CELL PHONE RADIATION

INTERVIEW WITH DR NICK BEGICH:          WWW.GLOBALREPORT2010.COM

INTERVIEW TRANSCRIPT

Regina Meredith: We, once again, had the opportunity to catch up with Nick Begich for an update on some of the technologies on the horizon. In this interview Nick speaks further about the Verichip and what that means to our lives. He also shares information regarding Quantum Computing, a reality that he says is just around the corner. These two technologies not only will make us easy marks for influencing our consumer choices, but also have a much more insidious potential.

Regina Meredith: I think it is very appropriate to keep up the conversation about cell phones and really take it even deeper because it is becoming a big issue. I think all of us personally know multiple people now who have died of brain tumors.

Nick Begich: Right. In fact, this is an ongoing controversy. You know it started, if you remember, with the very first reports of brain tumors. It came out of Florida; Congress got involved; they got very excited; they got Motorola and the industry to actually fund a study that was over 25 million dollars, five years. They hired Dr. George Carlo, actually, to conduct that study. And the odd thing was—you normally think about scientific studies being hooked up to an engineering team or a scientific team—in this case they were connected to the chief lobbyist for the industry in Washington D.C.

Regina Meredith: That’s nice.

Nick Begich: Because it really wasn’t about science, it was about politics. So, what the industry did is he spend five years, hired the best people in the world, put together his report. Motorola and others came out with that report saying see, everything is safe; everything is wonderful. And, Dr. Carlo, who is one of my heroes, had the integrity to stand up and say, “No, that is not what I said.” And then he published a book called, Cell Phones: The Invisible Hazards. It actually lays out the framework for not just tumor formation, but the breakdown of the blood/brain barrier. He put together a very good model that would explain what we are seeing in the research regarding the wireless world, particularly cell phones. What we are going to see is something that goes far beyond what we saw in the Tobacco Industry in terms of potential litigation in the future, particularly Third-Party Litigation. This is where employers, as a condition of employment, require their employees to use these phones consistently and constantly during the day. Eventually that’s going to probably breed some of the biggest Worker’s Compensation cases, Third- Party Litigation because of the health effects that are being widely reported today.

Regina Meredith: This begs the question—there are technologies out there, and you have basically put your stamp of approval on a couple of them—that start knocking out some of those frequencies that certainly lessen the impact of cell phones. Why would these companies not start investing hugely in these technologies?

Nick Begich: This is a great question because it has been asked before, and actually right after Carlo came out with his report at the last count we found 12 U.S. Patents where the industry had, in fact, redesigned circuitry to be safer. Although, they still maintain their perfectly safe. The thing is if you acknowledge there has been a safety issue, then you open the door immediately to the liability of everything that has happened before. And, this is something that we, as a public, should get involved in, because we need to provide a framework where industry, when the research comes out, that they can come forward and acknowledge it. And, as long as they are acknowledging the research, we should limit their liability because they didn’t do it, unless it is in bad faith. Like what we saw with the Tobacco Industry where the science started to emerge and they suppressed that science. Now, in that case, I say bankrupt the industry if they hide that science. But, if they are open, and they are open and they are honest and they make those corrective moves, there are lots that we can do. But, it requires a different kind of regulatory environment that encourages industry to be honest, to be upfront, and to take advantage of the kinds of principles applied in Europe—the Precautionary Principle, where when the information first starts to arise we alert the public, we take the appropriate actions, and if we are wrong there is nothing lost in that; but, if we are right there is everything gained by that. In the 30 years plus that the Europeans have applied this principle in health and environmental issues, they have never once—never once been wrong.

Regina Meredith: Let’s talk a little bit about the Scandinavian Cell Study just to get a little more depth to the physical aspects.

Nick Begich: This is interesting. Nokia was really a leader in the first, and they are a Finnish company; everybody thinks they are a Japanese firm because of the way it sounds, but it is Finnish company. So, the Scandinavians have the longest historical use. And you want to look at a population that has a reasonable number in the population across socioeconomic boundaries, rural, urban and for enough time. So, there they had at least five or six years of pretty intense cell phone use when this study was done. When this study was done it involved 15,000 people, which statistically is a very fine model; in fact, a very good model. And, in that they found that people that use the phones for over an hour a day, which is pretty routine these days, had a number of symptoms. The things they that were widely reported were heating behind the ears, first, short-term memory loss, appetite changes, sleep pattern disruptions, sex drive disruptions. Those were the widest reported kind of consequences. What they found in the study is it tended to be cumulative—the more you used it, the more susceptible to this you become, the more weakened your system becomes. There have been other studies more recently, in fact there is a study ongoing right now that is scheduled to end in 25 years, which will be a little late.

