Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

March 23, 2018 - Health Ranger - Mike Adams

13:10

Arsenic in California wine MEDIA HOAX exposed

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	On March 22, 2015, the mainstream media ran with a scare story that claimed California wines were contaminated with high levels of the toxic element known as arsenic.
	Mainstream media stories in USA Today and New York Daily News, CBS News, San Francisco Gate, and many other outlets claimed that this arsenic that was detected in California wine was present at alarmingly high levels even dangerous levels, that might be dangerous to human health.
	This is the same media that has long insisted that mercury in vaccines, and it is still present in flu shots, by the way, that are given to children and expectant mothers in the United States, the media insists that these flu shots contain a safe level of mercury because the amount of mercury in the flu shot is so small, they say.
	So arsenic in California wine is very high, we're told, and it's dangerous.
	And mercury in vaccines is very low, we're told, which is why it's safe.
	So, what is the actual concentration of arsenic in California wine or mercury in vaccines?
	The answer will shock you, because you've been lied to.
	In truth, the highest level of arsenic that was found in the California wines was 50 parts per billion.
	That wasn't even the average level, that was just the highest.
	The average was much lower.
	50 parts per billion?
	Is a very, very tiny quantity.
	And let me explain it this way.
	A part per million is obviously one millionth of something.
	And a part per billion is one one-thousandth of a part per million.
	So it's very, very small.
	But we're told that it's very dangerous.
	And that, again, mercury in vaccines is safe because, well, it's small.
	So what's the concentration of mercury in a flu shot?
	It's 50,000 parts per billion, or about 50 parts per million.
	So the concentration of mercury in a flu shot is 1,000 times higher than the concentration of arsenic that was found in the highest sample of California wine.
	Now, you may wonder, how is it that the mainstream media can say that 50 parts per billion of arsenic is Dangerous in California wine, while 50,000 parts per billion, that is a thousand times higher, concentration of mercury in vaccines is totally safe to inject into the bodies of infants, children, and even expectant mothers.
	Now you may be even more curious when you consider the fact that vaccines are injected into the body, which is orders of magnitude more toxic than swallowing something when you're dealing with a toxic substance.
	Injecting it is obviously putting it directly into the body's tissues, whereas swallowing it or chewing something It allows the body to potentially pass some of it through without it being absorbed into the bloodstream.
	But in a vaccine, everything that gets injected into that child gets absorbed into the body because it bypasses digestion and bypasses the skin.
	Now, furthermore, you may also realize that mercury is orders of magnitude more toxic to human biology than arsenic.
	In fact, when we're dealing with foods and beverages and environmental samples, arsenic is the least toxic of what's called the big four in scientific circles.
	And I am the lab director of an ICP-MS lab that conducts elemental analysis at parts per billion concentrations.
	And I look for lots of different elements, but the big four that are most interesting to people are lead, cadmium, mercury, and arsenic.
	And out of that list, arsenic is the least toxic.
	In fact, I'm the creator of LowHeavyMetalsVerified.org, which shows a relative safety chart and a classification system that I invented in 2014 after documenting lead in organic brown rice protein products.
	I also found cadmium in cacao superfoods and lead in ginkgo biloba and tungsten in rice protein.
	And in that research, I also looked at common seaweeds such as wakame and kombu, nori and kelp.
	And I found that the level of arsenic in these seaweeds was, get this, not just...
	50 parts per billion as was found in the California wine.
	Not even 500 parts per billion or 5,000 parts per billion, but in fact 100,000 parts per billion.
	So I've documented levels of arsenic in seaweed that's 2,000 times higher than what was found in the California wine.
	Now here's the interesting part.
	The mainstream media and scientific community both seem to insist that toxic elements are extremely toxic when they're found in foods or beverages, but then they are magically transmuted into non-toxic substances when they are inserted into vaccines.
	This is a sort of magical wishful thinking.
	A virus of the mind, if you will, that has infected our modern culture, where you'll see members of the press talking about the dangers of mercury in tuna fish, but the safety of mercury when injected in children in the form of vaccines.
	We'll talk about the dangers of very, very low levels of arsenic in wine, as we've discussed here, but then the safety of a thousand times higher concentrations of mercury in a vaccine.
	And all this leads to the absurd conclusion that, according to the mainstream media, The only safe way to consume California wine would be to inject it in the form of a vaccine because then the arsenic that it contains would be magically transmuted into an inert and harmless heavy metal as is all mercury in vaccines according to the media.
	Now here's another interesting angle in all of this.
	Anyone who actually conducts real science to look at the composition of vaccines, as I have done in the ICP-MS laboratory, is accused of being anti-science when you discover alarmingly high levels of toxic heavy metals in those vaccines.
