52.200 You're not going to get that in communist China or countries that are controlled by their governments, right? 00:38:52.200 --> 00:38:56.200 That's what a free and open society is all about, 00:38:56.200 --> 00:39:03.200 where our voices are what direct the government to put things into place. 00:39:03.200 --> 00:39:07.200 Anyway, we have a couple of callers, so let's take this first caller. 00:39:07.200 --> 00:39:11.200 And caller, where are you from and what's your question? 00:39:11.200 --> 00:39:13.200 Hi, Cora, are you there? 00:39:13.200 --> 00:39:15.200 Is this me? 00:39:15.200 --> 00:39:16.200 Yes. 00:39:16.200 --> 00:39:19.200 Hi, I'm from the San Francisco Bay Area, 00:39:19.200 --> 00:39:23.200 and I found that as my hypothyroidism and estrogen dominance improves, 00:39:23.200 --> 00:39:25.200 things are less and less overwhelming. 00:39:25.200 --> 00:39:30.200 For example, I used to get anxious and overwhelmed with simple tasks like grocery shopping, 00:39:30.200 --> 00:39:35.200 and recently someone told me that I was using my health issues as an excuse for laziness. 00:39:35.200 --> 00:39:39.200 And so I was wondering, what are your thoughts on the concept of laziness? 00:39:39.200 --> 00:39:44.200 Interestingly, I'm the most productive when I feel very healthy, like when I eat well, sleep well, et cetera. 00:39:44.200 --> 00:39:45.200 Absolutely. 00:39:45.200 --> 00:39:48.200 Dr. Peat, would you like to answer that question? 00:39:48.200 --> 00:39:50.200 As an excuse for what? 00:39:50.200 --> 00:39:51.200 Laziness. 00:39:51.200 --> 00:40:00.200 Yeah, people, blaming people, saying, oh, you're just using your health problems as an excuse to be lazy and not work. 00:40:00.200 --> 00:40:15.200 I don't think I've ever run into anyone that had exactly that excuse. 00:40:15.200 --> 00:40:20.200 Well, I think what the caller was trying to put through was -- 00:40:20.200 --> 00:40:25.200 the way I interpret it straightaway was that when you are metabolically deficient, 00:40:25.200 --> 00:40:28.200 it has a psychological effect, and I think it's a very real effect. 00:40:28.200 --> 00:40:34.200 And so in terms of improving your metabolic health, everything improves with it. 00:40:34.200 --> 00:40:43.200 I think whether it's your thought processes, your recapitulation, or your accuracy and your performance, 00:40:43.200 --> 00:40:48.200 it's a bit like adaptogens, like the Russians did that research on the Lutheran and the ginsengs, 00:40:48.200 --> 00:40:54.200 as cognitive performance or cognitive enhancing products. 00:40:54.200 --> 00:40:59.200 No, when you're metabolically healthy, then you're definitely the most productive. 00:40:59.200 --> 00:41:10.200 The chronic fatigue syndrome for quite a few years was said to be a personality issue. 00:41:10.200 --> 00:41:12.200 Right, and fibromyalgia, I think they also put that down to -- 00:41:12.200 --> 00:41:18.200 But that's something that can actually be measured metabolically and hormonally and such. 00:41:18.200 --> 00:41:19.200 Absolutely. 00:41:19.200 --> 00:41:24.200 Okay, you're listening to Ask Urb Doctor on KMED Galbraithville, 91.1 FM. 00:41:24.200 --> 00:41:28.200 From now until the end of the show, 8 o'clock, you're invited to call in with any questions related 00:41:28.200 --> 00:41:32.200 or unrelated to this month's subject of the precautionary principle. 00:41:32.200 --> 00:41:36.200 If you live in the area, there's a toll-free number -- sorry, if you live in the area, 00:41:36.200 --> 00:41:41.200 there's a regular number, 707-383-9007. 00:41:41.200 --> 00:41:47.200 Or if you're outside the area, there's a toll-free number, 1-800-568-3723. 00:41:47.200 --> 00:41:49.200 So, Dr. Peat, we do have another call on the air. 00:41:49.200 --> 00:41:50.200 Let's take this next caller. 00:41:50.200 --> 00:41:54.200 Caller, where are you from, and what's your question? 00:41:54.200 --> 00:41:57.200 Hello? 00:41:57.200 --> 00:41:59.200 Engineer, do we have a caller? 00:41:59.200 --> 00:42:01.200 He might have gotten tired of waiting. 00:42:01.200 --> 00:42:02.200 I don't know. 00:42:02.200 --> 00:42:03.200 We hear him now. 00:42:03.200 --> 00:42:04.200 I think you're on the air now. 00:42:04.200 --> 00:42:09.200 Where are you from and what's your question? 