Wild Water Botanicals

05/28/2026

Did you know they are planning an AI data centre in Nanaimo? In an area that already experiences water restrictions and on an island with an already overwhelmed power grid? It seems our desire for a more sustainable future have gone out the window.

Sign the petition

https://www.change.org/p/stop-nanaimo-city-from-building-ai-data-centres

05/22/2026

Researchers at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU) have delivered striking evidence that writing by hand engages the brain far more deeply than typing the same words on a keyboard.
In the study, published in Frontiers in Psychology, 36 university students wore high-density EEG caps with 256 electrodes while performing a simple task: copying words they saw on a screen. They did it once by hand with a digital pen and once by typing on a keyboard.
The results were dramatic. When participants wrote by hand, widespread brain connectivity patterns lit up — particularly in theta and alpha frequency bands linked to memory formation, sensory processing, attention, and learning. These connections spanned central and parietal regions. When they typed, those same areas went almost completely silent.
Lead researchers Audrey van der Meer and Ruud van der Weel emphasize that the fine motor movements, sensory feedback from the pen, and visual-motor coordination of handwriting create rich, elaborate neural networks that typing simply doesn’t replicate.
The findings have clear implications for education. As schools shift toward tablets and laptops, this research suggests preserving time for handwriting could give children a significant advantage in learning and memory. In an increasingly digital world, the humble pen may still be one of the best tools for building a stronger brain.

05/09/2026

Work with me!

Herbal Medicine:
Are you seeking a natural approach to health and wellness? I offer 1:1 herbal medicine consultations with a personalized health plan to guide you on your journey to vibrant health. With a deep understanding of herbal remedies, I create custom herbal formulas designed just for you and your unique needs. Whether you’re dealing with chronic conditions, an acute condition, or simply seeking to enhance your general well-being, my holistic approach integrates the wisdom of nature with the research of modern medicine to support your body’s innate healing abilities.

Flower Essences:
Are you interested in working with flower essences but are unsure where to start? Then my 1:1 flower essence consultations might be the right fit! Flower essences can be a powerful tool for emotional healing and personal growth. During our private session together, we’ll delve into your unique needs and create a custom flower essence blend tailored just for you. Experience the gentle yet profound impact flower essences can have.

Mentorship:
Are you a budding clinical herbalist starting your practice, or maybe you’re coming back to your clinical practice after some time away? Perhaps you have a particularly challenging case you would like another perspective on, or maybe you are just eager to refine your clinical skills? My herbal mentorship is crafted with your professional growth in mind. Choose between the collaborative atmosphere of a monthly group meet-up or the focused, individualized attention of 1:1 mentoring.

For more information on any of these offerings, please visit my website (link in bio)

05/01/2026

Even if the spring feels mild, dead grass from last season is dry and can ignite easily. The Fine Fuel Moisture Code (FFMC) measures how easily fine surface fuels like grass and needles can catch and carry fire, and spring values are often high. The FFMC varies by region and topography, so conditions across B.C. may not be the same.

When it comes to grass fires, wind matters more than temperature. Wind dries fuels quickly and drives how fast a fire can spread. If it's a windy day, it's not a good day to burn.

Before any open burning:
📱Check whether burning is permitted in your area at gov.bc.ca/fireprohibitions
👀Never leave a fire unattended.
💦Have an adequate water supply and a hand tool, like a shovel, within reach at all times.
👉🏼When you're done, make sure your fire is fully extinguished and cold to the touch.
💻Review gov.bc.ca/saferburning to learn more

04/27/2026

The littlest bouquet 🥰

04/17/2026

04/16/2026

12/23/2025

A major toxicology journal has retracted a w**d killer study backed by Monsanto, citing ‘serious ethical concerns’. The highly cited paper was used as evidence that the widely used herbicide glyphosate (Roundup) is safe.

In 2017, a lawsuit uncovered internal emails from Monsanto that suggested its employees helped ghostwrite an influential paper that claimed to find no evidence glyphosate caused cancer. Now, the scientific journal that published the 2000 paper has announced it has been retracted.

The paper was withdrawn because of “serious ethical concerns” and questions about the validity of the research findings, toxicologist Martin van den Berg, co-editor-in-chief of Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology, wrote in a scathing retraction notice released on 28th November. “This article has been widely regarded as a hallmark paper in the discourse surrounding the carcinogenicity of glyphosate and Roundup,” wrote van den Berg, who works at Utrecht University. “However, the lack of clarity regarding which parts of the article were authored by Monsanto employees creates uncertainty about the integrity of the conclusions drawn.”

The decision, which came more than 8 years after the initial revelations, can be traced to the work of two scientists who this year filed a retraction request with the journal after documenting the staying power of the disputed paper. “My worry is that people will keep citing it,” says Naomi Oreskes, a historian of science at Harvard University who sought the retraction along with her then postdoctoral researcher, Alexander Kaurov.

