Raised garden beds that use the concept of the trophic chain to create new life.  What is the trophic chain?  It's the food chain, starting with producers (creatures that make their own food) which are eaten by various levels of consumers, which are in turn eaten by apex consumers. There are different food chains, depending on the ecosystem.  Every chain ends with decomposers -- the bacteria that turn organic waste into inorganic nutrients for use by producers.  Decomposers complete the cycle of life.

Here's a video that explains this very amazing gardening idea.  Afraid of drought?  Check this out:

Now see how to make one of these beds:

Decomposers work on the logs at the bottom of the hugelkultur bed and render them into fertile components for new life.  The seeds planted in the bed are the new life (producers), creating their food from sunlight (photosynthesis) and the help of nutrients being returned to the soil by the bacteria breaking down the logs.  You and I will be consumers of these producers, taking our own positions on the trophic chain.

I recently visited a new house that was being shielded from cell-tower radiation.  The practice is called remediation, and may be done for many causes, including electrical fields, chemicals and molds.  (See Larry Gust's website Gustenviro.com for more info.)  Larry was consulting for the homeowners, who are chemical- and radiation-sensitive.  The cause of the microwave radiation that made Larry's RF meter wail was the cluster of large cell towers on nearby Black Mountain (San Diego County):

San Diego's Black Mountain, now crowned with cell towers that blanket homes with microwave radiation.

Here's what hikers see when they get to the top (click to enlarge):

Worse, even, is Santiago Peak on the border of adjacent Orange and Riverside counties in southern California (below):

What can I say?  If people fail to realize that radio-frequency microwaves bombarding our world from mountaintops 24/7 are not safe for living organisms, we will all go down together.  Fondness for and reliance on cellular technologies and wireless communication is behind our insomnia, agitation and general failing health.  Turn off your WiFi router for a few nights and see how well you sleep!  In case you don't get it, sleep is when the cells go into deep restoration modes.  This is why you must lie still for eight hours and do nothing -- so serious is the repair work going on.  Why would you jolt your cells with RFMW from transmitters right in your bedroom?  Our cells are used to electromagnetic frequencies that peak at 40 Hz, running mostly between 7 and 12 Hz, the earth's natural EMF range.  Compare this to unnatural, man-made WiFi at 2.4 billion Hz and cordless phones at 6 and 7 billion Hz!  Your cell barriers are shattering, DNA strands are breaking, and with so much constant injury, repairs on the cellular level cannot be maintained.  Give it awhile -- see how it catches up with you ...

Jenner says, in his man-voice: "I'm the new normal!"  And the media fuss has been huge!  But "normal" is not really attainable for real folks who don't have professionals doing tricks for them.  Her are two iconic stills of Caitlyn/Bruce.  Note the smooth skin and the VERY flat stomach, and even the breasts are significantly larger in the bottom picture.  Where are Bruce-the-Olympian's big lungs?  This is a Photoshop job or they've used a model.  If you enlarge the photos and know what to look for (click photo for bigger version), you will see the pixelation and new layers where Bruce's real body and bulk has been wiped out.

But below are pictures of Bruce taken not so long ago and a news report with video footage from 2013.  How much surgery does it require to lose that midriff and shape up those bony legs?  Either the above photos were heavily altered, or a stand-in for Jenner's body was used.  There is no way a person can go from burly male girth (breadth of ribcage and bulky core) to the svelte form we see in the stills above.  (Click photos for enlargements.)

Sequence of photos, from 1976 to recent.  Changes, achieved through hormones and surgery, can be seen over time.

Women are being told they "have the BRCA gene for breast cancer" and are electing to have their reproductive organs removed as a preventive measure against reproductive-system cancer(s).  What is the BRCA gene, anyway (pronounced "braca")?  According to Wiki, it's a human tumor suppressor gene that ensures the proper repair of DNA double-strand breaks (see here).  Actually, ALL WOMEN have the BRCA genes; it is only when they mutate that one's risk of breast cancer supposedly rises.  So to be told you "have the BRCA gene," as a friend of mine recently was, means nothing unless one has "the BRCA gene mutation," yet this is not the way commoners phrase it.  Given the mutation news, some women are getting into a panic and undergoing radical surgeries (paid for out of pocket) to dodge the possibility of certain cancers.

In 2013 and again in 2015, actress Angelina Jolie modeled the choice to have a preventive double mastectomy and breast reconstruction, followed by surgeries for ovarian and fallopian-tube removal.  She is only in her thirties, but feared the cancers that claimed the lives of other women in her family.  Epigenetics is the science that tracks heritable cellular potential and is relied on for genetic risk assessment -- predicting disease development in family lines (see more here).

Compare Angelina Jolie's female deconstruction to the making of Caitlyn Jenner (right).  The transgender movement is making women out of men (adding sexual characteristics/organs) while the cancer business is taking sex organs out of women.  Both result in one thing: non-reproductive humans.  Jenner claims he "has had these issues since he was ten" -- presumably wanting to be a girl.  He's been given the Arthur Ashe Courage Award for his transition, which included ten hours of facial-feminization surgery.  All this retrofitting and body-morphing for, in the case of Jenner, a cosmetic result that finally supports a lifelong quest, and in the case of Jolie (who now has artificial breasts) to maximize health.  "I didn't expect there to be so much support, and I was very moved by it," Jolie says.  "It's been a really beautiful journey."

The reality is that cancer results from cellular energy loss due to extreme cytotoxicity -- toxic cells that can no longer keep up with their metabolic workload.  Epigenetics only points to the areas of our bodies that might first fail when systemic oxidative stress becomes too great.  If those body systems are removed, common sense suggests that cancer will only develop elsewhere.  Additionally, artificial breasts are no picnic!  Muscle is taken from the back and brought to the chest to anchor the new breasts, the skin for which is supplied by other areas of the body (donor areas -- e.g., the back), resulting in scarring, tightness, pain, pressure, loss of natural sensitivity.  Sequential implant surgeries stretch the new breasts over time, until the final implants are put in.  These are often silicone (the preferred medical choice) and can later rupture.  The artificial breasts have no nipples until these are constructed from vaginal tissue and added as a final touch.  Lifelong chest scars remain, and women who have had radiation (for earlier breast cancer) report great difficulty breathing, which is the result of chest muscles adhering to the lungs from radiation damage.  "I feel like I live in a straitjacket," said one. "I can't breathe, I can't sleep comfortably ... no one -- not even all the women who had this done -- told me this was going to happen."

An important postscript: Cells can repair broken DNA a limited number of times.  The presence of micronuclei (multiple small nuclei) in cells is a red flag indicating mutation, that proper DNA repair is not happening.  Micronuclei are now considered a diagnostic marker for elevated risk of cancer (Berwick/Vineis, Journal of the National Cancer Institute, August 2000).  Please note that a mere 24 hours of exposure to cell phone radiation creates micronuclei in red blood cells (Lai/Singh, 1994 and Tice/Hook, 1998-99).  In a world where nearly everyone is now bathed in wireless radiation, how much can we expect from BRCA genes?

EMFScientist.org has put out an appeal for international recognition of the dangers of this new kind of radiation: