If Everyone Ate Beans Instead Of Beef, This Is What Would Happen To The Environment

The government and the media are constantly stressing that the environment is in total disarray, that we’re on our way to massively affecting our climate, and that we need to adhere to specific emissions targets in order to prevent further damage. Though we clearly need to treat the environment with more respect, the focus is often misplaced on other industries including transportation, oil and gas, and fast fashion.

Though all of these industries are contributing to the problem, and there’s truly no reason to still be using old energy systems that require oil and gas, these simply are not the leading causes of our environmental issues. There’s an elephant in the room, one that the government and many organizations choose to ignore because it’s so profitable, and that is animal agriculture. The hard truth is that the animal agriculture industry is one of the leading causes of environmental degradation and destruction, and society is heavily empowering it (to the tune of $1.4 trillion, to be exact).

Animal agriculture is responsible for 65% of all human-related nitrous oxide emissions and an absurd amount of methane and carbon dioxide emissions. It’s also a leading cause of overfishing, wildlife destruction, deforestation, land degradation, and depletion of freshwater. Growing feed crops in the U.S. for farm animals consumes 56% of water in the U.S., not to mention the extreme amount of water required to process meat and dairy (34-76 trillion gallons annually, to be precise).

So, what would happen if we ate less meat and fewer dairy products? How would this affect the environment? Well, a team of scientists from Oregon State University, Bard College, and Loma Linda University discovered exactly what would happen if every American substituted beans for beef.

Would Substituting Beans for Beef Help the Environment? 

It’s no secret that eating meat has a severe effect on the environment. These researchers actually found that by switching out beef for beans in all Americans’ diets, even if they continued to eat all other animal products, people could reduce their environmental footprint significantly.

This small dietary change could actually make a huge impact on the environment; in fact, it would have a greater impact than downsizing one’s car, reducing your electricity usage, or even refraining from showering entirely.

The researchers stated: “Our results demonstrate that substituting one food for another, beans for beef, could achieve approximately 46 to 74% of the reductions needed to meet the 2020 GHG target for the US. In turn, this shift would free up 42% of US cropland (692,918 km2).”

Let’s put that into perspective: 42% of U.S. cropland represents a grand total of 1.65 million square kilometres, which is greater than 400 million square acres, or about 1.6 times the size of California. Keep in mind these changes would achieve these results only by swapping beef for beans. The government could still satisfy more than half of their greenhouse gas reduction goals by simply making these dietary changes and without imposing any restrictions on cars, manufacturing, etc.

To be clear, it’s not just land and emissions that are an issue. For example, the amount of water used to make one burger is 660 gallons. Likewise, 1 pound of beef uses 1,799 gallons of water. This calculation includes irrigation of the grains and grasses used to feed the animal in addition to the water used for drinking and when processing.

In comparison, 1 pound of soybeans requires 257 gallons of water and 1 pound of chickpeas uses 501 gallons. Even in regards to water usage, it’s clear that beans would use far less than beef (at least 1,000 gallons less per pound).

The researchers addressed the fact that veganism is becoming more popular, and to be frank, may become a necessity in order to save our environment and our health. They noted that plant-based “mock meat” products are becoming more popular, as more than a third of Americans are purchasing/consuming them.

To learn more about the environmental impact of animal agriculture, I’d highly recommend watching the documentary Cowspiracy and/or reading the following CE article:

Pay Attention: We’re Heavily Empowering One Industry To Destroy The Environment

How Do They Compare in Nutritional Value? 

Harvard University researchers published a study in JAMA Internal Medicine that examined the association of animal and plant protein with mortality rates and causes as well as longevity of life. Researchers studied approximately 130,000 people for 36 years, monitoring their diet, lifestyle, illness, and mortality. The study found that by switching a small amount of processed red meat for plant protein, participants reduced their risk of early death by 34%.

Harvard has studied the risks associated with consuming meat extensively. Other research performed by Harvard University found that even eating small amounts of red meat, especially processed red meat, on a regular basis has been linked to an increased risk of heart disease, stroke, and dying from cardiovascular disease or any other cause in general.

