What Are Vaccine Injuries? What Are “Psychosomatic” Consequences of Life-Threatening Fear and Living Conditions?

What Are Vaccine Injuries? What Are “Psychosomatic” Consequences of Life-Threatening Fear and Living Conditions?

by Dr. Stefan Lanka & Ursula Stoll, LankaVision telegram
translation from German via Telegram translate
October 25, 2024

 

In the conventional medical narrative, symptoms can only be explained as the result of defects, pathogens and toxins. In this forced logic, all symptoms that appear months and years after a vaccination are interpreted as vaccine damage. In the case of Corona, for example, all symptoms that appear months or years after vaccination are attributed to so-called mRNA in the vaccine. So-called spike proteins are formed everywhere in the body, which are blamed for all observed symptoms and deaths.

This is not true for several reasons: Like all so-called pathogenic viruses, there is no such thing as a corona virus . So-called mRNA technology can never work because every aspect of molecular genetics has been refuted. mRNA in the vaccine syringe is destroyed by the nanoparticles it contains. If mRNA were injected into the muscle, it would be digested within milliseconds. It is the nanoparticles contained in the vaccines that can form thromboses within a few days to weeks. Once the nanos have spread throughout the body, they cause nonspecific inflammation, resulting in globulin formation, aka seroconversion, which is presented as immune protection. By the way: every package insert states that so-called immune protection does not provide protection against disease.

From the perspective of “real biology”, which Dr. Ryke Geerd Hamer discovered in 1985 and later called “Germanic medicine” , all symptoms, apart from the thrombosis and the more or less severe “non-specific” inflammations, immediately or shortly after the vaccination (3-4 weeks), are “psychosomatic” consequences of existential fear and terror. For example, destruction of families and livelihoods, violent isolation of people and other forms of torture. Here is just one of the resulting symptoms: In EVERYONE who feels completely alone, is on the run or believes that their existence has been destroyed, their kidneys retain water and substances that are excreted in the urine.

This “kidney syndrome” with the resulting edema formation can kill an adult within just three days. All existing symptoms become many times larger, more painful and more dangerous due to this water retention. This much larger swelling is often misinterpreted as turbo cancer, even if no tumor has grown. In the “real biology” that Dr. Hamer discovered, symptoms are not the result of previous damage, but biologically meaningful processes to enable life and survival during a conflict shock or trauma. Most symptoms appear in the phase when the conflict shock or trauma is resolved – in belief in the vaccination or the freedom that was bought by it – or at the latest when the global fear mongers in the Pentagon have ended the virus fear terror or have interrupted it for a longer period.

 

 

Connect with LankaVision at Telegram

Cover image credit: lechenie-narkomanii




Global Tyranny Never Sounded So Good: UN Summit of the Future

Global Tyranny Never Sounded So Good: UN Summit of the Future

 

~~~

“Wading through the finished product, 66 pages of hackneyed phrases passed off as profound policy, requires the stoicism of a saint and a devil’s dictionary in order to translate its conniving “globalese” into a comprehensible tongue.”

~ Michael Bryant

~~~

 

 

by Michael Bryant, Health Freedom Defense Fund
October 18, 2024

 

Lost in the hoopla of the coming US presidential election and the pandemonium of current global affairs was an unheralded summit last month that could cause more upheaval on the planet than anything our self-described world leaders have thrown at the populace yet.

On September 22, representatives of 193 sovereign nation-states gathered at the United Nations headquarters in New York City to adopt a Pact for the Future.

The document, which includes a Global Digital Compact and a Declaration on Future Generations, promises to “open the door to new opportunities and untapped possibilities,” according to UN Secretary-General António Guterres.

The landmark agreement, which Guterres called a “step-change towards more effective, inclusive, networked multilateralism,” contains 56 “actions” that countries pledged to achieve.

The net effect of the Pact for the Future and its two so-called annexes is intended to radically accelerate the push toward completion of the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and its Agenda 2030.

Marketed as a blueprint to “lay the foundations for a sustainable, just, and peaceful global order—for all peoples and nations” (and who could possibly object to such a heavenly vision?)—this latest flurry of UN paperwork may have set new records in linguistic maneuvers and platitudes per page.

A few questions are in order:

  • What do all the bureaucratic bromides and buzzwords in the Pact actually mean when translated into plain English?
  • How will the Pact’s sound and fury impact us once its “multilateral” wheels are set in motion?
  • Is this “sustainable, just, and peaceful global order” really a pot of gold awaiting us at the end of the United Nations Summit of the Future rainbow?
  • Are these promises of “new opportunities and untapped possibilities” truly wonderful gifts designed to serve the public? Or are they just more Trojan horses that will carry us closer to the cliff’s edge than into a Canaan-like Promised Land flowing with milk and honey?
  • And what exactly did Secretary-General Guterres mean when he said the UN Summit of the Future represented “an essential first step towards making global institutions more legitimate, effective, and fit for the world of today and tomorrow” and that UN member states had gathered to “bring multilateralism back from the brink”?

Wading through the finished product, 66 pages of hackneyed phrases passed off as profound policy, requires the stoicism of a saint and a devil’s dictionary in order to translate its conniving “globalese” into a comprehensible tongue.

Rather than answer the above questions one by one, we can turn to the accompanying four-page Concept Notes for the Interactive Dialogues, which offer a concise version of the Pact’s mind-numbing pages and pages.

The Concept Notes begin by highlighting the need to “transform global governance and turbocharge the implementation of the 2030 agenda for sustainable development.” These notes give us a clear idea of what the priorities were for the two-day “Summit of the Future” as well as the direction that UN 2.0 is attempting to steer the planet.

For instance, the opening line of Interactive Dialogue 1 speaks of “[t]he urgent need for reform of the global financial architecture” in order to “modernize the system while accelerating progress to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals.” Well, those words end our suspense as to what the UN’s top priority shall be: total control of the world’s financial transactions and systems.

The framework for what that new global economic system might look like is articulated in the World Economic Forum’s guidebook The Great Reset. A deep dive into the details of The Great Reset, made famous by the slogan “You’ll own nothing and be happy,” exposes this pretentious tract as just another long-winded rationale for economic despotism and centralized control over the lives of all the people (read: peons) on the planet.

Next on the globalists’ to-do list is the “urgent” need for a vaguely defined “enhanced multilateralism.”

According to various UN pooh-bahs, the international community is facing challenges that are “too great for any nation, small or large, to tackle alone.” Naturally, the UN proclaims that these undefined “challenges” can be resolved only through mechanisms installed by the UN and its sponsors.

Putting aside the fact that the UN and its affiliates have a track record that proves they are part of the problem instead of the solution to anything, the terms “multilateralism” and “global governance”—repeated throughout the UN documents—need to be exposed for what they actually mean.

Apparently, from what we can ascertain, the UN decided that the more sinister-sounding terms “one world government” and “new world order” had worn out their welcome and were justifiably raising alarm bells in the public square. Thus, kinder, gentler surrogate words have been introduced in an attempt to pacify the people and soften the not-so-fuzzy image of global totalitarianism.

It’s called marketing.

When the curtains are pulled back, exposing the spin machine, we find that the true intent of these autocrats, who claim to “represent the peoples of the world,” is to create a global governance structure with dramatically increased powers over all human activity.

Such a centralized control system would, by design, erode a nation’s ability to control its own domestic and foreign policy, eliminating such “quaint” notions as national sovereignty.

One example of how this might play out in the real world can be found in how the UN pushes the idea that the only possible way to effectively tackle what it determines to be “complex global shocks” is through “multilateralism,” as defined by the UN.

In a March 2023 policy paper titled “Strengthening the International Response to Complex Global Shocks — An Emergency Platform,” the UN Secretary-General proposed that “the General Assembly provide the Secretary-General and the United Nations system with a standing authority to convene and operationalize automatically an Emergency Platform in the event of a future complex global shock of sufficient scale, severity and reach.”

In practice, what this could mean is that the standing UN Secretary-General would become a “global emergency czar” who is given power to preside over any international emergency, be it real or manufactured.

The proposal would strip nations, businesses, and the public sector of the right to make their own decisions, while handing over all authority to intergovernmental bodies within the UN’s orbit. NGOs, UN agencies and private “stakeholders” would effectively rule, like dictators, over every nation and even over every jurisdiction (province, state, county, city) within each nation. National sovereignty would be null and void.

Another major item on the UN menu is the concept of a “Common Digital Future,” which is embedded within the aforementioned “Global Digital Compact.”

Curiously, the UN directly compares these digital technologies to natural resources, observing that the potential of digital technology can be only optimized through shared access and use of resources such as the air around us and earth’s bodies of water.

Setting aside the fact that we can’t drink technology or eat data, the irony of the UN suggesting that shared access will be a defining feature of any of its programs flies in the face of the UN’s history as a vehicle for increased privatization of the commons.

As part of this Common Digital Future, the UN promotes the idea of “working together to promote information integrity, tolerance and respect in the digital space.” Again, more noble-sounding words, but how does the UN propose to do this?

Here’s a clue: The UN offers to help the public sort through the flotsam and jetsam of the social media landscape by promising to “strengthen international cooperation to address the challenge of misinformation and disinformation and hate speech online and mitigate the risks of information manipulation in a manner consistent with international law.”

If you are uncertain as to what that means, consider that the UN is seeking tighter controls over what they judge to be misinformation in order to manage and restrict what information the public can freely access. The end product, if implemented, would allow certain UN agencies to have complete control over all information sources.

This has long been one of the principal desires of the globocrats, who know that a well-informed public that is able to discern between government deceptions (such as the propaganda used to sell the corona crisis) and on-the-ground realities is exceedingly difficult to control.

At the conclusion of the September summit, UN leaders stressed the importance of the need for “a reinvigorated multilateral system.” The countries in attendance reached the consensus that “the world must accelerate progress towards achieving the Sustainable Development Goals.”

If you didn’t hear about the summit and its outcome on your evening news, don’t be surprised. It was scarcely covered by any nation’s news media. Are your eyebrows raised at the thought of the world’s “leaders” making plans to reshape the earth, its economy, and its inhabitants without so much as a whisper or a whimper from mainstream journalists?

If these journalists were to scrutinize the UN’s latest plans, they would find that what is being presented as a new and necessary plan of action is really the same old story of the megalomaniacs’ desire for total control of the planet, dressed up in a shiny new package to conceal their intentions.

The bottom line is that any time you see a program being forwarded by a gaggle of unelected, unaccountable globalists, you can rest assured that the program being promised is as thoroughly tyrannical as it can be. And that’s by design. 

 

Connect with Health Freedom Defense Fund

Cover image credit: UrbanOrigami




Disclosure & The Metaverse

Disclosure & The Metaverse

by Rosanne Lindsay, Traditional Naturopath, Nature of Healing
October 17, 2024

 

Since ‘hindsight is 20/20,’ what happened in 2020?

In 2020, the new, experimental mRNA injections rolled out as a premeditated response to Coronavirus. What was on the package inserts of the products?

Nothing.

The inserts were blank. This way, companies could not be held liable for any ill effects following injection. It’s called indemnity, an exemption from penalties.

Fast forward to 2024. Eureka! Suddenly scientists know what was in those Emergency Use Authorized (EUA), FDA-unapproved COVID injections!

Nanotechnology Through a Needle

According to an Argentinian study, scientists discovered 55 undeclared chemicals and metals not listed on package inserts. The study published last week in the International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice, and Research discloses:

Among the undeclared chemical elements were detected 11 of the 15 cytotoxic lanthanides used in electronic devices and optogenetics. In addition, among the undeclared elements were all 11 of the heavy metals: chromium was found in 100% of the samples; arsenic 82%; nickel 59%; cobalt and copper 47%; tin 35%; cadmium, lead and manganese in 18%; and mercury in 6%. A total of 55 undeclared chemical elements were found and quantified…

James Lyons-Weiler, Ph.D., a member of the journal’s editorial board said, “Individually, these chemicals are known to cause neurological, cardiovascular and immunological damage.”

What is not disclosed? Metals and chemicals are required for nanopolymers. Delivered through a needle, they target specific areas of the body for ‘connectivity’ to the Internet of Things.

Disclosure & Implied Consent

No matter where the information is found in the media, whether in an articlesocial mediacinema, documentary, or hidden in a medical journal study, the architects who create toxic products must disclose the information somewhere, whether perceived positively or negatively.  Of course how you perceive the information is up to you.

In 2020, social media tracking of information suggests 43% of content retrieved on Google was antivaccination in nature. However, today, it is nearly impossible to find a negative campaign against the jab.

As long as the deed is visible, it has been exposed, even if it is after the fact.  This is called implied consent. 

No response is considered to be silent acquiescence. This means that by your non response, you have agreed to the methods used.

When hindsight is 20/20, it means “too little, too late.” The deed is done.

Biodigital Convergence

There is another purpose to the disclosing information after the fact; that is to misdirect an investigation. Four years later, mRNA is old information since, in the Information Age, old news happens yesterday, not four years ago.

For at least two decades, scientists and governments have been paving the way toward Transhumanism, the merging of humans and machines. The way to Transhumanism is through Biodigital Convergence. Read more here.

In the coming years, biodigital technologies could be woven into our lives in the way that digital technologies are now. Biological and digital systems are converging, and could change the way we work, live, and even evolve as a species. More than a technological change, this biodigital convergence may transform the way we understand ourselves and cause us to redefine what we consider human or natural.

In the Covidian Age, “CORONA” represents the addition of metamaterials, to augment humans and upgrade the system with faster speeds to run more applications. According to a 2021 study in the American Journal of Bioinformatics Research, “corona is a non-communicable disease spread worldwide through wireless sensor technology…

To The Metaverse!

The positive side of Hindsight is Foresight.  Instead of looking to the past, we can focus on what is unfolding now, and into the near future.

Biodigital Convergence leads to Smart cities, Cognitive(C40) cities, Blockchain, Reverse engineering, Digital Twin, Self-assembly nanotechnologies, the Internet of Bodies, and more… in the connected future of the Metaverse.

If Biodigital Convergence sound like a Virtual Reality, then you are one step closer to your Avatar. Will you become an Avatar in the Metaverse? Watch the feature film, Avatar for disclosure.

The architects of converging technologies want everyone to live a Metaverse of their construction.

Of course, disclosure is found openly, in Sci-fi movies, and fiction. However, for a drier presentation, it is also found in a slideshow from the 2022 International Electrotechnical Commission. For current and future standards that will run The Convergence, read the 480-page report on the National Nanotech Initiative (NNI).

The NNI recently celebrated its 20th birthday. This proves that mRNA nanotechnology is old news. It does not discriminate against gender, sex, race, or religion. This global initiative seeks to incorporate everyone, everywhere. They have our consent through silent acquiescence.

The concept of ‘vaccine status,’ along with related vaccine science and laws are mere propaganda and distraction. These are symptoms of past strategies that lead to future ‘connectivity.’ Unfortunately, focus on vaccines is exactly where architects want people to be.

Foresight might be fuzzy, but without it, we are left scrambling in the past.

 

Related Articles:

 

Rosanne Lindsay is a Traditional Naturopath, Herbalist, Writer, and Author of the books The Nature of Healing, Heal the Body, Heal the Planet and Free Your Voice, Heal Your Thyroid, Reverse Thyroid Disease Naturally. Find her on Facebook at facebook.com/Natureofhealing. Consult with her remotely at www.natureofhealing.org. Listen to her archived podcasts at blogtalkradio.com/rosanne-lindsay.

 

Connect with Rosanne Lindsay, Traditional Naturopath

Cover image credit: denflinkegrafiker




La Quinta Columna: Targeting the Brain

Targeting the Brain

by La Quinta Columna
October 6, 2024

 

Video available at OdyseeRumble

 

Transcript:

Self-assembling technology, that has an affinity for the central nervous system, whose purpose is to impregnate neurons, thereby creating an artificial neural network.

Optoelectronics is a branch of photonics related to the study and application of electronic devices that interact with Light, systems in which electrons and photons coexist.

Optoelectronic devices operate as electro-optical or opto-electrical transducers.

Millions of people have been IMPLANTED with graphene-based liquid nanotechnology through the co-called COVID “vaccines”.

Currently, all types of injectables contain graphene, which acts as fuel to make all this technology work.

Self-assembling technology, that has an affinity for the central nervous system, whose purpose is to impregnate neurons, thereby creating an artificial neural network.

You can see it for yourself by accessing the Telegram channel: Mira al microscopio [https://t.me/miraalmicroscopio]

What you are going to see next is not optogenetics. It’s optoelectronics.

Rafael Yuste, Spanish neurobiologist and ideologist of the Human Brain Project.

 

Optoelectronic locomotion control.

Experiment realized by Ranier Guiérrez at the Stanford OIL Workshop on 25 July 2011.

 

“The possibility that machines can read our thoughts and even insert thoughts. Insert feelings and ….”

~ Former President of Chile, Sebastian Pinera

 

The cover is called Neuralink and apparently we have been made to see that it is voluntary.

 

“But does this not imply some kind of surgery?”

~ [unidentified interviewer]

“Not necessarily. You can go through the veins and arteries.”

~ Elon Musk

 

“There are also people who think that the vaccines against COVID put a chip in us whereby the Chinese, from any laboratory in Beijing going to control our lives.

“What does it sound like, a joke?”

~ President of Spain, Pedro Sanchez

 

Recording with night vision camera HYCMICRO CHEETAH

 

 

Don’t use Bluetooth headsets unless strictly necessary.

Similarly, mask the camera of your mobile phone if you don’t need it.

 

Thanks to Rafa Calvin and Miguel Angel for the recordings.

 

Do you understand it now?

 

 

Connect with La Quinta Columna


See Related:

The Effects of Pulsed Microwaves and Extra Low Frequency Electromagnetic Waves on Human Brains? Governments Routinely “Classify Information” Pertaining to the Manipulation of the Human Nervous System

5G Frequencies Mimic COVID: The Evidence




Policy Imperatives for Health Freedom

Policy Imperatives for Health Freedom

by Leslie Manookian, President, Health Freedom Defense Fund
September 30, 2024

 

As a requirement for discussing and appreciating the imperative of health freedom in the USA, we must first define what is meant by health freedom. A simple definition is: the right of every American to decide what medical interventions to put into or onto one’s body, the right to access and use the medical and healing modalities of one’s choice, the right to maintain one’s health according to one’s conscience, and the right to live free of involuntary medication be it via the food supply, the water supply, or something airborne.

In a free and moral society, health freedom is not simply a convenience, it’s an imperative. In this vein, in the event of injury or illness, all Americans must possess the absolute right to choose what medical interventions and treatments to accept and what medical or healing modalities to utilize in order to address illness or injury; Americans must be free to choose how to maintain their health whether that be through nutrition, supplements, herbs, drugs, or a myriad of healing modalities; Americans must have access to truthful information regarding how the seeds for plants and animal feed and the food in our food supply has been grown or developed, medicated, processed, and packaged; and Americans have the right to exist in a society free of water and airborne medications, insect vectors, and chemicals.

Health freedom can only exist in a free and moral society which values each and every member of that society. This prerequisite thus excludes medical mandates of any kind. It is immoral to force another individual to risk their life for the theoretical benefit of another. Moreover, government does not have the moral authority or power to dictate what medical products any American puts into or on his or her body. If anyone in government does possess that power, then no American is truly free, nor does he or she possess any meaningful right whatsoever – Americans are merely chattel.

In order to create a society based on true health freedom, the following policy shifts should be implemented, as a first step. There are many more changes which should be implemented as well, but these proposals would address some of the most glaring, pernicious anti-liberty and anti-health aspects of our system as it exists today:

1. Ban all Medical Mandates:

The Declaration of Independence states, “that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness…”  Medical mandates are prime facie violations of our founding documents.

Health freedom demands prior voluntary informed consent before a medical treatment or intervention is administered. Medical mandates are thus, by definition, antithetical to voluntary consent and therefore must be prohibited in a free and moral society. No single individual in government knows the medical history of any American, knows what is best for Americans, or has to live with the repercussions of any choices made by Americans, thus, medical mandates are never justified in any circumstance.

2. Repeal the Bayh-Dole Act:

“The Bayh-Dole Act, formerly known as the Patent and Trademark Act Amendments, is a federal law enacted in 1980 that enables universities, nonprofit research institutions and small businesses to own, patent and commercialize inventions developed under federally funded research programs within their organizations.”

Under this program, government scientists may receive up to $150,000 per year on their patents.

In theory, Bayh-Dole incentivizes bright scientists to seek employment at federal health agencies rather than entering more lucrative private industry by allowing these taxpayer-funded scientists and other individuals and entities to retain the patent rights to intellectual property developed during their taxpayer-funded research and development activities.

In practice, this Act forever realigned the interests of taxpayer-funded scientists away from the American people and toward their own interests and profits and the profits of the private industries with which they collaborate. Dr. Anthony Fauci and his team at NIAID infamously owned half the Moderna Covid vaccine patent which incentivized the misguided covid era policies leading to a colossal violation of the rights of Americans demonstrating the perverse incentives created by Bayh-Dole and the necessity of repealing the act.

3. Repeal the Prescription Drug User Fee Act (PDUFA) of 1992:

“The Prescription Drug User Fee Act (PDUFA) was created by Congress in 1992 and authorizes FDA to collect user fees from persons that submit certain human drug applications for review or that are named in approved applications as the sponsor of certain prescription drug products. Since the passage of PDUFA, user fees have played an important role in expediting the drug review and approval process.”

In 2022 alone, the pharmaceutical industry paid $2.9 billion in user fees amounting to 46% of FDA’s entire budget including $1.4 billion or 66% for FDA’s drug approvers’ salaries and $197 million or 43% of the biologics (vaccines) program budget. As a direct consequence of PDUFA, the FDA has a vested interest aligned with the profits and success of the pharmaceutical industry rather than the health and wellbeing of the American people.

4. Repeal the Public Readiness and Preparedness Act (PREP Act) which authorizes the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services to issue a PREP Act declaration.

“The declaration provides immunity from liability (except for willful misconduct) for claims:

  • of loss caused, arising out of, relating to, or resulting from administration or use of countermeasures to diseases, threats and conditions
  • determined by the Secretary to constitute a present, or credible risk of a future public health emergency
  • to entities and individuals involved in the development, manufacture, testing, distribution, administration, and use of such countermeasures

A PREP Act declaration is specifically for the purpose of providing immunity from liability, and is different from, and not dependent on, other emergency declarations.”

The PREP Act desecrates the ethical principle of informed consent by protecting individuals from liability even when they expressly act contrary to patients’ wishes and instructions and must be repealed.

5. Repeal the Affordable Care Act:

The Affordable Care Act anchors Americans to the pharmaceutical and drug-based medical paradigm even though a majority of Americans used at least one form of “alternative” medicine in 2021 and spent $30.6 billion in out of pocket expenses for those holistic medicine services in 2023 according to Statista. Instead, implement a health savings program which permits Americans to access the health and medical modalities of their choice which in turn would foster more competition and reduce the exorbitant health care costs in the US by breaking the extant monopolies held by the medical and insurance industries.

6. Repeal the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (NCVIA):

NCVIA shields vaccine makers and those who administer vaccines from liability (except for willful misconduct), creating a perverse incentive to industry to develop a never-ending stream of vaccines which are then mandated by the states and a perverse incentive to medical professionals to charge for and inject patients irrespective of the harm they may cause. Further, the NCVIA protects industry, medical professionals, and vaccine programs by creating a separate administrative federal court structure lacking due process and discovery, managed by “Special Masters” instead of judges, all in violation of the constitutionally protected right to due process. While NCVIA contains other provisions designed to protect American families and ensure the safety of the national vaccine supply, Congress is not conducting proper oversight and the promises made in 1986 at the time of the Act’s passage have not been upheld. As such, Americans who have been injured or killed by vaccines are left with astronomical medical bills and to fend for themselves.

7. Prohibit Private Donations to Government Entities:

Prohibit private individuals, foundations, corporations, contractors, any other person or entity from donating or otherwise giving money to any agency or entity of the federal government. FDA and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) accept money from private actors such as the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and Pfizer thus skewing the interests of the agency in favor of these private actors and away from the American public. Gates has collaborated with FDA and the CDC Foundation takes money from the pharmaceutical industry whose products CDC is responsible for monitoring for safety.

8. Cooling-off Period for Senior Federal Employees:

Enact a 5-year cooling-off period before which agency leadership, deputies, and other key officials may depart federal agencies in order to enter the companies they regulate in the private sector.

9. Prevent Conflicts of Interest:

Eliminate conflict of interest waivers so that no person serving on a health agency committee, board, or other regulatory entity may have a conflict of interest. Disclosure of conflicts of interest is insufficient to ensure the agencies pursue the interests of the American people. Individuals with financial or ideological conflicts of interest should not serve as decision makers in any capacity.

10. Prohibit Government Grants to Nonprofits:

Prohibit government from allocating taxpayer dollars to nonprofit. Nonprofits exists to serve the public interests and should be funded directly by American citizens. If a nonprofit has a worthwhile mission, the public will gladly support it. Government exists to protect our rights and should not be in the business of picking winners and losers nor should it be using third parties to pursue policies outside the reach and review of the public.

11. Ban Water Fluoridation:

While water fluoridation programs are broad spread, they are not only dangerous from a health standpoint, they are forced medication in violation of the ethical principle of informed consent. Research comparing the health outcomes and IQs of communities that do and do not fluoridate their water supply reveal that children in the fluoridated water communities have reduced IQs and therefore inferior prospects in life. Other research has documented the health hazards of fluoride, an industrial waste product.

In addition, as fluoride is added to municipal water supplies, residents of those communities have no way to opt out and therefore are subjected to involuntary forced medication. No one should be forced to consume drugged water in order to maintain a biological necessity.

12. Ban Release of Genetically Modified Insects

Two tenets of good health are abundant exposure to sunshine and fresh air, however in some states, the state governments have collaborated with private business to release genetically modified mosquitoes into communities. While these mosquitoes are often designed to breed with one another and eliminate the “dangerous” species going forward, the health impacts of humans being bitten by these insects is not well understood. Nor should a person have to be risk being bitten by one of these creatures in order to venture outside. This amounts to a form of forced medication absent any form of consent and must be ended.

These recommendations should be understood as necessary first steps to begin correcting the disastrous health policy environment that exists in the United States today and to restore true health freedom in the US which would allow all Americans to decide what medical interventions to allow into or onto one’s body, which health and medical modalities to utilize in maintaining their health, and the ability to live free of involuntary medication be it via the food supply, the water supply, or the air we breathe.

Update October 3, 2024: Policy Imperative 6. has been edited to note that the NCVIA shields medical professionals from liability as well as the vaccine industry.

 

Connect with Health Freedom Defense Fund

Cover image based on creative commons work of: pixundfertig & Prawny




Covid Vaccines Associated With ALL Cases of Heart Inflammation in Children in a Large UK Health Dataset

Covid Vaccines Associated With ALL Cases of Heart Inflammation in Children in a Large UK Health Dataset

by Sasha Latypova, Due Diligence and Art
October 1, 2024

 

This paper has been published in peer review.

Conclusions of this observational study in ~800K children and adolescents in the UK: covid vaccines had no efficacy and were associated with ALL cases of myocarditis and pericarditis! Anyone injecting kids with this garbage is simply poisoning them for no reason at all. You can read for yourself:

OpenSAFELY: Effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccination in children and adolescents

Colm D Andrews[1] , Edward P K Parker[2] , Elsie Horne[4] , Venexia Walker[4] , Tom Palmer[4] , Andrea L Schaffer[1] , Amelia CA Green[1] , Helen J Curtis[1] , Alex J Walker[1] , Lucy Bridges[1] , Christopher Wood[1] , Victoria Speed[1] , Christopher Bates[3] , Jonathan Cockburn[3] , John Parry[3] , Amir Mehrkar[1] , Brian MacKenna[1], Sebastian CJ Bacon[1] , Ben Goldacre[1] , Miguel A Hernan[5] , Jonathan AC Sterne[4] , The OpenSAFELY Collaborative, and William J Hulme[1] .