Regina Meredith: Yeah, a little late!

Nick Begich: Because by then this technology will have been replaced by who-knows-what in 25 years. I mean that’s almost like going back to the Telegraph. I mean it just doesn’t work. But this is how they design these in the U.S., and when you look at the things that are coming out more recently–in the last month we had the German Environmental Health Ministry came out and was giving warnings on WiFi, saying that they are not going into public schools because of the risks associate with them; they have given the warning to the public that these have potential risks, again, under the Precautionary Principle, which has never been wrong. Germans are not some slouch country. I mean they are very sophisticated.

Regina Meredith: They are not sloppy in research.

Nick Begich: And very thorough and precise in their research. When the Germans say there is a problem, we better all be paying attention. The Swiss actually acknowledge this problem. Swiss Reinsurance, one of the biggest insurance groups in the world in terms of making recommendations to the Insurance Industry so they avoid troubled waters, wrote a publication that is available on the Internet called, Electro smog. Electro smog is a concept, and what they said is don’t underwrite the risks of radiation or electromagnetic field effects; don’t underwrite those risks because they believe it would bankrupt the Insurance Industry globally.

Regina Meredith: So, in plain English for anybody listening that means they find them simply too dangerous to underwrite because it is going to be absolute that there is going to be one law suit after another.

Nick Begich: They are convinced of it, and even Lloyds of London, which will insure anything, won’t insure cell phone radiation risk. That should tell us something. If they won’t take the financial risk, why should we take the health risk? We need to look at the ways to utilize cell phones in a more sensible way, because we can. I mean they are not going away. But, the wireless component is something that is going to become increasingly intrusive. I think about my home environment. Within my home environment I have six wireless networks and none of them are mine. But they all intrude upon my property and upon my airspace and upon my home. Do I have a right to sue my neighbors for inflicting that on me? When the science is in I will, because it is an intrusion on my personal space and my life. When you think about Cell Phone Towers, and there has been research on this in Europe, within 1,500 meters of Cell Phone Towers they noted distinct changes in the genetic character of [developing] embryos. Now, this was done with animal species, but genetics are genetics. What we are talking about here is manipulating genetic material in a way that causes deformation. Now, when you start to think about cell phones, and cell phone use, it is not just the system you put on your head, it is the entire system of broadcasting that we need to be concerned with. Then that extends into the wireless world, and it also extends into the home portable phones, which people generally don’t even think about when they think about cell phone safety. But the portable phones tend to be even more poorly 3 designed and more poorly engineered so they end up using energy much more inefficiently, which means that the energy is transiting somewhere, and a lot of it is transiting directly into your head. The other thing that is important is with children. With an adult when you put it up to your head you have a skull thickness and you have tissue that offers some resistance to the signal transfer. With a five- year-old 400% more energy transfers into the brain because of skull thickness than an adult. With a ten- year-old 200 % percent more energy transits into the brain than an adult. So, when you think about cell phones being marketed to children, it is not done in Europe in most of the European countries. They don’t put Mickey Mouse characters on cell phones.

Regina Meredith: Right!

Nick Begich: In fact, in Great Britain every year in August they warn families if your kids are under 16, try and avoid cell phones, before they go back to school. So, these aren’t going away, and at the same time there is gaining recognition that there is a problem here. Hopefully the regulatory bodies, at some point, will begin to address it.

Regina Meredith: To what degrees are those in the industry kind of preemptively beginning to modernize the technology to where it is less dangerous?

Nick Begich: There are several things that have happened. Again, it is a question of how much intensity? Just being here in this space we are being bombarded by electromagnetic fields that are affecting us— less so than placing something next to the head. When you place it next to the head, because of the way energy transfers, it spreads out; the density of that energy spreads out very rapidly with distance. So, if you can get it just a little ways away you dramatically. . .

Regina Meredith: Put it on speaker phone.

Nick Begich: Exactly! So many of them now have the speaker phone feature. We already hear half of the conversation; what do you care if we hear the other half? In fact, it makes it more interesting for the rest of us.

Regina Meredith: Right.

Nick Begich: So, you hold the phone a little bit further away; it makes a huge difference. Don’t put it next to your body where there is soft tissue and you get deeper penetration—you affect Kidneys, Liver, and so on. Get the phone away from you if you are carrying a purse, put it in the purse. If you are male try and figure out a way to not get it next to your body.

