Health Supreme by Sepp Hasslberger

Networking For A Better Future - News and perspectives you may not find in the media

Networking For A Better Future - News and perspectives you may not find in the media

Health Supreme

News Blog

Site Map





Food for Thought


Human Potential






The Media

War Crimes


Articles Archive


See also:


Communication Agents:

INACTIVE  Ivan Ingrilli
  Chris Gupta
  Tom Atlee
INACTIVE  Emma Holister
  Rinaldo Lampis
  Steve Bosserman
  CA Journal


Robin Good's
Web sites:












The Individual - Human Ability:


Society - Politics:






June 29, 2003

San Francisco adopts precautionary principle

The San Francisco Board of Supervisors adopted the precautionary principle as city and county policy June 17, 2003, a stunning and unprecedented breakthrough in the management of environmental matters in the U.S. The vote carried 8 to 2.

The long political road to the June 17 vote began when San Francisco mayor Willie Brown hired Jared Blumenfeld to head the city's Department of the Environment.

Under Blumenfeld's guidance, San Francisco government spent more than 2 years studying and debating how to integrate the precautionary principle into city- and county-wide policy. It was Blumenfeld who corralled the political resources to put precaution on the agenda in San Francisco.

Source: San Francisco Department of the Environment

Update December 2003:

Chemical Industry's Secret Plan to Attack California's Anti-Toxics Trend: Memo Calls for Phony Front Groups, Spying on Activists.

Update April 2004:

Answering Critiques of Precaution, Part 1, April 15, 2004 Rachel's Environment and Health News # 789

Answering Critiques of Precaution, Part 2, April 29, 2004 Rachel's Environment and Health News # 790

The following is the Text of the San Francisco Precautionary Principle Policy

Chapter 1 Precautionary Principle Policy Statement.

Sec. 100. FINDINGS.

The Board of Supervisors finds and declares that:

A. Every San Franciscan has an equal right to a healthy and safe environment. This requires that our air, water, earth, and food be of a sufficiently high standard that individuals and communities can live healthy, fulfilling, and dignified lives. The duty to enhance, protect and preserve San Francisco's environment rests on the shoulders of government, residents, citizen groups and businesses alike.

B. Historically, environmentally harmful activities have only been stopped after they have manifested extreme environmental degradation or exposed people to harm. In the case of DDT, lead, and asbestos, for instance, regulatory action took place only after disaster had struck. The delay between first knowledge of harm and appropriate action to deal with it can be measured in human lives cut short.

C. San Francisco is a leader in making choices based on the least environmentally harmful alternatives, thereby challenging traditional assumptions about risk management. Numerous City ordinances including: the Integrated Pest Management Ordinance, the Resource Efficient Building Ordinance, the Healthy Air Ordinance, the Resource Conservation Ordinance, and the Environmentally Preferable Purchasing Ordinance apply a precautionary approach to specific City purchases and activities. Internationally, this model is called the Precautionary Principle.

D. As the City consolidates existing environmental laws into a single Environment Code, and builds a framework for new legislation, the City sees the Precautionary Principle approach as its policy framework to develop laws for a healthier and more just San Francisco. By doing so, the City will create and maintain a healthy, viable Bay Area environment for current and future generations, and will become a model of sustainability.

E. Science and technology are creating new solutions to prevent or mitigate environmental problems. However, science is also creating new compounds and chemicals that are already finding their way into mother's milk and causing other new problems. New legislation may be required to address these situations, and the Precautionary Principle is intended as a tool to help promote environmentally healthy alternatives while weeding out the negative and often unintended consequences of new technologies.

F. A central element of the precautionary approach is the careful assessment of available alternatives using the best available science. An alternatives assessment examines a broad range of options in order to present the public with different effects of different options considering short-term versus long-term effects or costs, and evaluating and comparing the adverse or potentially adverse effects of each option, noting options with fewer potential hazards. This process allows fundamental questions to be asked: "Is this potentially hazardous activity necessary?" "What less hazardous options are available?" and "How little damage is possible?"

G. The alternatives assessment is also a public process because, locally or internationally, the public bears the ecological and health consequences of environmental decisions. A government's course of action is necessarily enriched by broadly based public participation when a full range of alternatives is considered based on input from diverse individuals and groups. The public should be able to determine the range of alternatives examined and suggest specific reasonable alternatives, as well as their short- and long-term benefits and drawbacks.