00:42:09.200 --> 00:42:12.200 I did hear someone's voice, but they've gone again. 00:42:12.200 --> 00:42:16.200 Hi. 00:42:16.200 --> 00:42:19.200 I'm interested in two topics, if you have the time. 00:42:19.200 --> 00:42:28.200 The first question would be, is there an ideal body fat percentage to aim for? 00:42:28.200 --> 00:42:29.200 Right. 00:42:29.200 --> 00:42:32.200 And the second question would be related to sleep. 00:42:32.200 --> 00:42:33.200 What do we know? 00:42:33.200 --> 00:42:38.200 What does science tell us about how much sleep we really need? 00:42:38.200 --> 00:42:42.200 Maybe the sleeping positions. 00:42:42.200 --> 00:42:50.200 Is it smart to sleep just once at night? 00:42:50.200 --> 00:42:51.200 Okay. 00:42:51.200 --> 00:42:53.200 Where are you from? 00:42:53.200 --> 00:43:01.200 The deep sleep, how much time we need in deep sleep and such things. 00:43:01.200 --> 00:43:02.200 Sure. 00:43:02.200 --> 00:43:04.200 Where are you from? 00:43:04.200 --> 00:43:05.200 From Finland. 00:43:05.200 --> 00:43:06.200 Finland. 00:43:06.200 --> 00:43:08.200 You're calling from Finland now, eh? 00:43:08.200 --> 00:43:09.200 That's correct. 00:43:09.200 --> 00:43:11.200 It is now 5 a.m. 00:43:11.200 --> 00:43:12.200 And very dark. 00:43:12.200 --> 00:43:13.200 3 a.m. 00:43:13.200 --> 00:43:14.200 And very dark probably. 00:43:14.200 --> 00:43:15.200 Okay. 00:43:15.200 --> 00:43:18.200 Dr. Peat, what's the ideal body fat percentage? 00:43:18.200 --> 00:43:21.200 I guess that's probably the proportion of the height and everything else. 00:43:21.200 --> 00:43:24.200 And sleep. 00:43:24.200 --> 00:43:27.200 I know you've got a lot to say about how much sleep a person should get, 00:43:27.200 --> 00:43:31.200 but would you start with what you think an ideal body fat percentage should be? 00:43:31.200 --> 00:43:36.200 I think it varies according to gender and age. 00:43:36.200 --> 00:43:46.200 For example, young women who are overweight have a better outcome of breast cancer, 00:43:46.200 --> 00:43:50.200 a lower incidence of breast cancer, than those who are underweight. 00:43:50.200 --> 00:43:53.200 And what age are you saying young women? 00:43:53.200 --> 00:43:55.200 Oh, in the 20s and 30s. 00:43:55.200 --> 00:44:06.200 And one of the greatest increases in cancer is occurring among women between the ages of 25 00:44:06.200 --> 00:44:08.200 and the early 30s. 00:44:08.200 --> 00:44:15.200 It's tripled in the last 30 or 40 years in that age group. 00:44:15.200 --> 00:44:26.200 But because of that relationship, it's better for a young woman to be on the plump side. 00:44:26.200 --> 00:44:28.200 With saturated fats, sir. 00:44:28.200 --> 00:44:31.200 Yeah, with a good diet. 00:44:31.200 --> 00:44:44.200 And then in older people, being somewhat leaner for women is reducing the risk of breast cancer. 00:44:44.200 --> 00:44:53.200 But in old people in general, mortality is lower with heavier body weight. 00:44:53.200 --> 00:44:57.200 They just have greater resistance to stresses. 00:44:57.200 --> 00:45:04.200 So you have to look at the individual and their age and gender. 00:45:04.200 --> 00:45:14.200 Overall, mortality goes down in the old people who are slightly on the heavy side. 00:45:14.200 --> 00:45:20.200 So it's very much relative to age then and age and gender because obviously that percentage will change then. 00:45:20.200 --> 00:45:26.200 I thought you said that older people who are slightly more plump have a decreased mortality. 00:45:26.200 --> 00:45:37.200 Yeah, same with increased cholesterol and a slight increase of blood pressure in the old age is good. 00:45:37.200 --> 00:45:42.200 What do you think that body fat percentage would be though, 20%, 24%? 00:45:42.200 --> 00:45:44.200 I think a little higher. 00:45:44.200 --> 00:45:46.200 That's pretty low. 00:45:46.200 --> 00:45:47.200 Okay. 00:45:47.200 --> 00:45:48.200 That's too low, huh? 00:45:48.200 --> 00:45:52.200 I remember when I was 19, I think I had it measured at 19%. 00:45:52.200 --> 00:45:53.200 Okay. 00:45:53.200 --> 00:45:57.200 I don't think you'd ever be able to get pregnant at 19%. 00:45:57.200 --> 00:45:59.200 So how about 30%? 00:45:59.200 --> 00:46:02.200 Yeah, I think 30% is a good average. 