Regina Meredith: Carry a Man-bag.

Nick Begich: Carry a Man-bag, there you go!

Regina Meredith: So, we’re looking at some of the problems, and you were talking earlier about just the heating behind the ear. That sounds rather innocuous in and of itself, but it is not. It is the heating that is actually at issue, isn’t it?

Nick Begich: The heating what it does is breaks down the blood/brain barrier, because that heating also transfers into the brain. In fact, when you are using a cell phone—and I’ve seen the images where they actually show the heating. What happens is that heating moves through the skull into the brain, breaks down the blood/brain barrier and also slows the repair of DNA. This normal, natural repair process is slowed down. This is the mechanism that Carlo theoretically believes that this is the mechanism that is the trigger for tumor formation, which actually does make good sense.

Regina Meredith: Yeah.

Nick Begich: It also makes sense why it would confuse things like appetite, sleep rhythms and so on, because you are transferring toxins into the brain. Short-term memory loss gets explained; I mean a lot of this starts to make a lot more sense. The other interesting thing is when your friends start dying of tumors; look at which side they held their phone on. We traditionally hold the phone on one side or the other, and that is 4 where they show up. And, you are going to see the busiest people in the world—the Johnny Cochran’s of the world, who are busy and on that phone 6 or 8 hours a day—those are going to be the first fallen in this thing. It is going to be the people that actually we probably really need for their intellectual capacity because they tend to be the busiest people in the world. And, we really need to think about how we use our technology, and how better to utilize it so we can avoid some of the downfalls of these two-edged swords.

Regina Meredith: Looking at cell phone technology in terms of some of the more nefarious uses of it, yesterday I heard you talking about the Roving Wire Tap.

Nick Begich: Roving Wire Taps: There was a test case that actually went to the Supreme Court, and it was a case in New York, where they had taped conversations of Mafioso, and used it in prosecuting them, and they wanted that evidence thrown out. Because, the way the Roving Wire Taps works is, for instance, if you wanted to tap a conversation in a restaurant, you could literally go in from a distance, activate all of the cell phones within that restaurant by downloading just a bit of software to them remotely, activate them, and they act as a microphone in the room.

Regina Meredith: Even if they are turned off?

Nick Begich: Even if they are turned off. And they can pick up all of the conversations within a given space. So, even if these guys are smart enough to remove the battery, it’s the guy next to him at the table one over that has the phone laying on the table or sitting in their jacket. The idea is with a Roving Wire Tap when they first came out people thought well, what does that mean? They just kind of go through a neighborhood and randomly check phone lines? It was kind of confusing. And, then this law suit came out, and actually they won. The Mafia didn’t get the evidence thrown out; they went to jail because the evidence stayed in.

Regina Meredith: And no warrant of course, for any of this, or was there for this case.

Nick Begich: Well it was a warrant for the wire tap, but it was just an unusual mechanism for utilizing it. We always think of a bug, and you can go in and do a bug sweep. But, when you are doing a bug sweep and you are looking at the frequency bands and you see that your cell phone band width assigned by the Department of Commerce. You look at it and you go well, those are just cell phones, so you ignore it.

Regina Meredith: Yeah.

Nick Begich: And, the microphones are still there. You have heard about it with On Star on your car. That is another example of this. The voice you call—you call them up—well, how do you know they didn’t turn it off? Who do you know has activating that system? Do you really want every move you make tracked? I, personally, find that offensive.

Regina Meredith: Yeah!

Nick Begich: The whole idea of the convenience in trading for your safety and security—and this is always the content of the argument: Don’t you want to be safe? Don’t you want to be secure? They use fear to motivate you to accept a lowering, and lowering of your standards of what is acceptable in a civil society. These are just small examples of it. But, I think a lot of it has to do with the general convenience of the device people will let that other stuff go, because all of us know it is built in now. Most of us just don’t think about it.

Regina Meredith: Yeah. Well, not only that there is the conversion over from land lines. As you were also stating yesterday, some 20% of people don’t bother with land lines anymore. So, some conversion had to be made if you were going to continue to be intrusive.

Nick Begich: Right. Land lines are interesting because the dropping of land lines, generally, and going to the cell phone offers a lot of things from a marketing and from a political prospective because now you have a unique identifier that is connect to a unique individual. I mean Radio Shack, in our community, won’t charge up phones unless you do it on a card. They won’t take cash, and they won’t take checks, because they also want to know who charged that phone up, who is paying for the phone use. 5

Regina Meredith: Interesting.

