The Kevin Trudeau Show: 3-10-10

Today, Kevin explains why the government is suppressing the free flow of information and why the medical community wants you to be deficient in vitamin D.

At Least 3 of 4 Americans Don’t Get Enough Vitamin D
1 in 6 Americans Infected with Herpes
FDA Approves Drug Banned In 160 Countries
Chemical Substances Found in All Commercial Meat
The Government Regulation of Supplements
Vitamin D Essential For Activating Immune System
Supreme Court Will Decide Whether Drug Makers Can Be Sued
Most Drug Studies Don’t Help Docs Pick Best Treatment
Tainted Ingredient Sold After Salmonella Found
Bone Strengthening Drug Linked to Fractures

Take Trudeau on the Go! Click here to download this show to your iPod, mp3 player, or PC through iTunes!
 

Click below to hear The Kevin Trudeau Show RIGHT NOW!!!

Federal Reserve Chairman Says Regulation Came Too Late to Stop Housing Bubble

January 5, 2010

Bloomberg

By Scott Lanman

Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke said low central bank interest rates didn’t cause the housing bubble of the past decade and that better regulation would have been more effective in curbing the boom.

“The best response to the housing bubble would have been regulatory, rather than monetary,” Bernanke said yesterday in remarks to the American Economic Association’s annual meeting in Atlanta. The Fed’s efforts to constrain the bubble were “too late or were insufficient,” which means that regulatory actions “must be better and smarter,” he said.

Bernanke said the Fed is improving supervision of banks and has strengthened measures to protect consumers of financial products. Senate Banking Committee Chairman Christopher Dodd, who backs Bernanke for a second term, has called the Fed’s oversight of bank lending before the crisis an “abysmal failure.” Dodd proposes stripping the Fed and other agencies of bank supervision powers and moving them to a new regulator.

Scholars such as Allan Meltzer, a historian of the central bank, have criticized the Fed for helping fuel the housing boom by keeping interest rates too low for too long. The bursting of the housing bubble led to the worst recession since the Great Depression and the loss of more than 7 million U.S. jobs.

“It sounds a little bit like a mea culpa,” said Randall Wray, an economics professor at the University of Missouri in Kansas City, who was in Atlanta and didn’t attend Bernanke’s speech. “The Fed played a role by promoting the most dangerous financial innovations used by institutions to fuel the housing bubble.”

Shelby Criticism

Senator Richard Shelby of Alabama, the senior Republican on the Banking Committee, has said Bernanke failed to anticipate the crisis that led to Fed-backed bailouts of financial firms including Citigroup Inc. and American International Group Inc. and doesn’t deserve a second term as Fed chief.

Shelby, at a Dec. 17 committee vote on Bernanke’s nomination to a second four-year term starting next month, said the former Princeton University professor “missed clear signals” when he was a Fed governor from 2002 until 2005. Bernanke still must be approved by the full Senate.

Bernanke didn’t discuss the outlook for the U.S. economy or Fed monetary policy in yesterday’s speech.

Separately, Fed Vice Chairman Donald Kohn said at the conference that tight bank credit and caution among households and businesses may impede spending amid an improvement in financial markets. The Standard & Poor’s 500 Index climbed 23 percent last year, its best performance since 2003.

‘Very Cautious’

“Households and businesses and bank lenders remain very cautious, and the odds are that the pickup in spending will not be very sharp,” Kohn said.

Bernanke said increased use of variable-rate and interest- only mortgages, and the “associated decline of underwriting standards,” were more responsible for the bubble than low rates.

He left the door open to using interest rates for preventing “dangerous buildups of financial risks” should regulatory changes fail to be made or turn out to be insufficient.

“We must remain open to using monetary policy as a supplementary tool for addressing those risks — proceeding cautiously and always keeping in mind the inherent difficulties of that approach,” Bernanke said.

Responding to audience questions after the speech, Bernanke said he wasn’t “particularly concerned” about a possible loss of investor confidence in the U.S. financial system. When financial conditions become more “worrisome,” investors see the dollar as a safe haven and U.S. markets as the deepest and most liquid, he said.

Policy ‘Appropriate’

Bernanke devoted most of his speech to rebutting criticism that the Fed’s rate policy fueled the housing bubble. Monetary policy after the 2001 recession “appears to have been reasonably appropriate, at least in relation to” a formula based on the so-called “Taylor Rule.” In addition, Bernanke said Fed research shows the rise in housing prices had little to do with monetary policy or the broader economy.

John Taylor, a Stanford University economist and former Treasury undersecretary, created a shorthand formula that suggests how a central bank should set rates if inflation or growth veers from goals.