00:46:02.200 --> 00:46:03.200 Alright. 00:46:03.200 --> 00:46:05.200 And now how about your recommendations for sleep? 00:46:05.200 --> 00:46:09.200 I know you're a good advocate of getting enough rest. 00:46:09.200 --> 00:46:10.200 The timing also. 00:46:10.200 --> 00:46:13.200 And the quality of the sleep is the thing. 00:46:13.200 --> 00:46:22.200 Your blood sugar has to stay fairly steady, not drop too much during the night. 00:46:22.200 --> 00:46:37.200 Otherwise, the deep sleep is diminished and the lighter phase of sleep in which you don't really repair your tissues becomes, 00:46:37.200 --> 00:46:51.200 for example, in a low thyroid person, they might spend 8 or 10 hours in bed semi-sleeping but wake up feeling fatigued and stiff and so on. 00:46:51.200 --> 00:47:02.200 And the level of blood sugar and metabolic rate are the main things that allow the deep and restful sleep. 00:47:02.200 --> 00:47:07.200 The turnover of the brain tissue is very great during the night. 00:47:07.200 --> 00:47:19.200 And that's one of the places where polyunsaturated fats in your, for example, your thighs and abdomen, during the night, 00:47:19.200 --> 00:47:27.200 those are released into the bloodstream and whatever is in the bloodstream gets built into the brain structure. 00:47:27.200 --> 00:47:35.200 And you get this terrific turnover constantly during the night of the brain substance. 00:47:35.200 --> 00:47:43.200 So you want to keep your free fatty acids fairly low during the night by keeping your blood sugar up. 00:47:43.200 --> 00:47:50.200 And so having carbohydrates close to bedtime protects the quality of sleep. 00:47:50.200 --> 00:48:02.200 I've studied people with cirrhosis of the liver who did much better on all their tests if they had a fairly big dose of any carbohydrate, 00:48:02.200 --> 00:48:07.200 sugar or rice, for example, at bedtime. 00:48:07.200 --> 00:48:18.200 And the breakdown that happens with aging primarily happens during the night, the calcium loss from the bones. 00:48:18.200 --> 00:48:28.200 It's essentially all in the morning urine or the night urine because that's when the stress hormones rise and cause the turnover. 00:48:28.200 --> 00:48:42.200 So if you can take advantage of that rapid turnover, if your stores of glycogen are high enough to keep the free fatty acids down. 00:48:42.200 --> 00:48:51.200 Okay, good. So I think you like to suggest that 10 hours is really not too much sleep. 00:48:51.200 --> 00:48:56.200 No, but you probably don't need that much if it's efficient sleep. 00:48:56.200 --> 00:49:09.200 But 10 hours is fine if it's cyclic, if you're going through the deep sleep and then the slight arousal and then back into the deep sleep. 00:49:09.200 --> 00:49:17.200 But I think it should be more than six hours for almost everyone. 00:49:17.200 --> 00:49:28.200 I think Nicola was thinking about perhaps your comments on the "neanderthal sleep patterns" where we'd actually wake up, 00:49:28.200 --> 00:49:33.200 or maybe not even neanderthal, but maybe not quite so far back in history as that, 00:49:33.200 --> 00:49:41.200 where they say that humans used to go through two or three sleep cycles in a night and that actually was quite normal. 00:49:41.200 --> 00:49:47.200 And actually now what we do, we go to bed at 10 or 11 and we don't wake up to 7, is actually being abnormal. 00:49:47.200 --> 00:49:55.200 Yeah, in the long winter or the night darkness would be stressful. 00:49:55.200 --> 00:50:06.200 But if they wake up and have a lunch in the middle of the night, that replenishes their glycogen stores and makes the night much less stressful. 00:50:06.200 --> 00:50:09.200 Right, okay. So it's all about how much sugar storage you have. 00:50:09.200 --> 00:50:14.200 And you know you're not storing your sugar if you wake up at 3 a.m. and can't go back to sleep. 00:50:14.200 --> 00:50:16.200 There you go. That's a cue. 00:50:16.200 --> 00:50:24.200 Doctors used to be very negative about night eaters, like it was some kind of abnormality. 00:50:24.200 --> 00:50:31.200 But the studies in the last five years or so show that it's very protective. 00:50:31.200 --> 00:50:32.200 Excellent. 00:50:32.200 --> 00:50:36.200 And haven't you said too, Dr. Peat, that no one should get up before 8 o'clock? 