[1]Bennett Institute for Applied Data Science, Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, OX2 6GG, UK

[2] London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Keppel Street, London WC1E 7HT, UK

[3] TPP, TPP House, 129 Low Lane, Horsforth, Leeds, LS18 5PX, UK

[4] Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Oakfield House, Oakfield Grove, Bristol, BS8 2BN, UK

[5] Departments of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA 02115

 

Abstract:

Background Children and adolescents in England were offered BNT162b2 as part of the national COVID-19 vaccine roll out from September 2021. We assessed the safety and effectiveness of first and second dose BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccination in children and adolescents in England.

Methods:

With the approval of NHS England, we conducted an observational study in the OpenSAFELY-TPP database, including a) adolescents aged 12-15 years, and b) children aged 5-11 years and comparing individuals receiving i) first vaccination with unvaccinated controls and ii) second vaccination to single-vaccinated controls. We matched vaccinated individuals with controls on age, sex, region, and other important characteristics. Outcomes were positive SARS-CoV-2 test (adolescents only); COVID-19 A&E attendance; COVID-19 hospitalisation; COVID-19 critical care admission; COVID-19 death, with non-COVID-19 death and fractures as negative control outcomes and A&E attendance, unplanned hospitalisation, pericarditis, and myocarditis as safety outcomes.

Results:

Amongst 820,926 previously unvaccinated adolescents, the incidence rate ratio (IRR) for positive SARS-CoV-2 test comparing vaccination with no vaccination was 0.74 (95% CI 0.72-0.75), although the 20-week risks were similar. The IRRs were 0.60 (0.37-0.97) for COVID-19 A&E attendance, 0.58 (0.38-0.89) for COVID-19 hospitalisation, 0.99 (0.93-1.06) for fractures, 0.89 (0.87- 0.91) for A&E attendances and 0.88 (0.81-0.95) for unplanned hospitalisation. Amongst 441,858 adolescents who had received first vaccination IRRs comparing second dose with first dose only were 0.67 (0.65-0.69) for positive SARS-CoV-2 test, 1.00 (0.20-4.96) for COVID-19 A&E attendance, 0.60 (0.26-1.37) for COVID-19 hospitalisation, 0.94 (0.84-1.05) for fractures, 0.93 (0.89-0.98) for A&E attendance and 0.99 (0.86-1.13) for unplanned hospitalisation. Amongst 283,422 previously unvaccinated children and 132,462 children who had received a first vaccine dose, COVID-19-related outcomes were too rare to allow IRRs to be estimated precisely. A&E attendance and unplanned hospitalisation were slightly higher after first vaccination (IRRs versus no vaccination 1.05 (1.01- 1.10) and 1.10 (0.95-1.26) respectively) but slightly lower after second vaccination (IRRs versus first dose 0.95 (0.86-1.05) and 0.78 (0.56-1.08) respectively). There were no COVID-19-related deaths in any group. Fewer than seven (exact number redacted) COVID-19-related critical care admissions occurred in the adolescent first dose vs unvaccinated cohort.

Among both adolescents and children, myocarditis and pericarditis were documented only in the vaccinated groups, with rates of 27 and 10 cases/million after first and second doses respectively. Conclusion BNT162b2 vaccination in adolescents reduced COVID-19 A&E attendance and hospitalisation, although these outcomes were rare. Protection against positive SARS-CoV-2 tests was transient.

“Myocarditis and pericarditis ONLY in vaccinated”
“Protection against a positive TEST – transient”
you read this correctly!

 

Connect with Sasha Latypova

Cover image credit: fujikama




Breaking: Fluoride in Water Poses ‘Unreasonable Risk’ to Children, Federal Judge Rules

Breaking: Fluoride in Water Poses ‘Unreasonable Risk’ to Children, Federal Judge Rules
A federal judge rejected the EPA’s argument that the exact level at which fluoride is hazardous is too unclear to determine if the chemical presents an unreasonable risk, and ruled the agency must take regulatory action.

by Brenda Baletti, Ph.D., The Defender
September 25, 2024

 

In a decision that could end the practice of water fluoridation in the U.S., a federal judge late Tuesday ruled that water fluoridation at current U.S. levels poses an “unreasonable risk” of reduced IQ in children.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) can no longer ignore that risk, and must take regulatory action, Judge Edward Chen of the U.S. District Court of the Northern District of California wrote in the long-awaited landmark decision.

More than 200 million Americans drink water treated with fluoride at the “optimal” level of 0.7 milligrams per liter (mg/L). However, Chen ruled that a preponderance of scientific evidence shows this level of fluoride exposure may damage human health, particularly that of pregnant mothers and young children.

The verdict delivers a major blow to the EPA, public health agencies like the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and professional lobbying groups like the American Dental Association (ADA), which have staked their reputations on the claim that water fluoridation is one of the greatest public health achievements of the 20th century and an unqualified public good.

Fluoride proponents refused to reexamine that stance despite mounting scientific evidence from top researchers and government agencies of fluoride’s neurotoxic risks, particularly for infants’ developing brains.

Instead, they attempted to weaken and suppress the research and discredit the scientists carrying it out.

Rick North, board member of Fluoride Action Network, one of the plaintiffs in the lawsuit, told The Defender, “What’s false is the CDC claiming that fluoridation is one of the 10 greatest health achievements of the 20th century. What’s true is that ending fluoridation will be one of the 10 greatest health achievements of the 21st century.”

“The judge did what EPA has long refused to do, and that is to apply the EPA standard risk assessment framework to fluoride,” said Michael Connett, attorney for the plaintiffs. “In so doing, the court has shown that the widespread exposure to fluoride that we now have in the United States is unreasonably and precariously close to the levels that we know cause harm.”

The EPA can appeal Tuesday’s decision. The agency told The Defender it is reviewing the decision and has no comment at this time. The U.S. Department of Justice, which represents the EPA in the lawsuit, also said it has no comment.

EPA’s argument ‘not persuasive’

The ruling concludes a historic lawsuit — one that has dragged on for seven years — brought against the EPA by environmental and consumer advocacy organizations like the Fluoride Action NetworkMoms Against Fluoridation and Food & Water Watch, along with individual parents and children.

It is the first lawsuit to go to a federal trial under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), as amended by Congress in 2016. The TSCA allows U.S. citizens to petition the EPA to evaluate whether a chemical presents an unreasonable risk to public health and should be regulated.

If the EPA denies a TSCA citizen petition — which the agency did when the plaintiffs asked it to reexamine water fluoridation in 2016 — the petitioners are entitled to a “de novo” judicial review of the science without the deference to the agency typically afforded it in legal cases.

Chen’s 80-page ruling, issued six months after closing arguments in February, offers a careful and detailed articulation of the EPA’s review process for chemicals that pose a hazard to human health and evaluates and summarizes the extensive scientific data presented at trial.

Chen wrote, “EPA’s own expert agrees that fluoride is hazardous at some level.” He cited a key report issued by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) National Toxicology Program (NTP), which undertook a systematic review of all available scientific research at the time of publication.

The report “concluded that fluoride is indeed associated with reduced IQ in children, at least at exposure levels at or above 1.5 mg/L,” Chen wrote.

The NTP also reported that although there are technical challenges to measuring fluoride’s toxic effects at low levels, “scientists have observed a statistically significant association between fluoride and adverse effects in children even at such ‘lower’ exposure levels,” Chen wrote.

He said that despite recognizing that fluoride is hazardous, the EPA’s defense rested largely on the fact that the exact level at which it is hazardous is too unclear for the agency to determine whether the chemical presents an unreasonable risk.

This argument is “not persuasive,” Chen wrote.

Pregnant women exposed to fluoride in water at levels exceeding the hazard level

The EPA requires a margin of error by a factor of at least 10 to exist between the hazard level for a toxin and the acceptable human exposure level. “Put differently, only an exposure that is below 1/10th of the hazard level would be deemed safe under Amended TSCA, given the margin of error required,” Chen wrote.

That means that even if the hazard level were 4 mg/L — well above the 1.5 mg/L identified by the NTP — the safe level of fluoride exposure would be 0.4 mg/L, well below the current “optimal” fluoride level in the U.S., Chen wrote.

The much lower probable hazard level established by high-quality studies indicates that many pregnant women in the U.S. are already exposed to fluoride in water at levels exceeding the hazard level.

“Under even the most conservative estimates of this level, there is not enough of a margin between the accepted hazard level and the actual human exposure levels to find that fluoride is safe,” Chen concluded.

“Simply put, the risk to health at exposure levels in United States drinking water is sufficiently high to trigger regulatory response by the EPA under Amended TSCA.”

The law dictates that the EPA must take regulatory action, but it does not specify what that action has to be. EPA regulatory actions can range from notifying the public of risks to banning chemicals.

Philippe Grandjean, M.D., Ph.D., adjunct professor in environmental health at Harvard and chair of environmental medicine at the University of Southern Denmark, top researcher on fluoride’s neurotoxicity and expert witness for plaintiffs in the case told The Defender he thought the court’s decision was “well-justified.”

He said the ruling made it incumbent on the EPA to go beyond simply ending water fluoridation.

“EPA will have to consider what to do in the southwestern parts of the country where the fluoride content of groundwater is too high due to minerals in the soil containing fluoride,” he said. “And then there is the question about ingestion of toothpaste.”

The CDC and the ADA did not immediately respond to The Defender’s request for comment.

More than 70 years of controversy

For more than seven decades, U.S. public health officials have steadfastly supported water fluoridation, claiming the practice is a key strategy for maintaining and improving dental health.

Proponents of water fluoridation, with help from the mainstream press, often attempted to cast those questioning fluoride’s benefits and raising concerns about its safety as conspiracy theorists.

The EPA in 1975 recommended adding fluoride to water at an optimal level of 1.2 mg/L for its dental benefits, but recommended a maximum level of 4 mg/L, the ruling said.

As more evidence has emerged about fluoride’s adverse health effects, including skeletal fluorosis, recommended levels were revised.

Surgeon General Vivek Murthy, officially lowered the recommended dosage for water fluoridation in 2015 from 0.7-1.2 mg/L to 0.7 mg/L after considering “adverse health effects” along with alleged benefits.

However, evidence that fluoride poses a neurotoxic risk has existed for decades.

In 2017, after the EPA rejected their citizen petition to end fluoridation of drinking water in the U.S. based on evidence of health risks, namely neurotoxicity, the plaintiffs filed the lawsuit.

A seven-day trial took place in federal court in San Francisco in June 2020, but Chen put the proceedings on hold pending the release of the NTP’s systematic review of research available on the neurotoxic effects of fluoride.

The NTP sought to publish its report — which consisted of a “state of the science” monograph and a meta-analysis — in May 2022, but dental officials at the CDC and the National Institutes of Health National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research pressured HHS Assistant Secretary for Health Rachel Levine to prevent the review from being published.

The ADA also sought to suppress the report.

Levine told the NTP to not publish the report but to put it on hold and allow for further review.

Plaintiffs submitted documents obtained via the Freedom of Information Act exposing this intervention to the court. The revelation prompted Chen to rule that the trial should go forward using the draft report from the NTP.

The trial resumed in January in San Francisco, with arguments presented over the course of two weeks.

The NTP’s monograph was finalized and published last month on its website. The meta-analysis is forthcoming in a peer-reviewed journal.

Connett said that Congress created the citizen petition provision in TSCA as a counterweight to bureaucratic lethargy and as a check on the EPA.

The statute, he said, is a powerful tool for overcoming politicized science.

“When science becomes fossilized in political inertia, the citizen petition provision of TSCA is a very powerful tool for citizens,” Connett said. “Through this case, we have been able to effectuate what Congress had envisioned with this part of the statute.”

 

Connect with The Defender, Children’s Health Defense

Cover image credit: Myriams-Fotos




The Corruption Is Real and Sickening

The Corruption Is Real and Sickening

by Paul Cudenec, The Acorn
September 3, 2024

 

The difference between conspiracy realists and conspiracy deniers is, of course, that the latter never question anything, never think for themselves, never do their own research.

They simply lap up every last drop of drivel and delusion presented to them, including the laughable conceit that in so doing they are proving themselves somehow more “advanced”, more “adult”, more “astute” than those tin-foil-hat-wearing idiots who dare challenge official top-down truth.

As they remain rooted to their theatre seats, stuffing their faces with propaganda popcorn and fizzy fakery, their scientifically-sealed minds cannot even grasp the possibility that others might have taken the initiative to have a peek backstage and work out what The Spectacle is all about.

I don’t suppose there are many conspiracy deniers reading this, but just in case one or two have wandered in by mistake, here are some more stones to look under, if you can find the courage to face the reality of the seething maggot-infested corruption that lies beneath the surface of our society.

First of all, have a read of Hedley Rees’ Inside Pharma blog and in particular his reporting on what he describes as “the latest Big Pharma feeding frenzy”.

He points us to the existence of an annual J.P. Morgan Healthcare Conference, which will next be held in San Francisco in January 2025.

Its site states: “This premier conference is the largest and most informative healthcare investment symposium in the industry which connects global industry leaders, emerging fast-growth companies, innovative technology creators and members of the investment community”.

Hmmm…

J.P. Morgan is, as I set out in Enemies of the People, a longstanding front for the Rothschilds, those leading members of “the investment community” who have long been involved in profiting from bio-tech and the grotesquely-misnamed “healthcare” industry.

As I report in my booklet, International Biotechnology Trust (IBT), a division of Rothschilds, says on its website that it “offers investors access to the fast-growing biotechnology sector”.

Predictably, in view of the Rothschilds’ intimacy with UK governments, their biotech wing was involved in the country’s “response” to Covid.

IBT proudly relates that its investment manager Kate Bingham was in May 2020 appointed chair of the UK Vaccine Taskforce “reporting to the Prime Minster to lead UK efforts to find and manufacture a COVID-19 vaccine, on a six-month engagement”.

It says: “On December 8th 2020 the UK started COVID-19 vaccinations – the first Western country to do so. She [Bingham] was awarded a DBE in the Queen’s Birthday Honours in June 2021 for services to the procurement, manufacture and distribution of COVID-19 vaccines”.

One of the most prominent UK enthusiasts for the Covid jabsvaccine passports and the digital ID to which they were designed to lead is former Prime Minister Tony Blair.

Last November I wrote about the research by the UK Column’s Ben Rubin which revealed that in June 2022 Blair was the main speaker at a conference on the “Future of Britain” hosted, with the organisation My Life My Say, by the Institute of Global Health Innovation at Imperial College, London.

In investigating My Life My Say, Rubin discovered that trustee Glen Manning was a senior banker with Rothschild & Co.

Blair himself, after resigning from British politics, in January 2008 joined the Rothschilds’ JPMorgan Chase in a “senior advisory capacity”, on a modest salary of £2.52m per year.

A thank-you, perhaps, for having led the UK into the invasion of Iraq in 2003, among many other invaluable services to the money power?

Blair is very keen on the “modernisation” of public services in the UK, including, of course, the National Health Service.

This would involve our data being held centrally in a “new NHS cloud infrastructure” and “used as a collective national asset to help our life-science sector to be world-leading”.

Marvellous.

In the light of all that, it is hardly surprising to read, back on the Inside Pharma blog, that the key speaker at the 2024 JP Morgan Healthcare Conference was none other than “The Rt. Hon. Tony Blair: Executive Chairman of the Institute for Global Change”.

I would once again echo Rubin’s warning that “Tony Blair is coordinating with the Rothschild family to fundamentally reshape British society and implement a global, digital slave state”.

Of course, for my (probably imaginary) conspiracy-denying readers this will all no doubt be seen as a meaningless series of complete coincidences.

So I would suggest they also take a peek at this article from Australian researcher Warren Ross about the climate scam.

Rightly describing this as “a whole new area of investment and opportunity” for the billionaire class, he notes that “BlackRock are eager to fill as much of this space as they can and have proved their commitment to this by purchasing infrastructure investment fund Global Infrastructure Partners”.

He adds: “ESG compliance is used by companies like BlackRock to direct investment away from companies that choose not to comply or don’t comply with sufficient zealotry”.

BlackRock is part of the Rothschilds’ empire.

In addition, as I note in Enemies of the People, Edmund de Rothschild was the key player behind the World Conservation Bank, later renamed Global Environment Facility (GEF).

The Corbett Report has explained that the idea for an international “conservation” bank had been around for some time before France put forward a formal proposal at a joint ministerial meeting of the IMF in 1989.

“The project was put under the umbrella of the World Bank and by 1991 the World Conservation Bank was formally established”.

The article adds that the GEF has made and co-financed tens of billions of dollars worth of grants and “is the funding mechanism for five different UN conventions, including the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change”.

As well as establishing so-called “protected areas”, it has funded Chinese companies producing solar cells and wind farm technology…

The reality that conspiracy deniers cannot bear to see, and that those in power want to keep hidden, is that our society is dominated by one single giant global organisation.

I have seen this time and time again through all the joined dots, all the revolving doors, all the zig-zagging public-private career paths that are incomprehensible unless they amount to a series of internal transfers within one single entity.

This mega-organisation is not one that aims to do good for us or for our world, which is why it has to take such pains to conceal its existence and its activities.

It is an unimaginably vast, ruthless, greedy, destructive crime syndicate which has grabbed global control by means of lies and usury, blackmail and bribery, manipulation and murder.

The sooner we all wake up to this nauseating reality, and get together to do something about it, the better.

 

Connect with Paul Cudenec substack | The Acorn

Cover image credit: CDD20


See related video by Mark & Samantha Bailey highlighting the article above by Paul Cudenec:

 

Read show notes for the video and related links

 

Connect with Mark & Samantha Bailey




Backyard Pharmacies with Medical Marijuana

Backyard Pharmacies with Medical Marijuana
by Dr. Mark Sircus
September 4, 2024

 

Here in Brazil, it is now legal to grow marijuana in your backyard, and in at least half of the United States, it is legal. In these troubled times of high stress and higher incidences of chronic disease, it makes perfect sense to grow marijuana plants (they grow like weeds). As a medicine, these gifts from nature compete with anything pharmaceutical companies can produce and sell, and they are much safer regarding side effects. Some of the side effects are rather pleasant, which is why so many people use it for stress reduction or what they call recreational use.

This is all awful news for pharmaceutical companies who have always done their best to keep helpful, valuable, and safe medicines out of the hands of the public. There is very little intelligence in modern medicine, which always recommends dangerous, expensive medicines over natural ones.

There are many ways to administer marijuana, and many of them will not get you high. There is CBD, which is legal almost everywhere because of its very low THC content. Did you know that you can eat organic buds loaded with THC, use it in smoothies; when marijuana is not cooked, it does not get one high but retains all its active medical properties.

Marijuana is an extremely broad-acting and universally valid medicine with appropriate application for most disease conditions. Crohn’s disease patients credit the plant with helping reverse their debilitating intestinal disorders, and accredited research suggests its use in dealing with and preventing diabetes, heart disease, Alzheimer’s, and assorted maladies arising from chronic inflammation. Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and natural cannabinoids counteract cancer and chemical toxicity from drugs and environmental sources, thus helping to preserve normal cells.

Not many people or physicians realize how helpful or even critical medical marijuana can be in pediatrics – or how it can save children’s lives. We are talking about serious medicine, and the pharmaceutical companies know this.

Dr. Ben Whalley, middle, with Dr. Gary Stephens and Dr. Claire Williams at their secret cannabis farm near London. These researchers have discovered that three compounds found in cannabis leaves can help to reduce and control seizures in epilepsy. CBD is commonly used for epilepsy.

“It seems to me if one is going to need to use drugs, one ought to consider a relatively safe drug, like marijuana,” said Bernard Rimland, Ph.D. of the Autism Research Institute. Some families have found marijuana to be nothing short of miraculous. Some of the symptoms marijuana has ameliorated include anxiety – even severe anxiety – aggression, panic disorder, generalized rage, tantrums, property destruction, and self-injurious behavior. One mother commenting on using marijuana for her autistic child said, “I know it’s not the end-all answer, but it’s been the best answer for the longest time for us in regards to ALL the other medications. I cannot tell you how many months we would go on a medication, wondering if it was doing anything, anything at all. Here, we can see the difference in 30-60 minutes guaranteed.”

Patients report medical marijuana as more therapeutic
and better tolerated than other medications.

Dr. Rimland continues, saying, “Clearly, medical marijuana is not a drug to be administered lightly. But the reports we are seeing from parents indicate that medical marijuana often works when no other treatments, drug or non-drug, have helped.”

Medical Marijuana Saves Baby’s Life

ABC News reported:

Doctors said two-year-old Cash Hyde would likely die after they found a stage 4 brain tumor surrounding his optic nerve just a year ago this week. And he nearly did. After being subjected to seven different chemotherapy drugs, the little boy from Missoula, Montana, suffered septic shock, a stroke, and pulmonary hemorrhaging.

Cash was so sick he went 40 days without eating. His organs were threatening to shut down. His father, Mike Hyde, intervened, slipping cannabis oil into his son’s feeding tube. Cash, now three, made a miraculous recovery at Primary Children’s Hospital in Salt Lake City, but his father’s bold action—taken behind the doctors’ backs—has raised serious questions about a parent’s role in medical treatment.

Anyone can use marijuana and see for themselves how it affects their pain and disease conditions. In a 400-page analysis of the current state of scientific knowledge on the health risks and benefits of marijuana, medical scientists concluded that marijuana can effectively treat chronic pain. The sweeping National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine report covered over 10,000 scientific studies.

“I was diagnosed with prostate cancer on October 18, 2014. I was advised by my doctor that my only options were to get a prostatectomy, have radiation seeds implanted in my prostate, or receive regular external beam radiation. I declined. I knew there had to be other options. I scoured the Internet and discovered a wealth of information about cannabis oil curing cancer. I was able to obtain some medical marijuana oil (Rick Simpson Oil) and consumed the recommended dosage by mid-January. On January 26, I had a cancer reassessment, which consisted of an MRI with a state of the art Tesla 3 MRI machine. Results – NO SIGN OF CANCER! CANCER FREE! One of the things that helped me while going through all this was reading the testimonials and the success stories of those who have used the oil and were cured also with good food diet. Now that this wonderful oil has cured me, I feel I need to let others know as well.”

Conclusion

The bottom line of marijuana is that it mitigates human suffering. It is the best and safest pain medication. It is cheap if you grow it yourself. It is better than any pharmaceutical on the market. It treats cancer. It is a wonderful drug that healthy people can use to keep their stress down.

 

Dr. Mark Sircus AC., OMD, DM (P)
Professor of Natural Oncology, Da Vinci Institute of Holistic Medicine
Doctor of Oriental and Pastoral Medicine
Founder of Natural Allopathic Medicine

 

Connect with Dr. Mark Sircus

Cover image credit: CMElixirs




Something in the Water

Something in the Water

by Rosanne Lindsay, Traditional Naturopath, Nature of Healing
updated from February 2016

 

Rocket fuel (Perchlorate) is in the news…again.

Rocket fuel chemical found in dozens of food items.

Testing showed that “fast food and fresh produce had the highest levels, while beverages, seafood and meats had the lowest.”

However, rocket fuel contamination has been well known for decades as a contaminant, widespread in the water supply. How does rocket fuel get into the food and water?

Most drinking water contamination comes from activities related to the manufacture, disposal, and research of propellants, explosives, and pyrotechnics, as well as to accidental releases from manufacturing facilities and rocket launch failures, according to the National Institutes of Health’s Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. There are other sources of contamination, too, according to the ATSDR, including fireworks, road safety flares, and certain fertilizers. When crops are irrigated with contaminated water, that leads to contaminated produce.

The scientific way around any toxin is to normalize and naturalize it. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) states, Perchlorate may occur naturally, particularly in arid regions such as the southwestern United States. 

Perchlorate is anything but natural.

As a known goitrogen, Perchlorate prevents the uptake of iodine to affect the thyroid. Along with chloride and fluoride, added to public water supplies, as well as lead, PCBs, pesticides, nitrates, formaldehyde, and other toxins, Perchlorate is only one reason for a global epidemic of thyroid disease.

Thus, Perchlorate is not the only toxin in the water.

In 2016, toxic water made headlines when the EPA announced that water was unsafe to drink in Flint, Michigan due to lead contamination. But water dangers in Flint go back to 2003. By 2017, the consequences of drinking toxic water turned up as an increase in fetal deaths and a drop in fertility rates. In 2024, the EPA says lead in Flint water is at acceptable levels.

…financial motives are causing government science agencies to ignore inconvenient truths—like high levels of lead in public drinking water. – Marc Edwards, the Virginia Tech civil engineering professor who helped expose the Flint water crisis, February 4, 2016

Instead of reassuring residents of Michigan, that lead could be filtered from the water using carbon filters, the government supplied bottled water – one bottle per day per resident – bottles which carry their own toxins of nanoplastics.

The researchers found that, on average, a liter of bottled water included about 240,000 tiny pieces of plastic. About 90% of these plastic fragments were nanoplastics. – NIH, January 2024

Ironically, most bottled water in the U.S. is tap water.

In 2018, Mark Edwards, the Virginia Tech researcher who helped expose the 2016 Flint, Michigan water crisis, was barred from testing well water in South Carolinia.

Not Safe To Drink

Agencies, such as the Department of Natural Resources, and the EPA claim  public water supplies are safe to drink. Some of the reported water-related disasters over the last decade show otherwise:

  1. Fluoridation of water using waste byproducts (hydrofluorsilicic acid) from the phosphate fertilizer industry.
  2. August 2015 Gold Mine disaster in Colorado that sent 3 million gallons of contaminated wastewater (lead, arsenic, mercury, cadmium, uranium, cyanide, sulfuric acid, etc.) into rivers that supply drinking water to at least three states (Colorado, New Mexico and Utah) as well as the Navajo Nation. The spill resulted from a blow-out, a risk that EPA knew about, but are washing their hands of any responsibility.
  3. November 2015 Mining disaster in Brazil, from the Samarco mine in an area where around 150,000 people are still reliant on deliveries of drinking water.  “The best thing that can happen now is for the mud to flow out to sea as quickly as possible,” said Antonio de Padua Almeida, a biologist and head of the local Comboios nature reserve. “The mud will have much greater impact on the river than on the sea.”
  4. Discovery of PFOA’s (Perfluorooctanoic acid, also known as C8), chemicals from Dupont’s Teflon manufacturing process, that are now pervasive around the world though water systems. “DuPont pumped hundreds of thousands of pounds of PFOA powder through the outfall pipes of the Parkersburg facility into the Ohio River.
  5. One million tons of oil enters the marine environment annually. The 2010 BP Oil disaster in the Gulf —and the addition of the toxic chemical Corexit  has longterm human and environmental effects.
  6. Fracking water being used to irrigate organic crops, such as fruits and vegetables in numerous states like Texas and California.
  7. Flint, Michigan water crisis, 2016 (lead)
  8. Ohio 2023 train derailment  spills hazardous chemicals. As of October 2023, 742 incident reports for train derailments in the U.S. have been recorded. [See derailment and spills map of U.S.].
  9. Graphene oxide  and hydrogels (nanotechnology) used in vaccines, wastewater treatment, and water filtration, is also spread via cloud seeding and  climate engineering.

Various synthetic medications, hormones,  anti-depressants, and nanotechnologies make their way to public water that cannot be filtered out. Chemicals, such as Triclosan used in hand sanitizers, creates chloroform when mixed with tap water. Triclosan is an antimicrobial chemical, also known to affect thyroid function.

Nitrates in ground water from pesticide run-off, fertilizers, and septic tank waste affect fertility. [See evidence of nitrates in drinking water by state].