Certain meats are also known to cause cancer. Numerous studies have proven that replacing animal protein with plant protein is not only healthier for your body, but it could even reverse the harmful effects of eating meat.

In regards to protein, yellow soybeans contain 28.6 grams of protein in every cup, edamame contains 22.2 grams in every cup, black beans contain 15.2 grams per cup, and pinto beans contain 14 grams per cup. In comparison, ground beef contains 31.18 grams of protein per cup, but it also contains 22.85 grams of fat and 339 calories. However, most beans are about half the calories and contain less than 1 gram of fat.

To learn more about the difference between plant-based protein and meat, read the following article:

Plant-Based Protein VS. Protein From Meat: Which One Is Better For Your Body?

Final Thoughts 

It’s clear that making simple changes to our diet can have a huge impact. Not only would swapping beef with beans be beneficial for the environment, but it could seriously help your health, too! Of course, there are certain things about beans that we want to be mindful of, like being sure to purchase them organic and wash/soak them before consuming, but beans are still an excellent, nutritious source of protein.

If you’re not ready or don’t feel called to make the full transition toward a plant-based diet, this could be a really great stepping stone! To learn more about how to adopt a plant-based diet more easily, check out the following CE resources:

6 Vegan Cookbooks You Need To Try This Summer!

16 Vegan One-Pot Recipes If You Are Considering Cutting Animals Out Of Your Diet

7 Simple & Delicious Vegan Slow Cooker Recipes

21 Easy Vegan Lunches To Take To Work

Government Geologist’s Terrifying Encounter With Extraterrestrials – After Drilling On Top of Their Base 2 Miles Underground

“On the Southwest part of the Archuleta Mesa, we built an underground facility the better part of three cubic miles hollowed out underground. And to the southwest of that, we were in the process of the early stages of building, we drilled four large tunnel-like holes, some of them ran two and a half miles underneath the surface. . . . The drilling machines that were used were at the rate of two miles a day, it was fairly rapid. The equipment kept coming up broken. So we wanted to send somebody down there, a human observer . . . to find out what was going on.” 

Above is a quote given by Phil Schneider, who spent two years travelling around the country leaking some very sensitive information. One day, a friend of his named Al Pratt, along with the manager of the apartment complex where Phil lived, found him dead in his apartment. While his death was originally attributed to a stroke, many believe he was murdered for leaking this information.

Phil’s story has gained a lot of attention from UFO researchers, and that’s because his story never changed, and has been corroborated by other people as well. It also aligns with a lot of other information that has been leaked on this subject.

Phil himself claimed to be a government contractor who specialized in engineering and geology. He was tasked multiple times with building underground military facilities.

Now, keep in mind that deep underground military facilities are no conspiracy theory; even in-bottom and under-bottom bases beneath the ocean are most likely a reality. Plans to begin this type of construction began long ago. For example, in 1968, the Stanford Research Institute discussed the construction of dozens of undersea bases in a study titled “Feasibility of Manned In-Botton Bases.”

Programs like these are funded directly by the “Black Budget,” a little-known term that became widespread after Snowden leaked sensitive information about the NSA (and other) global surveillance program(s).  These programs do not exist publicly, but they do indeed exist. They are better known as “Deep Black programs”  and “Special Access Programs.” A 1997 US Senate report described them as “so sensitive that they are exempt from standard reporting requirements to the Congress.”

Schneider continues:

To our total surprise, first of all the government knew all about it, they didn’t tell anybody. When I saw Green Beret and Black Beret people encamped inside of our geologist camp, I knew something was up, the gig was up. First of all I knew all about the alien agenda — I’ll explain that in a few minutes. The large alien greys had been encamped there for, as best, as believed possible, for about 4 or 500 years. It had been one of their internal bases, and we drilled holes right on top of it. . . . Well, that’s when all hell broke loose, really.