00:50:36.200 --> 00:50:38.200 I think so. 00:50:38.200 --> 00:50:40.200 I like to quote that. 00:50:40.200 --> 00:50:46.200 If you're in the area, the 707 number, 707-383-9007. 00:50:46.200 --> 00:50:51.200 Or if you want a call toll free, 1-800-568-3723. 00:50:51.200 --> 00:50:53.200 We've got them to the top of the hour here. 00:50:53.200 --> 00:50:56.200 And I haven't ever met a night worker who is healthy. 00:50:56.200 --> 00:51:00.200 But I could still meet one. I'm not saying it's not possible. 00:51:00.200 --> 00:51:02.200 How about that is the question. 00:51:02.200 --> 00:51:19.200 It's a little bit unrelated, but in terms of night shifts and the total imbalance of circadian rhythm and night and day and pineal gland involvement with serotonin and sleep and everything else. 00:51:19.200 --> 00:51:21.200 What do you think about people doing night shifts? 00:51:21.200 --> 00:51:28.200 It's very bad for the health, increases the cancer incidence, for example. 00:51:28.200 --> 00:51:34.200 I think it's very important to avoid it when it's possible. 00:51:34.200 --> 00:51:35.200 Yeah. Okay. 00:51:35.200 --> 00:51:36.200 All right. 00:51:36.200 --> 00:51:37.200 I think we do have somebody calling in here. 00:51:37.200 --> 00:51:41.200 So let's just see if this call is actually a call. 00:51:41.200 --> 00:51:56.200 I was going to question a little bit if we didn't get any more calls about clinical trials and how -- because I know that you've certainly got experience with publishing material and the whole clinical trial basis and the mechanisms. 00:51:56.200 --> 00:51:57.200 But anyway, we have a caller here. 00:51:57.200 --> 00:51:58.200 So let's take this next caller. 00:51:58.200 --> 00:52:00.200 Call away from and what's your question? 00:52:00.200 --> 00:52:02.200 Hi. San Francisco Bay Area. 00:52:02.200 --> 00:52:07.200 I just called, but Sarah just mentioned that Dr. Peat said before that you shouldn't wake up after 8. 00:52:07.200 --> 00:52:08.200 Can you elaborate on that? 00:52:08.200 --> 00:52:10.200 I've never heard of that before. 00:52:10.200 --> 00:52:11.200 Dr. Peat. 00:52:11.200 --> 00:52:14.200 Or you should wake up after 8, I think. 00:52:14.200 --> 00:52:15.200 Right. 00:52:15.200 --> 00:52:18.200 Yeah, you shouldn't get up before 8 o'clock in the morning. 00:52:18.200 --> 00:52:26.200 And, Dr. Peat, is that because of cortisol levels that are very high at the early hours of the morning and if you try to do much, it's a real strain on your system? 00:52:26.200 --> 00:52:27.200 Yeah. 00:52:27.200 --> 00:52:39.200 For example, people who would go for a jog first thing in the morning without eating, they looked at their blood cells and their chromosomes in their white blood cells were broken. 00:52:39.200 --> 00:52:56.200 And if they ate and then did their run, there was no chromosome damage and that same morning susceptibility to stress shows up in the mortality. 00:52:56.200 --> 00:53:01.200 There's a morning peak in death from strokes and heart attacks. 00:53:01.200 --> 00:53:09.200 The blood is thicker in the morning and the cortisol is at its daytime peak. 00:53:09.200 --> 00:53:13.200 So people are relatively fragile in the morning. 00:53:13.200 --> 00:53:17.200 That's why you don't want to jump in a hot shower first thing in the morning before eating either. 00:53:17.200 --> 00:53:18.200 Right? 00:53:18.200 --> 00:53:20.200 Doesn't that lower blood sugar? 00:53:20.200 --> 00:53:21.200 Yeah. 00:53:21.200 --> 00:53:22.200 Okay. 00:53:22.200 --> 00:53:27.200 So let me ask you in the six minutes or so that we have until the top of the hour. 00:53:27.200 --> 00:53:55.200 About the clinical trials and in terms of published work, I think because like you said, you know, the only real reliable source of information if you can afford it or if you can get a library to join to find real, well I say real, but unbiased publications is the biological abstracts or chemical abstracts. 