Focus on age-old contaminants distracts from new threats at a nano-level.

How do we control an unseen threat?

Nanotech Toxicity

What is a nanoform? How would EPA regulate it?

Current regulations do not adequately address the development and use of nanomaterials in any system, human or otherwise.

A nanometer is roughly 10,000 times smaller than the diameter of a human hair and 1 million times smaller than a single grain of sand. A major concern with new technologies are unknown risk factors.

First, due to their extremely small size, nanoparticles are difficult to contain, meaning they could escape into the environment and pose a threat to aquatic life, all life. Secondly, the enhanced reactivity of nanoparticles increases their toxicity.

 As we inject a nanomaterial into groundwater to remediate a problem are we simultaneously creating a new problem by injecting a material that may have adverse environmental effects? – Troy Benn, ASU researcher in environmental engineering

Graphene oxide, as an electrically-charged magnetic nanoform, is considered relatively ‘new.’ Even the structure of graphene oxide, as a one atom thick layer of carbon atoms, is still unclear due to its complicated non-stoichiometric nature.

There are never any regulations published before new technologies are unleashed into the environment (eg. GMO crops and mosquitoes). Yet, graphene is now used in all industries, from plastics, and water filtration, to dental anesthetics, biomedical applications and cloud seeding.

Impacts and Solutions

A little known fact is that water holds memoryHumans are 99% water at the molecular level.

What does nano-contamination do to the collective memory of humanity? We know Alzheimer’s is a disease of Aluminum toxicity.

The problems are multifaceted: 1) the failure of government scientists, and agencies, to acknowledge a problem, 2) failure of agencies to do their job to protect the public health, 3) the failure of people to question the status quo.

The impacts are many, from reproductive harm to shortened lifespan, to the destruction of habitats, and oxygen depletion. Unfortunately, mitigation solutions are far behind the rollout of contamination.

Basic Solutions to Complex Problems
  1. Test your well water or water source.
  2. Find and collect a clean source of water, or boil and filter tap water (avoiding nanofiltration)
  3. Stop eating processed foods; know your farmer, and grow your own.
  4. Reduce your plastic consumption and reuse or recycle plastic when you can.
  5. Don’t drink bottled water.
  6. Don’t flush old medications.
  7. Opt for herbs and homeopathy over synthetic medications.
  8. Properly dispose of chemical cleaners, oils, and nonbiodegradable items to keep them from going down the drain.

While individual solutions are a mere drop in the industrial toxic waste bucket, they can protect your health where you live. Simply take responsibility for what you inhale, ingest, imbibe, and inject.

 

Related Articles:

 

Rosanne Lindsay is a Traditional Naturopath, Herbalist, Writer, and Author of the books The Nature of Healing, Heal the Body, Heal the Planet and Free Your Voice, Heal Your Thyroid, Reverse Thyroid Disease Naturally. Find her on Facebook at facebook.com/Natureofhealing. Consult with her remotely at www.natureofhealing.org. Listen to her archived podcasts at blogtalkradio.com/rosanne-lindsay.

 

Connect with Rosanne Lindsay

Cover image credit: cocoparisienne




Recent Study Shows Self-Assembly Nanobots in the COVID-19 Injectables

Recent Study Shows Self-Assembly Nanobots in the COVID-19 Injectables
Research from Korea and Japan confirm previous reports of nanotech in the COVID-19 

by Greg Reese, The Reese Report
September 11, 2024

 

 

Recently published research from Korea and Japan confirm previous reports we’ve heard of nanotech in the COVID-19 injectables.

Contents of the COVID-19 injectables produced by Pfizer and Moderna were examined under a stereo-microscope at four-hundred-times magnification. Specimens were cultured in different media to observe the effect they had on living cells.

The study concluded that the anomalous injuries that have occurred worldwide since the injectables were “pressed upon billions of individuals,” were caused by the nanotechnology contents of the COVID-19 injectables.

The research found cellular toxicity, and over the course of a few weeks, simple one dimensional structures grew into complex three dimensional structures. Numerous artificial self-assembling nano-sized objects of many different shapes. Including animated worm-like entities, discs, chains, spirals, tubes, and right-angle structures containing other artificial structures within them. Some structures even “seemed to appear and then disappear over time.” All of this was found to be well “beyond any expected and acceptable levels of contamination.”

This was first reported on nearly three years ago by Ricardo Delgado and La Quinta Columna, out of Spain. Who found a relationship between the nano-tech and 5G

“The Fifth Column recently published their findings and conclusions on the strange self-assembling nano tech they discovered in the Pfizer mRNA vaccines via Optical Microscopy Analysis.”

The objects they found in the vaccine correspond with known items in the scientific record. And the conclusion they come to seems quite clear, that the well documented scientific goal to use nanotechnology in living human beings to form networks capable of controlling several nanomachines, is currently being deployed in the COV-19 vaccines”
~ Greg Reese “5G Powered Graphene Based Nano-Tech in the Pfizer Vaccine” (2022)

5G towers were fired up for the first time in Wuhan the same time they were reportedly experiencing a COVID-19 outbreak. David Icke said there was a relationship between COVID-19 and 5G back in 2020. And it got him banned.

Using Dark-field microscopy, Doctor Ana Maria Mihalcea has found these same artificial nano-structures in the blood of both those who got the COVID-19 injectables, and those who did not.

Decades ago, Silicon Valley guru Ray Kurzweil, said that by 2045, most of human civilization will be non-biological machines thanks to the advancements of nano-robots which could cure aging and death.

While talk of mRNA is making it easily into the mainstream, the nano-tech is being ignored.

According to the work at La Quinta Columna, there is no mRNA spike protein. According to their research, it’s all about the nano-tech. Which they recently reported can be “totally destroyed” by a nicotine mixture derived from tobacco and distilled water.

Hopefully this nicotine study will be repeated by other independent scientists, because the mass infection of humanity with experimental nano-tech has now been ignored for at least three years. And all sides of political leadership are steering us towards a brave new world of A.I. and the internet of things. Where being an organic human being seems to not be an option.

 

Connect with Greg Reese substack | Rumble




CDC Confesses: Our DHCPP “Experts” Have Never Obtained Scientific Evidence of Any Alleged “Virus”… Including “Hantavirus”

CDC Confesses: Our DHCPP “Experts” Have Never Obtained Scientific Evidence of Any Alleged “Virus”… Including “Hantavirus”

by Christine Massey, Christine Massey’s “germ” FOI Newsletter
August 26, 2024

 

Greetings and Best Wishes,

April 12, 2024:

A FOIA request was filed with the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) (see pages 1 & 2) for all studies/reports in the possession, custody or control of the institutions:

  • that scientifically prove/provide evidence of the existence of any alleged “hantavirus” (showing that the alleged particles exist and cause the illness/symptoms they are alleged to cause), or
  • that even describe purification of particles alleged to be “hantavirus” directly from bodily fluid/tissue/excrement of “hosts”, with purification confirmed via EM imaging, or
  • wherein the purported genome of the alleged “hantavirus” was found intact (as opposed to fabricated in silico aka computer modeled), or
  • that scientifically demonstrate contagion of the illness / symptoms that are allegedly caused by said purported “virus”.

As usual I asked that if records matching my request were held but were already publicly available, I be given citations so that I may identify and access each one. I also clarified that my request was not limited to records authored by the CDC or ATSDR but included records authored by anyone, anywhere, ever.

May 10, 2024, #24-00976-FOIA:

Roger Andoh acting as CDC/ATSDR FOIA Officer in the Office of the Chief Operating Officer responded, citing only the first section of my request where I asked for studies providing scientific evidence of the existence of the alleged virus.

Before looking at Roger’s response, please review the exact wording of that section of my request. I hadn’t even asked for evidence of particles infecting cells, hijacking them and making copies of themselves, which according to “virus” dogma “viruses” do. I have never asked for such evidence in any of my requests. My requests have been much simpler than that.

And yet, despite the simplicity of my request, not only did Roger confess that “we do not have any documents pertaining to your request” (written by anyone, anywhere, ever)…

… he also disclosed that the “experts” in the Division of High-Consequence Pathogens and Pathology have never obtained scientific evidence of purported “viruses” existing in “hosts” and causing the illness/symptoms that they are claimed to cause. Because virology was never a science.

See pages 7 & 8:

“The Division of High-Consequence Pathogens and Pathology has stated that the procedure asked about in this FOIA request is not a methodology or procedure that the branch utilizes or has ever implementedDHCPP routinely, per protocol, places samples on cell culture post sample receipt or conduct RT-PCR.” (emphasis added)

(The various problems with PCR “tests” and the use of cell cultures in virology have already been discussed by many at great length.)

I followed up with Roger (pg 9) asking about the remaining sections of the request: records of the alleged “virus” simply being found and purified from bodily fluid/tissue/excrement of “hosts” (required for valid analysis and experiments), records of the alleged “viral genome” having been found intact anywhere, and studies providing scientific evidence of illness contagion.

Roger never responded. Based on my knowledge of the virology literature and the 100% failure rate of 224 institutions in 40 countries responding to requests for foundational “virus” evidence I am confident that such studies do not exist, anywhere.

Here is the CDC’s web page on imaginary “hantaviruses”. Hmm, where have we seen those “signs and symptoms” before?

(Note: this information has been sent to ~200 people who work for “the state”, lamestream media, etc. at Canada, Isle of Man, England and the U.S., so that they can’t claim later that they didn’t know.)

More Official Confessions/Evidence Showing that Virology is Pseudoscience

Freedom of Information Responses reveal that health/science institutions around the world (224 and counting!) have no record of SARS-COV-2 (the alleged convid virus) isolation/purification, anywhere, ever:
https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/fois-reveal-that-health-science-institutions-around-the-world-have-no-record-of-sars-cov-2-isolation-purification/

Excel file listing 224 institutions:
https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/Institution-list-for-website.xlsx

FOI responses re other imaginary “viruses” (HIV, avian influenza, HPV, Influenza, Measles, etc., etc., etc.):
https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/fois-reveal-that-health-science-institutions-have-no-record-of-any-virus-having-been-isolated-purified-virology-isnt-a-science/

FOIs re secretive and unscientifically “mock infected” cells (aka invalid controls) and fabricated “virus genomes”:
https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/do-virologists-perform-valid-control-experiments-is-virology-a-science/

3000+ pages of “virus” FOIs in 8 compilation pdfs, and my notarized declarations re the anti-scientific nature of virology:
https://tinyurl.com/IsolationFOIs

Failed freedom of Information responses re contagion:
https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/freedom-of-information-responses-re-contagion/

Do health and science institutions have studies proving that bacteria CAUSE disease?
https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/do-health-authorities-have-studies-proving-that-bacteria-cause-disease-lets-find-out-via-freedom-of-information/

Because “they” (HIV, influenza virus, HPV, measles virus, etc., etc., etc.) have never been shown to exist, clearly don’t exist and virology isn’t a science.

For truth, freedom and sanity,
Christine

 

 

Connect with Christine Massey & support her work at substack

Cover image credit: kalhh




‘We Will Not Comply’ With Pandemic Treaty, 26 Republican Governors Tell WHO

‘We Will Not Comply’ With Pandemic Treaty, 26 Republican Governors Tell WHO
In a joint statement issued Aug. 29, the governors accused the WHO of using the Pandemic Agreement to attempt “one world control over health policy.”

by Suzanne Burdick, Ph.D., The Defender
September 4, 2024

 

Twenty-six U.S. governors — over half of the nation’s state leaders — have stated publicly that they will not comply with a World Health Organization (WHO)-led global attempt at controlling U.S. Americans’ health.

In their Aug. 29 statement, the 26 governors — all Republicans — and the Republican Governors Association accused the WHO of “attempting one world control over health policy” by promoting a “pandemic agreement” or “pandemic treaty.”

“Put simply,” they wrote, “Republican Governors will not comply.”

Since 2021, the WHO has been drafting proposals for a pandemic agreement and amendments to its International Health Regulations.

During the organization’s most recent World Health Assembly session, which ended on June 1, WHO negotiators did not agree on a final draft of a pandemic agreement. However, they did make “concrete commitments to completing negotiations on a global pandemic agreement within a year, at the latest, and possibly in 2024,” the WHO stated.

Health freedom activist Dr. Meryl Nass, an internist and founder of Door to Freedom, an organization that lobbied against the WHO pandemic treaty proposals, told The Defender the governors’ statement is “very necessary at this time” because the United Nations (U.N.) — which runs the WHO — “seeks to gain world control over emergencies such as cyber emergencies, supply chain emergencies or outer space emergencies.”

“The jig is up,” Nass said. “It has become widely understood that the U.N. system is being used in an attempt to centralize its control and usurp national sovereignty.”

The governors said they refuse to comply with a WHO pandemic agreement because it would consolidate power in the hands of the WHO, thereby threatening nationa

Nass said:

“This was every Republican governor in the United States with the single exception of Vermont Republican governor [Phil Scott]. He governs a state that is strongly Democrat and may have felt he could not expend the political capital required to go along and make this statement unanimous.”

The 26 governors pointed to a May 22 letter to President Joe Biden in which 24 Republican governors voiced their concerns about the WHO’s proposal.

According to the letter, the WHO’s proposed treaty would “empower the WHO, particularly its uncontrollable Director-General, with the authority to restrict the rights of U.S. citizens, including freedoms such as speech, privacy, travel, choice of medical care, and informed consent, thus violating our Constitution’s core principles.”

WHO fails to pass pandemic treaty but says it’s still committed to it 

For more than two years, the WHO has been trying to pass a pandemic treaty deal.

In December 2021, the agency’s World Health Assembly established an “intergovernmental negotiating body” to draft an international agreement under the WHO’s constitution to strengthen the agency’s pandemic prevention, preparedness and response. The U.S. federal government supported the initiative.

Although WHO negotiators disagreed on a final draft of the agreement during the most recent World Health Assembly session, they did approve a set of revisions to the WHO’s International Health Regulations.

However, the approved revisions did not include many of the most restrictive proposals that worried health freedom advocates, The Defender reported.

Nass wrote on her Substack that the World Health Assembly “had to adopt something to save face, and it had become apparent to the globalists that they would not do any better if they delayed a decision.”

U.S. states’ actions ‘central’ to defeating WHO pandemic plan

Action by U.S. states was “central” to defeating the WHO plan to centralize control of public health during declared emergencies, Nass told The Defender.

Children’s Health Defense and Door to Freedom were central in devising this strategy,” she said, adding:

“The Constitution’s 10th Amendment reserves for the states all powers that were not specifically granted to the central government. Healthcare was never a federal authority.

“Therefore, we urged citizens to contact their attorneys general, governors, legislators — and federal officials — to demand they not turn over authority for health to the WHO.”

In May, in addition to 24 governors writing their letter of opposition, 49 senators called on the Biden administration to reject the WHO agreement.

Additionally, 22 attorneys general told Biden they would “resist any attempt to enable the WHO to directly or indirectly set public policy for our citizens.”

Numerous states — including Utah, Florida, Louisiana and Oklahoma — wrote legislation to prevent the WHO from overriding states’ authority on matters of public health policy.

“I am certain,” Nass added, “that these efforts reverberated around the world and helped lead to rejection” of the WHO’s proposals.

 

Connect with The Defender

 




La Quinta Columna: Demonstration of Tobacco/Nicotine Destroying Injectable Nanotechnology

La Quinta Columna: Demonstration of Tobacco/Nicotine Destroying Injectable Nanotechnology

 

Truth Comes to Light editor’s note: Below you will find a video released today by La Quinta Columna wherein Ricardo Delgado shares the work of one of their associates, Rafa Calvin, who demonstrates the destruction of (apparent) nanotechnology as found in dental anesthetics (used locally via injection) by applying drops of a distilled water/tobacco mixture. As readers here will know, La Quinta Columna has done great work in researching the graphene and nanoparticles found in the so-called covid vaccines. They have also revealed similar toxins in dental anesthetics.

The video speaks for itself. As the video was produced in Spanish, I have included their transcript (as found in the video) along with a few additional translated notes that were displayed in Spanish without English translation. You will need to watch the video to understand context of Richardo’s words. At approximately 5:05 minutes into the video, the demonstration begins.

This has inspired me to begin researching the medicinal uses of tobacco throughout history and spanning many cultures. As with most natural healing options gifted to us by nature, the strange humans who seek to control by any means have buried the truth and offer us endless toxins in their place — all requiring “money”, thus not only poisoning us, but harvesting our energy by making us work within their system to supply them with “payment”.

~ Kathleen


Nicotine Destroys Injectable Nanotechnology

by Ricardo Delgado, La Quinta Columna
August 23, 2024

 

La Quinta Columna would like to inform you that we are working on further studies in the light of the recent findings.

Today, Friday 23rd August, we will begin to carry out more tests directly on the Pfizer “vaccine”.

We do not want with this discovery to encourage smoking in the population, only to show the evidence that nicotine, as we already suspected, apparently interacts negatively with what has been introduced to millions of people around the world.

We are continuing our research and will show more results in the near future.

Yours sincerely;

La Quinta Columna,.Ricardo Delgado

 

 

Transcript:

 

Let’s remember some news. Some articles that were published at the time and recently as well.

For example, Turkish doctor:

‘Smoking and drinking alcohol make COVID-19 vaccines less effective.’

And someone will say, from now on… Well, if precisely what they call vaccines, we now know that it is a neuronal implant that precisely amplifies and catalyzes microwave electromagnetic radiation because it contains graphene.

In this sense. Smoking and drinking, as they say here, and we’re not going to encourage that here, eh?

But smoking, which is what we are focusing on, does make them less effective, since it would cause fewer deaths. Right?

That’s the first logic that comes to mind.

The following study tells us:

Vaccines COVID [covid vaccines] and tobacco. Here we are focusing precisely on nicotine.

‘Can smoking affect the effectiveness of Pfizer doses?’ he says.

A study that has yet to be reviewed claims that people who smoke develop fewer antibodies.

Another example. The Infobae newspaper published: ‘Are COVID vaccines less effective in smokers?’

This is to say, do they do less harm? This is the question we have to ask ourselves?

A recent review of studies showed that antibody levels are lower in this group compared to non-smokers.

What is the cause? Well, we are going to read it here because these are his arguments — his lies, in short.

The study here or the news, February 2022, okay?

And we must remember the emphasis that the Minister of Health, Monica Garcia, places on the issue of tobacco. Listen.

[Monica Garcia] ‘Today is a great day for quality of life. Today, the plan for tobacco control that had not been updated for 14 years was approved and I insist that it puts our country back on track…’

And after 14 years it had not been updated and now they are making it more restrictive for the health of the Spanish people above all, right?

[Monica Garcia] ‘The vanguard of the world in the fight of tobacco, which is the main cause of preventable mortality. As I said, it is the cause of 30% of cancers in our country and is also the cause of more than 16 types of cancer. Today we do it…’

We don’t talk about graphene, the cancers it causes and so on. No, we don’t say that. It far exceeds those of tobacco, almost certainly. And in record time, too, eh?

[Monica Garcia] ‘We are going with ambition, we are doing it with pride, we are doing it with coherence, and we are also doing it without fear. Dusting off this plan will give more years of life to our citizens and that will give a better quality of life in those years.’

Clear!…

[Monica Garcia] ‘It is others who will have to explain why they do not want to adhere to this plan. It is others who will have to explain why they turn their back on scientific evidence, why they turn their back on health, why they turn their back on their own technicians, and they will have to explain why they are not in favour of a consensus that I believe is a fairly broad social consensus. Regardless of this refusal, the origin of which we do not know exactly, they will have to explain it to us. I don’t know if they have given in to the pressure. We don’t know if they have already embarked on this established denialism.’

Wow!

[Monica Garcia] ‘that some people in this country have, we don’t know if..’

So, denialism has to do with tobacco?

Do you see how this woman’s subconscious instinctively betrays her?

What does denialism have to do with a proposal to restrict, after all — the sale or prohibition of tobacco in this regard? See?

Because they’re not very smart, huh?

And when she’s reading, it all seems somewhat coherent since they write the speech for her, but when she interprets, she completely screws up.

[Monica Garcia] ‘As if it were already the result of the obsessive attack on the central government. But this attitude will not tarnish the splendid and wonderful news we have today. And I insist that in our country we will once again be at the forefront of the fight against smoking and at the forefront of the fight for the health of our citizens.’

Denialism, smoking!

But this all stinks pretty bad, huh? In the sense of making you see that now, precisely now. This incisive fight against tobacco and which reduces the effectiveness of the COVID vaccine and the effectiveness of what they call a vaccine, which is not a vaccine — will not in any case reduce the effectiveness of this intracorporeal technology introduced?

Indeed, La Quinta Columna has carried out some kind of tests on the part of that follower Rafa Calvin. And he has mixed. Let’s watch the video.

[Video begins.]

Nicotine extracted directly from a gram of tobacco with distilled water and added it to a sample of a dental anesthetic, local, for dental use, where that micro tech appears.

First part 5cc of distilled water, 1 gram of tobacco. Place the mixture in the centre of the object holder.

[Image] Dental anesthetic 30 days drying.

[Hundreds of micro tech bits can be observed at 100x magnification.]

Well, I’m going to make a little clarification for people who are asking what this is. Surely there is still a lot of research time left, even from the year 2021-2022 until now of La Quinta Columna. What we are seeing is an intracorporeal network of biosensors introduced in local anesthetics. OK?

[I put a small amount of the water/tobacco mixture.]

Well, good for Rafa Calvin. Let’s watch another video. I think they show more results here. There it goes.

Let us also remember what we said about nicotine having a neuroprotective action, and that there were some studies that seemed to determine that it could be an effective treatment for diseases such as Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s and other types of neuropathies.

However, it does not necessarily have to be inhaled and smoked. There are many ways to administer nicotine, including chewing gum. This substance passes in certain doses into the blood, which we now know is contaminated with you know what.

It is an indication that should be tested and more tests must obviously be done.

Starting tomorrow, I’m going to get pure liquid nicotine, which they also sell, and we’re going to test the Pfizer vaccine in different doses and quantities. We will show the results as soon as we have it.

 

 

Connect with La Quinta Columna: website | Odysee | Rumble | telegram




From Agrarianism to Transhumanism: The Long March to Dystopia

From Agrarianism to Transhumanism: The Long March to Dystopia

by Colin Todhunter, Global Research
August 18, 2024

 

“A total demolition of the previous forms of existence is underway: how one comes into the world, biological sex, education, relationships, the family, even the diet that is about to become synthetic.”

 — Silvia Guerini, radical ecologist, in ‘From the ‘Neutral’ Body to the Posthuman Cyborg: A Critique of Gender Ideology’ (2023)

We are currently seeing an acceleration of the corporate consolidation of the entire global agri-food chain. The big data conglomerates, including Amazon, Microsoft, Facebook and Google, have joined traditional agribusiness giants, such as Corteva, Bayer, Cargill and Syngenta, in a quest to impose their model of food and agriculture on the world. [1]

The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and big financial institutions, like BlackRock and Vanguard, are also involved, whether through buying up huge tracts of farmland,  pushing biosynthetic (fake) food and genetic engineering technologies or more generally facilitating and financing the aims of the mega agri-food corporations. [2]

The billionaire interests behind this try to portray their techno-solutionism as some kind of humanitarian endeavour: saving the planet with ‘climate-friendly solutions’, ‘helping farmers’ or ‘feeding the world’. But what it really amounts to is repackaging and greenwashing the dispossessive strategies of imperialism.

It involves a shift towards a ‘one world agriculture’ under the control of agritech and the data giants, which is to be based on genetically engineered seeds, laboratory created products that resemble food, ‘precision’ and ‘data-driven’ agriculture and farming without farmers, with the entire agrifood chain, from field (or lab) to retail, being governed by monopolistic e-commerce platforms determined by artificial intelligence systems and algorithms.

Those who are pushing this agenda have a vision not only for farmers but also for humanity in general.

The elites through their military-digital-financial (Pentagon/Silicon Valley/Big Finance) complex want to use their technologies to reshape the world and redefine what it means to be human. They regard humans, their cultures and their practices, like nature itself, as a problem and deficient.

Farmers are to be displaced and replaced with drones, machines and cloud-based computing. Food is to be redefined and people are to be fed synthetic, genetically engineered products. Cultures are to be eradicated, and humanity is to be fully urbanised, subservient and disconnected from the natural world.

What it means to be human is to be radically transformed. But what has it meant to be human until now or at least prior to the (relatively recent) Industrial Revolution and associated mass urbanisation?

To answer this question, we need to discuss our connection to nature and what most of humanity was involved in prior to industrialisation — cultivating food.

Many of the ancient rituals and celebrations of our forebears were built around stories, myths and rituals that helped them come to terms with some of the most fundamental issues of existence, from death to rebirth and fertility. These culturally embedded beliefs and practices served to sanctify their practical relationship with nature and its role in sustaining human life.

As agriculture became key to human survival, the planting and harvesting of crops and other seasonal activities associated with food production were central to these customs.

Humans celebrated nature and the life it gave birth to. Ancient beliefs and rituals were imbued with hope and renewal and people had a necessary and immediate relationship with the sun, seeds, animals, wind, fire, soil and rain and the changing seasons that nourished and brought life. Our cultural and social relationships with agrarian production and associated deities had a sound practical base.

People’s lives have been tied to planting, harvesting, seeds, soil and the seasons for thousands of years.

Silvia Guerini, whose quote introduces this article, notes the importance of deep-rooted relationships and the rituals that re-affirm them. She says that through rituals a community recognises itself and its place in the world. They create the spirit of a rooted community by contributing to rooting and making a single existence endure in a time, in a territory, in a community.

Professor Robert W Nicholls explains that the cults of Woden and Thor were superimposed on far older and better-rooted beliefs related to the sun and the earth, the crops and the animals and the rotation of the seasons between the light and warmth of summer and the cold and dark of winter.

Humanity’s relationship with farming and food and our connections to land, nature and community has for millennia defined what it means to be human.

Take India, for example. Environmental scientist Viva Kermani says that Hinduism is the world’s largest nature-based religion that:

“… recognises and seeks the Divine in nature and acknowledges everything as sacred. It views the earth as our Mother and hence advocates that it should not be exploited. A loss of this understanding that earth is our mother, or rather a deliberate ignorance of this, has resulted in the abuse and the exploitation of the earth and its resources.”

Kermani notes that ancient scriptures instructed people that the animals and plants found in India are sacred and, therefore, all aspects of nature are to be revered. She adds that this understanding of and reverence towards the environment is common to all Indic religious and spiritual systems: Hinduism, Buddhism and Jainism.

According to Kermani, the Vedic deities have deep symbolism and many layers of existence. One such association is with ecology. Surya is associated with the sun, the source of heat and light that nourishes everyone; Indra is associated with rain, crops, and abundance; and Agni is the deity of fire and transformation and controls all changes.

She notes that the Vrikshayurveda, an ancient Sanskrit text on the science of plants and trees, contains details about soil conservation, planting, sowing, treatment, propagating, how to deal with pests and diseases and a lot more.

Like Nicholls, Kermani provides insight into some of the profound cultural, philosophical and practical aspects of humanity’s connection to nature and food production.

This connection resonates with agrarianism, a philosophy based on cooperative labour and fellowship, which stands in stark contrast to the values and impacts of urban life, capitalism and technology that are seen as detrimental to independence and dignity. Agrarianism, too, emphasises a spiritual dimension as well as the value of rural society, small farms, widespread property ownership and political decentralisation.

The prominent proponent of agrarianism Wedell Berry says:

“The revolution which began with machines and chemicals now continues with automation, computers and biotechnology.”

For Berry, agrarianism is not a sentimental longing for a time past. Colonial attitudes, domestic, foreign and now global, have resisted true agrarianism almost from the beginning — there has never been fully sustainable, stable, locally adapted, land-based economies.