H. This form of open decision-making is in line with San Francisco's historic Sunshine Act, which allows citizens to have full view of the legislative process. One of the goals of the Precautionary Principle is to include citizens as equal partners in decisions affecting their environment.

I. San Francisco looks forward to the time when the City's power is generated from renewable sources, when all our waste is recycled, when our vehicles produce only potable water as emissions, when the Bay is free from toxins, and the oceans are free from pollutants. The Precautionary Principle provides a means to help us attain these goals as we evaluate future laws and policies in such areas as transportation, construction, land use, planning, water, energy, health care, recreation, purchasing, and public expenditure.

J. Transforming our society to realize these goals and achieving a society living respectfully within the bounds of nature will take a behavioral as well as technological revolution. The Precautionary approach to decision-making will help San Francisco speed this process of change by moving beyond finding cures for environmental ills to preventing the ills before they can do harm.


The following shall constitute the City and County of San Francisco's Precautionary Principle policy. All officers, boards, commissions, and departments of the City and County shall implement the Precautionary Principle in conducting the City and County's affairs The Precautionary Principle requires a thorough exploration and a careful analysis of a wide range of alternatives. Using the best available science, the Precautionary Principle requires the selection of the alternative that presents the least potential threat to human health and the City's natural systems. Public participation and an open and transparent decision making process are critical to finding and selecting alternatives.

Where threats of serious or irreversible damage to people or nature exist, lack of full scientific certainty about cause and effect shall not be viewed as sufficient reason for the City to postpone measures to prevent the degradation of the environment or protect the health of its citizens. Any gaps in scientific data uncovered by the examination of alternatives will provide a guidepost for future research, but will not prevent protective action being taken by the City. As new scientific data become available, the City will review its decisions and make adjustments when warranted.

Where there are reasonable grounds for concern, the precautionary approach to decision-making is meant to help reduce harm by triggering a process to select the least potential threat. The essential elements of the Precautionary Principle approach to decision-making include

1. Anticipatory Action: There is a duty to take anticipatory action to prevent harm. Government, business, and community groups, as well as the general public, share this responsibility.

2. Right to Know: The community has a right to know complete and accurate information on potential human health and environmental impacts associated with the selection of products, services, operations or plans. The burden to supply this information lies with the proponent, not with the general public.

3. Alternatives Assessment: An obligation exists to examine a full range of alternatives and select the alternative with the least potential impact on human health and the environment including the alternative of doing nothing.

4. Full Cost Accounting: When evaluating potential alternatives, there is a duty to consider all the costs, including raw materials, manufacturing, transportation, use, cleanup, eventual disposal, and health costs even if such costs are not reflected in the initial price. Short- and long-term time thresholds should be considered when making decisions.

5. Participatory Decision Process: Decisions applying the Precautionary Principle must be transparent, participatory, and informed by the best available information.


No later than three years from the effective date of this ordinance, and after a public hearing, the Commission on the Environment shall submit a report to the Board of Supervisors on the effectiveness of the Precautionary Principle policy.


The Director of the Department of the Environment shall produce and maintain a list of all City and County of San Francisco ordinances and resolutions which affect or relate to the environment and shall post this list on the Department of the Environment's website.


The Board of Supervisors encourages all City employees and officials to take the precautionary principle into consideration and evaluate alternatives when taking actions that could impact health and the environment, especially where those actions could pose threats of serious harm or irreversible damage. This ordinance does not impose specific duties upon any City employee or official to take specific actions. In adopting and undertaking the enforcement of this ordinance, the City and County of San Francisco is assuming an undertaking only to promote the general welfare. It is not assuming, nor is it imposing on its officers and employees, an obligation for breach of which it is liable in money damages to any person who claims that such breach proximately caused injury nor may this ordinance provide any basis for any other judicial relief including, but not limited to a writ of mandamus or an injuction.


The decision seems to have corporate public relations people extremely worried. Here is what Ross Irvine, President / Corporate Activist of ePublic Relations Ltd has to say about the San Francisco move towards a more environmentally friendly City and County policy.

Environmentalists win victory of unprecedented importance and magnitude:
PR changed globally and forever

Environmental activists have won a victory that's so stunning and far-reaching that even they are amazed. It's a win that -- over time-- will have an impact on PR across the United States, North America, and the entire world.

Regardless of the business you're in -- biotechnology, banking, transportation, chemical, nuclear, mining or agriculture -- you will feel its influence. It will stifle innovation, creativity and progress in your company or organization. And, it will change the way you do PR on a day-to-day basis.