Nick Begich: Which is an interesting thing because, again, why isn’t U.S. currency good at a Radio Shack for cell phone minutes?

Regina Meredith: No kidding! Talk about more insidious data mining.

Nick Begich: Exactly, and so you start to look at it, and you say ok, 20% of the population—as children grow up they are not going to get land lines; they are going to look at it like my son when I tried to explain what a typewriter was, and I said, “It is a computer keyboard without a screen.” and he said, “That’ll never work!” you know. And, land lines are going the same way in relationship to cell phones. When you think about the call phone, it identifies you when you travel around because it has built in features. Every time you make a call where you were is also recorded, not just where you were and who called and what time it was, but where you physically were is stored, because it is triangulated between the Cell Phone Towers. So, your movements are traced, as well. And, when you start to think about this—one of the things that is forecasted because the cell phone is unique enough to you so that as data mining occurs, where lots of information is collated about individuals, and then you walk by the electronic billboard down the street, and the billboard recognizes you, personally, because of that cell phone, and then based upon your entire profile starts pitching advertising messages that you are most likely to respond to.

Regina Meredith: How far away is that?

Nick Begich: We are very close; I’d say within the next three to five years you are going to see some of this technology commercially applied.

Regina Meredith: You are going to be more stimulated as you walk through life because you are going to be pitched with exactly what your desires [are], right?

Nick Begich: Right Now, the other part of this is from a political perspective when you think about tailored messages based on data mining, what is really important about this is you could have a political candidate that has ten major issues; nine of them you are 100% against; one of them you are 100% for. He is going to isolate which of those issues you are in favor of, and those are the only messages you are ever going to get from that candidate, directly, either by mail or by the push polls, or whatever mechanisms. So that they can manipulate you into believing that this person resonates with your same belief system, when 90% of their agenda is something you would fight vigorously against. That is the manipulation that occurs with data mining, whether it is for political purposes; the same thing can be used commercially when you isolate where a person’s general pattern of existence is. And, you can narrow it down when you start to look at larger, and larger populations you can draw some very important analysis from that from a marketing perspective. That’s why Google is becoming so important, because they are collecting all of that data, which is allowing for a honing of marketing—the idea of all of the interconnections, and how a person views the world can be deduced from these kinds of engines. All that data is stored because it’s the data that is valuable. Even though we may not have the capacity, today, to sort all that data, that’s coming and it is coming extremely rapidly. Storing it is relatively easy, and because it is so cheap to store vast amounts of data, virtually all data is stored on line.

Regina Meredith: Processing it is becoming, also, another game that is increasing very rapidly.

Nick Begich: Oh yes. This is very important because it is the quantum computing area.

Regina Meredith: Yes.

Nick Begich: We have talked about that in the past. Quantum computing and I’ll use this analogy because it is a good one, and it was in an article discussing the Super Computer that had just broke the record in 2006 for speed, and it was 280 teraflops, which doesn’t mean anything to most people in the world. But, it is the equivalent of 6.6 billion people with a hand calculator, each of them every five seconds doing a calculation for 60 hours, and all those 6.6 billion calculators, every five seconds for 60 hours equal what a Supercomputer today does in one second!

Regina Meredith: That’s amazing!

Nick Begich: Now, that’s an amazing thing, when you think about it. But, a neuron-firing chain in the Human brain requires a three-dimensional MRI that requires three Super Computers tied together just to get one Neuron firing in the brain. Now, wrapping your head around that for a minute, and then think about that Super Computer of today running for a trillion years, ok. I just told you what it does in a second; in a trillion years of operating a Quantum Computer in one hour will do what a trillion years of today’s Super Computer will do. Now, quantum computing is the idea on an atomic level, on a very small level. The thing about it is on that level the operator influences the outcome. You know this idea in physics, the observer influences whether it is a particle or a wave. Well, this is a problem in quantum computing that was resolved earlier this year, because they figured out a way to electromagnetically shield a Quantum Computer so you could develop this technology. So, from this point forward we are going to see accelerated advances. And the other thing that we have seen in speeds are things like Optical Microcircuits that work on light rather than electrons, which is a much, much faster medium. But, when you start to think about Light Circuits that’s another major area that will probably be a step in between the quantum computing step, but these things are coming. Superconductivity feeds into this, as well, because when you reduce the resistance down to zero, then you have these incredible speeds of transmitting information and computing that information. So, it is sort of this coalescing of technologies taking place right now. Quantum computing is going to be here in the next couple of years, and the day it arrives—whoever gets there first—every security system in the world is then vulnerable to hacking. You know with enough persistence you hack through them all?