Related CE Articles:

Is This What You Think They Would Look Like? Supposed Pictures of Real Extraterrestrial Beings

The Most Commonly Reported Extraterrestrials By Contactees/Abductees & Experiencers

Phil goes on to describe how he was injured and maimed as a result of this incident. In the lecture, he shows his scars and his missing toes and fingers.

His story also has the attention of several researchers, which says there could be some truth to it, but we can’t say for sure just as we cannot verify his background with certainty. However, the pictures, documents, and support from other colleagues and family in getting his story out there, suggests there is some truth to his claims.

Below is a picture provided from Phil in one of his lectures, where he claims the gentleman in the red circle is actually an extraterrestrial. The men in the back are the world’s most brilliant scientists, and the man to the right of the supposed extraterrestrial is Phil’s father, a high ranking navy officer, Oscar Schneider, who has a verified background.

Phil’s story is a long one, with lots of information and research to do. To truly determine if there is any validity behind these claims, and there very well could be, it’s important to really do your research into this field. A wise man once said “condemnation without investigation is the height of ignorance.” Prior to the Edward Snowden leaks, everybody believed that mere mass surveillance was a conspiracy theory.

When it comes to this subject, with UFOs being verified in the mainstream and talk of intelligent extraterrestrials spreading, it’s always a good idea to keep an open mind. We need to understand that we can entertain an idea without fully accepting it, and we’re living in an age where new information will continue to emerge which challenges and conflicts with old belief systems.

Thanks for reading.

Be sure to check out our UFO/extraterrestrial article archive for more articles and information pertaining to this subject.

You can watch the full lecture, which spans more than hour, here.



Study: Excessive Cadmium Linked to Higher Risk of Endometrial Cancer

Women who have excessive cadmium in their bodies may be at increased risk for developing endometrial cancer, researchers from the University of Missouri reported in a recent study.

Accounting for 92% of cancers of the uterus, endometrial cancer, or uterine cancer, is the most common type of reproductive cancer in women in the United States. The disease is caused by cells in the endometrium growing out of control.

Cadmium is a “highly persistent” toxic metal which mimics estrogen in the body. According to lead author Jane McElroy, an associate professor in the University of Missouri Medical School’s Department of Family and Community Medicine, and a team of researchers, cadmium builds up in the body over time. It has been linked to “a variety of adverse health effects,” including kidney damage, calcium imbalance, and an increased risk of pancreatic, breast, and endometrial cancer.

Apart from exposure on the job, excess cadmium usually enters the body through 1 of 2 ways: by eating foods that contain the metal, and by smoking tobacco. Smoking tobacco is cadmium’s second port of entry to the body due to the fact that tobacco plants absorb it from the soil. In urine tests, heavy smokers were found to contain twice as much cadmium as non-smokers.’

Related: High Levels of Heavy Metals Found in Popular Chocolate Brands

Cadmium & Cancers

It’s logical to assume cadmium fuels hormone-dependent cancers because the toxic metal has similar effects to that of the female hormone, estrogen.

McElroy explained:

“Endometrial cancer has been associated with estrogen exposure. Because cadmium mimics estrogen, it may lead to an increased growth of the endometrium, contributing to an increased risk of endometrial cancer.”

However, it was the lack of information about the link that led researchers to dig deeper.

Additionally, past studies have suggested that even low levels of cadmium may significantly shorten the protective caps of DNA on the ends of chromosomes, called telomeres. [2]

Telomeres are associated with aging, and shortened telomeres may increase the risk for cardiovascular disease, diabetes, various age-related conditions, and cancer.

Studying the Link

Researchers gathered data from the cancer registries in Arkansas, Iowa, and Missouri to identify cases of endometrial cancer. Participants included 631 women with a history of endometrial cancer, and 879 women with no history of the disease who served as a control group. [3]

The women completed a 200-question survey about risk factors potentially associated with endometrial cancer. Once the questionnaires were completed, the participants were asked to collect their own urine and saliva samples for the researchers, so they could analyze them for cadmium.