On June 17, the San Francisco Board of Supervisors adopted the precautionary principle as the basis for city and county policies.

The precautionary principle is a notoriously vague and imprecise concept for which there are at least 23 definitions. One activist has said, "It (the precautionary principle) is a broad ethical principle.

It can guide us all - workers and environmentalists - in a righteous fight against corporate greed."

It's little wonder that the activist newsletter Rachel's Environment & Health News describes "a city guided by the precautionary principle" as a "dream." Rachel's also said the San Francisco development was "a stunning and unprecedented breakthrough in the management of environmental matters in the U.S."

The precautionary principle made its major public debut in the 1992 United Nations Rio Declaration but has a history that's much longer.

It has been discussed on this web site, its predecessor --EnviroScan, a newsletter distributed by fax in the early and mid 1990s -- and in ePublic Relations presentations to PR and business groups.

Framework for future laws.

The San Francisco Board of Supervisors stated: "...the City sees the Precautionary Principle approach as its policy framework to develop laws for a healthier and more just San Francisco."

It goes on to say "Where threats of serious or irreversible damage to people or nature exist, lack of full scientific certainty about cause and effect shall not be viewed as sufficient reason for the City to postpone measures to prevent the degradation of the environment or protect the health of its citizens. Any gaps in scientific data uncovered by the examination of alternatives will provide a guidepost for future research, but will not prevent protective action being taken by the City. As new scientific data become available, the City will review its decisions and make adjustments when warranted."

In this single paragraph, San Francisco discards accepted and effective scientific risk assessment programs. Instead, the mere suspicion that something may cause harm is sufficient to bring an activity to a halt. Furthermore, any gap in knowledge or information-- not matter how small -- can be used to bring an activity to a halt. As a result, if opponents of a technology or residential development ask proponents "Have you thought of this? Have you considered that?" and the answer is "No," the technology or development can be stopped. It's simply impossible to think of -- let alone consider and evaluate -- all alternatives and their implications.

The San Francisco Board of Supervisors is asking for the impossible when it states "An obligation exists to examine a full (emphasis added) range of alternatives and select the alternative with the least potential impact on human health and the environment including the alternative of doing nothing."

There's no leeway here! The burden on business is great and costly.

San Francisco adoption of the precautionary principle also includes a high degree of public participation with which most corporate and organizational PR folks are unfamiliar.

The board of supervisors says "The alternatives assessment is also a public process because, locally or internationally, the public bears the ecological and health consequences of environmental decisions. A government's course of action is necessarily enriched by broadly based public participation when a full range of alternatives is considered based on input from diverse individuals and groups. The public should be able to determine the range of alternatives examined and suggest specific reasonable alternatives, as well as their short- and long-term benefits and drawbacks."

This opens the doors to international activists in addition to the homegrown variety to become in San Francisco's public participation process. In addition, uninformed, malevolent and self-serving activists individuals and groups now have a role in setting the range of alternatives to be considered in the San Francisco decision-making process.

Business must participate.

Participation in the public process will require business to take part in decision-making from every ad hoc committee to the mayor's office. Failure to do so, will mean business forfeits the right to partake in the final decision and to criticize the final decision. If business isn't there from day one and throughout the process it can't complain that it didn't have the opportunity to make its case.

To cope with this new reality, corporate PR folks need to intensify and broaden their efforts at the local level. This will be necessary in every village, town, and city across the U.S. and eventually around the world. Local PR, not global PR, is the PR challenge of the future. It will usurp crisis PR as the ultimate PR challenge.

The history of the San Francisco precautionary approach and the documentation adopted by the city board of supervisors has been circulated around the world. Just as nuclear-free, GE-free, pesticide-free and smoking-free communities have sprung up around the world, it's only a matter of time before precautionary-principle communities surface everywhere. The model is in place and available.

It only needs to be adapted for use in other communities.

The San Francisco situation illustrates one of the great differences between corporate and activist PR. Corporate PR folks are concerned about the business, the industry, the brand, the next news cycle and media relations. Activist PR folks are concerned about the environment in which business, industry, the brand, the news cycle and media relations are conducted. Corporate PR folks manage issues while activist PR folks manage the context in which issues occur. Put another way, activist PR folks deal with values and visions, corporate PR folks deal with things.

The San Francisco board of supervisors talks a great deal about values and visions in the information explaining its adoption of the precautionary principle. For your information and thoughtful consideration the board of supervisors' policy follows.