Under former Chairman Alan Greenspan, the Fed lowered its benchmark rate to 1.75 percent from 6.5 percent in 2001 and cut it to 1 percent in June 2003. The central bank left the federal funds rate for overnight interbank lending at 1 percent for a year before raising it in quarter-point increments from 2004 to 2006.

Rates Slashed

Bernanke, 56, joined the Fed as a governor in 2002 and supported all of the interest-rate decisions under Greenspan before being appointed chairman in 2006. After the financial crisis struck, he cut the federal funds rate almost to zero in December 2008 from 5.25 percent in September 2007.

The standard Taylor Rule would have recommended that the Fed raise the rate to a range of 7 percent to 8 percent through the first three quarters of 2008, “a policy decision that probably would not have garnered much support among monetary specialists,” Bernanke said. A variation of the rule used by the Fed focused on anticipated rates of inflation, not actual rates, he said.

Click here for the full report

International Consensus on Population Control Policy

December 7, 2009

InfoWars

By Jurriaan Maessen  

Klaus Töpfer, 1996 Bilderberg attendee and former Executive Director of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) admitted in 2000 that there is an “international consensus” on worldwide population control. During a speech given in Berlin in the beginning of the new millennium, Töpfer stated:

“Most people and policymakers are unaware that there is an international consensus that grounds population policy in human rights and development, emphasizing building the capacities of women to manage their own lives.”

Here Töpfer admits not only that there is an international consensus to ground population policy in the concepts of “human rights and development”, but also that most people and policymakers are unaware of this consensus.

Töpfer should know. He  visited a Bilderberg meeting back in 1989, organized in La Toja, Spain and the  Bilderberg conference held near Toronto, Canada, from May 30 to June 2 1996. Besides being a Bilderberger and former UNEP-chieftain, Klaus Töpfer is also a member of the Club of Rome. In 2004 he contributed to the Club’s publication ‘Sustainability Creates New Prosperity: Basis for a New World Order, New Economics and Environmental Protection’.

In his speech in 2000, Töpfer stresses the point:

“Policymakers rarely contemplate long time periods and connections between disparate sets of issues, especially controversial ones. Nonetheless, at the dawn of the new century the world faces a host of environmental and security risks strongly connected to the growing size of human population and the growing affluence of some, but not all, of that population.”

Ominously, the Executive Director appeared to manifest a crystal ball:

“Future changes in global population will contribute significantly to the need for such integrated, long-term approaches to environmental problems.”

On another occasion, the Executive Director of UNEP called for the creation of a new global religion:

“We have to develop the ecological, holistic wold view which connects us with the rest of Nature- both materially and spiritually. Religious traditions emphasize this connection. Our task should be to retrieve these basic symbols and doctrines within each tradition and translate them into clear prescription for public policy and behavior.”

This statement about the “international consensus” reaffirms that which we already know, namely that the global elite have their noses pointed in the same direction when it comes to the world’s human inhabitants and the “need” to curb their numbers.

Click here for the full report

Why We Use Natural and Alternative Remedies

November 18, 2009

EurekAlert.org

Alternative health remedies are increasingly important in the health care marketplace. A new study in the Journal of Consumer Research explores how consumers choose among the many available remedies.

“Examples of the wide array of health remedy options available to consumers include drugs, supplements, acupuncture, massage therapy, Ayurveda, and Traditional Chinese Medicine (to name a few). Such medical pluralism is common in both developed and developing countries and raises the questions: How do consumers choose among health remedies, and what are the consequences for a healthy lifestyle?” write authors Wenbo Wang (New York University), Hean Tat Keh (Beijing University), and Lisa E. Bolton (Pennsylvania State University).

The authors use “lay theories of medicine” to explain how consumers choose between Western medicine and its Eastern counterparts, Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) and Ayurvedic medicine.

“Western Medicine is primarily concerned with the material aspect of the body and views all medical phenomena as cause-effect sequences, relying on rigorous scientific studies and research that seeks empirical proof to all phenomena,” write the authors. “On the other hand, TCM and Ayurvedic Medicine favor a holistic approach, view the mind and body as a whole system, and rely upon inductive tools and methods for treatment.”

Based on a series of experiments and surveys in the United States, China, and India, the authors found that consumers prefer TCM (over Western medicine) when uncertain about the cause of an illness (i.e., diagnosis uncertainty)—because a holistic medicine tolerates uncertainty better than Western Medicine. Similarly, consumers prefer TCM (over Western medicine) because of lay beliefs that TCM offers an underlying cure (versus symptom alleviation by Western Medicine).

“These findings add to the growing debate over the regulation of health marketing and the delivery of health care, the role of direct-to-consumer advertising, and marketing efforts to promote a healthy lifestyle,” the authors conclude.

Click here for the full report.