However, Berry provides many examples of small (and larger) farms that have similar output as industrial agriculture with one third of the energy.

In his poem ‘A Spiritual Journey’, Berry writes the following:

“And the world cannot be discovered by a journey of miles,
no matter how long,
but only by a spiritual journey,
a journey of one inch,
very arduous and humbling and joyful,
by which we arrive at the ground at our feet,
and learn to be at home.”

But in the cold, centralised, technocratic dystopia that is planned, humanity’s spiritual connection to the countryside, food and agrarian production are to be cast into the dustbin of history.

Silvia Guerini says [3]:

“The past becomes something to be erased in order to break the thread that binds us to a history, to a tradition, to a belonging, for the transition towards a new uprooted humanity, without past, without memory… a new humanity dehumanised in its essence, totally in the hands of the manipulators of reality and truth”.

This dehumanised humanity severed from the past is part of the wider agenda of transhumanism. For instance, we are not just seeing a push towards a world without farmers and everything that has connected us to the soil but, according to Guerini, also a world without mothers.

She argues that those behind test-tube babies and surrogate motherhood now have their sights on genetic engineering and artificial wombs, which would cut women out of the reproductive process. Guerini predicts that artificial wombs could eventually be demanded, or rather marketed, as a right for everyone, including transgender people. It is interesting that the language around pregnancy is already contested with the omission of ‘women’ from statements like ‘persons who can get pregnant’.

Of course, there has long been a blurring of lines between biotechnology, eugenics and genetic engineering. Genetically engineered crops, gene drives and gene editing are now a reality, but the ultimate goal is marrying artificial intelligence, bionanotechnology and genetic engineering to produce the one-world transhuman.

This is being pushed by powerful interests, who, according to Guerini, are using a rainbow, transgenic left and LGBTQ+ organisations to promote a new synthetic identity and claim to new rights. She says this is an attack on life, on nature, on “what is born, as opposed to artificial” and adds that all ties to the real, natural world must be severed.

It is interesting that in its report Future of Food, the UK supermarket giant Sainsburys celebrates a future where we are microchipped and tracked and neural laces have the potential to see all of our genetic, health and situational data recorded, stored and analysed by algorithms that could work out exactly what food (delivered by drone) we need to support us at a particular time in our life. All sold as ‘personal optimisation’.

Moreover, it is likely, according to the report, that we will be getting key nutrients through implants. Part of these nutrients will come in the form of lab-grown food and insects.

A neural lace is an ultra-thin mesh that can be implanted in the skull, forming a collection of electrodes capable of monitoring brain function. It creates an interface between the brain and the machine.

Sainsburys does a pretty good job of trying to promote a dystopian future where AI has taken your job, but, according to the report, you have lots of time to celebrate the wonderful, warped world of ‘food culture’ created by the supermarket and your digital overlords.

Technofeudalism meets transhumanism — all for your convenience, of course.

But none of this will happen overnight. And whether the technology will deliver remains to be seen. Those who are promoting this brave new world might have overplayed their hand but will spend the following decades trying to drive their vision forward.

But arrogance is their Achilles heel.

There is still time to educate, to organise, to resist and to agitate against this hubris, not least by challenging the industrial food giants and the system that sustains them and by advocating for and creating grass-root food movements and local economies that strengthen food sovereignty.


Renowned author Colin Todhunter specialises in development, food and agriculture. He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG).  

Notes

[1] See Food, Dispossession and Dependency: Resisting the New World Order.

[2] See Sickening Profits: The Global Food System’s Poisoned Food and Toxic Wealth

[3] A debt of gratitude is owed to Paul Cudenec and his article Truth, reality, tradition and freedom: our resistance to the great uprooting on the Winter Oak website, which provides quotes from and insight into the work of Silvia Guerini.

>The original source of this article is Global Research

Copyright © Colin Todhunter, Global Research, 2024

 

Connect with Global Research

Cover image credit: sujp26 




Return of The Monkeypox!

Return of The Monkeypox! 

by Rosanne Lindsay, Traditional Naturopath, Nature of Healing
August 15, 2024

 

Get ready for a feature event sequel!

Remember, the original Monkeypox story from 2022? If not, read The Monkeypox Story:

Do you have a desire to swing from trees, pick breakfast bugs off your mate, to screech, yell, and generally monkey around? But seriously…. 

Back in 2022, the CDC called Monkeypox a “rare” disease, but spreading. The World Health Organization (WHO) declared it a public health emergency of international concern. Amidst many contradictions, suddenly, the story ended. Nothing more was reported. Of course, at the time. another event had taken center stage.

But we all know how stories become epic sagas.

What is once considered rare soon becomes ripe (as a banana) for an epidemic then a pandemic.  Give it two years and one outbreak of rash goes global. Today’s Monkeypox story claims that back in 2023 there were warnings similar to HIV-AIDS in how the disease was targeted:

Some of these cases are being found in communities of gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men. Transgender people and gender-diverse people may also be more vulnerable in the context of the current outbreak.

However, in 2024, Monkeypox has been renamed Mpox, perhaps because we all have shorter attention spans. All reference to HIV-AIDS has all but disappeared. Early reviews of this feature story include the following:

Mpox is an infectious disease closely related to but much less severe than smallpox, and is suspected to originate in African rodents and non-human primates. Mpox spreads through close contact with an infected person, including from sexual and skin-to-skin-contact. Pregnant people can also pass the virus to their child during pregnancy and after birth. The most common symptom of mpox is a blister-like rash that typically lasts for two to four weeks. Other symptoms include fever, fatigue, muscle aches, cough, and sore throat.

New Classification System

This time, Mpox is divided into two clades.  A clade indicates a grouping of animals or plants (or in this case, a strain of virus) from a shared ancestor.

There are two main strains of mpox: clade I, which causes more severe illness and has historically been confined to central Africa, and clade II, which has historically caused infections in west Africa.

 

Why call it a clade when we all know a group of monkeys is a troop?

The International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses has not determined an official name for the virus.  Various groups of scientists argue over the clades, while others avoid tying pathogens or diseases to geographic areas (Africa) by name because “it can be stigmatizing” to the area.

while the virus was first discovered in monkeys, it’s thought that the natural reservoir of the virus may be a rodent, leading to complaints that monkeypox is a misnomer.

Why shorten the name from Monkeypox to Mpox? Why not just make the “k” silent?

This time there is also a Monkeypox Tracker!

According to a situational WHO report, published in August 2024, as of June 2024, there were 175 cases (of Monkeypox) reported across North, Central, and South America; 100 cases were reported in Europe, and 11 cases were reported in Southeast Asian countries.

Monkeypox Rash

In 2022, officials released photos of rash dubbed “Monkeypox.”

Looking closer, any image labelled “Monkeypox” could double as an image labelled as Shingles.

Any skin rash often traces back to a congested liver. The liver needs to be cleansed for the skin to clear. According to Traditional Chinese Medicine, there is a blood imbalance, which involves the health of the liver.  Even the 2007 Journal of Hepatology states:

Chronic liver disease of any origin can cause typical skin findings.

What the WHO and CDC have not disclosed is that vaccine ingredients are widely known to cause rashes, often a full body rash.

A vaccine-associated rash is a consequence of an influx of toxins to the body that results in a suppressed immune system. Frequent Strep Throat infections are another indication of a suppressed immune system. A.S.I.A is not a continent when it comes to vaccine damage. A.S.I.A is Autoimmune/Inflammatory Syndrome Induced by Adjuvants, (ie, induced by toxins), where adjuvants are vaccine ingredients (eg. aluminum sulphate).

Is there a relationship between the pox and a rash? Between the CoV-SARS vaccine/boosters and a rash? Between the new SHINGRIX recombinant vaccine and a rash?

Dermatological reactions have been reported following Shingrix vaccine administration. 

Will Chickenpox become Cpox? Will Horsepox become Hpox?

It is recommended to do your own research. Reflect before you inject.

Spoilers to Endings

Beware of the spoilers! We may know how the story ends! The question is, do we share it and spoil the ending for everyone else?

Recent news reports fail to disclose that in February of 2021, patent application #20210260182 was filed for RECOMBINANT POXVIRUS BASED VACCINE AGAINST SARS-CoV-2 VIRUS. This is a combination pox/COVID vaccine patent filed over a year ago. After all, where there is a will, there is a vaccine patent!

The terms “chimeric” or “engineered” or “modified” (e.g., chimeric poxvirus, engineered polypeptide, modified polypeptide, engineered nucleic acid, modified nucleic acid) or grammatical variations thereof are used interchangeably herein to refer to a non-native sequence that has been manipulated to have one or more changes relative a native sequence.

In some embodiments, the SARS-CoV-2 protein is inserted into the Thymidine Kinase (TK) locus (Gene ID HPXV095; positions 992077-92610; SEQ ID NO: 1) of the horsepox virus or the synthetic horsepox virus.

Then came the pipeline of new patented pox-combo vaccines.

There are more than 292 COVID-19 candidates’ vaccines being developed as of July 2021 of which 184 are in human preclinical trials. 

Problem-Reaction-Solution

In the movie business, sequels are made to increase profit not gained by the first movie. The directors do not always expect people to remember the first version, especially if it was a flop. But now, the virus has mutated! It’s spreading!

So the red carpet is being rolled out.

Of course, there are those who question the merit of vaccination schemes as “the light at the end of the tunnel.”

But the era of Reverse Genetics is here. That is: engineering viruses from deadly Smallpox, which they admit could lead to the reemergence of Smallpox, as well as to future pandemics.

Since the first Monkeypox event, many labs have been developing tests for the unseen Monkeypox virus.

Get ready for the temperature checks. You know the routine.

Are we watching science fiction or have we become part of the script?

This story does not mean that humans need fear monkeys or eradicate them, like they did when they agreed to put chickens into lockdown from Pennsylvania to France, then exterminate 95 million chickens, turkeys, and other poultry out of fear since February 2022.

Do we care where this sequel goes? Or that it goes back to a patent?

 

Related Articles:

 

Connect with Rosanne Lindsay, Traditional Naturopath

Cover image credit:jonleong64




Fluoride To Zeolite: Safe or Shaky?

Fluoride To Zeolite: Safe or Shaky?

by Rosanne Lindsay, Traditional Naturopath, Nature of Healing
August 14, 2024

 

Zeolite.

It’s an aluminosilicate mineral by definition. Silico-aluminate. Powdered aluminum.

Toxic.

Ironically, in the natural health world, zeolite is advertised and promoted as a metal detoxifier; something that binds to and removes metal toxins from the body.  Zeolites are promoted in industry to minimize environmental issues linked to landfill disposal leakage.

Zeolites constituent [SiO4]4 −and [AlO4]5 . According to this 2005 article, they share all corners to create a three-dimensional framework structure carrying a negative charge.

Nearly 100 different frameworks have been crystallographically defined for zeolites, and related structures, each one having a unique molecular architecture. The internal dimensions of their channels and cavities are close to molecular dimensions and this has led to their employment as ‘molecular sieves’ and catalysts.

Some zeolite structures, high in aluminum, cannot be used in living systems (in vivo) because they are not stable in acids. But how do zeolite manufacturers assure the right form is used in human health applications?

Are zeolites safe in the body?

Waste Incineration Fly Ash

Whether recycled from volcanic ash, or synthesized from incineration fly ash, both sources of zeolite are synthesized from toxic ash clouds, i.e. waste.

Normally, waste is incinerated and sent to landfills for disposal. However, with the problems of available landfill space decreasing, hazardous substances leaching out of landfills, not to mention the cost of solidification, or burial of hazardous waste, what can be done?

From the 2021 Journal of Environmental Chemical Engineering:

The ash or residue materials containing rich silica and alumina are dissolved in the alkaline solution to form the aluminosilicate as the precursors of zeolite, after aging for a period of time, the aluminosilicate solution is put into an autoclave to conduct hydrothermal reactions at a specific temperature and pressure and the crystalline zeolite is formed gradually.

The recycling of hazardous waste to become a “healthy” additive is nothing new.

Fluoride in The Water

The same has been done with toxic waste byproducts from phosphate fertilizer production; hydrfluoroosilicic acid (HFSA), also known as fluoride.

The CDC and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) allow HSFA to be added as “fluoride” to municipal drinking water. For more than 80 years, HFSA has been deemed by “experts” as “safe” in preventing tooth decay. Even though there is plenty of proof that HFSA causes dental fluorosis.

These agencies know that, if buried, poisonous arsenic leaches into groundwater worldwide. Thus, the problem was transferred to public water supplies.

If a fluoride level of 0.7 mg/L, the “optimal” level used in U.S. and Canadian drinking water fluoridation projects, can create neurodevelopmental harm to the fetus, bottle-fed infant, and child, then what does it do to an adult who has been drinking tap water over the course of a lifetime?

Fluoride increases the body’s ability to absorb aluminum. And where does the aluminum go? The bones. The brain. What metal shows up in the brains of Alzheimer’s victimsAutism? Multiple Sclerosis? Aluminum.

The studies show a lowered I.Q. in any population that drinks fluoridated water. Within phosphate fertilizer waste (HFSA) is arsenic and lead, among other toxins. This leads to numerous forms of cancer in any population that drinks municipal fluoridated, water.

Even the American Dental Association (ADA) says fluoride is safe in community water fluoridation programs. Yet, the ADA also calls fluoride “a mineral that is found in all natural water sources and is the ionic form of the trace element fluorine, which is commonly found in the environment. Why the contradictions?

An April 22, 2013 Earth Day petition from a U.S. University, delivered to the U.S. EPA Administrator appealed to reason regarding HFSA’s carcinogenicity, but also the costs saved by eliminating  fluoridation of the public water supply (of between 1 and 6 billion annually). However, no amount of information, legal wrangling, or courtroom trials, have ended the addition of industrial toxic waste products to the water supply. The latest court case sits in California without a ruling.  Will EPA ever be forced to ban toxins in tap water?

Are fluoride drinkers more likely to disregard the dangers of nanotechnology?

Nanotechnology can be defined as “the art and science of manipulating matter at the nanoscale (down to 1/100,000 the width of a human hair) to create new and unique materials and products…seemingly ordinary materials may behave completely differently than in their larger bulk or macro form.

Due to their small size, nanoparticles can cross biological membranes, cells, tissues and organs more readily than larger particles. Once in the blood stream, nanomaterials can circulate throughout the body and can lodge in organs and tissues including the brain, liver, heart, kidneys, spleen, bone marrow and nervous system. Once inside cells, they may interfere with normal cellular function, cause oxidative damage and even cell death.

Ironically, calcium nano-fertilizer is being used to counter the effects of oxidative stress from fluoride uptake in rice!

Zeolite NanoTechnology

Zeolite is used in nanotechnology, specifically in the nanotech delivery of medications, as biosensors.  Biosensing is the basis of Smart Delivery, Monitoring, Surveillance, and Healthcare.

More broadly, zeolites are important to the industries of Artificial Intelligence, A.I.  Their nano-crystalline structure is useful to biomedical applications, not only as biosensors, but also as: Vaccine adjuvants, Antimicrobial agents, Drug and Gen delivery, Hemodyalisis, external applications, Diabetes Mellitus, Detoxicants, Bone formation, Anti-diarrheal agents, Anti-tumor adjuvants, and Enzyme mimetics.

Today, zeolites bind, while also building nano-systems for medical interventions.

Zeolites were used as part of the CoV-BAN, Internet of Things (IoT) Network, as a real time health monitoring system. A biosensor map of the world can identify people in real-time, whether you are pharmaceutical-friendly or “alternative.”

Before applying zeolite to your routine, or listening to “experts” who promote it for their own profit, do your own research.  Even with a lowered I.Q. from drinking fluoridated water, anyone can protect themselves by asking questions and checking the source.

These days, toxins are not only in the water, but also in fast foods, and in the air we breathe. People, who turn to supplements for help, need to ask if any new-and-improved product is safe or shaky?

 

Related articles:

Nano Drug Delivery Systems in Smart Healthcare

 

Rosanne Lindsay is a Traditional Naturopath, Herbalist, Writer, and Author of the books The Nature of Healing, Heal the Body, Heal the Planet and Free Your Voice, Heal Your Thyroid, Reverse Thyroid Disease Naturally. Find her on Facebook at facebook.com/Natureofhealing. Consult with her remotely at www.natureofhealing.org. Listen to her archived podcasts at blogtalkradio.com/rosanne-lindsay.

 

Connect with Rosanne Lindsay, Traditional Naturopath

Cover image credit: OfotoRay




“Vaxxed III: Authorized To Kill” — Coming Soon. The Film They Don’t Want You to See.

“Vaxxed III: Authorized To Kill” — Coming Soon. The Film They Don’t Want You to See.
“Vaxxed III: Authorized To Kill,” launching in over 200 theaters on Sept. 18, chronicles the stories of people injured or killed by the COVID-19 vaccines or hospital protocols. Children’s Health Defense gathered the testimonials during a nine-month, 50,000-mile bus tour across America.

by Children’s Health Defense
August 2, 2024

 

Vaxxed III: Authorized To Kill” sheds light on the devastating risks of severe injury and death associated with COVID-19 vaccines.

The documentary, which also highlights the tragic fatalities that resulted from COVID-19 hospital protocols, will be released nationwide on Wednesday, Sept. 18.

Children’s Health Defense (CHD) gathered the powerful testimonies that will be featured in the documentary during its 2023-2024 bus tour across America — “The People’s Study.”

According to CHD.TV Program Director Polly Tommey, even before the film’s release, Facebook is reportedly removing posts about “Vaxxed III,” claiming it has been discredited by people around the world.

Tommey described the painful stories she witnessed during the CHD bus tour:

“We were horrified by the COVID hospital protocol deaths, which just kept coming and still are. The injuries from the COVID shots were beyond belief. We thought we had seen it all with the babies’ deaths following routine vaccinations and the Gardasil HPV vaccine injuries and deaths. This time around, we were not prepared for so much death — it was everywhere.”

“Vaxxed III” will launch via a “People’s Premiere,” showing simultaneously in over 200 theaters across the country. Tommey said the film aims to create a powerful grassroots movement, bringing communities around the nation together and empowering more people to share their stories.

The film’s creators are asking people to find a screening near you and buy tickets before Aug. 18, to ensure each theater meets its minimum target — at least 50% of seats must be sold for the showing to proceed, or tickets will be refunded.

Whether a parent, healthcare professional or concerned citizen, “Vaxxed III” offers an opportunity to engage with these critical issues and join a movement dedicated to transparency, accountability and informed choice.

Toby Tommey, “Vaxxed III” co-producer who also produced “Vaxxed II: The People’s Truth,” said:

“This film is powerful. It’s the result of 50,000 miles on a bus across the country, hundreds of interviews with doctors, scientists, nurses and parents who will no longer be silenced about the vaccine injuries and hospital protocol deaths they have witnessed.

“‘Vaxxed III’ is more than a movie — it’s a call to action. We encourage everyone to find their nearest showing, invite friends and family and engage in discussion with your local community.”

Be part of the conversation, share your story and help shape the future of public health reform in America. Together, we can prevent this catastrophe from ever happening again.

For more information about “Vaxxed III” and the People’s Premiere, visit the official website and join the discussion on Instagram and X (formerly Twitter).

Watch the ‘Vaxxed III’ Trailer:



Find Premier Locations Near You

Get your tickets: https://vaxxed3.childrenshealthdefense.org/

 

Connect with Children’s Health Defense




Bird Flu BS

Bird Flu BS 

by Rosanne Lindsay, Traditional Naturopath, Nature of Healing
July 31, 2024

 

In 2024, the Avian “Bird Flu” has flown the coop to infect dairy cows!

Or, so says the CDC:

A multistate outbreak of HPAI A(H5N1) bird flu in dairy cows was first reported on March 25, 2024. This is the first time that these bird flu viruses had been found in cows. 

The USDA says:

Highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) H5N1 in the hemagglutinin clade 2.3.4.4b,” the virus associated with the dairy cow outbreak, was first detected in a Texas dairy cow on March 25, 2024. Since then, there have been 172 confirmed cases of infected dairy milking cows in 13 states.

The CDC states that today’s suspicious strain of “Bird Flu” is known to cross the species barrier in poultry, dairy cows, as well as in dairy workers!  That’s three different species!

Why lump humans into animal categories, unless the government considers humans part of the herd?

The CDC claims only 13 humans have been “infected.” According to the CDC, Bird flu in humans is rare. But, always a source of contradiction, CDC also claims Bird Flu could cause a human pandemic.

The Species Barrier

The species barrier still exists, even if the definition has been scrubbed from the Internet! Read more here. The UK Dictionary once defined it as:

The natural mechanisms that prevent a virus or disease from spreading from one species to another.

The ‘species barrier’ explains why certain species of animals are not affected by a given infectious agent or parasite. It also describes the phenomenon of natural genetic resistance to pathogens. In general, a pathogen may encounter three successive lines of defense in attempts to infect or parasitize a potential host:

  • first, the pathogen has to encounter the host animal;
  • next, the pathogen has to penetrate the body, overcoming mechanisms of nonspecific, natural, constitutional or innate resistance;
  • the pathogen may also face specific, adaptive or acquired resistance.

In other words, the species barrier makes animals, including humans, capable of resisting major infections. Such a concept explains the strength and power of an individual immune system. However, this would not apply when a substance breaks through the protective skin barrier, say, through an injection.

We don’t catch diseases, we create them by breaking down the natural defenses according to the way we eat, drink, think and live. – Dr. Constantine Hering, Father of American Homeopathy, Hering’s Law of Cure

Culling of Livestock is Common Practice

Whether designated “beef,” “poultry” or “dairy,” if an animal is deemed to be infected with bird flu, what follows is a mass extinction event of the herd and the subsequent elimination of the food supply.

According to Farm Policy News, today, states known for diary and beef herds are reporting higher death rates among cattle. And yet, the USDA insists the meat supply is safe.

Why suggest the flu results in immediate death by culling?

Why? Because every few years, the government justifies livestock depopulation. During the 2020 human pandemic, animal culling promoted  vaccination as a viable option for animals [and for humans, as well].

In 2020, chicken flocks were targeted. Covid-related slaughterhouse shutdowns resulted from killing millions of animals.  Chickens were “most at risk” followed by piglets. Five years earlier, in 2015, nearly 100,000 head of dairy cows were culled, compared to 2014, when 2000 were euthanized.  During 2014-2015, 50.4 million birds in 21 states were killed as “the nation’s largest animal health emergency.”

Official 2019 Guidelines for the euthanasia of animals was established in “response to natural or human-made disasters”… “in as humane a manner as possible.”

Yet, more than 10 million hens (at chicken or egg stage) and 10 million pigs were culled by suffocation.

In the Netherlands, the COVID virus was blamed for the culling of minks on mink farms, as a viral reservoir for human infection. Spain culled nearly 10,000 farmed mink. What was the rationale for the culling of mink?

Rationale for Culling

…these mutations might negatively impact the deployment of anti-coronavirus disease 2019 vaccines. – Journal New Microbes New Infect. 2o20 Nov

The authors of the 2020 study asked, “is it (culling of animals) a precautionary attitude or a panic-driven overreaction? These questions were never answered despite a 2022 CDC MMWR study documenting 75% of COVID deaths were related to the COVID shot.

A second rationale for culling is the growing industry of alternative meat products. The extinction of livestock (real meat) will necessitate the production of an alternative meat. Would that be fake meat?  Crickets anyone? What about the controversial mRNA technology that now targets livestock?

Is the meat supply safe from Bird flu, but not mRNA, unless you know your farmer?

Fear Dismantles Food Supply Chains

Fear is commonly observed in the face of a pandemic. However, fear and panic should not be the drivers because they lead to irrational reactions. Culling millions of animals with no evidence of actual danger but simply on the basis of fear is setting up a dangerous precedent. – Journal New Microbes New Infect. 2020 Nov

In 2020, the ‘depopulation’ of the food supply happened despite food banks across the US reporting extreme demand and widespread hunger during the pandemic, “with six-mile-long queues for aid forming at some newly set up distribution centers.

More than 52 million birds in 46 states were culled in 2022. In 2015, more than 50 million birds were culled during that Bird Flu outbreak.

Any Excuse Will Do

In 2023, ranchers said the killing of 19 feral cattle by helicopter in a New Mexico wilderness area was inhumane.  [Note: Feral refers to freely roaming animals]. Yet, ground-based and aerial removal efforts, since October 2021, have substantially reduced the feral cattle population, even without blaming Bird Flu.

Does Bird Flu sound like a bunch of bull?

Long before culling Guidelines, in 2014, under the Obama presidency, the Dept. of Agriculture had killed 2,713,570 animals, of 319 different species. A 2015 article in Mother Jones stated:

much like the actual kill list—the USDA’s operations are shrouded in secrecy, prone to collateral damage…The contradictions can be glaring.

To wit, the USDA killed cats (730) to save rats, but if you’re scoring at home, it also killed 1,327 black rats, 353 Norway rats, 74 Hutia rats, 7 Polynesian rats, 4 bushy-tailed woodrats, and 3 kangaroo rats. It slaughtered more than 16,500 double-breasted cormorants to save salmon. It’s shooting white-tailed deer (5,321) to save various plant species and the small fauna, like rabbits, that eat them. But the woods aren’t safe for Thumper either—the agency bagged 7,113 cottontail rabbits, plus assorted varieties of jackrabbits, swamp rabbits, and feral pet rabbits. The USDA killed 322 wolves and 61,702 coyotes to save livestock, perhaps in an attempt to atone for the 16 unspecified livestock it killed by accident.

Can humans justify killing some animals to save others if humans are part of Nature? The decision to cull the flying fox in 2015-16 resulted in its addition to the endangered species list in 2018.

Humans make mistakes.

If any excuse can result in the official culling of livestock, or freely roaming animals, and flying creatures, then does government-sponsored euthanasia of animals also include the human species?

 

Related articles:

 

Connect with Rosanne Lindsay, Traditional Naturopath

Cover image based on creative commons work of: OpenClipart-Vectors, MostafaElTurkey36, Zadok_Artifex




Dr. Mark Bailey: Virus, Bacteriophage & Single “Virus” Genomics

Virus, Bacteriophage & Single “Virus” Genomics

by Dr. Mark Bailey
July 20, 2024

 

 

This essay was written to address the fallacy that technological advances in the 21st century have provided evidence for the virus model. In essence, the technology-driven approach cannot change the fact that the concept of ‘virus’ remains as it was in the 1800s: a mental construct that attempts to explain why organisms become diseased.

The paper also examines the misinterpretations concerning bacteriophages and giant “viruses” and how these entities have been inappropriately placed in the virological realm. As former virologist Dr Stefan Lanka has explained, these entities can be found in nature, isolated and characterised, but they are not pathogenic. The linguistic legerdemain employed by the virologists cannot change biological reality.

I view this latest publication as a companion to Virology’s Event Horizon with both papers outlining the pivotal flaws in the methodologies employed by the virologists. We have dozens of videos, articles, interviews and books covering this topic at drsambailey.com with the most extensive refutation of the virus model being A Farewell to Virology (Expert Edition), a freely-downloadable treatise that was also made into a three part video series by Steve Falconer.

 

READ AND DOWNLOAD PDF

 

Connect with Drs. Mark & Samantha Bailey

Cover image credit: geralt




The Bird Flu Blues: The Sky Is Falling…Again

The Bird Flu Blues: The Sky Is Falling…Again

by Health Freedom Defense Fund (HFDF) Team
July 19, 2024

 

 

Here comes the rain again
Raining in my head like a tragedy 

– The Eurythmics, “Here Comes the Rain Again”

The pandemic pandemonium machine appears to be revving up its engines for yet another campaign as Bird Flu Mania Redux is being unleashed across the airwaves, onto every screen and into every cranium still naive enough to believe the masters of microbial terror are on the up and up.