Read it carefully. Its implications are much broader than described here. PR as you know it has changed forever.

See also:

An interesting article discussing the independence of science and the precautionary principle, found in an ISIS Report -
25 February 2005:
Which Science or Scientists Can You Trust?

SAN FRANCISCO'S RIGHT TO PROTECT ITS CHILDREN IS CHALLENGED AGAIN By Peter Montague. The American Chemistry Council (ACC) -- formerly known as the Chemical Manufacturers Association -- on November 16 filed a second lawsuit against the City of San Francisco, aiming to prevent the City from protecting children from toxic chemicals in toys. San Francisco passed a law in June prohibiting the sale of toys containing six toxic chemicals called phthalates (tha-lates) and another toxicant called bisphenol-A. In October, the ACC and other corporations sued the city in California state court, claiming that state law preempted the city's right to protect children by controlling toxics in toys.

The article focuses on flaws in the actual approaches of exposure to a chemical of recipient organisms. It demonstrates the excessive use of arguments based on adverse effects and underlines the necessity to take adaptive effects seriously. Regulators are invited to rethink their inclination to the 'When in doubt, keep it out.' precautionary approach, with results in counter-productive and costly regulations. The authors are clear about the necessity to include hormesis, in the form of a TIE (toxicologically insignificant exposure level) related to the concentration, as a regulatory translation of adaptive effects. This inclusion might well be the 'brake' for the looming 'collision' with reality of the actual linear toxicological models. This analysis includes the advice to EPA, not to follow the 'witch hunt of synthetic chemicals' as embodied in the EU REACH program.


posted by Sepp Hasslberger on Sunday June 29 2003
updated on Wednesday December 8 2010

URL of this article:


Related Articles

Risk Analysis - A Study Of Canadian Health Products Legislation
In the late nineties, Canada was announcing that natural health products would be regulated in an innovative way. The intention was to establish a "third category" for health products, separate both from foods and from medicines, to appropriately regulate natural health products. As it turned out however, the new regulations led to a more drug related environment for health products with onerous prior approval procedures for products. MP James Lunney... [read more]
August 25, 2004 - Sepp Hasslberger

Schubert: 'Sound Science' Overrides Reality and Common Sense
Science in the service of politics? Yes, says the Union of Concerned Scientists, appalled over the hijacking of science by political expediency. According to an article in The Register, more than four thousand scientists signed the latest protest against the Bush administration's appalling bending of scientific fact to fit the political agenda. David Schubert, head of the Cellular Neurobiology Laboratory at the Salk Institute for Biological Studies in La Jolla,... [read more]
July 18, 2004 - Sepp Hasslberger

Food Supplements: German Risk Institute Takes Dim View
The German Federal Institute for Risk Evaluation, formerly the Federal Office for Consumer Health Protection, has established a risk assessment model for deducing maximum safe levels of nutrients provided in supplements and fortified foods, according to a recent report of The report was published in two parts, one dealing with minerals, the other with vitamins, both available in PDF format - so far only in German language (Minerals here)... [read more]
January 20, 2005 - Sepp Hasslberger

EU supplements directive based on bad science
The European Union has issued a directive on food supplements which must be incorporated into national law by the member countries by the end of July 2003. There have been numerous protests and challenges to the EU legislators from consumers, health shops, manufacturers and practitioners, but the apparency is that of a decision made that cannot be undone. As consumers and sometimes patients we will lose access to a large... [read more]
June 12, 2003 - Sepp Hasslberger

Gene Mallove: Science Censorship is 'Invisible Evil'
When in February this year, the Union of Concerned Scientists came out with a warning that "the Bush administration had systematically distorted scientific fact in the service of policy goals on the environment, health, biomedical research and nuclear weaponry at home and abroad", a long festering wound was touched, but unfortunately no cleansing process seems to be underway as yet. Examples for the distortion of science for purposes of either... [read more]
April 30, 2004 - Sepp Hasslberger

You can't trust the drug 'experts'
Newshawk: CMAP Pubdate: Tuesday, April 13, 2004 Source: Ottawa Citizen (CN ON) Contact: You can't trust the drug 'experts' Dan Gardner The Ottawa Citizen 'One night's ecstasy use can cause brain damage," shouted a newspaper headline in September 2002, after the journal Science published a study that found a single dose of the drug ecstasy injected into monkeys and baboons caused terrible brain damage. Two of the 10 primates... [read more]
April 23, 2004 - Chris Gupta




Readers' Comments

This was received by email, from GE. It is relevant to this article, so I post it here:


I offer some feed back on the news grab about the Precautionary Principle.

