Cool band .. some new kids on the block going places … going to be famous soon.
And Daniel Shea, attorney and former Catholic deacon agrees … and explains why:
In fact, Shea believes that what he started with the lawsuit may eventually result in the destruction of the entire Roman Catholic Church.
Dan Shea, a former Catholic deacon, has come a long way from the seminary. Whether that’s a long way up or a long way down depends on where today’s Catholic Church stands in your eyes. In the last five years, Shea has cracked wise about the Pope being gay and a drag queen in front of the Italian Parliament. He got a bishop to declare in open court that it was the church’s position that minor children were accomplices in their own molestation. He looked another bishop dead in the eye and told him to kiss his ass.
So it’s safe to say, he evokes strong emotions while expressing his beliefs.
In Doe et al v. Roman Catholic Diocese of Galveston-Houston et al, Shea and Khan Merritt allege that a letter then-Cardinal Ratzinger sent to every Catholic bishop on May 18, 2001, constituted an international conspiracy to obstruct justice. This official Vatican document Ratzinger penned in his role as prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith dealt with official church procedure in dealing with clerical sex abuse cases.
Not only did this letter contain the cardinal’s current thinking on the subject, it also cited in a footnote a top-secret 1962 Vatican document Shea would eventually flush out.
This 48-year-old document, informally known as Crimen Sollicitationis, considered a smoking gun in some quarters, contains written orders from the Vatican laying bare a system for protecting child molesters. To Shea, Crimen is more than a smoking gun, it is “a nuclear bomb.”
Read the full story in the Houston Press here.
Vitamin D – The Cost To The NHS of Epidemic Deficiency And The Overwhelming Case For Supplementation.
From Cancer Research UK
The Government’s view
Professor Mike Richards, National Cancer Director, kicked off the session. He acknowledged that the UK spends less on healthcare as a whole than many other European countries. On top of this, we spend proportionally less on cancer care than many of our EU counterparts.
According to the latest figures, around 5 per cent of the NHS spend is on cancer, equating to around £76 per head each year in England ….
Clearly there is a need to increase spend in the NHS on cancer – particularly when the demographics and new advances in cancer drugs are taken into account. As the population ages, cancer is getting more common – Professor Richards commented that the incidence of the disease is increasing at a rate of around 1.5 per cent each year. This means there will inevitably be more people needing cancer care services.
And with great strides in cancer research, many new drugs and diagnostic tests are coming through – offering new hope to people touched by cancer – but at a price. On top of this, the NHS needs to consider the increasing cost of follow up care for cancer survivors (’survivorship care’) – as more and more people survive cancer.
So cancer care costs are certain to increase in the future, and these will need to be met through boosting spending and efficiency in the NHS.
Compare the £76 per head spent on Cancer alone by the NHS to the cost of effective supplementation with Vitamin D3 – approximately £10 per head, per annum.
Now factor in Diabetes:
The NHS is spending £1m an hour, 10% of its yearly budget, treating diabetes and its complications, according to a new report.
Despite advances in detection and treatment, incidence of the disease – which causes heart attacks, stokes and blindness – is spiralling.
GPs are still missing telltale symptoms which mean the disease may remain undetected for many years until irreversible damage has been done, said campaigning charity Diabetes UK.
Some 2.3million people in the UK are already diagnosed but the charity estimated the number of diagnosed and “hidden” diabetics will top 4million by 2025.
The report also revealed one in 10 people in hospital in the UK have diabetes and 60% of inpatients with diabetes have been admitted as emergencies. The total cost to the NHS equates to £9bn-a-year.
Source: The Guardian.
This is another £140 per head of the UK population on diabetes …
Now factor in heart disease .. allergies .. influenza treatment and deaths …. parkinsons .. multiple sclerosis …
How about depression? – another £140 per head UK population per annum. from the estimated cost in 2000:
The total cost of adult depression was estimated at over £9 billion
Source: Imperial College
So we can spend £10 per year on D3 supplements per head of the UK population and reduce NHS spending by say 75% of these amounts (conservatively) – meaning a saving of £271 per head per annum on Cancer, Diabetes and Depression alone. Cancer, diabetes and depression and Schizophrenia are pretty much unknown at the equator.
This amounts to a saving to the NHS potentially of £17.6 billion per annum at a cost of around £650 million for appropriate D3 supplementation and testing …. that’s quite a sum.
Are you getting the picture as to why the Pharma industry is deliberately overplaying the dangers of Vitamin D supplementation?
They can’t patent Vitamin D and they stand to stand to lose an awful lot of money if people are healthy.
Vitamin D – what is healthy? Not what your doctor is likely to tell you – unless your doctor is ahead of the curve. To prevent 75% of Breast and Colon Cancer University of California recommend >40ng/ml or 100nmol/L and 50 – 70 ng/ml is optimal (125 – 175 nmol/L) – look at the presentation for the scientific research behind this.
Gordon Brown speaking at TED Global 2009
“It is the start of what I will call a truly global society”