McElroy said:

“When comparing the cadmium levels of the individuals with endometrial cancer to the control group, we found a statistically significant increased risk of the cancer associated with a woman’s cadmium levels. We found the rate of endometrial cancer incidence increased by 22% in individuals with increased cadmium levels.”

More research is necessary to determine how strong the link is between excess cadmium and endometrial cancer, but based on the limited information available, there are some things you can do to limit your cadmium exposure.

McElroy explained:

“We all have cadmium present in our kidneys and livers, but smoking has been shown to more than double a person’s cadmium exposure.

Also, we recommend being attentive to your diet, as certain foods such as shellfish, kidney and liver can contain high levels of cadmium. You don’t necessarily need to cut these from your diet, but eat them in moderation. This is especially true if women have a predisposition to endometrial cancer, such as a family history, diabetes or obesity.”

Moreover, studies have shown that quercetin, an antioxidant compound found in fruits and vegetables like onions and apples, may protect the body against cadmium exposure, while cilantro and chlorella can help the body detox from the substance.


[1] Medical News Today

[2] Prevention

[3] Science Daily

Storable Food

Cancer Cure Suppressed for 80 Years: They’re Finally Admitting Royal Rife Was Right

(Melissa Dykes A person does not hear sound only through the ears; he hears sound through every pore of his body. It permeates the entire being, and according to its particular influence either slows or quickens the rhythm of the blood circulation; it either wakens or soothes the nervous system. It arouses a person to greater passions or it calms him by bringing him peace. According to the sound and its influence a certain effect is produced. Sound becomes visible in the form of radiance. This shows that the same energy which goes into the form of sound before being visible is absorbed by the physical body. In that way the physical body recuperates and becomes charged with new magnetism. — Sufi musician, mystic, and healer Hazrat Inayat Khan
Read more »

A totalitarian society has totalitarian science

A totalitarian society has totalitarian science

by Jon Rappoport

August 23, 2017

Over the past 35 years, I’ve exposed as least as much fraudulent science as any reporter around. That’s just a fact.

I mention it, because one would expect I’ve learned a few lessons in the process.

And I have.

Government-backed science exists because it is a fine weapon to use, in order to force an agenda of control over the population.

We aren’t talking about knowledge here. Knowledge is irrelevant. What counts is: ‘How can we fabricate something that looks like the truth?’

I keep pointing this out: we’re dealing with reality builders. In this case, they make their roads and fences and buildings out of data, and they massage and invent the data out of thin air to suit their purposes. After all, they also invent money out of thin air.

Since 1987, one of my goals as a reporter has been to educate the public about false science.

Between then and now, I have found that, with remarkably few exceptions, mainstream reporters are studiously indifferent to false science.

They shy away from it. They pretend “it couldn’t be.” They refuse to consider facts. They and their editors parrot “the experts.”

Official science has a stranglehold on major media. It has the force of a State religion. When you stop and think about it, official science is, in a significant sense, a holy church. Therefore, it is no surprise that the church’s spokespeople would wield power over major information outlets.

These prelates invent, guard, and dispense “what is known.” That was precisely the role of the Roman Church in times past. And those professionals within the modern Church of Science are severely punished when they leave the fold and accuse their former masters of lies and crimes. They are blackballed, discredited, and stripped of their licenses. At the very least.

Totalitarian science lets you know you’re living in a totalitarian society.

The government, the press, the mega-corporations, the prestigious foundations, the academic institutions, the “humanitarian” organizations say:

“This is the disease. This is its name. This is what causes it. This is the drug that treats it. This is the vaccine that prevents it.”

“This is how accurate diagnosis is done. These are the tests. These are the possible results and what they mean.”

“Here are the genes. This is what they do. This is how they can be changed and substituted and manipulated. These are the outcomes.”

“These are the data and the statistics. They are correct. There can be no argument about them.”

“This is life. These are the components of life. All change and improvement result from our management of the components.”

“This is the path. It is governed by truth which our science reveals. Walk the path. We will inform you when you stray. We will report new improvements.”

“This is the end. You can go no farther. You must give up the ghost. We will remember you.”