The pandemia industry is rolling out its version of stale, exaggerated plot lines and ham-fisted Hollywood sequels that make Grade ‘B’ movies seem avant-garde.

Hysterical headlines fill the airwaves screeching end-times tales of the coming avian apocalypse:

“This could be 100 times worse than covid” – “Now is the time to take action on H5N1 avian flu, because the stakes are enormous” –  “Concerns grow as ‘gigantic’ bird flu outbreak runs rampant in US dairy herds” – “Health warning over new pandemic ‘with 50 percent mortality rate’ after first human death confirmed.”

Running counter to the unsubstantiated caterwauling of the pharma influenced media parrots Mexican Health Secretary Jorge Alcocer countered the WHO’s claim that a 59 year old Mexican man had died from this latest presumed bird flu strain.

In unequivocal terms Alcocer rebuffed the WHO’s latest round of fear mongering stating, “I can point out that the statement made by the World Health Organization is pretty bad, since it speaks of a fatal case (of bird flu), which was not the case.” Noting that the man had numerous underlying medical conditions and had been bedridden for three weeks Alcocer added that the man had, “died from other causes, mainly kidney and respiratory failure.”

Lead role in this latest bird-brained episode of the Avian Flu H5N1 sequel seems to have been handed over to lifelong bureaucrat Rick Bright, former director of the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA) and self described Pandemic Nemesis.

Pandemia Theater
All the world’s a stage, 
And all the men and women merely players; 
They have their exits and their entrances; 
And one man in his time plays many parts

– William Shakespeare, from “As You Like It”, spoken by Jaques

No stranger to the bright lights of pandemic theatrics, Rick Bright was recently showcased at a Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) webinar, “Avian Flu Outbreak and Preventing the Next Pandemic,” that was broadcast to 300 state and local officials from 47 states.

Bright kicked off the hifalutin CFR symposium with an oblique reference to this latest viral hobgoblin, menacingly pronouncing it to be a “shapeshifter.”

With nary a piece of evidence in sight, Bright commenced to “educate” the audience on this potential plague with a performance reminiscent of the Mad Hatter:

“We know it can rapidly change. We know it can jump to different hosts and different species rapidly, and change, and evolve.

“And those mutations can help it be more lethal, or adapt, or spread to humans and other hosts. Sometimes because the genetic makeup of the virus is fragmented, there’s all these segments inside that virus, you can have two viruses infect a person, or an animal, or a seasonal virus and the H5N1 virus. And they’ll recombine and reassort. And you’ll have this virus that comes out with some of the best or worst of all worlds. And so we know the tricks of this virus.”

Bright’s breathless rambling of ifs, andsors and mights, coming on the heels of the most massive medical money grab in history might cause one to pause and consider the reliability, if not integrity, of such pronouncements.

These doomsday warnings come from the same pandemic fanatic “man-in-the-know” who in October of 2019 bizarrely foreshadowed the coming covid storm, “But it is not too crazy to think that an outbreak of a novel avian virus could occur in China somewhere.”

Lessons From the Past: Avian Flu 2005
“I don’t know of any biotech company that’s so politically well-connected” 

Andrew McDonald, analyst at Think Equity Partners referring to Gilead Sciences Inc.

For those who still do history it’s worth noting that the original H5N1 fright flick was shown across TV screens back in 2005.

In the original screenplay then President Bush primed the panic button by declaring that a minimum of 200,000 people would die from the avian flu, with as many as 2 million dying in the US alone.

President Bush called for $7.1 billion in spending to “stop the spread” of this fearful, feathered contagion and prompted Congress’ enactment of the infamous Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act (PREP Act).

This key Act, invoked during the covid crisis, protects pharmaceutical manufacturers from financial risk during a declared public health emergency. The act specifically provides immunity, from Federal and State liability, to drug makers involved in the manufacture, testing, distribution, administration and use of countermeasures, arising from public health emergencies.

While it’s not clear if even a single soul in the US perished from this predicted plague, what is clear is that certain companies and well-connected individuals made a killing off these dire prophecies.

Before taking a position in the Bush administration, as US Secretary of Defense, Donald H. Rumsfeld, served as Chairman of the Board of Gilead Sciences Inc., a biopharmaceutical company that focuses on developing antiviral drugs. In 1996 Gilead would patent the drug Tamiflu which was marketed as salvation for the pending avian armageddon of 2005. Gilead Inc., is also the developer of the controversial drug remdesivir that was used in covid protocols.

The avian flu scare of 2005, promoted by the Bush administration, would ultimately be used to justify the purchase of $2 billion worth of Tamiflu and as luck would have it Donald Rumsfeld would make more than $5 million in capital gains from selling his shares in Gilead.

Back to the Future: Follow the Money
Birds have been on this planet, Miss Daniels, since Archaeopteryx, a hundred and forty million years ago. Doesn’t it seem odd that they’d wait all that time to start a…a war against humanity.

Mrs. Bundy, “The Birds” by Alfred Hitchcock

In Hitchock’s classic, while trapped in a house that is being pecked into oblivion by an inexplicable mass bird attack, Cathy desperately asks a beleaguered Mitch, “Why are they doing this, the birds, why are they trying to kill people?” Mitch responds, “We don’t know, honey. I wish I could say.”

In this latest Pharma production there’s no need to look to the heavens for a supernatural explanation. Bereft of new ideas the pandemic profiteers pull from their predictable playbook, complete with tired lines delivered by some of the same seedy CDC actors,  Reciting the sweet syrupy notes straight from the BioPharma hymn book, the all too human actors and their mendacious mouthpieces give away the hustle.

Shortly after his performance at the influential CFR, Rick Bright made an appearance on the Biocentury Show and spoke to the supposed need for better surveillance, speedy mRNA vaccines, better therapeutics and the need to stockpile all of the above to be better prepared for alleged bird germ emergencies.

In that interview Bright went through the entire pandemic preparedness inventory, a wish list every Pharma executive dreams about. In a single sentence the not-so-subtle Pharma lifer gave away the not-so-hidden secret as to how this racket would be financed, “Industry will respond if the government makes the money available.”

When translated, Bright’s coy confessional is an unambiguous lesson in how to siphon off public monies for private interests.

They will invent the problem.

Problem-Reaction-Solution
One day, a leaf landed on Chicken Little’s tail. Chicken Little feels the leaf and jumps in surprise. He ran to Henny Penny and cried, “The sky is falling!” “Oh, I must tell everyone!” cried Henny Penny. Chicken Little jumps up and down in panic! Henny Penny looks worried. Soon, Henny Penny met Ducky Lucky. “The sky is falling!” cried Henny Penny. Ducky Lucky asked, “How do you know that?” “Chicken Little told me,” said Henny Penny. “We must tell everyone!” cried Ducky Lucky.

Soon, they met Foxy Loxy. “The sky is falling!” cried Turkey Lurkey. Foxy Loxy asked, “How do you know that?” “Goosey Loosey told me,” cried Turkey Lurkey. “Ducky Lucky told me,” cried Goosey Loosey. “Henny Penny told me,” cried Ducky Lucky. “Chicken Little told me,” cried Henny Penny. The birds point back at each other. Chicken Little covers his eyes. 
“Look!” said Foxy Loxy. “Do you see the sky falling?” “No, we don’t see it falling,” they said. “Listen!” said Foxy Loxy. “Do you hear the sky falling?” “No, we don’t hear it falling,” they said. “Feel!” said Foxy Loxy. “Do you feel the sky falling?” “No, we don’t feel it falling,” they said. “Silly birds!” said Foxy Loxy. “Next time, see, hear, and feel for yourselves before you tell everyone else!”.

– “Chicken Little: The Sky is Falling” – An English Folk Tale.

The pattern of problem-reaction-solution embedded in The Hegelian Dialectic is a repeating pattern that plays out in reality.

This analytical lens is “frequently used to scrutinize major global events and policies [and] suggests that powerful groups or entities engineer a problem, anticipating a public reaction that allows them to offer a pre-planned solution. While ostensibly solving the issue, these solutions often serve hidden interests, whether they be financial gains, increased power, or expanded control.”

In the universe of the Pharmaceutical Industry this is a seasoned and time honored strategy.

In the theatrical production of Avian Flu 2024, the media-manufactured fowl-based fear factor was founded on a mere four “confirmed” cases “discovered” in dairy workers. The primary symptom that sounded the alarms for the Pharma friendly bureaucrats at CDC Inc. was conjunctivitis (pink eye), a catch-all term for inflammation of the eye.

Eliminated from consideration were more reasonable explanations for why farm workers might have eye irritations such as, ever-present dust and dander found on farms, the boatload of chemical residues (from Roundup e.g.) that circulate throughout factory farms, or the ubiquitous dairy farm mountains of manure which release toxic ammonia.

To kick start the next pandemic bonanza the virus hunters, who dutifully serve the pharmaceutical syndicate, call upon the tried and true PCR shell game to hornswoggle the public into believing that another sinister, free-floating microbe is on-the-move.

Known for its ability to be manipulated in order to obtain the desired results, the decidedly non-diagnostic PCR process has proven to be the perfect tool for the art of medical deception and for casting a spell on an ill-informed public. No matter the well-documented history of PCR being used to invent non-existent epidemics and to “identify” non-existent diseases the PCR voodoo is being rolled out yet again as proof positive that this bird flu baddie represents reality.

Truth to be told, identifying The Virus™ is nearly superfluous, as all they need to do is create the perception of a pandemic, manufacture mass panic with staged Hollywood productions, and doomsday models and use the fraudulent PCR tests to manufacture the perception of an incoming alien invasion.

The CDC then starts squawking about another “deadly virus” in order to justify a multi million dollar government handout to a Pharma darling, like the recent $176 million government giveaway to Moderna to develop an “mRNA bird flu pandemic vaccine.”

Voila! Another boondoggle to funnel tax dollars to Pharma executives and shareholders.

You’d think by now it would be glaringly obvious the emperor’s wearing no clothes and that the only pandemic to be feared is not coming from barnyard animals but one of snake oil salesmen.

Whatever their motives, be it the sadistic inclinations of Nurse Ratched dying to jab everyone again; or Billy Bug Gates and Co. looking to decimate the food supply by culling millions of birds and cattle in order to crank up his failing bug and chemical fake meat factories; or central bankers looking to give payouts of fake currency to farmers for their “losses” in order to further exacerbate hyperinflation in order roll out their CBDCs, one thing is for sure, despite all advertisements none of this is being done for public health.

So the next time you hear the carnival barkers of the Medical Mafia and their media parrots whistling dixie about some deadly bird bug ignore their self-serving hype and whistle your own tune:

Meet the new flu – same as the old flu.

 

Connect with Health Freedom Defense Fund

Cover image based on creative commons work of OpenClipart-Vectors




Vitamins: A Good Hypothesis From the Beginning, but Long Since Refuted

Vitamins: A Good Hypothesis From the Beginning, but Long Since Refuted

by Next Level
translated from German via telegram translate
July 14, 2024

 

 

 

In 1921, Scientific American published an article pointing out that vitamins have never been isolated or seen and their chemical composition is unknown .

One might think that science has advanced further today and that vitamins are now proven facts – but whoever believes this is mistaken:

The parallels to disproven virology are frightening. In both cases, these are thought models without controlled evidence according to the scientific method.

Reality:

According to current studies, the symptoms associated with “vitamin deficiency” are the result of ongoing stress caused by poor nutrition.

Logic:

If a deficiency is supposed to cause disease, why do people who go without eating for a long time not get scurvy or beriberi?

NL BIO-LOGISCH [Next Level Bio-Logical] can accurately classify and explain the causes of these “diseases”.

 

Connect with Next Level [German language] at telegram
Cover image credit: CDD20


See Related:

Toxic Brews?: A Close-Up Look at the Source of Nutritional Supplements




Populations Sucked Into the Vortex of…Medical Labels

Populations Sucked Into the Vortex of…Medical Labels

by Jon Rappoport
July 3, 2024

 

Take these disasters: pesticides that disrupt hormone levels; plastics everywhere; chemicals in dead processed foods; infant formula replacing breast milk; vaccines that disrupt and shred the immune system.

THEN researchers come along.

They take the symptoms these disasters create and cluster them in groups and put medical labels on them.

ADHD, depression, Bipolar, gender dysphoria…

When it comes to disruption of the immune system from pesticides, plastics, no breast milk, dead processed food, etc., look at this boggling list of “immune system diseases” the medical system has invented:

Autoimmune Diseases:
Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA)
Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE)
Multiple Sclerosis (MS)
Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus
Hashimoto’s Thyroiditis
Graves’ Disease
Psoriasis
Celiac Disease
Sjogren’s Syndrome
Myasthenia Gravis

Immunodeficiencies:
Severe Combined Immunodeficiency (SCID)
Common Variable Immunodeficiency (CVID)
Chronic Granulomatous Disease (CGD)
X-Linked Agammaglobulinemia (XLA)
Wiskott-Aldrich Syndrome (WAS)
Hyper IgM Syndrome
DiGeorge Syndrome
Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) leading to Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome (AIDS)

Hypersensitivities:
Allergic Rhinitis (Hay Fever)
Asthma
Anaphylaxis
Atopic Dermatitis (Eczema)
Food Allergies
Contact Dermatitis

Other Conditions:
Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD), including Crohn’s Disease and Ulcerative Colitis
Guillain-Barre Syndrome
Dermatomyositis
Scleroderma

These guys really know how to label.

They’re experts.

They can cluster and carve up symptoms and come up with medical names from here to the horizon.

They can resist any attempt to see how pesticides or infant formula or processed foods are the actual realities.

You can see why.

For every disease label, there are medical treatments. Drugs.

Treatments and drugs=$$$.

Plus control over the lives of patients.

There’s a much longer list than the one I just published above. It’s the total of diseases based on…

Viruses that don’t exist.

Brought to you by The Label Kings.

If I were a greedy young psychopath starting out in the world today, I would major in Communications at a prestigious college and write a thesis titled:

“100 ways to recycle death and label it with many disease names.”

With that thesis in hand, I would land a very nice starting position with one of the largest pharmaceutical companies in the world.

They would see my value immediately.

Now consider a doctor’s point of view. A patient comes in with complaints. The doctor can listen, run a few tests, slap on a disease label, and prescribe a drug, or he can say:

“Looks to me like you have pesticide poisoning. I don’t know what to do about that. I don’t have a remedy that takes the poison out of your body.”

He wouldn’t say THAT if you had him in chains and were beating him with a club.

If he had that degree of honesty, he’d be out of business pretty quick. And eventually he’d find himself in front of a state medical board trying (and failing) to keep his license.

The board idiots and sold out quacks would rake him over the coals.

Why not take easy road instead? He closes his eyes, throws an imaginary dart at an imaginary dart board and comes up with a disease name the patient never heard of.

“This is what you’ve got,” he says to the patient. “We have a course of treatment for it. Let’s begin.”

And so they do.

On the long march to nowhere.


CODA: To explore the fake science that led to the fake pandemic that led to the COVID “vaccines,” read Dr. Mark Bailey’s and Dr Sam Bailey’s book, The Final Pandemic.  This dynamic duo has their hands on real science.  It’s a powerful antidote to mainstream nonsense.


See also: The People’s War against State Medical Boards; attack, don’t just defend

Connect with Jon Rappoport

Cover image credit: fszalai




The Future of Food: “We Are Witnessing a Controlled Demolition of the Food Supply Chain.”

The Future of Food: “We Are Witnessing a Controlled Demolition of the Food Supply Chain.”

by James Corbett & Broc West, The Corbett Report
June 11, 2024

 

We all know the problems of the modern factory farming system. But, as bad as things are, they’re about to get even worse. New technologies are coming online that threaten to upend our understanding of food altogether. Technologies that could, ultimately, begin altering the human species itself. This is The Future of Food on The Corbett Report.

 

Video available at Odysee, Rumble, BitChute

Transcript:

If it is true that “you are what you eat,” as the old adage has it, then what does that make us?

As consumers of heavily processed, chemically treated, GMO-infested gunk, we in the modern, developed world have solved the problem of hunger that plagued our forebears since time immemorial by handing our food sovereignty over to a handful of corporate conglomerates.

The result of this handover has been the creation of a factory farming system in which genetically engineered crops are doused in glyphosate and livestock are herded into tiny pens where they live their entire lives in fetid squalor, pumped up with antibiotics and growth hormones until they are slaughtered and shipped off to the supermarkets and fast food chains.

There are plenty of documentaries and exposés detailing the dangers of this industrial farming system that we find ourselves beholden to. Any number of activists ringing the alarm about these problems. Numerous campaigns and marches organized to raise awareness about these issues.

Yet still, nation after nation gets fatter and sicker as traditional diets based on fresh produce sourced from local farmers are displaced by the fast food pink slime sourced from the industrial farms of the Big Food oligopoly.

But, as bad as things may be, they’re about to get even worse. As crisis after crisis disrupts the food supply, the “solution” to these problems has already been prepared.

New technologies are coming online that threaten to upend our understanding of food altogether. Technologies that could, ultimately, begin altering the human species itself.

This is your guide to The Future of Food. You are watching The Corbett Report.

Food As A Weapon

So what is food, anyway?

To a normal human being whose head is screwed on straight, that sounds like a dumb question. Food is fuel for the body, obviously.

Oh, sure, we could get fancy about it. Scientists might talk about the caloric content of different foods, or measure their macronutrient levels. Sociologists might point to food as the basis of human community, drawing people together into families, tribes and communities to break bread and engage in social relations. Theologians may even discuss the transubstantiation of bread and wine and the communion with God that such sacred acts of consumption make possible. . . .

. . . But then there are the psychopathic would-be world controllers. These Machiavellian schemers would define food in a very different manner. To them, food is a very different thing altogether.

To those seeking to rule over nations, food is a weapon.

For millennia, attacking armies have known that a city can be conquered by blockading it. Eventually, the besieged city’s inhabitants will run out of food and will either starve to death or surrender.

The English knew that food was a powerful tool of control. They created the conditions that led to the Irish Potato Famine and then stood idly by as millions died or were displaced, because—in the memorable words of Charles Trevelyan, who was in charge of the British government’s response—”the judgement of God sent the calamity to teach the Irish a lesson, that calamity must not be too much mitigated.” But the Irish were neither the first nor the last to feel the brunt of the British Empire’s indifference to their hunger; just ask the Bengals about their own famine.

The 20th-century example of this “food as a weapon” mindset that immediately springs to mind is the Holodomor, a brazen act of genocide perpetrated by Josef Stalin’s Soviets against the Ukrainians in order to force through his campaign to collectivize agriculture in the USSR and to silence the agrarian peasants who were rebelling against that policy. The ensuing famine killed millions of Ukrainians.

But the Holodomor is certainly not the only time that food was weaponized in the previous century. Who can forget arch-globalist Henry Kissinger’s National Security Study Memorandum 200: Implications of Worldwide Population Growth for U.S. Security and Overseas Interests? This now-infamous document—drafted by Kissinger in December of 1974 and adopted as official policy by President Ford in 1975—argues that since “[g]rowing populations will have a serious impact on the need for food,” food aid to the developing world may need to be tied to mandatory sterilization programs or population reduction quotas. Even the coolly calculating Kissinger was forced to concede that such a scheme would turn food into “an instrument of national power.”

But that was then. This is now! Surely this “food as a weapon” idea has been retired, hasn’t it?

Lest there be any doubt that food is still being weaponized against us in the 21st century, we only have to turn to the latest news headlines to see that this idea is far from a relic of the past.

From the disruptions to the global food supply caused by the COVID lockdowns and restrictions to the decimation of the Ukrainian wheat harvest caused by the Russian invasion in 2022, the shocks to the global food supply chain have contributed to a doubling in the number of people facing acute food insecurity in the last four years.

Given this vivid demonstration of just how fragile the global food supply is and just how much economic and societal chaos can result from any shock to this system, it would be unthinkable that governments would now be deliberately attempting to undermine that supply chain further, wouldn’t it?

Well, think again. From the Netherlands to Ireland to Poland to Italy to Canada to Argentina to Sri Lanka, governments are cracking down on farmers, forcing them to cull herds, lower production, dump milk and comply with onerous new operating restrictions in the name of reducing pollution.

These governments are not stupid. Like the British, the Soviets, the Americans and other repressive regimes throughout history, they know that these measures, if played out to their conclusion, will result in widespread hunger and unrest. In fact, we’ve already seen massive protests against these restrictions in numerous countries, from Germany to Italy to Poland to Spain to Panama to Argentina to Canada. And that’s to say nothing of the mass Dutch farmer protests in recent years and Sri Lankans running their president out of the country when it became obvious that the government’s green policies and farming restrictions had contributed to the collapse of that nation’s economy.

And now, we find that the food supply itself is under attack.

ANCHOR: 40,000 pounds of food meant to feed people in a food desert near Maricopa, south of the valley, is completely gone.
And tonight, investigators are still trying to figure out what caused the fire.

SOURCE: Fire at Maricopa Food Pantry destroys 40,000 pounds of food

ANCHOR: Breaking news out of Pasco County: crews battling a huge fire at a chicken farm. It’s all happening on Cal Main Foods along Simpson Farm Lane in Dade City.

SOURCE: Dade City poultry farm fire likely killed 250,000 chickens

ANCHOR: Firefighters trying to figure out what sparked a fire at a food processing plant on the west side. It happened around 9.30 last night on Merida Street near South Zarzamora.

SOURCE: West Side food processing plant left with smoke damage after fire, SAFD says

ANCHOR: Breaking news in eastern Oregon, where crews are battling a major fire at a potato chip processing plant. Air 12 flew over the scene at Shearer’s foods on highway 207 in Hermiston.

SOURCE: At least two people injured in explosion at Hermiston food plant

ANCHOR: Crews were on the scene of a massive fire at an egg farm earlier this afternoon. The fire broke out at the Hillendale Farms location on Schwarz Road. The Salvation Army says around 100,000 chickens may have died in that fire.

SOURCE: VIDEO: 100,000 chickens die in Bozrah egg farm fire

series of mysterious fires, explosions, incidents of arson and even cyberattacks on food processing facilities across the United States in recent years has prompted law enforcement agencies to warn of a coordinated attack on the food supply.

In April 2022, the FBI even issued an official notice to private industry warning that “ransomware attacks against the entire farm-to-table spectrum of the FA [Food and Agriculture] sector occur on a regular basis” and noting that such attacks are “disrupting operations, causing financial loss, and negatively impacting the food supply chain.”

This mysterious attack has taken place at the same time as a massive disruption of the global food supply has left the world one crisis away from disaster. With nitrogen fertilizer shortages fueling food inflation even as governments around the world crack down on their farmers’ use of fertilizers and farming inputs, and with wardrought and trade disruptions also playing havoc on food production, the global farm-to-fork system’s ability to feed the world’s population is coming into question.

Organic farmers and local agriculture advocates have been warning about the precarious nature of the global just-in-time supply chain and its lack of resilience for decades. But one group didn’t just warn about the current crisis, they predicted it in surprising detail.

In November of 2015—as you can learn from an official press release on the Cargill website—”65 international policymakers, academics, business and thought leaders gathered at the World Wildlife Fund’s headquarters in Washington DC to game out how the world would respond to a future food crisis.” Over the course of two days, the participants in this “Food Chain Reaction” crisis simulation role-played a response to a number of converging and overlapping catastrophes in the 2020s, including “two major food crises, with prices approaching 400 percent of the long term average; a raft of climate-related extreme weather events; governments toppling in Pakistan and Ukraine; and famine and refugee crises in Bangladesh, Myanmar, Chad and Sudan.” The game—which, we are assured, “was built over the course of months, with maximal realism in mind”—went on to envision some very specific scenarios that bare an eery resemblance to current-day reality, including “a steep price spike with looming global food shortages in 2022” that prompted the EU players to impose a tax on meat.

Lest the meaning of this exercise be lost on the general public, the World Wildlife Fund went on to spell it out in their after-action report on the simulation: “Only by stopping agricultural expansion, augmenting agricultural production, increasing resource-use efficiency, and reducing food waste, can we provide the food and nourishment we need, while ensuring we are conserving nature for future generations.” Accordingly, this “game” ended with the imposition of a global carbon tax.

In February 2024, the European Union ran its own food crisis simulation. The exercise—which brought 60 EU and government officials together for a 2-day conference in Brussels—envisioned a cascading series of food emergencies unfolding over the next two years, from harvest failures and fertilizer shortages to popular uprisings and unrest. The war game ended, predictably enough, with the government bureaucrats calling for more centralization of food reserves and stockpiles in the name of biosecurity and concluding that “diets need to shift toward healthier options and away from meat.”

This EU crisis simulation and the “Food Chain Reaction” exercise, combined with a series of government and NGO-sponsored awareness campaigns related to food security—including the Rockefeller Foundation’s “Reset The Table” report calling for further consolidation of the global food supply and the Chinese government’s “Clean Your Plate Campaign,” which aims to bring technocratic management of the economy into every citizens’ dining room—throw the current round of mysterious and unexplained attacks on food processors and farmers into stark relief. Together, these campaigns and exercises suggest that the current food crisis is not a naturally occurring event, but a deliberately engineered phenomenon.

But if this food crisis is being knowingly engineered, the question is why? What could governments gain by creating food shortages for their own people?

The answer is simple. We are witnessing a controlled demolition of the food supply chain, one that is intended to result in the destruction of the current industrial farming system as we know it. But this changeover is not intended to return us to truly sustainable farming practices, with local, organic farmers producing crops in accordance with age-old agricultural wisdom. Far from it.

As it turns out, the “solution” to this food crisis, the one being proffered by the billionaires of the corporate-pharmaceutical-medical-industrial-philanthrocapital-military complex, is being engineered in laboratories and sold to the public via a bought-and-paid-for mainstream media.

One thing is for certain: the future of food will look very different from anything that we have seen in human history.

The Future of (Weaponized) Food

Now, anyone who has been paying attention in recent years will already know the direction that the food industry is heading.

Yes, by now we all know the “Eat Ze Bugs” agenda being pushed by Klaus Schwaub and his Davos minions. I guarantee that wherever you are, in whatever corner of the world you are reading this editorial, you will have seen (or could easily find) a local news story about high school students “spontaneously requesting” cricket powder dumplings in their school lunch or a puff piece about how valiant scientists are working to save the world with worm burgers.

And we all know about the GMO problem: genetically modified organisms making their way into our food supply. We know about the multiple health studies that have proven time and time again the deleterious health effects of GMO consumption. We know about the insane lengths that the GMO giants have gone to to suppress bad news about their products and the insane lengths that the press has gone to to assist them in this cover-up. And we know about the additional harms that this technology causes, ruining farmer’s livescontaminating the genome of the planet and causing associated products like glyphosate to further contaminate the food supply and further endanger our health.

But do we know about the next evolution in culinary technology? Now that scientists are playing around with the fundamental building blocks of life, reengineering organisms at the cellular level, an entire field of biotechnology is opening up that is threatening to fundamentally transform what we think of as food itself.

Moving beyond the simple insertion of foreign genes into an organism, scientists are now working on creating foodstuffs from designer microbes, engineering organisms into “bioreactors” that can be used to grow proteins and other materials for food production, growing meat-like products from cells in the laboratory and dozens of other zany ideas.

NARRATOR: The meat of the future will likely be lab-grown. Compared to our conventional methods of putting meat on the table, lab-grown meat—which debuted in 2013—doesn’t involve slaughtering of animals, nor does it require as many environmental resources.

SOURCE: The Meat of the Future: How Lab-Grown Meat Is Made

HOST: I’m about to be one of the first people on Earth to eat real chicken grown entirely in a lab. That’s right, we’re talking the most futuristic nuggets ever.

SOURCE: Lab-Grown Meat is Here… and I Taste-Tested It!

