Unbelievable, this finally provides eye witness based understanding of the palace based trade culture of the Atlantean Bronze Age. It had changed little since the Bronze age and the whole structure explains the motive for pyramid building.
I have been piecing it all together based on the massive extant pool of evidence but that could never confirm who was who. That demanded eyewitnesses i had despaired of ever encountering. Now that is resolved and we have a viable model that covers Mexico and the Atlantean world as well.
Again the Atlantean era ended in 1159 BC. However, they clearly put up palace factories during the preceding one and one half thousands of years and that is a minimum time period. That the culture then continued is what produced the later Meso American cultures and all the mounds in the USA.
More important, we now understand that the mounds were only for the elite traders and that everyone else lived in completely different towns that had no such large structures. This provides a completely different perspective on likely population numbers and estimates must cycle upward.
..
The Uchee (Yuchi~Euchee) – Part One
I have been piecing it all together based on the massive extant pool of evidence but that could never confirm who was who. That demanded eyewitnesses i had despaired of ever encountering. Now that is resolved and we have a viable model that covers Mexico and the Atlantean world as well.
Again the Atlantean era ended in 1159 BC. However, they clearly put up palace factories during the preceding one and one half thousands of years and that is a minimum time period. That the culture then continued is what produced the later Meso American cultures and all the mounds in the USA.
More important, we now understand that the mounds were only for the elite traders and that everyone else lived in completely different towns that had no such large structures. This provides a completely different perspective on likely population numbers and estimates must cycle upward.
..
The Uchee (Yuchi~Euchee) – Part One
There are two different versions of the Uchee people.
The one you read in Wikipedia and anthropology books calls them Yuchi
and is the product of a legion of late 20th century speculations that
have been regurgitated back and forth so much by academicians that they
have deluded themselves into thinking they are facts.
The other is what the Uchee People and Colonial Period
eyewitness accounts state. In this strange world we live in, their
factual history has become a taboo subject that cannot be discussed in
academia, because it might make some university-published book obsolete.
Native American Brain Food
Scan virtually any anthropological reference in the United States and
you will be told that the Yuchi originally lived in southeastern
Tennessee, but also occupied villages scattered around eastern North
America. You will be told that the Chiska encountered by Hernando de
Soto and Juan Pardo’s soldiers were Yuchi. A reference citation will
tell you that this is true, because John Swanton and Charles Hudson said
so. You will also be told that the Yuchi were driven out of Tennessee
in the early 1700s by the Cherokees and afterward moved down the
Savannah River Valley, where they eventually merged with the Creeks.
More recent books on the Creeks will tell you that the Yuchi became the
“slaves” of the Creeks. Say what?
Readers are also always told that the Yuchi language is unlike any
language in the Americas. Personally, I am not even sure that this
orthodoxy is true. The statement was ” inscribed in stone” by the same
academic disciplines, which failed to notice for two centuries that such
a basic word as chiki was used for house in the Totonac, Itza Maya and Eastern Creek languages.
I stumbled upon that baby step into a brave new world back in 2006,
while building the Etowah Model for the Muscogee-Creek Nation. I noticed
that the prefabricated, post-ditch houses at Etowah were identical to
Totonac and Itza houses that I had studied in Mexico. Out of curiosity, I
looked up casa in a Spanish-Totonac dictionary and had an OMG moment.
The name John Swanton stands out as
virtually the only early-to-mid- 20th century ethnologist, who published
books of national stature on the Southeastern Indians. Most
anthropological theses and dissertations at Southeastern universities
quote Swanton very early on in the paper in order to prove that the
writer is not a heretic. Both students and practicing archaeologists
consistently use Swanton’s translations of Muskogean words rather than
consulting official dictionaries. Until the People of One Fire came
along, John Swanton was virtually the Alpha and Omega of Muskogean
ethnology.
I keep all of Swanton’s books near my work station because they
contain a compendium of hundreds of eyewitness accounts from the
Colonial Period. However, very few of his translations are accurate. In
fact, his translations are so off-base, it is obvious that he did not
own a Muskogean dictionary. Some of his interpretations of eyewitness
accounts are solid, most are not. He assumed that the locations and
names of indigenous ethnic groups in 1000 AD and 1500 AD were the same
as they were in 1800 AD. Swanton consistently ignored Colonial Period
maps, because he was not a visually oriented person. Enough said.
Their name
In their own language, the Uchee called themselves Tsoyaha.
The word is roughly translated into English as “Children of the Sun.”