We are now witnessing the acceleration of Official Science. Of course, that term is an internal contradiction. But the State shrugs and moves forward.

The notion that the State can put its seal on favored science, enforce it, and punish its competitors, is anathema to a free society.

For example: declaring that psychiatrists can appear in court as expert witnesses, when none of the 300 so-called mental disorders listed in the psychiatric literature are diagnosed by laboratory tests.

For example: stating that vaccination is mandatory, in order to protect the vaccinated (who are supposed to be immune) from the unvaccinated. An absurdity on its face.

For example: announcing that the science of climate change is “settled,” when there are, in fact, huge numbers of researchers who disagree. —And then, drafting legislation and issuing executive orders based on the decidedly unsettled science.

For example: officially approving the release and sale of medical drugs (“safe and effective”) which go on to kill, at a conservative estimate, 100,000 Americans every year. And then refusing to investigate or punish the agents of these drug approvals (the FDA).

For example: permitting the widespread use of genetically modified food crops, based on no studies of their impact on human health. And then, arbitrarily announcing that the herbicide, Roundup, for which many of these crops are specifically designed, is non-toxic.

For example: declaring and promoting the existence of various epidemics, when the viruses purportedly causing them are not proven to exist or not proven to cause human illness (SARS, West Nile, Swine Flu, etc.)

A few of you reading this have been with me since 1988, when I published my first book, AIDS INC., Scandal of the Century. Among other conclusions, I pointed out that HIV had never been shown to cause human illness; the front-line drug given to AIDS patients, AZT, was overwhelmingly toxic; and what was being called AIDS was actually a diverse number immune-suppressing conditions.

Others of you have found my work more recently. I always return to the subject of false science, because it is the most powerful long-term instrument for repression, political control, and destruction of human life.

As I’ve stated on many occasions, medical science is ideal for mounting and launching covert ops aimed at populations—because it appears to be politically neutral, without any allegiance to State interests.

Unfortunately, medical science, on many fronts, has been hijacked and taken over. The profit motive is one objective, but beyond that, there is a more embracing goal:

Totalitarian control.

On the issue of vaccines, I’ve written much about their dangers and ineffectiveness. But also consider this: the push for mandatory vaccination goes a long way toward creating a herd effect—which is really a social construction.

In other words, parents are propagandized to think of themselves as a kind of synthetic artificial “community.”

“Here we are. We are the fathers and mothers. We must all protect our children against the outliers, the rebels, the defectors, the crazy ones who refuse to vaccinate their own children. We are all in this together. They are the threat. The enemy. We are good. We know the truth. They are evil.”

This “community of the willing” are dedicated to what the government tells them. They are crusaders imbued with group-think. They run around promoting “safety and protection.” This group consciousness is entirely an artifact, propelled by official science.

The crusaders are, in effect, agents of the State.

They are created by the State.


They live in an absurd Twilight Zone where fear of germs (the tiny invisible terrorists) demands coercive action against the individuals who see through the whole illusion.

This is what official science can achieve. This is how it can enlist obedient foot soldiers and spies who don’t have the faintest idea about how they’re being used.

This is a variant on Orwell’s 1984. The citizens are owned by the all-embracing State, but they aren’t even aware of it.

That’s quite a trick.

One of my favorite examples of double-think or reverse-think is the antibody test. It is given to diagnosis diseases. Antibodies are immune-system scouts sent out to identify germ-intruders, which can then be wiped out by other immune-system troops.

Prior to 1985, the prevailing view of a positive antibody test was: the patient is doing well; his body detected the germ and dispensed with it. After 1985, the view was suddenly: this is bad news; the patient is sick or he is on the verge of getting sick; he has the germ in his body; it does harm.

Within the medical community, no one (with very few exceptions) raised hell over this massive switch. It was accepted. It was actually good for business. Now, many more people could be labeled “needs treatment,” whereas before, they would have been labeled “healthy.”

While I was writing my first book, AIDS INC., in 1987-8, I wrote the FDA asking about a possible AIDS vaccine. I was told the following: every person given such a vaccine would, of course, produce antibodies against HIV. That is the whole purpose of a vaccine: to produce antibodies.