In July, the duo published an analysis showing that the now-retracted paper was in the top 0.1% of studies cited in glyphosate-related academic research. They found that citation rates barely budged after the revelations of Monsanto’s hidden involvement, and the paper continued to be used in policy documents. With the retraction, Oreskes hopes “the word will get out” that the study shouldn’t be used as a trusted source of information.

Questions about the paper emerged during a lawsuit against Monsanto, filed by people who claimed their non-Hodgkins lymphoma stemmed from glyphosate exposure. It brought to light internal company documents showing company officials debating how to respond to a 2015 finding by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) that glyphosate was a probable human carcinogen. One tactic they considered was to help academic researchers publish papers that supported the company’s claims that the chemical was not a risk to people. A way to do that, a company executive wrote in an email, would be to approach scientists who would “have their names on the publication, but we would be keeping the cost down by us doing the writing and they would just sign their names so to speak.” The email notes that “this is how we handled” the now-retracted paper.

Gary Williams, the paper’s lead author and a former New York Medical College pathologist who retired in 2018, did not respond to a request for comment. The retraction notice states that Williams also did not respond to the journal’s concerns about the paper. The two other authors, Robert Kroes and Ian Munro, are no longer alive.

In addition to the apparent involvement of Monsanto, the retraction announcement notes that the authors only reviewed unpublished studies produced by the company, and neglected to include a number of outside studies that were also not published in peer-reviewed journals. That could have skewed the study’s conclusions, van den Berg wrote.

The paper’s retraction could remove one hurdle for plaintiffs suing Monsanto, says Robin Greenwald, an attorney at the New York City–based law firm Weitz & Luxenberg who is overseeing glyphosate cases for hundreds of individuals. Monsanto “can’t rely on it anymore,” she says.

There may be more retractions coming. Kaurov, who is now studying for a PhD in science in society at New Zealand’s Victoria University of Wellington, says he and Oreskes recently submitted a retraction request to Critical Reviews in Toxicology for a 2013 paper published under the names of two other authors that does not fully disclose the role Monsanto played in the paper. “It’s not the end of the story,” he says.

For more information see: https://bit.ly/4pGMUY6
and
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1462901125001765

11/03/2025

Contemporary reviews and consensus statements now frame oral health as integral to overall health across the lifespan, with credible links to cardiovascular disease, diabetes, adverse pregnancy outcomes, pneumonia, rheumatoid arthritis, chronic kidney disease, dementia, and even some cancers, especially colon. While the evidence comes from observational studies (association not causation), the associations are generally strong and causality signals are strengthening through Mendelian randomisation, intervention trials and mechanistic data, but do vary by condition. Guideline/consensus bodies now explicitly recommend medical-dental co-management for cardiometabolic risk.

Oral dysbiosis/infection from bacteria appears to be the causal link, driving low-grade systemic inflammation and endotoxaemia, recurrent bacteraemia, immune priming, molecular mimicry and microbiome translocation (oral–gut axis).

In this context, the finding that a Chinese licorice root (Glycyrrhiza uralensis) mouthwash slashed plaque and gum-inflammation scores by around 40–50 % in just five days has implications well beyond just oral health. The herb wiped out several major periodontal pathogens, including Porphyromonas gingivalis and Treponema denticol, and substantially outperformed the speed of improvement seen in green-tea or conventional mouthwash trials. These results spotlight licorice as a fast-acting, natural antimicrobial for gum and oral health.

This was a randomised, double blind, controlled study conducted on 60 patients who visited a dental clinic in South Korea. For the periodontal clinical parameters, the O'Leary index, plaque index (PI), gingival index (GI), and periodontal-disease-related bacteria in subgingival plaques were examined (at baseline and after 5 days of treatment).

The O’Leary index decreased by 40.43%, the PI decreased by 51.29% and GI decreased by 44%, In terms of bacterial outcomes, the licorice gargle produced antibacterial effects on both Gram-positive and Gram-negative pathogens involved in periodontal disease.

Active treatment was 15 mL of the licorice solution applied once a day as both a gargle and mouthwash for 30 seconds for 5 days. This was prepared as follows: dried Glycyrrhiza uralensis root was extracted (70 % ethanol), filtered, concentrated and freeze-dried into a powder. This concentrated extract was then dissolved in distilled water to make a 0.5 % w/v mouthwash (the test solution). No eating, drinking, or other oral hygiene procedures were allowed for 30 minutes after use to maximise mucosal contact and antimicrobial exposure.

Given the phytochemical similarities, it is highly likely that European licorice (Glycyrrhiza glabra) will have the same benefit. I recommend a 1 in 10 dilution of a high glycyrrhizin licorice 1:1 extract. This should be considerably stronger than the test mouthwash/gargle used in the trial.

For more information see: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40413479/

10/13/2025

💕