This is a generic word. Individual Uchee provinces and bands had their
own names that more often as not, were derived from other languages.
These other names include Utsi, Okoni (Oconee), Okasi (Ogeechee) and
Ouete of the Uchee Water Clan; Nokoche, Nokose and Naguchee of the Uchee
Bear Clan; Chestua and Chestatee of the Rabbit Clan; Kowasate of the
Bobcat Clan; Ustanauli on the Upper Savannah River; Ustanauki on the
Suwannee River in Florida and Tchogaloge of the Upper Tennessee River.
There is a big question mark concerning the clan affiliations of
isolated Uchee trading villages that were once scattered across the
Southeast and Midwest. In most cases, the existences of these villages
were so quickly erased by the incessant tribal and colonial warfare of
the 1700s that there were few opportunities for Europeans to observe and
document them.
There are probably several other Uchee band names that have been lost
by history. However, Chiska was not one of them. The Chiska in
Tennessee were the same ethnic group as the Panaoan-speaking Chiska in
eastern Peru. Chiska means “bird” in Shipibo. It is no accident that the
Chiska were shown on 17th century French maps as living on the
Shipi-sipi that is now called the Holston River.
The Tsoyaha’s three most common names today, Yuchee, Uchee and Euchee are all Anglicizations of the Creek word Ue-se (pronounced roughly Ou : jzhē) which means “Offspring from Water.”
Both Carolina and Georgia Colonial authorities used the word Uchee.
It most closely approximates one of the Muskogean names for the Uchee
Water Clan, so probably is the most “correct.” That name predominates in
South Carolina, Georgia and Alabama today.
The Uchee lifestyle
The earliest eyewitness accounts by empathetic European explorers
described poly-ethnic indigenous societies in the Southeast that were
quite different than the simplistic concept of “chiefdoms” that so
saturates anthropological literature. One wonders if the late 20th
century academicians, who adapted the label of “chiefdom” from studies
of Sub-Saharan African societies, even bothered to read these eyewitness
accounts. This is especially true for the Uchee.
Throughout the Southeastern region, one reads eyewitness accounts of
dualistic societies. In most provinces, the elite lived in separate
towns from the commoners. Remember the description in the de Soto
Chronicles of the conurbation that composed the great town of Coça? The
elite were in a village on the south side of Talking Rock Creek. The
commoners were on the north side.
The French gave an identical description of the Natchez. The Natchez
elite lived in fortified mound centers and spoke a different language
than the commoners. The commoner’s villages either had no mounds or
else only small burial mounds.
[ we needed to know that because it explains so much for all of Meso American pre Columbian society. - Arclein ]
[ we needed to know that because it explains so much for all of Meso American pre Columbian society. - Arclein ]
In 1658, Charles de Rochefort wrote that North Georgia’s Apalache
lived in mountainside or hillside towns, built of stone. The Apalache
commoners lived in river bottomlands in villages that were identical
those of the Creeks a half century later. An alternative pattern was for
two or more ethnic groups to live in paired towns or clusters of
egalitarian towns.
The Uchee were the consummate regional traders of the Southeast, yet
in most regions they preferred to live in dualistic relationships with
other ethnic groups – particularly the Muskogeans. The Uchee lived in
dispersed villages and farmsteads, where they maintained their language,
religious traditions and distinct architecture, while having a
symbiotic relationship with entirely different ethnic groups, who
occupied separate towns.
The closest parallel to the Uchee lifestyle would be the Amish and
Orthodox Mennonite communities in North America. Within their own
communities, these Anabaptists speak Platt Duetsch,
the Late Medieval language of the Netherlands and northwestern Germany.
Most congregations only use horse-drawn transportation. Their church
congregations are exclusive and are prone to expel members, who do not
conform to all traditions.
Yet in order to survive, these Orthodox Mennonites and Amish actively
do business with the “English” outside their communities. Perhaps, in
the case of the Uchee, maintaining a distinct ethnic identity enabled
traders to maintain neutrality while passing through warring provinces.
There is also extensive cultural evidence that in some regions, Uchee
priests functioned like the Druids of the British Isles. They carried
the knowledge of ancient times through succeeding generations and were
considered to be sources of wisdom by many ethnic groups other than the
Uchee.
Uchee origin traditions
The Uchee, who made contact with the early British colonists, stated
that their ancestors came across the ocean from the home of the sun and
that their first homeland was on the South Atlantic Coast. That
statement obviously means that they arrived in North America by
traveling over the Atlantic Ocean. Where their migration journey began
is a subject of educated speculation that will be discussed in Part Two.