	You can find mercury and aluminum in vaccines.
	In fact, you can find aluminum at very, very high levels, much higher than the mercury.
	You'll find aluminum at over 500 parts per million in some vaccines.
	So the scientific scrutiny of a vaccine is considered anti-science.
	But the scientific scrutiny of California wine is not.
	So the fascinating thing here is that you are considered, or even labeled, either anti-science or pro-science, not based on the fact that you're following a scientific method using a scientific instrument, scientific methodology, in a scientific laboratory, but rather it is entirely determined by what substance you are testing.
	If you're testing a vaccine, you're labeled anti-science.
	If you're testing red wine in California, you're labeled pro-science.
	Now keep in mind that the instrument you're using, the ICP-MS, inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry, I use an Agilent 7700X instrument.
	The instrument doesn't know what it's testing.
	The instrument is measuring the masses, atomic masses, through a process that is entirely driven by the laws of physics and the boundaries of modern science.
	The instrument doesn't know what it's testing.
	You don't tell it this is a vaccine or this is wine.
	The instrument just tells you what it sees.
	The instrument is unbiased.
	But the media is entirely biased.
	Because if I announced in a press release that I had found 50,000 parts per billion of mercury in a wine product, that would be global headline news everywhere.
	And there would be calls to pull those wine products off the shelf because they pose a danger to the public.
	But if I ran a headline, a news story, that said I found 50,000 parts per billion of mercury in a vaccine, that story would be entirely censored.
	Not one mainstream media outlet would cover it.
	Because toxic elements don't count, you see, when they're found in vaccines.
	And the upshot is that while the media goes hysterical over 50 parts per billion of arsenic in California wine, the media goes silent over 50,000 parts per billion of mercury in a vaccine.
	The media's reporting to you isn't backed by science, it turns out.
	You are told what to believe, what to fear, what to trust, based entirely on a fictional narrative that has nothing whatsoever to do with actual reality or scientific facts.
	You are told to fear California wine, but to embrace vaccines, even though the scientific data utterly contradict each other.
	So be cautious when you hear the media telling you to be afraid of something or to trust something, that something is safe or something is dangerous.
	When it comes to elemental composition, I've seen the media completely whitewash, censor, and ignore stories of substances that were heavily contaminated.
	I'm talking about foods, for example, that are over 10 parts per million.
	Lead, that's over 10,000 parts per billion.
	While at the same time the media will run scare stories and create mass hysteria over substances or items that are perfectly safe.
	Bottom line, what can you really trust?
	Well, I've tested literally thousands of food samples for toxic heavy metals, including for arsenic.
	And what I've found is a very interesting and useful pattern.
	The pattern is as follows.
	Almost everything produced in California has virtually no contamination.
	California has strong environmental controls.
	And here I'm talking about heavy metals, by the way, not pesticides or GMOs or other chemicals.
	I'm just talking about heavy metals here.
	California produces clean food in terms of heavy metals.
	So does Canada.
	So does the European Union, where, in fact, heavy metals limits are far more strict due to EU requirements compared to the United States, where the FDA has virtually no limit on heavy metals contamination of foods.
	The products that are contaminated with toxic heavy metals come from China and India for the most part.
	China is the worst offender.
	If you're buying organic rice protein from China, you might want to take a closer look at its elemental composition.
	Find out how much lead or cadmium is present in that product.
	If you're buying superfood powders that are grown in China, or even Thailand in some cases, or turmeric herbs from India, or spices that come from India, which is where most spices come from, that are sold in the grocery stores across America, You'll find that many of those are very heavily contaminated with lead and cadmium, sometimes even mercury, sometimes even arsenic.
	We find high levels of toxic heavy metals in many tea products, especially when those teas are imported from India or China, as many of them are.
	If you'd like to learn the truth and stay informed about toxic heavy metals in consumer products just visit my website labs.naturalnews.com where I run the I think it's the world's only privately owned laboratory that's owned by a news publisher where we conduct research and publish results in the public interest to help save lives and help people avoid exposure to toxic metals
	that might harm their health.
	But as far as California wine goes, I would have no hesitation whatsoever drinking a glass of that wine even if I knew it contained 50 parts per billion of arsenic.
	That level is not on my radar of concern.
	I would be far more concerned about going to Whole Foods and purchasing tea products or spices or rice protein products imported from China or India which contain high levels of lead.
	But you won't see that story in the mainstream media.
	So check out naturalnews.com for truthful scientific reporting on food contamination that you won't find anywhere else.
	Thanks for listening.

▲