It does not surprise me that San Francisco has adopted this 'principle', or policy. The reason it does not is that Gorbachev

a) resides in SF

b) heads up the Green Cross and participated in the Rio Earth summit of 1992 which endorsed, even pushed, the precautionary principle

c) is still a die hard socialist and totalitarian

The so called Green Revolution promoted by Gorby is also called something else by astute critics - the Watermelon Revolution - green on the outside and red on the inside.

I love that portrayal. :-)

There is a good article called "Earth Charter - agenda for totalitarianism" at

The Green Revolution is a form of Trojan Horse with hidden agendas and dangers, but housed in "concerns" for the environment. It helps enormously that global warming really is happening - just as it did when the Ice Age melted 12,000 years ago - it is an opportunity. "Green" disarms people b/c it is like arguing against motherhood and apple pie to many people - green is good for the earth. Well yes on the surface, but what about HOW implemented?

And what of that most reliable of globalist strategies Hegelism - which always works obliquely and largely unseen to concentrate power in ever fewer hands.... especially globalist hands. E.g. to disarm Amercians, create lots of random shooting events and then rent-a-crowd demands for more gun control, letters to the editor (chosen for publishing of course) and media coverage. Soon everyone is demanding gun control and disarmament as a precautionary principle to protect innocent lives. Hitler bragged of gun control as a model for the world - just before he attacked 6 million of his own disarmed citizens, after all. That's what 9/11 was for - to create more power for globalists by suspending many civil rights based on a promotion of fear, protectionism and a precautionary principle. It is part of communist Hegelism at work. Ditto for avian flu - create demand for vaccinations with God knows what ingredients - the ultimate Trojan horse.

Red alerts and alarm bells should go off when one reads in that article "Steven Rockefeller, chairman of the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, is currently coordinating the drafting of the Earth Charter for the Earth Charter Commission and the Earth Council".

Maurice Strong (UN), Gorby and Rockefellers are all advocates of depopulation, global socialism and a One World Gov to replace national sovereignties. i.e. totalitarianism. How 'green' is a Global Commons policy? Perhaps as green as dollars and profits, but as red as control of the masses.

From a health perspective it is interesting to consider that the Precautionary Principle is what MDs and AMA uses supposedly as an oath of "first do no harm". But of course Hippocratic became hypocritic and harm is exactly what they do first. It applies well to man made drugs but it is largely inappliacable to age old uses of herbs and natural substances. So if developing a new drug be careful indeed but if humanity has used a substance for millennia then hands off by authorities like Health Regulators.

Health Regulators now declare age old natural substances as "new drugs" in order to control them and control the competiton to the profitable drug industry. Ditto for WTO. Health after all does not just interfere with medical profits, it interferes with depopulation goals.

Anything that gives authorities more control moves towards totalitarianism and Positivist Laws to replace Natural Law. Under Positivist Law one can only do what the law prescribes which results in an endless blizzard of laws. Under Natural Law one can do anything that is not specifically forbidden by law and we retain God given rights such as self-defense, right to bear arms, freedom of movement, speech, etc. Magna Carta and 1689 Bill of Rights in England. The blizzard of new laws can be seen at work in the EU - a globalist body - where on one busy day a record 187 laws were passed within one hour!! How much scrutiny did they get by each member of the European Parliament (MEP)? Let's see 187/60 = 3.1 laws per minute ... hmm.

As with the UN this is not democracy. Voting does not alone make anything democratic. The USSR used to have "elections" too - do you favor the guy in power or not? But appointees are much more convenient for globalists as per the 25th Amendment to the Constitution pushed by Rockefeller, and as per the UN - elected by no one.

So the precautionary principle cloaks itself in a policy intended for our protection. But it is a "protection racket" as wholesome as those used by the Mafia - another Illuminati creation. We see it at work in the FDA. We see it at work in all the new anti-terrorist laws that suspend civil liberties. I will take my chances with terrorists thank you - just let people keep a gun and ammo handy and natural substances for health and an unadulterated food supply using our own seeds and not terminator crops. Food is another grand target for depopulation and disease. As one UN rep said "control the food supply and control the people"..... to wit:-

"Food is power. We use it to change behavior. Some may call that bribery. We do not apologize," exclaimed Catherine Bertini, former Confidential Assistant to New York State Governor Nelson Rockefeller and Executive Director of the U.N. World Food Program at the Beijing Woman's Conference (Sept. 1995). Control the food and you control the people.