00:53:55.200 --> 00:54:10.200 In terms of pharmaceutical companies falsifying data and I know when I've questioned you about various abstracts and you've told me, well, that means this or this means that and otherwise actually not, it's not actually the way to interpret that. 00:54:10.200 --> 00:54:11.200 This is what they're trying to do. 00:54:11.200 --> 00:54:35.200 Is there any way, is there any way, any easy way for people to find, I don't know, glaring mistakes in clinical trials or information about clinical trials that will help find more accurate information about it or is it just completely sewn up by the companies doing the trials? 00:54:35.200 --> 00:54:50.200 If you think of propaganda analysis when you're reading a science paper, you have to think about everything that they can do wrong. 00:54:50.200 --> 00:55:07.200 Sometimes I see a paper with fairly good conclusions in which they did everything wrong, but doing those wrong techniques, it makes it a pretty subjective thing. 00:55:07.200 --> 00:55:32.200 You can come up with almost any conclusion you want if you're using crazy techniques and when you, for example, dissociate brain cells and put them in culture and if you separate mitochondria and do techniques such as the patch clamp recording, 00:55:32.200 --> 00:55:49.200 a special way of recording electrical activity, there are things that have absolutely no physiological real meaning that are very customary in the research papers. 00:55:49.200 --> 00:56:12.200 So you have to look for connections, how they can connect that to what's happening in the real organism and if you look at studies on animals, they can do things to animals, the intact animal that you can't do to a person and so you can get very good information. 00:56:12.200 --> 00:56:30.200 If you use an animal that's a good model of a person, but if you use, for example, a rodent with its night cycle and forget what time of day you're doing the experiment, they're stressed. 00:56:30.200 --> 00:56:44.200 If they're a nocturnal animal and you do experiments during the daytime when they normally would be sleeping, you have to look at whether the animal is a good model of the person. 00:56:44.200 --> 00:57:10.200 But typically someone with an ulterior motive will use exactly those tricks of putting an animal in stress and claiming that it's a good model or choosing an animal that has an opposite reaction, for example, to cortisol and estrogen. 00:57:10.200 --> 00:57:23.200 Much of the estrogen industry is based on the claims about the estrogen and bone health based on rodents. 00:57:23.200 --> 00:57:30.200 They have been doing studies in dogs and they found that estrogen damaged their bones. 00:57:30.200 --> 00:57:37.200 They gave up the dog studies and went to rodents because they could get opposite results. 00:57:37.200 --> 00:57:43.200 Let's hold you there, Dr. Peat. I do appreciate you bringing that out, but let me get people your information. 00:57:43.200 --> 00:57:53.200 Well, I just want to say one thing. Well, Dr. Peat, that's why we need you to help us sort out all this information because you have such a long history of looking at it and figuring it out. 00:57:53.200 --> 00:57:59.200 We really need you to help keep helping us, Dr. Peat. So I hope you stay alive for another 30 years. 00:57:59.200 --> 00:58:02.200 I'm praying. 00:58:02.200 --> 00:58:05.200 I bet you are. All right. Well, thanks so much for your time, Dr. Peat. 00:58:05.200 --> 00:58:06.200 Thank you. 00:58:06.200 --> 00:58:11.200 Okay. For those people who've listened to the show, thanks for calling in. It's always good to get callers from other countries. 00:58:11.200 --> 00:58:16.200 Normally, the East Coast is pretty cool and then when we get some of them out of the country, that's great. 00:58:16.200 --> 00:58:21.200 If you want to know more, www.raypeat.com. 00:58:21.200 --> 00:58:32.200 Let me just reiterate the two people that we were studying, Chris Busby, B-U-S-B-Y, URATOM, E-U-R-A-T-O-M, URATOM clause. 00:58:32.200 --> 00:58:43.200 And also do go and have a look at Dr. Ernest Sternglass's work. It's a very interesting section there on Einstein and his meeting with Einstein. 00:58:43.200 --> 00:58:48.200 Anyway, there's the glitch on the CD, folks. So we've got to get that sorted out for next month. 00:58:48.200 --> 00:58:50.200 My name's Andrew Murray. 00:58:50.200 --> 00:58:53.200 My name's Sarah Johanneson Murray. Thanks for listening and have a good night. 00:58:53.200 --> 00:58:55.200 Yeah. Bye-bye.