Could these 2 experiments change the world?
Could the results of these 2 studies change the direction of agriculture, rebuild soils, save coral reefs, sequester carbon, cure diabetes and drascticly reduce heart disease?
1. Do oxidised polyunsaturated fats rob electrons from the endothelial cells of our arteries or not?
This would show the root cause of "cholesterol problems" or arterial plaque, the biggest killer of humanity, to be from vegetable oils rather than animal fats. More importantly, it would begin to clarify once and for all which fats are beneficial and which are a catastrophe. No more questionnaire's or mouse studies based on un-disclosed mouse diets.
2. Is our immune system compromised in a high blood sugar environment - ie Glucose Ascorbate Antagonism theory. (glucose saturating receptor sites on macrophages, blocking uptake of electron donating vitamin C).
*Vitamin C is basically one of several electron donors, (anti-oxidants), which "pacify" oxidised substances, preventing them from"robbing" electrons from healthy tissues.
What is human food?
This, together with working out what IS actually a safe blood sugar level for our immunes system to function at, would help to clarify, what is exactly human food? - how much carbohydrate, wether refined or from whole foods can we safely tolerate.
Obviously the more closely our food production matches the food chains that were already in place 12,000 + years ago, or before we wiped out the mega fauna, (perhaps 50,000 years ago). The less energy, (ie pollution) and infrastructure that is required for us to live in abundance.
There is this great delusion that the Earth could not feed us without crops, these two studies would begin to look at the true costs and benefits of plant based food production. From there we can look at how soil is really created, and what are realistic population numbers, for humans and the other species we do actually need.
Data and its interpretation
We dont have an information problem, we have an honesty problem, a fear problem, due to investments and inter personal validation issues clouding our ability to even want to see things as they are, without bias.
If we could bring in an independent audit from another race, that may be helpful. Since we can not, we are going to have to settle for hard science. Hard science does not include epidemiological statistics and undisclosed test criteria, which is what the majority of people are exposed to.
We already knew 40 years ago what the root causes of metabolic syndrome were, how to test for it, (CAC and Insulin Essays) and how to treat it. Much like lead toxicity, (but worse) it is taking decades for the science that matters to reach the people who matter - you guys.
Abundance is a possible outcome, determined by how energy moves in a living system
Abundance is the nicest way to cure fear, the alternative, what we have now, is the illusion of abundance, (technological comforts for some and sought after by others) at great cost to ecology and our feeling of connection and worthiness.
Connection and our "deservedness of it, to each other and to our habitat. When we are emotionally shut down or wounded, we spin in our minds, lost to the realtime relationships around us. Abundance is not just the presence of resources, it is the absence of unnecessary fear and dysfunctional tension so that we can appreciate it.
Both of these studies are actually about the movement of electrons, energy. Pretty cool, this world we live in.
- please excuse my imprecise terminology and grandiose explanations, I am a layman, not a scientist and not university trained.
Does the cosmos move to laws or does man derive laws from the movement of the cosmos? Words divide to describe, we can be with the words or we can simply be moved - enough said