However, I was informed, patients receiving this vaccine would be given a letter to carry with them, in case they were ever tested for HIV and came up positive. The letter would explain that the antibodies causing the positive test were the result of the vaccine, not the result of “natural” action inside the patient’s body.

In other words, the very same antibodies were either protective against AIDS (good) or indicative of deadly disease (bad).

This was the contradictory and ridiculous and extraordinary pronouncement of official science.

It carries over into every disease for which an antibody test is administered. If a vaccine against disease X is given, it delivers immunity, because it produces antibodies. But if a diagnostic test for disease X reveals the presence of the same antibodies, naturally produced in the body, this is taken as a sign of illness.

Extrapolated to a more general level, the Word is: synthetic medical treatment is good; the action of the body to heal itself is incompetent.

This is a type of superstition that would astonish even the most “primitive” societies.

It no longer astonishes me. I see it everywhere in official science.

From the medical establishment’s point of view, being alive is a medical condition.

The most useful politicians—as far as official science is concerned—are those who automatically promote its findings. Such politicians are lifted into prominence. They are champions of the Science Matrix. They never ask questions. They never doubt. They never make waves. They blithely travel their merry way into new positions of power, knowing they have enormous elite support behind them. When they need to lie, they lie. They are taught that those who question or reject official science are a tiny ‘demographic’ who can be ignored during election campaigns. ‘Don’t worry about them. They don’t count.’ These politicians are never in the trenches with the people on issues of health.

The elite Plan is universal collectivism, in which all citizens are atoms of a giant molecule. Many lies need to be told in order to make that dream/nightmare come true. If some of those lies are about science, so much the better. People believe in science.

Think about the agendas behind universal vaccination, climate change, universal psychiatric treatment, GMO food, and other ‘science-based’ frauds. They all imply a model, in which individuals give up their power in exchange for ‘doing good’ and becoming members of the largest group in the world: ‘disabled’ people with needs that must be addressed and satisfied.

Instead of supporting the liberation of the individual, the controllers want to squash it. Why? Because they fear individual power. It is forever the unpredictable wild card. They want a society in which every thought an individual thinks connects him to a greater whole—and if that sounds attractive, understand that this Whole is a fiction, intentionally faked to resemble a genuine oceanic feeling. The elite Whole is ultimately a trance-like fiction that will slow down time to a crawl, and shrink space to a sliver, and focus attention on a single mandate: wait for the next instruction from above, content in the knowledge that it will benefit all of humanity.”

This program has many agents.

Some of them are agents of official science.

power outside the matrix

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, Power Outside The Matrix, click here.)

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

Filed under: Science Fraud

Mindful Eating Shown to Help People Lose Weight

If you mindlessly watch TV, you could easily wind up wasting the entire day. If you mindlessly drive, you could wind up getting lost, or worse. Likewise, mindlessly eating will cause you to gain weight, especially if the food is void of nutrition. The exact opposite is also true, a study foundgiving your full attention to the food in front of you can lead to weight loss[1]

Carolyn Dunn, a professor and nutrition specialist at North Carolina State University in Raleigh, and a team of colleagues evaluated the effectiveness of increasing mindful eating in an online weight loss program called Eat Smart, Move More, Weigh Less (ESMMWL).

The 15-week program, developed by NC State University and the NC Division of Public Health, uses the concept of “planned behavior” to help participants alter habits that are associated with weight management. Participants are invited to focus on their relationships and interactions with food, including paying attention to how it tastes, tuning into feelings of hunger and fullness, and planning mealtimes and snacks. [2]

Source: The Huffington Post

With mindful eating, participants don’t have to give up high-calorie foods. Instead, they are encouraged to take 2 or 3 bites, and “just savor the flavor.” You can eat whatever you want, but there’s one caveat: You must focus on nothing but enjoying your food. [1]

Read: Scientists Prove you can Think Your Way to Wellness

Dunn explained:

“For example, if one of us was going to eat a food that has very high calories, we would tell them to eat one or two bites, but to eat those one or two bites with awareness, so they are getting the most pleasure out of those one to two bites.” [2]

She went on:

“Mindfulness is paying attention to your surroundings, being in the present moment.