Regina Meredith: Right.

Nick Begich: Well, imagine that Super Computer of tomorrow, that Quantum Computer being able to hack through. Now, the interesting thing is every human brain is a Quantum Computer. We already have that capacity; we just haven’t figured out how to fully access it. And, it is kind of like Man always trying to replicate what the Creator has already done. We always do it with a big hammer, and we only need a feather, and we don’t quite figure that out.

Regina Meredith: Right!

Nick Begich: But, nonetheless, the human brain is capable of doing much more than we think, and that is where I believe that the real action will come. Because as these other technologies emerge on one side materially, the human consciousness also changes materially.

Regina Meredith: It is interesting because the Quantum Computer you are talking about and its capabilities, they were written about by Michio Kaku in his book, Visions, about ten years ago. But, it seems to me we are way ahead of schedule. Because, I think he had projected that for something like 2050, when this would become a useful reality.

Nick Begich: Sure. You know that’s not unusual to see those predictions far into the future. There was one on Space cast 2020 making predictions about being able to send voice information into someone’s head, and actually that was done at MIT; the Lemelson was awarded to Woody Norris, who did that in 2005, 15 years ahead of schedule.

Regina Meredith: Right.

Nick Begich: These schedules are really irrelevant, because [this is] what happens as computing power increases: Back in the 1980’s we were doubling our knowledge base from the invention of the wheel to where we are today about every five years; back at the beginning of this Century, around 2000 it was about every nine to ten months; now it is about every seven to six months, and getting shorter, and shorter, and shorter. We will double the knowledge of human beings almost every day with quantum computing. At that rate there is not way to analyze the implications of any of those changes; we will just be in this rush. And, the thing about quantum computing is the machines will be incredible. They will almost be miraculous, because of their predictive capacity—to predict future event based upon huge bodies of input. 7 We will begin to rely on them significantly in making decisions. The problem with quantum computing is it will never absolutely be perfect. So, you get a butterfly effect in the programming that over time they become less and less reliable.

Regina Meredith: When we have this capacity already, innately!

Nick Begich: Absolutely. And this is where the parallel is in my view—as we learn more about the brain, as we learn more about the mind, and we begin to open up our own potentials we are going to look back on this period 100 years from now and be laughing about what we were doing, in the same way that we look back 100 years ago at the thoughts and science then. It is not going to be any different. I think the biggest concern is from my perspective is you look at the mind and you look at the brain and what’s emerging in the whole area of Neuroscience, the biggest challenges for civil liberties are at stake. Because the domain of the mind is the connection to whatever you believe the Soul to be connected to, whatever you believe. It is our control station for this [the body], and our link to what else is out there. And, the fact that anyone believes that they should be able to manipulate activity within our brains for any other purpose—PBS just did a piece called the 22nd Century, and their opening segment was, “The Worldwide Mind,” where they believe, like we had the Internet of the 1990’s, that we will have a network where every human brain on the planet will be connected. Now, I don’t like that because, first of all, artificially doing this means that the manipulation of all of those human brains is also possible. Being able to project propaganda into those brains is also possible in lots of different ways. PBS is suggesting that this is where it is headed. In my view we already have this capacity; we are already connected in this way; we just don’t recognize that connection. The science is beginning to show this. What we don’t need is an artificial that there is an operator on that has the determinative ability to influence the human mind, human behavior. When you think about reliance on electronics, you know, everyone—the generation coming up now—are so different from you and I in terms of how they view the world. It’s the gadgetry. But, when you look at the world across the world, and you look at who is the most powerful on the planet; it is those with the highest capacity to control and command technologies. Within Democratic Republics like ours it means that we have to have at least a working conceptual knowledge. We don’t all have to know how to put the stuff together, but we ought to know what it does; we ought to consider the ethical and moral implications of it and have an opportunity to debate that within the public forum, and make sure that technologies serve Human Kinds interests rather than work against them.

Regina Meredith: Perfectly put. I wouldn’t say this is off topic, but we might need to find a segway here. Naomi Watts wrote an article recently. I think it was called, “The Tears of Americans,” or something. As she is out speaking she is noticing that people are coming up to her saying My God, what can we do? I’d love to be able to speak up; I’d love to defend what I think is right, but I am so afraid They are Watching Me! Well, now we know it is not plausible to watch every human being. But, on the other hand, the people who are aware of all of this are becoming deeply emotionally depressed over the loss of their autonomy and being able to speak out. Any thoughts on this because, valid or not, it is mass.