AMNA NAWAZ: Nearly 90 percent of Americans eat meat as a part of their diet. But earlier this year the Agriculture Department approved the production of what’s known as cultivated meat. That is, chicken grown in a lab.

SOURCE: How ‘lab-grown’ meat is made and will people accept it?

NARRATOR: This machine is 3D printing steak. The goal is to create a piece of meat without killing a cow. And this Israeli startup is one of the dozens of companies racing to perfect the process.

SIMON FRIED: It turns out that cows aren’t necessarily the most efficient way of making beef.

SOURCE: Can Lab-Grown Steak be the Future of Meat? | Big Business | Business Insider

After a near-decade-long PR campaign, you’ve probably heard of Impossible Foods and Beyond Meat, companies that employ the latest techniques in chemical engineering to create plant-based meat substitutes. But there are many more technologies around the corner that threaten to transform our food supply in even more bewildering ways.

Scientists are bioengineering spores that can be inserted into crops and livestock, allowing companies to identify and track food products all the way through the food system, from farm to factory to fork.

VISHAAL BUYAN: We use microbes as tracking devices. So what we do is we convert data digital data into strands of DNA. We insert that little bit of DNA into a microorganism. A probiotic microorganism, to be honest. And then we can sort of apply that organism and sort of “hitch a ride” on any food or agricultural product or really anything through the supply chain. And the reason we use a microbe to do it is because we engineer it to go into a spore, so that dormant state allows it to be impervious to high temperatures and UV light sort of protect that DNA barcode through transit.

SOURCE: Eating Bioengineered Spores

DARPA is doling out multi-million-dollar contracts for researchers to find ways “to turn military plastic waste into protein powder” for human consumption.

STEVE TECHTMAN: What we’re trying to do is to use microbes to take plastic and other inedible plant material and turn that into something that’s nutritious.

REPORTER: The idea is to turn components of plastic into protein and other nutrients like fats and sugars. If that sounds kind of gross to you, well . . .

TECHTMAN: I don’t want to eat plastic either. What we’re trying to do is to take that plastic and turn it into something completely different.

SOURCE: Turning Plastic Into Protein?

A company called Amai Proteins is using genetically engineered microbes to create peptides that taste like sugar but are digested like proteins, a process that, the company brags, allow their product to be legally sold as non-GMO even though, as they openly admit, these microbes are technically genetically engineered.

ILAN SAMISH: Then, we grow the protein. We biomanufacture it using yeast, just like you do in a brewery. We harvest the protein to get 100% pure protein. And last, our ProTaste food technology incorporates the protein to replace up to 70% of the sugar without compromising taste.

SOURCE: Sweet Protein | BBC StoryWorks

And then there are companies like Indigo Ag, a Boston-based agricultural technology company, and tech companies like EY Global and Microsoft, who are ushering in The New Normal Of Agriculture by—as their thinly-disguised corporate PR masquerading as “investment news” likes to boast—”utilizing advanced AI and machine learning techniques to create a revolutionary agronomics platform that boosts farmland sustainability and productivity through next-gen microbiome treatments, digital regenerative content, time-series satellite imagery, advanced crop monitoring and data analysis, and grain quality testing.”

NARRATOR: What if you could predict the best crops to grow using the power of data, recognize crop disease or pests faster, connect with vendors seamlessly, doing all this knowing you control your own data? With data captured from each field and connected to predictive analysis, farmers have an unprecedented view of their crops.

SOURCE: Innovating for Agribusiness – EY and Microsoft

Of course, these technologies will be sold to the public as a way to remarkably improve upon the boring old “food” that humanity has relied on for untold millennia. This isn’t food after all, this is Food 2.0!

Molecular gastronomy will allow for the creation of all sorts of zany and unimaginable dishes, from spherified juices to deep-fried hollandaise to lollipopified octopus!

In the nutrigenomical kitchen of the future, the AI systems that plan our meals and assemble our food will be able to precisely tailor our diet to our individual genome, calculating the exact portions of foodstuffs (or lab-grown food substitutes) we need to consume to meet our desired health goals!

And who needs a chef? In the future, we’ll bring the Star Trekkian idea of the replicator into reality by 3D printing all our food right in our own kitchen!

NARRATOR: You’re hungry. But instead of whipping up a meal, all you have to do is enter your menu choices into a computer and your dinner appears before you. So magical!

It may seem like science fiction, but it isn’t. Well, not completely. The future is now, my friends!

Is 3D printed food in your future?

SOURCE: Is 3D Printed Food the Future?

The propaganda that is being rolled out to sell the public on this transformation of our food supply sounds like the sales pitch of a used car salesman. This should not be surprising. For those who know the players who are pushing this “Food 2.0” agenda and their real intentions, it is obvious that the enormous and unbelievably hubristic effort to replace natural food with laboratory-made food substitutes is not about helping the poor and starving to achieve food security, but rather to deprive them of the earth’s natural abundance.

The end result will be a population dependent on the laboratory-produced food substitutes produced by a handful of corporations and a population at the mercy of the scientists these corporations employ. These molecular magicians will, after all, be able to insert all manner of exotic agents into the food supply at any time.

But to really understand where this agenda is heading and how quickly we are likely to get there if it is not opposed, we need look no further than the story of Future Fields. This company and its product has managed to combine the Unholy Trinity of fake food: GMOs, bugs and biotech.

MATT ANDERSON-BARON: So, today I’m here to talk about the humble fruit fly and how one day it could save your life—and perhaps all of humanity! So, science has given us countless medical miracles. You know: pandemic-stopping vaccines, life-saving therapies. But one of the most impactful things that it’s given us and given modern medicine is genetic engineering of biological systems.

SOURCE: How can a fruit fly save your life? Future Fields at Collision 2023

Future Fields, a Canadian biotech company, has notified the Canadian government of its intention to commercialize “EntoEngine,” a type of fruit fly that “has been genetically engineered to express a growth factor isolated from cows.” This growth factor, it turns out, is an important component of the lab-grown meat recipe, which has so far required the use of “fetal bovine serum” (FBS)—a substance extracted from unborn cattle—to grow the meat cells. But now that the “EntoEngine” has been created, Future Fields is excited to use these flying “bioreactors” to produce the growth factor faster and more cheaply than before.

Yes, from cricket powder dumplings and bug  burgers to GMOs and glyphosate to bioreactors and designer microbes to nutrigenomics and 3D printed materialthis is the future of food if the mad scientists get their way.

But who is funding these mad scientists? Where do they get their support? And what drives these shadowy billionaires and their non-profit organizations in their quest to reengineer the world’s food supply?

The Rockefeller Foundation

The Rockefeller family and their namesake foundation are in many ways the progenitors and the architects of the Great Food Reset. From the beginning of the so-called “Green Revolution” to the so-called “Gene Revolution,” the Rockefellers have been there, helping to move things along with their “philanthropic” donations.

In the 1940s, they founded the Mexican Agricultural Program in Mexico and the International Basic Economy Corporation in Brazil, both of which have been criticized for hooking farmers on expensive machinery and Rockefeller-supplied petroleum products. This formed the basis of the “agribusiness” concept that emerged, predictably enough, from the Harvard Business School out of research conducted by Wassily Leontief under a Rockefeller Foundation grant.

The Rockefeller’s agribusiness model arguably did more to change the course of human civilization in the 20th century than anything other than war. It transformed farming and traditional agriculture into the business-led, input-intensive industrial enterprise that it is today, and led to the creation of the global food supply chain.

But the Rockefellers’ influence did not end in the 21st century.

In 2006, The Rockefeller Foundation co-founded the Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa, whose stated goal of “elevat[ing] the single African voice” on the world stage is belied by the fact that over 200 organizations have come together to denounce the alliance and its activities, claiming that the group has not only “unequivocally failed in its mission” but has actuall y “harmed broader efforts to support African farmers.”

And in 2020 the Rockefeller Foundation released a report entitled “Reset the Table: Meeting the Moment to Transform the U.S. Food System” calling for a further centralization of control over the food supply, including “a new, integrated nutrition security system.”

Bill Gates

Having explicitly cited The Rockefeller Foundation as one of its main inspirations, it’s no surprise that the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation has emerged to become one of the most important players in the Great Food Reset in recent years.

Gates was an important early backer of “Impossible Burger” and its lab-grown synthetic biology food substitute. He also provided capital to Impossible rival Beyond Meat . . . until Beyond’s stock began to crumble. Miraculously, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation Trust was able to divest itself of its Beyond Meat stock right before the shares tanked in 2019.

And, as PleaseStopTheRide.com has pointed out, Gates is also investing millions into “hacking your microbiome” to reengineer humans’ gut bacteria.

Ominously, Bill Gates has also recently become the biggest owner of US farmland, a move that allows him unprecedented control over the future of farming in America.

USAID

Created in 1961 by executive order, USAID is a US government agency that has participated in subterfuge and counterinsurgency operations in VenezuelaCubaUkraine and numerous other countries under the guise of providing humanitarian assistance and, of course, food aid.

Last year, USAID, in conjunction with “Feed the Future” (the U.S. government’s global hunger and food security initiative), released a working paper titled “Systemic Solutions for Climate Change Adaptation and Mitigation.” The paper argues that:

. . . a perfect storm of circumstances in which supply chain issues, regional agricultural and nutrition challenges, the ongoing effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, and regional conflict have combined to form a looming food security crisis.

Their proposal for addressing this (generated) crisis includes:

  • linking “carbon markets” to “regenerative agriculture” in a move that continues the financialization of nature;
  • using ESG scores as a way to pressure companies into acquiescing to the nebulous and ever-changing demands of the Food Reset agenda;
  • and, of course, “the promotion of insects as sustainable sources of proteins.”

Throughout the document, USAID’s “leverage” over developing countries is referenced no less than 125 times. Given the Kissingerian food-as-a-weapon mentality that is the very basis of USAID and its mission, the document perfectly represents the kind of Rockefeller-inspired, Gates-funded, USAID-promoted,  agribusiness-based neocolonialism that people in Africa and elsewhere have been warning about for decades.

This list of Great Food Reset culprits is of course incomplete. I haven’t even mentioned the participants in the “Food Chain Reaction Game” or the “nitrogen reduction” schemes being pushed by national governments around the world or the Global Crop Diversity Trust and its ominous Svalbard seed vault or any of a million other relevant players and factors in this grand transformation.

But from this (admittedly incomplete) exploration we can begin to make a list of the types of players that are behind this push to “transform the global food supply” and better understand their methods and motivation. And, armed with that knowledge, we can start formulating our own plans for counteracting this agenda.

THE PUSHBACK

Now, if there is any good news to be had in the sad saga of future (fake) food, it’s that the people are waking up to the Great Food Reset agenda and they are not happy about it.

For a trivial example of the pushback against the fake food agenda and the oligarchs stewarding over it, witness Bill Gates’ recent “AMA” (ask me anything) thread on reddit, where one heavily upvoted question put the issue to America’s largest farmland owner directly:

Why are you buying up so much farmland, do you think this is a problem with billionaire wealth and how much you can disproportionally acquire? [sic]

Gates’ answer—employing the fact checkers’ ACKSHUALLY! by pointing out that he “own[s] less than 1/4000 of the farmland in the US [sic]” and that his only interest in farms is “to make them more productive and create more jobs”—is to be expected from a man who has spent billions on PR and propaganda in recent decades to transform his public image from that a reviled tech monopolist to that of a revered billionaire philanthropist.

The response to that answer, however—observing that 1/4,000th of US farmland is still an incredibly large amount of land and that Gates did not explain how consolidation of farmland in fewer hands will transform the agricultural sector—shows that the public is not buying Gates’ PR wholesale anymore.

A less trivial example of the pushback against Gates and his ilk is to be found in the “Open Letter to Bill Gates on Food, Farming, and Africa” published last November and signed by no less than 50 organizations dedicated to food sovereignty, including the Community Alliance for Global Justice/AGRA Watch and the Alliance for Food Sovereignty in Africa. The letter derides Gates’ role in “creating the very problem” of global food shortages that he is ostensibly “fixing,” accusing him of pushing ineffective (but profitable) technocratic solutions instead of simpler, less expensive agricultural solutions:

There are already many tangible, ongoing proposals and projects that work to boost productivity and food security—from biofertilizer and biopesticide manufacturing facilities, to agroecological farmer training programs, to experimentation with new water and soil management techniqueslow-input farming systems, and pest-deterring plant species. What you are doing here is gaslighting—presenting practical, ongoing, farmer-led solutions as somehow fanciful or ridiculous, while presenting your own preferred approaches as pragmatic. Yet it is your preferred high-tech solutions, including genetic engineering, new breeding technologies, and now digital agriculture, that have in fact consistently failed to reduce hunger or increase food access as promised.

The pushback against the transformation of the food supply is not limited to Gates and his eponymous foundation’s efforts, however.

Resistance against GMO foods, for instance, is massive. In fact, the more the biotech billionaires try to shove their genetically modified monstrosities on vast swaths of the human population, the more the public is rising up to reject them. In recent months alone we have seen people rebelling against GMOs in TurkeyKenyaNigeriaMexicoPakistan and Indonesia.

All of these protests against the Great Food Reset are hopeful signs. They show that the public are not simply going to swallow anything that is put on their plate.

But even more important than these examples of protest and pushback are the things that we can do to take the Future of Food away from the agribusiness conspirators and their bought-and-paid-for politicians and put it back in the hands of the people.

It involves getting our hands dirty and getting to work . . . but that’s the way it’s always been. And the alternative to this, this working of the land, is, as we have seen, no alternative at all.

And in the end, the future of food is ours to decide. Happy planting!

 

Connect with The Corbett Report




The Connection Between Toxic Mold, Parasites & EMFs

The Connection Between Toxic Mold, Parasites & EMFs

by Rosanne Lindsay, Traditional Naturopath, Nature of Healing
June 7, 2024
Updated from February 2022

 

Living in the material world means an attachment to wireless technology. When does an attachment become an addiction?

Can you do without a cellphone? Watching TV? Scrolling social media? How much time in a day does wireless occupy? What do you consider excessive use? Do you experience withdrawal symptoms (moodiness, irritability, depression) by going without? Would you consent to the imposition of technology at the risk of harming your health and potentially all biological life?

Unfortunately, the emotional and physical effects of invisible electromagnetic frequencies (EMFs) are not listed on the package. If you have two or more of the following devices; cell phones, computers, GPS, Smart appliances, electric cars, wearables, and Smart™ TVs, or electric cars, then there are symptoms you may never hear about.

The manufacturer does not disclose that EMFs activate the hidden world of yeast, fungus, mold, mycoplasma, Lyme spirochetes, and protozoan parasites to unhealthy levels in the human body.

The consequence of WiFi is a rise in chronic infections that can be misdiagnosed.

The industries responsible for creating this silent connection between EMFs and infection fail to take responsibility. The line between what will protect you, and what will not, has never been less clearly defined.

As 5G towers become compatible with 6G, 7G and beyond, who is responsible for the consequences?

Symptoms from exposure to mold toxins include:

  • Fatigue
  • Weakness
  • Muscle cramps
  • Headache and pain
  • Light sensitivity
  • Sinus problems
  • Abdominal pain
  • Diarrhea
  • Joint pain and stiffness
  • Cognitive issues
  • Mood dysregulation
  • Temperature regulation or dysregulation problems
  • Excessive thirst
  • Increased urination
  • Nervous system issues

The user is responsible.

Naturopath Dr. Klinghardt, of the Sophia Health Institute, shared an in vitro mold experiment comparing a mold plate shielded from electromagnetic fields to an unprotected mold plate exposed to ambient electromagnetic fields. The unprotected mold, mycoplasma, and spirochete (Lyme) reacts defensively by releasing more potent biotoxins, and by multiplying more than 600 times. This biological response can be observed anywhere in Nature; it is the desire to survive and thrive.  In 2011, the amount of cell phone radiation in a cubic inch of air was several million times higher than it had been a decade before that.

 

 

Billions of people worldwide harbor tropical worms and don’t know it. They don’t know that cell phones and cell towers trigger their activity. They don’t know that mold, parasites, and other microbes respond by becoming chronic infections. Medical doctors do not automatically rule out parasites, even though there are over one million worm species, alone, classified as helminths.

Helminths take many forms, but all of them harm their host in some way. In humans, they can live in the intestinal tract, urinary tract, bladder, or bloodstream, causing a variety of illness from malnutrition to organ failure” —Dr. Monica Botelho of Portugal’s National Institute of Health.

In endemic regions — predominantly sub-saharan Africa and Southeast Asia — flukes are responsible for the majority of all bladder and liver cancer cases. – Dr. Joachim Richter, Associate Professor at Charité Berlin and co-editor with Botelho.

Symptoms of Parasites:

Parasites Among Us

Worms R us! When in balance, worms live with us in harmony  Out of balance, they can invade and overpower any part of the body, including the eyes.

There are hundreds of large parasites that can enter the body by various modes, take up residence, and cause a variety of life-threatening diseases, including cancer. For worms to make a home in the body, the body must be conducive to their existence. The body is best suited for worms if it is depleted of essential minerals and nutrients, thus acidic.

Scientists have known for decades that helminths can turn healthy cells into diseased cells. The same is true of protozoan parasites. For instance, Chagas disease is caused by infection with the protozoan parasite T. cruzi.

It has long been established by study of Ascaris lumbricoides (phylum and species) in man as well as in laboratory hosts, that the larvae, on hatching in the small intestine, migrate through the liver to the lungs. On the eighth to ninth day after infestation, they move farther into the bronchii and then, via the trachea and esophagus, return to the intestine. It has also been shown that the larvae in their migration and development often cause extreme eosinophilia, symptoms such as shortness of breath and cough. —Naval Captain David P. Osborne, chief of surgery, Bethesda Naval Hospital 

A search of Pubmed will net hundreds of published, peer-reviewed studies describing Dirofilaria in humans, a mere drop in the worm

bucket. Dirofilaria immitis is a canine parasite that can infect humans, specifically it is a roundworm, otherwise known as a nematode. For instance, whereas Dirofilaria immitis infects the heart and lungsDirofiaria repens infects the eye.

Patented Transgenic Insects

Dirofilaria, or heartworm, is transmitted by mosquitoes. An egg gets deposited through the proboscis, which is the long, flexible tube mosquitoes use to pierce the skin. There is plenty of evidence showing that mosquitoes are genetically engineered and patented.

Despite a kill-switch gene, these transgenic mosquitoes breed in the wild. The dire consequence is the contamination of the native mosquito population. Evidence from field trials show that GMO mosquitoes have been bred for disease resistance for decades.

So, why not expect the same for GMO tics and biting flies infected with agents known to transmit Lyme disease? The CDC acknowledges that Lyme disease from multiple vectors is on the rise in the US., but offers no explanation and no solutions.

Parasites & Cancer

Tumors analyzed for pathology often come back showing worms and parasites. Parasitic invasion by a nematode worm is often mistaken for “cancer” in women presenting with breast lumps.

Filarial infection of the breast is not rare, explain the authors. “The larvae enter the lymphatic vessels of the mammary gland, causing lymphangitis, fibrosis, and disruption of lymphatic drainage.” In late, inactive phases, the larvae appear on mammography as serpiginous calcifications.  —Medwire News, 2005

Slowly, the information worming its way out into the public is that parasitic infestations represent the internal conditions called “cancer.” All cancers are, in fact, parasitic infections (with high Candida levels) even if not all parasitic infections present as cancer. Worms cause cancer. based on an acidic tissue environment.

It is no secret that the American Cancer Society knows that parasites can lead to cancer. Even the CDC publishes the fact on their website  that cases or parasitic infections are misdiagnosed as cancer.

Scientists at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention have discovered cancer cells originating in a common tapeworm may take root in people with weakened immune systems, causing cancer-like tumors. It is the first known case of a person becoming ill from cancer cells that arose in a parasite – in this case, Hymenolepis nana, the dwarf tapeworm.

The report, in the Nov. 5 issue of the New England Journal of Medicine, raises concern that other similar cases, if they occur, may be misdiagnosed as human cancer – especially in less developed countries where this tapeworm and immune-system-suppressing illnesses like HIV are widespread.

“We were amazed when we found this new type of disease – tapeworms growing inside a person essentially getting cancer that spreads to the person, causing tumors,” said Atis Muehlenbachs, M.D., Ph.D., staff pathologist in CDC’s Infectious Diseases Pathology Branch (IDPB) and lead author of the study. “We think this type of event is rare. However, this tapeworm is found worldwide and millions of people globally suffer from conditions like HIV that weaken their immune system. So there may be more cases that are unrecognized. It’s definitely an area that deserves more study. – CDC, November 4, 2015

So why are we always the last to know?

Anti-Parasitic Protocol 

In the Age of Information, ignorance is a choice.

Today, more people diagnosed with cancer have taken matters into their own hands and begun sharing information to heal. Their choice of medicine? An inexpensive pet dewormers/antihelminths called Fenbendazole found at the local pet store. Why don’t doctors tell patients that Fenbendazole is being studied as an anti-cancer drug?

According to sources promoting this anti-worm protocol, Fenbendazole is a triple-threat to cancer: it kills cancer cells in three ways which are significant:

  1. It destroys microtubules that sustain the structure of the cancer cell and its ability to divide and multiply rapidly.It interrupts the cancer cells’ ability to process sugar, and cancer cells must metabolize sugar to survive.
  2. It boosts the production of a cancer-killing gene called p53, a gene cancer patients may lack. When p53 becomes mutated or can’t keep cancer cells in check, cancer cells can proliferate.
  3. The de-wormer also works against parasites, which might be the origin of some cancers.

Before you decide to blame all cancers on worms, realize that helminths are also being used as Immunotherapy (Helminthic Therapy) for Crohn’s disease and for malignancies. In a strange twist of fate, the earthworm’s immune system has shown an ability to kill cancer cells (in vitro). Could it be that a worm’s metabolism depends on a balance of oxygen supply and demand like their human hosts? Yes, indeed.

Is that why oxygen deprivation from EMF fields harm both host and worm?

Add Pulsed EMFs And Mix

The forces in EMFs are caused by EMF radiation, broken down into two categories:

  1. High frequency EMF include: x-rays, gamma rays, or ionizing radiation, and
  2. Low to mid frequencies include: electric power lines, radio waves, cell phones, wireless networks, smart meters, TVs, microwaves, infrared radiation, visible light, or non-ionizing radiation. These are the most dangerous emission, known to cause direct damage to DNA or cells.

Wireless communication (cell towers, phones, etc) is more dangerous because it produces pulsed EMFs. Pulsed EMFs are much more biologically active than are non-pulsed EMFs.  When introducing pulsed electric and magnetic fields into a population infested with parasites and yeast, you have a recipe for dis-ease disaster.

Today, the answers are available to anyone who has a curiosity to search the electronic database of scientific studies. Science has well established that EMF fields incite the growth of fungus, yeasts, molds, mycoplasmas, and parasites.

Just as the chemicals and metal constituents of synthetic medications serve as a food source for these  pathogens, so does radioactivity, which serves as an energy source for making food and spurring the growth of fungus. 

Those fungi able to “eat” radiation must possess melanin, the pigment found in many if not most fungal species. But up until now, melanin’s biological role in fungi—if any–has been a mystery.  —Albert Einstein College of Medicine, May 23, 2007 

Since May of 2011, the IARC classification for cell phone radiation internationally had been officially documented as a Class 2B Carcinogen. See the Cell Phone Radiation Emissions Chart from Least to Greatest head SAR level.

BioToxins

Humans are 1:10 human cells to microbes. What affects our smallest inhabitants also affects us. When our microbes perceive an attack from man-made frequencies, they release biotoxins in defense of their lives, even if it damages their host. Sit down before you watch this freakishly large worm (parasitic nematode) slither out of a dead spider host.

Biotoxins are released from microbial metabolism and die-off. This process drives inflammation in humans. As our microbes struggle to survive, they congest the host’s liver and impair digestion. The liver is unable to produce bile to digest fats which leads to a deficiency of fatty acids and eventually fatty liver disease, unrelated to alcohol.

Our microbes cause stress on the whole body, which leads to “Leaky Gut,” now an accepted term. Leaky Gut gave rise to the previously unknown field of neurogastroenterology, and the disorders of IBD, IBS, and Crohn’s disease. When the gut is “leaky,” microbes and their biotoxins leak into the bloodstream to infect other organs, including the brain, also known as “leaky brain.” In the brain, symptoms resemble depression, anxiety, and other neurological conditions.

Magnetic Fields 

Sleep is critical for cell repair and regeneration. When electrical and magnetic fields barrage the body, day and night, the stress hormone, cortisol, is stimulated, which prevents normal elimination (constipation) and detoxification. As cortisol rises, melatonin falls. Sleep is elusive.  Magnetic fields also alter the movement of minerals and metals the body. A loss of iron leads to anemia.

In 2005, Extremely low frequencies (ELF) have been documented as a possible carcinogen in children diagnosed with leukemia. More than a decade later, ELF exposures have only increased.

I personally suspect that the exposure to electromagnetic fields in the home and the microwaves from cell phone radiation are driving the virulence of many of the microbes that are naturally in us, and makes them aggressive and illness producing. Shielding patients from EMFs has been a more successful strategy to treating Lyme disease and to get people neurologically well than any of the antibiotics or any of the antimicrobial compounds. —Dr. Dietrich Klinghardt, MD, PhD, 2018

Solutions

1. EMF Shielding Tools

With the rise of EMF fields a new EMF shielding industry was born. Now you can use the benefits of wireless technology and shield yourself from is health depleting effects using the following tools:

  • purchase or make faraday cages for cell phones.
  • hardwire your computers with an Ethernet cable.
  • Shield smart meters with meter guards.
  • Wear Shungite, a mineraloid, or place shungite pyramids around the house. Since they become saturated. you will need to cleanse these stones often.
  • Paint bedrooms with EMF shielding paint.
  • Use EMF shielding material. Do not use aluminum foil which can shield and also reflect back EMFs.
  • Hardwire a cell phone, and computer.
  • Blue light blockers:
  • Use a blue light blocker covering for all your computer/laptop/tablet screens including cell phones.
  • Use blue blocking glasses when you are working on the computer (this does not protect skin.). Some people will use a blue light blocker (a thin film that covers the screen) and then also a 100% blue blocker of hard thick plastic at night. However be aware that many of the thinner unnoticable blue light coverings on the market do not protect 100% blue light.
  • Download a program (e.g.., Iris) onto your device that will automatically reduce blue light at night.

2. Cellphone-Free Communities:

If you can live without electronic devices, there are cellphone-free communities forming. The Intentional Sanctuary Lifestyle Alternative (ISLA), it is located on 40 acres on the Pacific coast of Nicaragua:

Cell phones, WiFi, wireless mice and keyboards, AirPods, smart watches, wireless printers, and all other wireless devices will be prohibited in public and private spaces throughout the property. Interest is growing, and prospective home-buyers have already invested 1/4 of the amount needed to break ground and begin building. There is space for up to 200 homes in the future.

3. Natural Mold and Parasite Detox

If you will continue using electronic devices, know the symptoms of mold poisoning and parasitic infections. Secondly, prevent infections of mold, yeast, and parasites, by keeping your immune system strong and allowing it to work for you by acquiring natural infections.

Eat clean, organic foods. Drink clean water, and avoid drinking public tap water, especially if the water tower has 5G technology on top. Seek out natural spring water.

Avoid factory-farmed foods—sugar and processed grains, coffee, chicken, fish, and red meat—which generate an acidic pH in the body. Choose natural medicines vs. synthetic medicines. Seek out natural healers to assist. And be aware of parasitic relationships among your peers. As within So without.

If you have a parasitic infection, try adding food grade diatomaceous earth. There are two strong herbs that can kill nematodes. One popular anti-parasitic herb is Thyme. Thyme is a culinary herb, but it also kills hook-worms, roundworms, threadworms, skin parasites and several types of harmful bacteria.