This discussion is going to be quite controversial since it challenges
the presumption that all indigenous peoples arrived in the Americas via
the land bridge between Siberia and Alaska.
Wherever the Uchee originated, both they and the Creek Indians agreed
that the Uchee were one of the oldest ethnic groups in the Southeast.
According to Uchee tradition, when they arrived on the coast, there were
several other peoples living in the interior that either moved westward
or took canoes to southern lands. The Algonquians were the only
indigenous peoples, whose presence in Southeast was older than the
Uchee.
After the Uchee, the Siouans migrated southward into the Carolinas
and portions of eastern Tennessee. They were eventually followed by
bands of people from the south and west, who evolved into the
Chickasaws, Alabamus and Creeks. When and why the Uchees arrived is
again going to be a controversial subject that can at present be
answered by “educated” speculations.
In Part Two, we will first examine the locations of Uchi
provinces and villages, when first contacts were made with Europeans.
Most readers will be surprised how extensive and widespread the Uchee
provinces were. The United States Department of the Interior has
relabeled all known Uchee Provinces as Creek, Cherokee, Timucua or
“Tribal Affiliation Unknown.”
We will then take a look at the available archaeological and
linguistic information in the Southeastern United States and Western
Europe, to speculate on the origin or origins of the Uchee. The Uchee
could well be the descendants of the ancient people, who are the source
of the story of Atlantis.
Major drug cover-up may have killed untold numbers of kids
And as far as Sara Bostock is concerned, it killed her daughter.
Cecily Bostock had only been taking the antidepressant Paxil for a couple weeks when she plunged a knife into her own chest.
Like millions of other children and young adults, Cecily had been prescribed Paxil based on GlaxoSmithKline’s Study 329 — a clinical trial that supposedly proved the drug was safe and effective for younger patients.
But a new analysis is proving that this study was based on fraud, deception and outright lies.
It was part of a plot to make GSK billions — no matter how many young lives were lost in the process.
You see, when Study 329 was published in 2001, it was designed to prove that Paxil could be safely taken by kids and younger adults. But the drug didn’t work any better than a placebo, and even the FDA called it a “failed trial.”
And that’s when the GSK spin machine kicked into high gear. The company launched a massive campaign of lies — right under the FDA’s nose — claiming Study 329 proved Paxil was effective for younger patients.
The claims were so outrageous that the company even had to pay $3 billion in penalties after the New York State Attorney General’s Office hauled GSK to court.
But by then the damage was done. Doctors all across the country had drunk the GSK Kool-Aid and were prescribing Paxil to millions of adolescents.
Major drug cover-up may have killed untold numbers of kids
And as far as Sara Bostock is concerned, it killed her daughter.
Cecily Bostock had only been taking the antidepressant Paxil for a couple weeks when she plunged a knife into her own chest.
Like millions of other children and young adults, Cecily had been prescribed Paxil based on GlaxoSmithKline’s Study 329 — a clinical trial that supposedly proved the drug was safe and effective for younger patients.
But a new analysis is proving that this study was based on fraud, deception and outright lies.
It was part of a plot to make GSK billions — no matter how many young lives were lost in the process.
You see, when Study 329 was published in 2001, it was designed to prove that Paxil could be safely taken by kids and younger adults. But the drug didn’t work any better than a placebo, and even the FDA called it a “failed trial.”
And that’s when the GSK spin machine kicked into high gear. The company launched a massive campaign of lies — right under the FDA’s nose — claiming Study 329 proved Paxil was effective for younger patients.
The claims were so outrageous that the company even had to pay $3 billion in penalties after the New York State Attorney General’s Office hauled GSK to court.
But by then the damage was done. Doctors all across the country had drunk the GSK Kool-Aid and were prescribing Paxil to millions of adolescents.
And it turns out that, in some cases, docs were handing these young patients a death sentence.
Through a unique program called RIAT — which was started a few years ago by leading medical journals and stands for “restoring invisible and abandoned trials — researchers have begun analyzing 77,000 pages of raw data on Study 329.
And they’ve found damning evidence that GSK may have tried to cover up evidence of suicides and other risks for young patients who took Paxil.
Talk about blind greed!
The data revealed that adolescents in the trial who attempted suicide (such as one who took 80 Tylenol tablets) were deliberately misclassified using strange coding methods or filtered from the results completely.
Adverse events were even lumped together so they appeared less obvious. And in many cases, reactions to the drug were never even added to the trial’s records.