Mindful eating is eating with purpose, eating with awareness, eating without distraction, when eating only eating, not watching television or playing computer games or having any other distractions, not eating at our desks.”

Past research shows that the first 2 bites of food provide the most enjoyment, and eating more just leads to more calorie consumption, but not more enjoyment.

Really, mindful eating doesn’t begin at mealtime, it begins before you even start cooking. Mindfulness involves the way you shop for food, and the choices you make in restaurants.

Read: 5 Tips to “Trick Yourself” into Eating Less and Eating Healthier

Dunn said:

“Are you letting your emotions drive your eating? Are you eating out of fear or depression? Are you letting external cues drive your eating because you are in line in the grocery store and that food is being heavily marketed to us?”

To see what kind of impact mindful eating had on participants’ weight-loss efforts, researchers had them complete a questionnaire, called the Mindful Eating Questionnaire (MEQ), which assesses 5 different areas of mindful eating. [1]

Those who enrolled in the ESMMWL program were invited to participate in the randomized clinical trial portion of the study. Of the 80 people who agreed to participate, 42 were randomly assigned to the intervention group, and the remaining 38 people were assigned to the control group. [2]

The researchers found that participants who completed the program lost more weight than those in the control group. On average, the volunteers in the mindfulness group lost 4.2 lbs. compared to 0.7 lbs. in the control group – a result the team called “statistically significant.” [1]

After 6 months, about 75% of the participants had not regained the weight they lost in the program, and someone even lost additional weight. [2]

When the control group finally got the opportunity to participate in the program, they saw similar results.

The team concluded:

“Results suggest that there is a beneficial association between mindful eating and weight loss. The current study contributes to the mindfulness literature as there are very few studies that employed rigorous methodology to examine the effectiveness of an intervention on mindful eating.” [3]


[1] Medical News Today

[2] Pulse Headlines

[3] The Guardian

The Huffington Post

Storable Food

What Is a Psychic Attack?

Stillness in the Storm Editor’s note: Did you find a spelling error or grammar mistake? Do you think this article needs a correction or update? Or do you just have some feedback? Send us an email at sitsshow@gmail.com with the error, headline and urlThank you for reading.


Question — What is the goal of this website? Why do we share different sources of information that sometimes conflicts or might even be considered disinformation? 
Answer — The primary goal of Stillness in the Storm is to help all people become better truth-seekers in a real-time boots-on-the-ground fashion. This is for the purpose of learning to think critically, discovering the truth from within—not just believing things blindly because it came from an “authority” or credible source. Instead of telling you what the truth is, we share information from many sources so that you can discern it for yourself. We focus on teaching you the tools to become your own authority on the truth, gaining self-mastery, sovereignty, and freedom in the process. We want each of you to become your own leaders and masters of personal discernment, and as such, all information should be vetted, analyzed and discerned at a personal level. We also encourage you to discuss your thoughts in the comments section of this site to engage in a group discernment process. 

“It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.” – Aristotle

The opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of Stillness in the Storm, the authors who contribute to it, or those who follow it. 
View and Share our Images
Curious about Stillness in the Storm? 
See our About this blog – Contact Us page.

If it was not for the gallant support of readers, we could not devote so much energy into continuing this blog. We greatly appreciate any support you provide!

We hope you benefit from this not-for-profit site 

It takes hours of work every day to maintain, write, edit, research, illustrate and publish this blog. We have been greatly empowered by our search for the truth, and the work of other researchers. We hope our efforts 
to give back, with this website, helps others in gaining 
knowledge, liberation and empowerment.

“There are only two mistakes one can make along the road to truth; 
not going all the way, and not starting.” — Buddha

If you find our work of value, consider making a Contribution.
This website is supported by readers like you. 

[Click on Image below to Contribute]