Other natural antifungal/antiparasitic herbs include: Black walnut hulls, high in iodine; wormwood, clove oil, oregano oil,  and consider a cleanse diet. For other remedies, consult a natural health care practitioner.

When the worm population in the human body overwhelms the immune system, it is called a hyperinfection. At this stage, it may be difficult to kill the worms with herbs unless you eat clean. Using frequencies to target parasites through a Rife machine or homeopathic (energy) preparations can directly target parasites in the body, gently and safely. However, the Rife machine does not always solve the problem since parasites can shift their frequency and hide in the body to evade death. A diet and lifestyle change will be necessary by changing your habits to prevent the problems of living with EMFs.

 

Disclaimer: The author encourages you to consult a doctor before making any health changes, especially any changes related to a specific diagnosis or condition. No information in this article should be relied upon to determine diet, make a medical diagnosis, or to determine or prescribe a treatment for a medical condition. This information is not intended to replace a one-on-one relationship with a qualified health care professional and is not intended as medical advice.

 

Related Articles:

 

Connect with Rosanne Lindsay

Cover ai-generated image credit: bluemoont




Andrew Kaufman With Paul Saladino: Stepping Away From Dietary Dogma

Andrew Kaufman With Paul Saladino: Stepping Away From Dietary Dogma

by Andrew Kaufman, MD
sourced from Andrew Kaufman MD newsletter
May 31, 2024

 

 

When it comes to diet and nutrition, the last place you want to go for advice is the medical establishment. Their definition of a “healthy” diet will likely put you on the stretcher…

That means that you’re going to have to do your own homework, and that’s no small feat considering all the conflicting views on what a “healthy” human diet actually is, especially when it comes to men’s health…

Knowing full-well that grocery shelves are filled with synthetic, hormone-disrupting garbage—slowly turning strong, defiant men into docile yellow-bellies—the ability to recognize which foods will optimally strengthen you both physically and mentally becomes critical in these times…

I’ve been tumbling down this neverending nutritional rabbit hole for a long time now, and I’ve encountered many invaluable voices. But there’s one individual who stood out like nobody else… the illustrious Dr. Paul Saladino.

Paul has been at the forefront of the carnivore community for a long time, so much so that he has even worn the title of “Carnivore MD”…. And he’s an archnemesis of Big Pharma and its evil twin-brother, Big Food…

Occasionally dropping by places like McDonald’s and Chipotle to reveal the harmful ingredients contained in their infamous “Happy” meals and Mexican burritos made him extremely popular on Youtube…

(It’s useful to know when your son’s Chicken McNuggets are fried in seed oils and contain a whopping 30 ingredients you couldn’t pronounce if you tried.)

After 2 years of doing the carnivore diet, Paul eventually decided to add organic fruit and honey into his diet. And since those foods don’t exactly typify a carnivorous diet, he morphed it into the rubric of ‘animal-based,’ with the addition of various organ meats and raw dairy products.

Being a broad-minded thinker, and no stranger to controversy, like myself; Paul was bound to be a guest on my Healthy Living Interviews series, and today we finally made it happen!

During our remarkable discussion, Paul reflects on his long-distance journey of becoming a psychiatrist, and how he eventually parted ways with the allopathic priesthood and adopted a natural approach to healing…

“On the first day of medical school, they told me: ’50% of what you’ll learn is going to be wrong.’ I found it very ironic when a physician questions anything dogmatic in medicine and then gets thrown out of the kingdom.”

We also touched on the difference between beneficial and unhealthy carbohydrates, the xenoestrogen deluge and its effects on men’s hormones, and the perils of seed oil consumption.

I have much appreciation for Paul and his inspiring work. It’s rare to find avid contrarians like himself who continue to point our collective understanding of health in the right direction.

 

Connect with Andrew Kaufman

 




How the WHO Plans to Take Over the World

How the WHO Plans to Take Over the World

by Health Freedom Defense Fund Team
March 20, 2024

 

The World Health Organization (WHO) is set to convene the 77th World Health Assembly (WHA) meeting for May 27 – June 1, 2024 at the plush InterContinental Hotel in Geneva, Switzerland.

This in-person meeting of the WHA, the decision-making body of WHO, will bring together senior representatives from governments, multilateral organizations, and the private sector to discuss two international legal instruments intended to increase WHO’s authority in identifying and managing health emergencies.

The two documents, (1) Amendments to the 2005 International Health Regulations (IHR), and (2) A Pandemic Treaty, termed ‘ÇA+’ by the WHO, when viewed together in the context of the globalist pandemic preparedness agenda represent an ambitious attempt towards monopoly power in global health governance.

These two instruments, the Pandemic Treaty and the IHR Amendments, are designed to operate in concert and consolidate the influence of the WHO as the world’s “global health authority.” If adopted and approved by member states these proposals would bring about significant changes in how the WHO operates.

The draft IHR amendments would lay out new powers for the WHO during health emergencies, and broaden the context within which they can be used. The draft CA+ (‘treaty’) if implemented would support the bureaucracy, financing and governance that underpins the expanded IHR amendments.

Under the guise of a “One Health” approach these proposals and amendments would grant the WHO sweeping powers, under its Director General, in the arena of health management and broaden the WHO’s reach into areas of governance on food economies, the environment and issues surrounding allocation of national resources.

If implemented, the IHR Amendments and the Pandemic Treaty working in tandem would grant administrative authority to unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats at the WHO.

These unilateral, wide-ranging decisions would assuredly benefit those who work for the various public-private partnerships that control the financial and political machinery of the WHO.

While there are countless reasons this latest hijacking of power by the WHO must be opposed, the list below highlights some of the primary concerns and consequences entailed in the IHR amendments and Pandemic Treaty:

  • Changes the existing IHR provisions from non-binding “advice” to legally binding regulations;
  • Allows the WHO to declare a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC) which can oblige national governments to “undertake” border closures, lockdown of individuals, mandated medical examinations and vaccination;
  • Expands the WHO Director General’s (DG) authority to unilaterally declare a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC);
  • Empowers Regional Directors to declare regional public health emergencies;
  • Expands the definitions of what constitutes pandemics and health emergencies;
  • Maintain a perpetually operative pandemic preparedness bureaucracy through the development of a “framework convention” that would establish a new $30 billion per year international health authority. This new global health bureaucracy would choreograph the WHO’s role in developing global “allocation plans for health products” (including vaccines);
  • Require member States to support censorship and suppression of information that diverges or dissents from WHO opinions and directives;
  • Sets up wide-ranging health surveillance systems in all member States, which WHO will monitor regularly through administrative mechanisms;
  • Gives WHO control over some measure of country resources, including requirements for financial contributions to fund “capacity building and “technical assistance” structures by requiring a percentage of national health budgets be devoted to health emergencies as defined by the WHO;
  • Removal of a clause that required regulations must be in accordance “with full respect for the dignity, human rights and fundamental freedoms of persons”, and replacing it with a new clause that reads regulations shall be “based on the principles of equity, inclusivity, coherence and in accordance with their common but differentiated responsibilities of the States Parties, taking into consideration their social and economic development”;
  • Expands WHO’s scope by emphasizing a ‘One Health’ agenda which includes a broad range of health, economic, social and political life which impact health, and therefore fall under the dictates of a declared international health emergency.

In addition to creating a multi-billion dollar self-perpetuating pandemic-preparedness industry, which will fund itself by looting the world’s taxpayers, this latest power grab by the WHO and its globalist sponsors represents a fundamental threat to national, medical and bodily autonomy and is a clear and present danger to the citizens of the world.

This entire process under which unelected delegates negotiate terms and conditions which would place people at the mercy of medical officers, public health bureaucrats and health enforcement gendarmes, who will be immune to any penalty for any acts carried out in the name of “public good,” stands in direct opposition to, and are in direct violation of informed consent and stands in direct opposition to multiple long-standing national and international principles of medical ethics such as:

The Nuremberg Code of 1947: ′′The consent of the human subject is absolutely essential. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights resumed this ban against unintentional experimentation, in its 1966 text, which states: no one may be subjected without his consent to medical or scientific experiment.”

The Geneva statement for doctors from 1948: “I will respect the autonomy and dignity of my patient. I will not use my medical knowledge to infringe human rights and civil liberties, even under force. I will keep absolute respect for human life, from conception. I will consider my patient’s health as my first concern.”

The Declaration of Geneva of the World Medical Association that binds the physician with the words, “The health of my patient will be my first consideration,” and the International Code of Medical Ethics declares that, “A physician shall act only in the patient’s interest when providing medical care which might have the effect of weakening the physical and mental condition of the patient.”

The Belmont Report on voluntariness which asserts, “[the] element of informed consent requires conditions free of coercion and undue influence. Coercion occurs when an overt threat of harm is intentionally presented by one person to another in order to obtain compliance. Undue influence, by contrast, occurs through an offer of an excessive, unwarranted, inappropriate or improper reward or other overture in order to obtain compliance.

Unjustifiable pressures usually occur when persons in positions of authority or commanding influence — especially where possible sanctions are involved — urge a course of action for a subject.”

UNESCO’s Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights in 2005: “to provide a universal framework of principles and procedures to guide States in the formulation of their legislation, policies or other instruments in the field of bioethics [and to] promote respect for human dignity and protect human rights, by ensuring respect for the life of human beings, and fundamental freedoms, consistent with international human rights law.”

The World Health Organization, a UN agency with no national legal oversight and no legal accountability at all, seeks to establish itself as global health dictator by demanding member States respond to perceived threats through autocratic decrees formulated and given by the WHO which are certain to accrue profits and power to its corporate sponsors.

Make no mistake, whatever bylines and selling points the WHO offers, be it called “treaty,” “agreement” or “accord,”the practical intent and desired effect of this latest autocratic assault on our rights is to create the legal and financial basis for an internationally coordinated bio-surveillance regime that will significantly strengthen the authority of the World Health Organisation.

The historical precedence of coercive and oppressive actions seen throughout the Covid-19 crisis provides a clear warning to all and demonstrates that the WHO will assuredly attempt to leverage the Pandemic Treaty and IHR Amendments to gain monopoly power through a global health governance pact that will inevitably result in global health despotism.

The WHO Pandemic Treaty which creates a world of “declared pandemics” and rolling “perpetual lockdowns” that will take away people’s inalienable human rights and bodily autonomy must be rebuked by all citizens of the world and formally rejected by all local, state, regional and national governments of the world.

 

Connect with Health Freedom Defense Fund

Cover image based on creative commons work of: Wikingo_Design




ADHD: Ritalin, Cocaine, and the Fraudulent Pharmaceutical Physical and ‘Psychological’ Torture of Children

ADHD: Ritalin, Cocaine, and the Fraudulent Pharmaceutical Physical and ‘Psychological’ Torture of Children

by Gary D. Barnett
May 24, 2024

 

“The degree to which the psychiatric community is complicit with abusive parents in drugging non-compliant children is a war crime across the generations, and there will be a Nuremberg at some point in the future”

~ Stefan Molyneux

 

I will step away from my normal correspondence in order to address a purposely-generated problem that has reached heights of abuse so extreme as to have grossly compromised one in nine children in this country. This intentionally manufactured problem is insanely egregious, and has caused irreparable harm due to the administration of psycho-stimulation drugs prescribed to mostly children, and in many (most) cases, has destroyed their ability to think, function normally, live active and fulfilling lives, and to exist without devastation of their health, mind, body, and soul. I am speaking of what is dishonestly labeled as ‘ADHD,’ or Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity ‘Disorder,’ a bogus scam meant only  to achieve wealth, power, and control of a large segment of the young in society, without any physiological evidence whatsoever.

I was first introduced to this State-supported atrocity 25 years ago, when the government (‘public) school system attempted to erroneously ‘diagnose’ and drug my granddaughter with what is the equivalent of cocaine on steroids for a non-existent ‘disorder.’ She was only 6 years old at the time, but I was able to get her out of the heinous ‘public’ school system and into a private school that did not promote (force) the drugging of children. This began my research efforts into this collaborative and criminal government’s fascist partnership with pharmaceutical companies targeting kids.

This was (and is) in essence, a domestic false flag operation targeting the young, with a multi-dimensional agenda that could at the same time disturb the mental capabilities of a large swath of the youngest generations. This of course, would lead to a compounding effect over time, breeding a more obedient and a less intellectual population. It could cause additional health-related problems for life, serve as a control mechanism based on the compromising of brain and motor functions of the young through central nervous system damage, and could easily lead to a much more compliant society so as to enhance the ability to manage and regulate large numbers. This is all based on the greatly enhanced wealth of the few, gaining governing power, and a higher level of control over the collective herd of the dumbed-down masses.

There is no such thing as ADHD! Period. No brain condition, no brain damage, ‘mental’ or physical, no physiological evidence whatsoever exists, or has ever been demonstrated to prove that any cause dishonestly referred to as ADHD is valid. None.

What has been proven and is obvious, is the horrible damage done due to the administration of harmful drugs, especially to the bodies and minds of the not fully developed, and immature young. The so-called (illegitimate) ‘treatment’ for the fake ‘disorder’ called ADHD is Ritalin, a most devastating and mind-altering drug to be certain. The properties of Ritalin as opposed to cocaine are staggeringly similar, and in fact, are two sides of the same coin, except that Ritalin has longer lasting adverse effects. Cocaine is said to be plant based, while Ritalin is said to be chemically based. In simple terms, and from a comparative analysis, the differences are few. Ritalin is the immediate-release form of methylphenidate, and is classified as a central nervous system stimulant or psychostimulant. in fact, it has been classified as a Schedule II drug, which is in the same class as cocaine, Vicodin, methamphetamine, methadone, hydromorphone, Demerol, OxyContin, fentanyl, Dexedrine, Adderall, and Ritalin.

Ritalin’s side effects, and many are not even listed here, are astounding. They include allergies, hives, swelling, extreme heart problems, psychosis, circulation problems, increased blood pressure, mood changes, anxiety, nervousness, irritability, inability to sleep, fast heart rate, heart arrhythmia, no appetite, extreme weight loss, nausea, vomiting, pain, headache, dizziness, disorientation, aggression, hostility, paranoia, and loss of coordination. This is in addition to possible permanent brain damage. All of these side effects can also be enhanced to even more dangerous levels when other drugs, anti-depressants, and even over-the-counter ‘medications.’ are co-mingled. Given the massive prescribing and administration of drugs for everything and everybody today, the risks are astronomical. Also, the risk of dependency (addiction) is great as well.

The incidence of diagnosis of this bogus ‘disorder’ has increased steadily year after year. Since 1997, and just up to 2017, the increase in stated cases rose by approximately 145%. The rate of diagnosed cases by that time were over 11% of children under 12 years of age. In addition, more cases are said to be dramatically increasing in older children and adults, opening up much larger markets for higher profits for the murderous pharmaceutical companies.

This is an abomination, as it is the literal destruction of a large percentage of children. Much of this criminal medical scam is based on fear of one’s child being ‘different,’ which should be applauded, instead of suppressed. Today’s parents are much at fault (or most) for allowing the State and its partners in crime, to dictate how their children should be raised and drugged to suit the perverted mores of the ruling class’s idea of societal collective mediocrity. There is another degrading aspect to this dilemma, as parents today, many who have been ‘forced,’ (due to voluntary support of the State) both married couples and single parents, to work outside the home, leaving their children to be raised by the evil governing and schooling systems. This in my mind is the abandonment of family for the sake of material survival, which would never have been prevalent if government instead of family had been abandoned.

Every child, every human in fact, is different from every other. We are unique as individuals, and that uniqueness should be cherished. Wants, needs, intelligence, interests, personality, desire, energy levels, talents, hopes, and dreams, are destroyed when all attempt to stifle individual excellence in favor of conformity. When the individual is sacrificed for the so-called ‘good’ of the collective crowd, an inferior society will be the result, and independence, strength, self-ownership, and self-responsibility, will be discarded in favor of  sameness, universal attitudes of victimization, boredom, and depression.

This is why the drugging of society, especially the current and future generations of the impressionable young, are targeted by this fascist and criminal State. The older generations still exist in large numbers, but their lives are not long for this world. In two generations only, all will dramatically change. If the young are fully controlled due to indoctrination, AI, technocratic design, drugs, and propagandized from birth, the controlling element of this world will have an easy time eliminating all dissent, while creating an entire society of drone-like mannequins accepting of their own dependency and enslavement.

There is a reason that the young are being dumbed down and targeted from every angle, manipulated to never question false ‘authority,’ to forget and eliminate tradition, to abandon family, and to hate everything and everybody. The State and its criminal partners fully understand the path they are taking in order to achieve its goal  of creating a kept and indifferent society of slaves. The medical fraud, including the toxic and fatal poisoning by lethal injection of bioweapons called ‘vaccines,’, and the extreme drugging of youth, including the ADHD and Ritalin crime, is just one aspect of this terror being inflicted on society.

To stop this deadly assault, parents have to once again become parents, instead of worthless, pathetic, dolts worried more about their phone, games, and constant personal desires that run completely counter to the well-being of their own children.

 

“Why fit in when you were born to stand out?”

~ Dr. Sues

 

Connect with Gary D. Barnett substack | website

Cover image credit: hulkiokantabak




The Health Benefits of Fermented Kombucha Beverage

The Health Benefits of Fermented Kombucha Beverage

by Sally Fallon Morell, Weston A. Price Foundation
May 21, 2024

 

This recipe is from the “Beverages” section of  Nourishing Traditions and can be found on page 496. It reflects the fifth of our 11 Wise Traditions Dietary Principles: enjoy lacto-fermented condiments and beverages.

It seems surprising, even ironic, to conclude a health food cookbook, in which we have warned against sugar, yeasted foods and tea, with a tonic made from sugar, yeast and tea! But the kombucha “mushroom” (which is actually a symbiotic colony of yeast and bacteria) acts on sugar and tea to produce not only acetic and lactic acid but also small amounts of a potent detoxifying substance, glucuronic acid. Normally this organic acid is produced by the liver in sufficient quantities to neutralize toxins in the body— whether these are naturally produced toxins or poisons ingested in food and water. However, when liver function becomes overloaded, and when the body must deal with a superabundance of toxins from the environment—certainly the case with most of us today—additional glucuronic acid taken in the form of kombucha is said to be a powerful aid to the body’s natural cleansing process, a boost to the immune system and a proven prophylactic against cancer and other degenerative diseases.

More importantly, kombucha is the cure for a hot day—it tastes delicious and refreshing. A fizzy, dark colored, energizing beverage, at the same time acidic and slightly sweet, this gift to the world from the Ural mountain region of Russia qualifies as the soft drink of the twenty-first century, the answer to the scourge of cola drinks that now wreaks havoc with the health of Western populations.

Read the article: In a world full of soda, be a kombucha. for more background!

The following recipe makes 2 quarts:

INGREDIENTS

  • 3 quarts filtered water
  • 1 cup sugar [organic cane sugar]
  • 4 tea bags of organic black tea
  • ½ cup kombucha from a previous culture
  • 1 kombucha mushroom

INSTRUCTIONS

  1. Bring 3 quarts filtered water to boil.
  2. Add sugar and simmer until dissolved.
  3. Remove from heat, add the tea bags and allow the tea to steep until water has completely cooled.
  4. Remove tea bags. Pour cooled liquid into a 4-quart pyrex bowl and add ½ cup kombucha from previous batch.
  5. Place the mushroom on top of the liquid.
  6. Make a crisscross over the bowl with masking tape, cover loosely with a cloth or towel and transfer to a warm, dark place, away from contaminants and insects. [Alternatively, put a loose cloth over the container and tie it in place so it dosen’t fall in!]
  7. In about 7 to 10 days the kombucha will be ready, depending on the temperature.
  8. It should be rather sour and possibly fizzy, with no taste of tea remaining.
  9. Transfer to covered glass containers and store in the refrigerator. (Note: Do not wash kombucha bowls in the dishwasher.)
  10. When the kombucha is ready, your mushroom will have grown a second spongy pancake. This can be used to make other batches or given away to friends.
  11. Store fresh mushrooms in the refrigerator in a glass container—never plastic. A kombucha mushroom can be used dozens of times. If it begins to turn black, or if the resulting kombucha doesn’t sour properly, it’s a sign that the culture has become contaminated. When this happens, it’s best to throw away all your mushrooms and order a new clean one.
  12. Note: White sugar, rather than honey or Rapadura, and black tea, rather than flavored teas, give the highest amounts of glucuronic acid. Non-organic tea is high in fluoride so always use organic tea.
  13. A word of caution: Some individuals may have an allergic reaction to kombucha. If you have allergies, start with a small taste to observe any adverse effects. If you react badly, use beet kvass several weeks to detoxify and then try again.

 

Connect with Weston A. Price Foundation

Cover image credit: Nennieinszweidrei




The Financial Incentive to Murder and Poison American Children

The Financial Incentive to Murder and Poison American Children
There are more deaths from vaccines than from the diseases they are said to prevent.

by Greg Reese, The Reese Report
May 16, 2024

 



 

In an April 16th interview with Polly Tommey, Dr. Paul Thomas, explained how the American medical establishment incentivizes pediatricians to fully vaccinate their young patients, and fines them if they don’t. Vaccinations that have been proven to cause more death and harm than the diseases they are said to be preventing.

“Well, as other practices started kicking people out of their practices if they weren’t following the CDC schedule, I was getting more and more families who didn’t want to do any vaccines. Which was fine with me. So we took an entire month of every single billing sheet. And on every visit, on the back of that, our providers would mark off what vaccines we recommend according to the CDC schedule. Families could decline them. And then our billing department, insurance company by insurance company, vaccine by vaccine, we looked at how much money was being lost for vaccines that were refused, just the admin fee.

So there’s three main ways you make money off of vaccines in pediatrics. The number one is the admin fee. And you get about, it depends on the insurance company, every contract’s different, but I would average it out to say about $40 for the first antigen and $20 for each subsequent antigen. So let’s just say a two month well baby visit. There’s a DPT. That’s three shots, three antigens. Hib, Prevnar, HepB, Polio, Rotavirus, six shots, eight antigens, about $240. Thank you for giving those shots. Multiply that by the fact that I was getting 30 to 40 newborns per month. They’re coming in repeatedly at two months, four months, six months, nine months, twelve months, fifteen, eighteen months, and age two. So we looked at the admin fee loss and from my practice that was billing at that time, about 3 million gross, we were losing a million dollars, over a million dollars, in vaccines that were refused. So you cannot stay in business if you’re not giving, pretty close to the CDC schedule. It just doesn’t pencil out economically at all.

But let me tell you about the other two ways we make money from vaccines. One is the markup. That’s,that’s small. They don’t allow a lot of profit on vaccines as far as markups. But they do this thing called incentives or bonuses. And it’s called a “Quality Bonus.” Well in pediatrics, one of the main quality measures is how well you vaccinate. Isn’t that interesting? It has nothing to do with how healthy your kids are. Like when I studied my vaxed vs unvaxed patients, the unvaxed were so incredibly healthy. They rarely got sick. They rarely would end up in an emergency room or in a hospital or with any chronic condition. So being unvaxed results in very healthy kids who don’t use a lot of medical dollars. Every health system should want that. But it’s reversed, it’s all flipped, It’s bizarre.

You’re supposed to have had your kids up to date about 80% of them by age two. Guess what percentage of my population was at fully vaccinated at age two? 1%. The goal is 80%. So Doctor Paul gets an F minus. Basically what that means is not only do I not get paid the normal amount for everything else we do in the office, I get dinged maybe 10 or 15% off of those RVUs, relative value units, that are ascribed. To everything you do in medicine is given a value. If you do very well on your quality measures, you’re a really good vaccinator, you may get an additional 10% on everything you do in your office. That’s huge.

SIDs is sudden infant death syndrome. When you hear the word syndrome, it means we don’t know what it is. We don’t know what causes it. Well, we actually have a pretty good clue because there are six data sets. Studies that looked at SIDs when that infant died, relative to when they got a vaccine. In one data set, 97% were in the first ten days after the vaccine. For the six other studies, a couple of them showed that 50% of the deaths happened in the first week. But 75 to about 90% of those deaths are happening in the first week after vaccines in all these studies. We’ve known this for decades. The countries that have the most infant vaccines have the highest infant mortality. Guess where the US stands? We are number one in infant vaccines. We are number one in industrial countries for infant mortality.

There’s a document, 450 page legal document, that has tables showing for every single disease for which we have a vaccine, there are more deaths from the vaccine
than there are from the disease for which we have that vaccine.”

~ Dr. Paul Thomas

 

Connect with Greg Reese

Cover image credit: Alexas_Fotos




If I Were a Parent I Wouldn’t Vaccinate My Child…

If I Were a Parent I Wouldn’t Vaccinate My Child…

by Jon Rappoport
May 15, 2024

 

If I Were a Parent I Wouldn’t Vaccinate My Child…

…According to the CDC schedule…

With a gun pointed at my head.

I wouldn’t vaccinate him at all.

I’ve been told the CDC expects every child to receive 70 shots in the arm between birth and 18 years of age.

I recently took a look at the CDC childhood vaccine schedule. I found the tables confusing.

But I did note the two lists of vaccines they want kids to take between birth and 15 months, and then between 18 months and 18 years old.

This isn’t the number of injections; it’s the number of vaccines.

Between birth and 15 months: 20 vaccines.

Between 18 months and 18 years old: 20 vaccines.

40 vaccines. FORTY.

20 during the most vulnerable period possible—birth to 15 months. And that doesn’t include vaccines the mother took during pregnancy.

So the CDC is Murder Incorporated.

Show me the hundred well done studies that prove 20 plus 20 vaccines are safe.

Also—show me one well done study against another large study of children who were never vaccinated. Compare overall health in the 2 groups.

No? You can’t?

There is no science going on.

Imagine this. A sales person approaches a parent. He says, “I have a very low-cost offer. Here are dozens and dozens of chemicals and random biological materials I can inject into your child between birth and 18 years of age. How about it? It’s a great deal.”

That’s what’s going on.

Psychopathic motherfuckers are going on.

 

Connect with Jon Rappoport

Cover image credit: skalekar1992


See Related:

Vaccine Woman




What Is in the Jabs?

What Is in the Jabs?

by Library of Atlantis
sourced from Library of Atlantis at telegram
May 4, 2024

 

There does not seem to be much of a consensus about this. Lots pf people still saying that the mRNA is altering our DNA. DNA is irrelevant but the processes which alter DNA can cause permanent and inheritable damage.

Damage seems to be done sometimes months after the shots and the body itself is building spike protein or white clots or something bad elsewhere

Stefan Lanka is saying that the RNA does no damage as it breaks down quickly in the body and it cannot be an inorganic toxin as it would either get expelled or have an immediate toxic effect. So he doesn’t seem to think that toxins are stored for a later detox and he is going for biological-conflict.

The technology used to produce particularly the RNA vaccines is very similar to that used to produce GMO. Toxins are introduced into biological material and this results in effects (usually bad) that can span several generations.

Injecting the blood of black chickens into white chickens gave offspring that had inherited a tendency to produce black feathers: https://library-of-atlantis.com/2023/06/10/telegony/

So ‘genetic’ information can be permanently transmitted by injection into the bloodstream but it has little to do with DNA. The active ‘ingredient’ is a piece of bio-field containing morphological information harmful to human health. This consists of a scalar-wave complex that is invisible and unmeasurable. Whatever its origins it is modified by the manufacturing process in a wholly unpredictable manner.

This information becomes integrated into the body bio-field and may cause trouble at any time, thereby explaining the delay between jab and effects. No lab test will be able to detect or characterise this information.

We don’t really know anything and there is no way of telling if the antipathetic field will or could ever be expelled or neutralised. We cannot therefore say if things will get better or worse for the jabbed or their children.


Telegony

Healing frequencies

 

Connect with Library of Atlantis

Cover image credit: geralt


See Related:

What Is the Brain?