Nick Begich: I see it, too, in a lot of my travels. The injection of fear into populations is one of the routes to control the populations; it always has been. Because what happens, if you look at the brain in an EEG, where you are actually measuring brain activity, and you look people experiencing fear, you get incoherent brain patterns; they are all over the map, and they tend to be in the higher Beta ranges and above. They are the kind of signals that don’t allow for intellectual, higher-ordered thinking. What you need is to slow the brain down, to relax. Often what happens with activists, and I see this all the time: hey see the issue; they see the goal, but instead of recognizing their immediate spheres of influence, which is where we should start, they stretch beyond it. When they do they are in an unstable position, because they are not able to carry the message forward. We all have a part to play; we all have a different part to play. Work within your spheres of influence; do what you absolutely know that you can accomplish. Do that. Don’t do what you don’t believe in; don’t do what you don’t believe you can achieve, because it will only create fear and anxiety. Do what you can do, and it may be as simple as talking to your neighbor. Once you have done that the next thing will reveal itself, and your level of confidence and your knowledge of following your own truth will allow you to propel yourself forward. Yeah, you’ll have times. I, myself do. I’ve been doing this a long time, where 8 you get overwhelmed. And it is usually the other things in life for me; it is not the work that we are doing, it is just five kids, a big family, a lot of stuff going on.

Regina Meredith: Life, finances, all of it. (Laughing)

Nick Begich: All the stuff that happens in life. But the thing that we need to remember is it is in the calmness of the center of our Soul, where the good things happen. We can’t do it in an agitated state. Our government wants to blow Red Alerts and Orange Alerts. Forget all of that; recognize that we have one alert, and it is Green. It means go forward in what you know to be right and true, and follow that. At the end of the day the fear will dissipate.

Regina Meredith: In terms of counter-technology, as it were, that can kind of block and shield, and so forth, is there any technology you know of outside of what we are beginning to re-discover in really ancient technologies that can, in essence, kind of do a smog-bust on these frequencies in your domain?

Nick Begich: It is difficult because the carriers are so different. You would have to develop systems toblock each and every potential. Now, the other way to kind of—you look at that side; how to you counterall the signals coming in—and, the other way to look at it is can I create a signal within my Near Field that will be strong enough that my body will lock onto it and ignore the rest? That’s the better approach.

Regina Meredith: That’s better. Now what—so, how do you.

Nick Begich: There are some things out there. There are some Electromagnetic Field Generators. I can’t give you a brand name, or anything, but they are out there. They create an electromagnetic pulse in, say, the 7.83 hertz range, which is the Human’s resonance. These things exist. They create an electromagnetic field pulse that the body will couple with; you will lock onto, but it is a pulse rate that correlates to the higher states of consciousness, correlates to the planet, itself, and is a healthful thing. So, what happens is you lock onto that—you are zeroed in on that, and all of these other signals coming in tend to be weak, so you ignore them like background noise in a crowded room. That is exactly how it works. So, strong systems are the better systems. When you look at depressed systems—I’m talking about Human Beings around the country, the level of Depression related to stress, which drives the system down, which weakens the Immune System, which weakens your own signal strength in terms of how you act as a transceiver and transducer of energy. All of that changes when your system is crushed by stress. Stress is really the root of a lot of this. Fear drives stress; a lot of other things do, as well. So, looking for techniques, simple breathing can reduce stress. We’ve demonstrated a lot of things in the past, certain methods of Biofeedback can be used. But just some basic meditation techniques. We’re not talking about in a religious connotation here. I’m just talking about basic techniques for slowing the brain activity down; getting your body back in sync, and providing your body with the right nutrients, which is something else that we don’t do in this country sufficiently. You need the right building blocks within the body to build a strong system, and then you need to look at stress as one of the things that breaks that system down. Try and find ways to mitigate against the stresses of life. A lot of that happens by taking your own control of your own power, again. See, when you know you need to do something and you don’t do it, your stress level actually increases. If you take a step in the direction of what you know to be right and true, you regain your own control, your own empowerment—you recognize you are creative. If you believe this, and I do—you are created in the image of a Creator. It is not how we look; it is what our capacity is. Don’t insult the creation itself by limiting your own possibilities.

You can also see this interview here:  http://www.globalreport2010.com/globalwatch14sep12.pdf