And here’s the kicker — it turns out that Study 329 wasn’t even authored by the 22 prestigious doctors whose names appear on it. It was written by a PR firm hired by GSK.
It’s clear that GSK was hellbent on making a fortune off of Paxil — even if it had to hide the deadly risks from doctors and patients. Risks that may have cost Cecily Bostock and other patients their lives.
We saw just this week how the owner of a peanut butter company was sentenced to 28 years in prison for knowingly causing a salmonella outbreak. And if you ask me, someone from GSK ought to end up in handcuffs over Study 329.
And scientists are now demanding that Study 329 be permanently retracted and that GSK admit it was bogus from the start. Well, good luck with that.
As a BMJ editor noted, “no correction, no retraction, no apology, no comment” have been offered by either GSK or the academics involved.
No surprise there, right?
And while GSK and the Feds might not be doing a thing to keep Paxil away from children and young adults, there’s plenty you can do.
If there’s a young person in your life who has been prescribed this killer — and many are still getting the drug and its generic version paroxetine every single year — schedule a doctor’s appointment right away.
And in the meantime, always be on the lookout for sudden behavioral changes. Because this fraud has already claimed enough victims, and you don’t want someone you love to be next.
Sources:
“The human cost of a misleading drug-safety study” David Dobbs, September 18, 2015, The Atlantic, theatlantic.com
Major drug cover-up may have killed untold numbers of kids
And as far as Sara Bostock is concerned, it killed her daughter.
Cecily Bostock had only been taking the antidepressant Paxil for a couple weeks when she plunged a knife into her own chest.
Like millions of other children and young adults, Cecily had been prescribed Paxil based on GlaxoSmithKline’s Study 329 — a clinical trial that supposedly proved the drug was safe and effective for younger patients.
But a new analysis is proving that this study was based on fraud, deception and outright lies.
It was part of a plot to make GSK billions — no matter how many young lives were lost in the process.
You see, when Study 329 was published in 2001, it was designed to prove that Paxil could be safely taken by kids and younger adults. But the drug didn’t work any better than a placebo, and even the FDA called it a “failed trial.”
And that’s when the GSK spin machine kicked into high gear. The company launched a massive campaign of lies — right under the FDA’s nose — claiming Study 329 proved Paxil was effective for younger patients.
The claims were so outrageous that the company even had to pay $3 billion in penalties after the New York State Attorney General’s Office hauled GSK to court.
But by then the damage was done. Doctors all across the country had drunk the GSK Kool-Aid and were prescribing Paxil to millions of adolescents.
And it turns out that, in some cases, docs were handing these young patients a death sentence.
Through a unique program called RIAT — which was started a few years ago by leading medical journals and stands for “restoring invisible and abandoned trials — researchers have begun analyzing 77,000 pages of raw data on Study 329.
And they’ve found damning evidence that GSK may have tried to cover up evidence of suicides and other risks for young patients who took Paxil.
Talk about blind greed!
The data revealed that adolescents in the trial who attempted suicide (such as one who took 80 Tylenol tablets) were deliberately misclassified using strange coding methods or filtered from the results completely.
Adverse events were even lumped together so they appeared less obvious. And in many cases, reactions to the drug were never even added to the trial’s records.
And here’s the kicker — it turns out that Study 329 wasn’t even authored by the 22 prestigious doctors whose names appear on it. It was written by a PR firm hired by GSK.
It’s clear that GSK was hellbent on making a fortune off of Paxil — even if it had to hide the deadly risks from doctors and patients. Risks that may have cost Cecily Bostock and other patients their lives.
We saw just this week how the owner of a peanut butter company was sentenced to 28 years in prison for knowingly causing a salmonella outbreak. And if you ask me, someone from GSK ought to end up in handcuffs over Study 329.
And scientists are now demanding that Study 329 be permanently retracted and that GSK admit it was bogus from the start. Well, good luck with that.
As a BMJ editor noted, “no correction, no retraction, no apology, no comment” have been offered by either GSK or the academics involved.
No surprise there, right?
And while GSK and the Feds might not be doing a thing to keep Paxil away from children and young adults, there’s plenty you can do.
If there’s a young person in your life who has been prescribed this killer — and many are still getting the drug and its generic version paroxetine every single year — schedule a doctor’s appointment right away.
And in the meantime, always be on the lookout for sudden behavioral changes. Because this fraud has already claimed enough victims, and you don’t want someone you love to be next.
Sources:
“The human cost of a misleading drug-safety study” David Dobbs, September 18, 2015, The Atlantic, theatlantic.com
No comments:
Post a Comment