Natural Law is one counter point to the Precautionary Principle. Democracy could be but there is no real democracy anymore and both sides are controlled pawns. Civil servants now act as masters. The people are increasingly constrained by bureaucratic dos and don'ts. Real democracy is power (kratos) of the people (demos) not voting for a sequential string of tyrants..... or sequential dictatorship. Positivism gives us Five Year Plans as per USSR - not a natural system of supply and demand and natural rights.

Rockefellers promote the Earth Charter and the UN sits on land they 'donated', no doubt from obscene profits from drug cartelism which was a favorite of the family way back during Sterling Drug days. The Sterling Drug Trust story is here

Rockefellers also control the Federal Reserve along with other international banksters, as they do the central banks of all countries having one. Senator Aldrich (a Rockefeller family member) in 1912 drafted the bill that made the Fed a private bank on Dec 23, 1913.

"A Central Bank is 90 % of communizing a country." This is a quote from Nikolai Lenin! ( Marrs, Millennium, p 143.)

Where is that Second Coming when we need it?

Best regards .......... GE.

Posted by: GE on October 27, 2006 10:55 AM


Security code:

Please enter the security code displayed on the above grid

Due to our anti-spamming policy the comments you are posting will show up online within few hours from the posting time.



The Individual Is Supreme And Finds Its Way Through Intuition


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

These articles are brought to you strictly for educational and informational purposes. Be sure to consult your health practitioner of choice before utilizing any of the information to cure or mitigate disease. Any copyrighted material cited is used strictly in a non commercial way and in accordance with the "fair use" doctrine.



Enter your Email

Powered by FeedBlitz



Most Popular Articles
Lipitor: Side Effects And Natural Remedy

Lipitor - The Human Cost

Fluoride Accumulates in Pineal Gland

Original blueprints for 200 mpg carburetor found in England

Medical system is leading cause of death and injury in US

Aspartame and Multiple Sclerosis - Neurosurgeon's Warning

'Bird Flu', SARS - Biowarfare or a Pandemic of Propaganda?



More recent articles
Chromotherapy in Cancer

Inclined Bed Therapy: Tilt your bed for healthful sleep

European Food Safety Authority cherry picks evidence - finds Aspartame completely safe

Did Aspartame kill Cory Terry?

Retroviral particles in human immune defenses - is AIDS orthodoxy dead wrong?

Vaccine damage in Great Britain: The consequences of Dr Wakefield’s trials

Archive of all articles on this site



Most recent comments
Uganda: Pfizer Sponsored AIDS Institute Snubs Natural Treatment Options

Lipitor: Side Effects And Natural Remedy

AIDS: 'No Gold Standard' For HIV Testing

Lipitor: Side Effects And Natural Remedy

'Global Business Coalition' Wants More Testing: But Tests Do Not Show AIDS



Candida International

What Does MHRA Stand For??

Bono and Bush Party without Koch: AIDS Industry Makes a Mockery of Medical Science

Profit as Usual and to Hell with the Risks: Media Urge that Young Girls Receive Mandatory Cervical Cancer Vaccine


Share The Wealth

Artificial Water Fluoridation: Off To A Poor Start / Fluoride Injures The Newborn

Drinking Water Fluoridation is Genotoxic & Teratogenic

Democracy At Work? - PPM On Fluoride

"Evidence Be Damned...Patient Outcome Is Irrelevant" - From Helke

Why Remove Fluoride From Phosphate Rock To Make Fertilizer


Evolving Collective Intelligence

Let Us Please Frame Collective Intelligence As Big As It Is

Reflections on the evolution of choice and collective intelligence

Whole System Learning and Evolution -- and the New Journalism

Gathering storms of unwanted change

Protect Sources or Not? - More Complex than It Seems



Islanda, quando il popolo sconfigge l'economia globale.

Il Giorno Fuori dal Tempo, Il significato energetico del 25 luglio

Rinaldo Lampis: L'uso Cosciente delle Energie

Attivazione nei Colli Euganei (PD) della Piramide di Luce

Contatti con gli Abitanti Invisibili della Natura


Diary of a Knowledge Broker

Giving It Away, Making Money

Greenhouses That Change the World

Cycles of Communication and Collaboration

What Is an "Integrated Solution"?

Thoughts about Value-Add




Best sellers from