Dr. Tom Cowan: Do COVID “mRNA Shots” Actually Contain mRNA? Let’s Look at the Science

Is DNA Targeting Really Happening? Or Are They Faking “High Level” Science & Bedazzling Us With Fancy Words?




Vaccines From Womb to Tomb

Vaccines From Womb to Tomb
Why Do We Have an Adult Immunization Schedule?

by Health Freedom Institute
May 2, 2024

 

Did you know that the CDC has an adult vaccination schedule?1 It’s been around for 22 years, growing and changing.2 Promotion of routine adult immunization started around 1990 but wasn’t formalized into a schedule until 2002.

The federal government has embraced vaccination as “a lifespan approach, covering vaccination from before birth into old age,”3 basically, from womb to tomb. This is laid out in its National Vaccination Plans, which were mandated by U.S. Congress in 1987.

The Adult Immunization Schedule has been a bit of a sleeper, but in recent years, when listening to the CDC’s Advisory Council on Immunization Practices (ACIP) meetings, we hear about it more and more. What changed? Let’s start at the beginning.

What Is the Adult Schedule?

In 1991, the CDC acknowledged in its weekly public health report that vaccination in adults wasn’t typical.4

 

The very first time the CDC pulled all their immunization recommendations into one place was in their weekly publication “Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report” (MMWR) in 1969.5 Those recommendations laid the foundation for what we now recognize as the “schedule.” This first publication included dosage recommendations for adults, but those dosages generally were for shots missed in childhood or special circumstances like travel. It was not until many years later that the idea of an adult schedule was independently promoted. Other than influenza, the shots were targeted toward common childhood illnesses, and there wasn’t much to promote for adults.

The face of public health, and thus immunization, changed in 1979 when the federal Department of Health, Education, and Welfare (the predecessor to Health and Human Services) released a report titled “Healthy People: The Surgeon General’s Report on Health Promotion and Disease Prevention.”6 That publication marked the beginning of a new era of emphasis on population health. It was unique in its structured, data-driven approach to setting and surveilling health policy goals for our nation.7 This approach gave it longevity and flexibility and created the foundation for a new, decades-long infrastructure of setting health policy goals through identification of specific objectives with measurable targets, starting with “Healthy People 1990,” (launched in 1980) that continues to the latest “Healthy People 2030.”

The 1980s were tumultuous for vaccine policy. The expose “Vaccine Roulette” aired in 1982, helping parents across the country (and the globe) connect the dots on symptoms their children suddenly acquired after routine vaccination with DPT. The awareness congealed into a movement of parents who ignited a fire under U.S. Congress about the injustice of following the federally recommended childhood schedule only to find it was not safe for their babies. This outcry culminated in the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act, known by many as the “1986 Act,” which removed liability from manufacturers. (You can do a deep dive on DPT in our article, “Shining a light on Pertussis & DPT: the vaccine that shut the courthouse doors.”)

While the 1986 Act was being debated, 1985 saw two measles outbreaks on college campuses.8 With vaccines in mind, a joint resolution was adopted by Congress that was signed by Ronald Reagan into law, acknowledging the last week in October as “National Adult Immunization Awareness Week.”9 The intent behind the resolution was to prevent deaths from influenza and pneumonia in older adults, but the college measles outbreaks were mentioned as justification for needing to raise awareness of vaccination among adults.10 Baked into federal adult immunization policy was the intent that the awareness week was “only the beginning.”

Source: Congressional Record, Aug. 13, 1986; remarks by Sen. Orrin Hatch, sponsor of the joint resolution.

 

A National Coalition for Adult Immunization (NCAI) was formed shortly after, in 1988, to align “public and private resources to achieve Healthy People national goals.”

Source: Resource Guide for Adult and Adolescent Immunization, 3rd ed. : National Coalition for Adult Immunization : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

 

The 1979 report that inspired “Healthy People” only mentioned adult immunization in passing.

 

And the follow up report in 1980, “Promoting Health, Preventing Disease,” which came to be known as “Healthy People 1990,” provided 226 health policy goals with targets to be reached by 1990, but did not dive into adult vaccination.11

 

Regardless, the CDC fell in line with NCAI and started calling on doctors to include adult immunization as “a routine part of their practice.” In the 1991 publication where the CDC changed its tune on adult immunization, they reasoned that we couldn’t eliminate all illnesses because some adults were still “at risk” of getting sick from diseases on the childhood schedule if they were never vaccinated or weren’t sick in childhood. That said, there weren’t many action items because there weren’t many vaccines licensed to be marketed to adults.

After the 1986 Act, many vaccines were added to the childhood schedule. When the pneumococcal vaccine was added in 2001, it was licensed both for adolescents and adults. The promotion of adult vaccines picked up again for that moment in time. In 2002, the CDC unveiled its first official adult schedule. In short, healthy adults who had already been following the CDC’s childhood schedule were recommended annual flu shots, tetanus boosters every 10 years (generally at the time given in tandem with diphtheria as a TD shot), and the newly added pneumococcal recommendation for people who were 65 and over.

 

Source: https://www.aafp.org/pubs/afp/issues/2002/1215/p2329.html

 

 

Note that right now COVID is recommended as “one or more doses,” which basically means there’s a blank check for how many shots will be recommended. The FDA and the CDC, along with their advisory committees (ACIP and VRBPAC respectively), have contemplated annual doses, but there’s also discussion of targeting strains. In other words, what will be recommended is yet to be seen.

One thing we can say for certain is that back in 2002 when the adult schedule table was first unveiled, the dose counts recommended were a lot lower.

Barriers to Success for the Adult Schedule

Simplification: The American Family Physician group says of the adult schedule, “The success of the childhood immunization program is partly because of the annual publication of the Recommended Childhood Immunization Schedule that summarizes the current recommendations and that it can be posted in the office for quick reference. We suggest that physicians post the Recommended Adult Immunization Schedule in the office as a quick reference tool and that it be used as part of a larger office-based program to improve adult immunization rates.”

Access: A study published on February 4, 2014, in the Annals of Internal Medicinerecommended that physicians refer patients to get the vaccines they did not stock to a pharmacy or public health department to get vaccinated.12 The reason for referring patients outside their clinic was either “lack of insurance coverage for the vaccine (55% for general internists and 62% for family physicians) or inadequate reimbursement (36% for general internists and 41% for family physicians).” Dr. Laura Hurley, one of the authors of the paper,13 that improving the delivery of recommended vaccines to adults will require a concerted effort to resolve financial barriers, especially for smaller practices and for general internists who see more patients with Medicare Part D.

In short, access comes down to whether a doctor is going to be paid enough to go to the trouble of stocking a shot. 

The current White House has been promoting increased uptake of immunizing agents in adults. And the CDC, the agency in charge of getting “shots in arms,” has increased both propaganda and financial incentives. The 2023 Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), for example, was14

 

Conveniently, any American with Medicare or Medicaid can get any shot on the schedule at no cost to them. But some states did not require payment through their Medicaid for certain vaccines, and this federal law overrode their autonomy to decide how to spend taxpayer money. The new policy addresses that.

Biden’s policy follows the footsteps laid by Obama’s Affordable Care Act in 2010, which expanded access to vaccines with cost-sharing. The Healthy People plan was mentioned in the Affordable Care Act four times.15

The IRA law also highlights the importance of the schedule itself — insurance payments hinge on whether the vaccine is on the schedule, not simply whether it has been recommended. Not surprisingly, for the first time in history, the ACIP chose to update its annual schedule to a rolling schedule to keep up with all the anticipated changes and additional recommendations. For the first time in the history of the schedule, the ACIP left the last page blank so new recommendations could be quickly added through the year, rather than waiting for the annual update. This was done in the name of access.

You may have also been hearing of calls for financing called Vaccines for Adults. This will have to be legislated through the budget.

Why the Sudden Push for Vaccines for Adults?

A review of 100 vaccines in development by “Vaccines Today,” found a staggering 80% percent are aimed at adults.16 A survey of the vaccines and immunizing agents approved for use by the FDA over the past five years shows 11 of 15 can be marketed to adults, nine of which are only approved for those over 18 years of age.17 This is a shift from around the 1960s where we saw an explosion in new vaccines aimed at children, especially after the 1986 Act removed liability for injury from manufacturers and providers for shots on the childhood schedule.

The National Adult Immunization Plan

“Global Immunization Vision and Strategy.” World Health Organization, 64th World Health Assembly (2011).

One of the goals of the plan is to simply increase demand. In other words, the federal government wants you to want these products. The plan was launched in 2015, a year after the CDC announced it was collaborating with Pfizer and a company called CECity to increase adult immunization rates.19 We know Pfizer makes vaccines (and “immunizing agents”); CECity is a company that specializes in electronic health records and was brought on board to implement a cloud-based “Adult Immunization Registry.” The initiative was released during the World Health Organization’s “Decade of Vaccines,” where their “Global Immunization Vision and Strategy 2006-2015” expanded the target group for routine immunizations to include adults.

The plan integrates health data transfer goals with calls for “interoperability” and “bidirectional exchange” of personal data between electronic health records (EHRs) and Immunization Information Systems (IIS’s).

Can adults injured by vaccines sue the manufacturer? It depends.

The 1986 Act and subsequent court cases removed liability from manufacturers and providers of vaccines if a person is injured or killed from vaccines. Does that apply to all vaccines? No, it only applies to shots that are on the childhood schedule. So if an adult takes a vaccine that is on the childhood schedule, like HPV or tetanus, they are bound by law to lose their right to a day in court and instead go through an administrative process many call “Vaccine Court,” which removes the right to a trial by jury. But if an adult takes the vaccine for shingles, which is not on the childhood schedule and therefore not under the umbrella of the VICP, an injured person can sue in court. It makes one wonder if those legal rights could be taken away and swept up into an amendment to the 1986 Act with a normalized Adult Immunization Schedule.


References:
  1. “Recommended Adult Immunization Schedule.” CDC. February 28, 2024. https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/schedules/downloads/adult/adult-combined-schedule.pdf.
  2. “Recommended Adult Immunization Schedule–United States, 2002-2003.” MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep., (2003): 52(15):345. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12418546/.
  3. “2020 National Vaccine Plan Development: Recommendations from the National Vaccine Advisory Committee.” Public Health Reports, 135(2):181–188. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12418546/.
  4. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep., (1991): 40(RR-12). v “ACIP Recommendations 1969: Collected Recommendations of the Public Health Service Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices.” National Communicable Disease Center 18, no. 43. https://stacks.cdc.gov/view/cdc/818.
  5. “Healthy People: The Surgeon General’s Report on Health Promotion and Disease Prevention.” Public Health Service 79-55071, U.S. Department of Health and Welfare (1979). https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED186357.pdf.
  6. “The Evolution of the Healthy People Initiative: A Look Through the Decades.” J Public Health Manag Pract, (2021): 27(6):S225–S234. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8478310/. ↩︎
  7. “Current Trends Measles on College Campuses.” Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, (1985): 34(29);445-9. https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/00000581.htm.
  8. “Public Law 99-528.” Congressional Record, 99th Congress 132, (1986). https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/STATUTE-100/pdf/STATUTE-100-Pg3009.pdf.
  9. Congressional Record, 99th Congress 132, part 15 (1986): 21399. https://www.congress.gov/bound-congressional-record/1986/08/13/senate-section?p=1.
  10. “Healthy People: The Surgeon General’s Report on Health Promotion and Disease Prevention.” Public Health Service 79-55071, U.S. Department of Health and Welfare (1979). https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED186357.pdf.
  11. “Healthy People: The Surgeon General’s Report on Health Promotion and Disease Prevention.” Public Health Service 79-55071, U.S. Department of Health and Welfare (1979). https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED186357.pdf.
  12. ”US Physicians’ Perspective of Adult Vaccine Delivery. Annals of Internal Medicine. Volume 160. No. 3. https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M13-2332?articleid=1819120
  13. “National Adult Immunization Plan.” U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. https://www.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/nvpo/national-adult-immunization-plan/naip.pdf.
  14. “Several Changes to Adult Vaccine Access Enacted Through IRA.” Avalere, (2022). https://avalere.com/insights/several-changes-to-adult-vaccine-access-enacted-through-ira.
  15. “Compilation of Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.” U.S. House of Representatives, (2010). https://housedocs.house.gov/energycommerce/ppacacon.pdf.
  16. Future of Immunisation: 100 Vaccines in the Pipeline.” Vaccines Today, Gary Finnegan (2023). https://www.vaccinestoday.eu/stories/future-of-immunisation-100-vaccines-in-the-pipeline/.
  17. “Biological Approvals by Year.” The Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, U.S.FDA (2024). https://www.fda.gov/vaccines-blood-biologics/development-approval-process-cber/biological-approvals-year.
  18. “Adult Immunization Plans.” U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, (2019). https://www.hhs.gov/vaccines/national-adult-immunization-plan/index.html.
  19. “American College of Physicians, CECity, and Pfizer Collaborate to Increase Adult Immunization Rates.” Pfizer, (2014). https://www.pfizer.com/news/press-release/press-release-detail/american_college_of_physicians_cecity_and_pfizer_collaborate_to_increase_adult_immunization_rates

 

 Connect with Health Freedom Institute

Cover image credit: TCTL with creative commons images by larspromotion & OpenClipart-Vectors




GM Golden Rice in the Philippines Stopped: The Deception of Development and the Politics of Progress

GM Golden Rice in the Philippines Stopped: The Deception of Development and the Politics of Progress

by Colin Todhunter, Asia-Pacific Research
April 29, 2024

 

On 19 April 2024, the Philippines Supreme Court issued a cease-and-desist order on the commercial propagation of genetically modified (GM) Golden Rice and GM eggplant in the country.  

The Stop Golden Rice Network says that the court decision is a victory for farmers and consumers everywhere as the decision goes beyond Golden Rice and insecticidal eggplant and covers “any application for contained use, field testing, direct use as food or feed or processing, commercial propagation, and importation of GMOs.”

The court recognised that government agencies and other proponents of GM Golden Rice and GM eggplant “failed to submit proof of safety and compliance with all legal requirements.” The order remains indefinite until GMO proponents can fulfil all the mandated steps and provide concrete evidence that these GMOs are indeed safe.

A network of farmers, consumers and civil society organisations, Stop Golden Rice emphasises the need to address hunger and malnutrition through securing small farmers’ control over resources such as seed, appropriate technologies, water and land.

The campaign group says:

“We believe that GM crops are primarily pushed by global monopoly capitalists in food and agriculture… there is already irrevocable evidence of the failure of GM crops and how it has contributed to further indebtedness, crop failures, hunger and loss of biodiversity.”

It states that the court’s decision shows that ordinary people can prevail in the face of corporate power.

The Story of Golden Rice 

Vitamin A deficiency is a problem in many poor countries in the Global South and leaves millions at high risk of infection, diseases and other maladies, such as blindness.

The agritech industry has long argued that Golden Rice is a practical way to provide poor farmers in remote areas with a subsistence crop capable of adding much-needed vitamin A to local diets. Lobbyists say that Golden Rice, developed with funding from the Rockefeller Foundation, could help save the lives of around 670,000 children who die each year from Vitamin A deficiency and another 350,000 who go blind.

Such claims, however, are based more on spin than reality, and, over the years, the interests behind Golden Rice have wasted no time in attacking anyone who questioned it.

As Britain’s Environment Secretary in 2013, the now disgraced Owen Paterson claimed that opponents of GM were “casting a dark shadow over attempts to feed the world”. He called for the rapid roll-out of vitamin A-enhanced rice to help prevent the cause of up to a third of the world’s child deaths. He claimed:

“It’s just disgusting that little children are allowed to go blind and die because of a hang-up by a small number of people about this technology. I feel really strongly about it. I think what they do is absolutely wicked.”

On Twitter, The Observer’s Nick Cohen chimed in with his support by tweeting:

“There is no greater example of ignorant Western privilege causing needless misery than the campaign against genetically modified golden rice.”

The rhetoric took the well-worn cynically devised PR line that anti-GM activists and environmentalists are little more than privileged, affluent people residing in rich countries and are denying the poor the supposed benefits of GM crops.

Despite these smears and emotional blackmail, in a 2016 article in the journal Agriculture & Human Values Glenn Stone and Dominic Glover found little evidence that activists were to blame for Golden Rice’s unfulfilled promises.

Researchers still had problems developing beta carotene-enriched strains that yield as well as non-GM strains already being grown by farmers. It was questionable whether the beta carotene in Golden Rice could even be converted to vitamin A in the bodies of badly undernourished children. There had also been little research on how well the beta carotene in Golden Rice would hold up when stored for long periods between harvest seasons or when cooked using traditional methods common in remote rural locations.

In the meantime, Glenn Stone noted that that, as the development of Golden Rice crept along, the Philippines had managed to slash the incidence of Vitamin A deficiency by non-GM methods.

So, whose interests were really being served in the push for Golden Rice?

In 2011, Marcia Ishii-Eiteman, a senior scientist with a background in insect ecology and pest management, answered this question:

“An elite, so-called Humanitarian Board where Syngenta sits – along with the inventors of Golden Rice, Rockefeller Foundation, USAID and public relations and marketing experts, among a handful of others. Not a single farmer, indigenous person or even an ecologist or sociologist to assess the huge political, social and ecological implications of this massive experiment. And the leader of IRRI’s Golden Rice project is none other than Gerald Barry, previously Director of Research at Monsanto.”

Sarojeni V Rengam, executive director of Pesticide Action Network Asia and the Pacific, called on the donors and scientists involved to wake up and do the right thing:

“Golden Rice is really a ‘Trojan horse’; a public relations stunt pulled by the agribusiness corporations to garner acceptance of genetically engineered (GE) crops and food… money and efforts would be better spent on restoring natural and agricultural biodiversity rather than destroying it by promoting monoculture plantations and GE food crops.”

To tackle disease, malnutrition and poverty, you have to first understand the underlying causes – or indeed want to understand them.

Renowned academic Walden Bello notes that the complex of policies that pushed the Philippines into an economic quagmire over the past few decades is due to ‘structural adjustment’ that included the restructuring of agriculture and export-oriented production.

And that restructuring of the agrarian economy is something touched on by Claire Robinson of GMWatch who notes that leafy green vegetables used to be grown in backyards as well as in rice (paddy) fields on the banks between the flooded ditches in which the rice grew.

Ditches also contained fish, which ate pests. People thus had access to rice, green leafy veg and fish – a balanced diet that gave them a healthy mix of nutrients, including plenty of beta-carotene.

But indigenous crops and farming systems have been replaced by monocultures dependent on chemical inputs. Green leafy veg were killed off with pesticides, artificial fertilisers were introduced, and the fish could not live in the resulting chemically contaminated water. Moreover, decreased access to land meant that many people no longer had backyards containing leafy green veg.

Blindness in developing countries could have been eradicated years ago if only the money, research and publicity put into Golden Rice over the last 20 years had gone into proven ways of addressing Vitamin A deficiency. However, instead of pursuing genuine solutions, what we have seen is pro-GM spin in an attempt to close down debate.

Technology and Development 

If the discussion so far tells us anything, it is that technology is not neutral. It is developed and promoted by people who want to cement their control over a sector and stand to financially gain from its rollout.

All too often, politicians, corporations and the media equate new technology with ‘progress’. And those who question it, as we see with GMOs, are called Luddites or anti-science in order to prevent proper debate over the social, economic and ethical concerns of rolling out a given technology.

Take the Green Revolution, for instance. There was nothing progressive, inevitable or neutral about its seed, chemical and related infrastructure technology.

Despite it being rolled out under the banner of ‘progress’, it underperformed, was exploitative and has had devastating social, ecological and environmental impacts (see the writings of Prof. Glenn StoneVandana Shiva and Bhaskar Save). It served US geopolitical, financial and agribusiness interests and prioritised urban-industrial expansion at the expense of rural communities and a more diverse, healthy and nutrient-sufficient agriculture.

But the Green Revolution became integral to the ‘development’ agenda.

In a recent article on the Winter Oak website, Paul Cudenec says that ‘development’:

“… is the destruction of nature, now seen as a mere resource to be used for development or as an empty undeveloped space in which development could, should and, ultimately, must take place. It is the destruction of natural human communities, whose self-sufficiency gets in the way of the advance of development, and of authentic human culture and traditional values, which are incompatible with the dogma and domination of development.”

Cudenec argues that those behind ‘development’ have been destroying everything of real value in our natural world and our human societies in the pursuit of personal wealth and power. Moreover, they have concealed this crime behind all the positive-sounding rhetoric associated with development on every level.

Nowhere is this more apparent than in India.

The World Bank, the World Trade Organization, global agribusiness and financial capital are working to corporatise India’s agriculture sector. This ‘structural adjustment’ policy and process involves displacing the current food production system with contract farming and an industrial model of agriculture and food retail that serves the above interests.

The plan is to displace the peasantry, create a land market and amalgamate landholdings to form larger farms that are more suited to international land investors and export-oriented industrial farming.

The demand is that India sacrifice its farmers and its own food security for the benefit of a handful of billionaires. This is all passed off as ‘development’.

It involves the state facilitating the enrichment of a wealthy elite and privileging a certain model of social and economic development based on urban sprawl, centralised power and dependency on global finance, corporations, markets and supply chains. All legitimised under the banners of innovation, technological progress and ‘development’.

There are other pathways that humanity can take. Anthropologist Felix Padel and researcher Malvika Gupta offer some insights (based on their work with India’s Adivasi communities) into what the solutions or alternatives to ‘development’ might look like:

“Democracy as consensus politics rather than the Western model of liberal democracy that perpetuates division and corruption behind the scenes; exchange labour rather than the ruthless, anti-life logic of ‘the market’; law as reconciliation rather than judgements that depend on exorbitant legal fees and divide people into winners and losers… and learning as something to be shared, not competed over.”

However, we see more ‘development’ being proposed: more rural population displacement and human dislocation, more mining, port and other big infrastructure developments and the further entrenchment of corporate interests and their projects.

While many have a different vision for the future, self-interest and consumerism underpinned by economic neoliberal dogma continue to seduce the masses into accepting the prevailing ‘development’ agenda.

Corporate industrial agriculture is integral to that agenda. A model that took hold half a century ago in the Western nations and which has resulted in nutrient-deficient food, narrower diets, the massive use of agrochemicals, food contaminated by hormones, steroids, antibiotics and a wide range of chemical additives, the eradication of many smallholder farmers, spiralling rates of ill health, degraded soil and contaminated and depleted water supplies.

That’s ‘progress’? Well, agribusiness interests aside, perhaps so for the many private health clinics that have sprung up in India in recent years.

The introduction of GMOs represents a further entrenchment of the prevailing ‘development’ agenda.

The decision by the Philippines Supreme Court called out government agencies and those behind the Golden Rice agenda for key failures. This is important for India, whose Supreme Court is about to decide on whether to sanction the commercial cultivation of GM mustard. It would be India’s first GM food crop (of which there are many more in the pipeline).

Will India’s Supreme Court come down on the side of reason and stop GM mustard on the basis of there being no need for GMOs in Indian agriculture and the well-documented fraud and regulatory delinquency that has surrounded this issue for many years?

That remains to be seen.

 

Many of the issues presented above are discussed in the author’s free e-book Food, Dispossession and Dependency. Resisting the New World Order.

 

Renowned author Colin Todhunter specialises in development, food and agriculture. He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG).  

 

Connect with Colin Todhunter

Cover image credit: consolesafari




“Transgender Kids” Are a Myth, a Fairy Tale

“Transgender Kids” Are a Myth, a Fairy Tale

by Jon Rappoport
April 26, 2024

 

There are no transgender kids.

There are children who get all sorts of ideas in their heads. They change their minds every day.

In the current culture, on a given Tuesday, a boy might decide he wants to be a girl, and vice versa.

But then comes Wednesday, and the world is completely different.

Except we have the psycho meddlers. Parents, teachers, counselors, government-backed groups, pedophiles…

They enter the scene and they’re committed to making that random Tuesday last forever.

I put most of this on the parents. The mind-controlled parents who believe in total permissiveness and “the new cultural imperatives” at the same time.

They weren’t fit to have the children in the first place.

When I was a kid, I entertained all sorts of crazy ideas. It was fun. I went to my father with a plan to buy a pet rattlesnake and bring it in the house. I told him I could tame the snake.

He came down on me like a ton of bricks. NO took ten seconds.

He wasn’t pleasant and kind and understanding and supportive of my claim that I was a wild animal tamer and a healer.

If it were possible (it isn’t), I’d like to see one of these oh so permissive parents put on trial, with a sane jury behind the rail. And a sentence of 30 years in prison for the parent’s encouragement—which led to his child taking toxic meds, ruinous hormones, and going into an operating room for life-destroying surgery.

 

Connect with Jon Rappoport

Cover image credit: Saydung89




GMO Bio-Imperialism

GMO Bio-Imperialism

by Dr. Vandana Shiva, Navdanya International
April 26, 2024

 

Over the past few decades, GMO crops have been imposed in countries around the world, touted as a solution to food insecurity and malnutrition crises. However, hunger, disease and malnutrition have increased, while biodiversity has declined and toxins have spread. GMO imperialism has destroyed the lives and livelihoods of small farmers and biodiversity in the centers of origin. These centers of biodiversity origin are the cradles of the world’s food supply and protection against disease, climate challenges, natural disasters or other obstacles to food production.

In Mexico, which is the center of origin of corn, there has been a long struggle by society and organized communities against GMO imperialism which threatens the subsistence and culture of local peoples. It is following this mobilization that the Mexican society obtained a ban on planting genetically modified corn through a collective lawsuit brought against the companies Bayer-Monsanto, Syngenta and Corteva Agriscience. This ban is still in effect.

Recently, the Mexican government issued an executive order phasing out the use of glyphosate and banning the use of genetically modified corn in tortillas, a staple food. Faced with this decision, the US government, on the basis of the United States-Mexico-Canada Free Trade Agreement (USMCA), activated the dispute resolution mechanism with the aim of canceling the order and forcing the introduction of GMOs into the country.

The Mexican government as well as the non-governmental organizations from Mexico presented their Technical Opinions before this Panel, based on detailed scientific evidence, including new found evidence by Mexico’s scientific advisory board CONAHCYT, rooted in scientifically rigorous evidence from academic institutions. This evidence pointed out and warned about the multiple risks that make it pertinent and urgent to stop the presence of genetically manipulated maize in the food of the Mexican population, and as raw material for other industries.

From 12 to 16 March 2024, Navdanya International, together with Latin American partners and the Mexican Government, organized a series of events in Mexico City to build a common strategy against the imposition of new and old GMOs. The mobilization in Mexico City counted on the presence of representatives of Latin American movements such as Argentina, Colombia, Bolivia, Costa Rica and others, in collaboration with Mexican civil society organizations, the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, the Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources and the Ministry of Culture. It was at the Ministry of Culture that the Garden of Milpa, the biodiverse traditional farming system of Mexico, was blessed at the Museum of Corn.

The case of Mexico represents the attempt of a people to protect their biodiverse cultures, their thousand-year-old food heritage, the health of their population and ecosystems. It is the case of a people who demand respect for their sovereignty and represents a beacon of hope for the places where this imposition continues. People have the right to have sovereignty over their health, and that starts with food sovereignty.

However, the GMO agenda has always been about patents and profits, not food and health. Food sovereignty is a high-level concept, because it implies the sovereignty of beings to manage and organize themselves and protect their right to health. This is why the goal of industrial agriculture has always been to push farmers off the land. It is inherent in the very definition of industrial agriculture. The sovereignty of people, farmers and nature has been violated by the imposition of agrotoxins, GMOs and ultra-processed foods, destroying diversity and ancient food cultures and threatening land, water and biodiversity.

Agribusiness and biotechnology giants are trying to circumvent existing biosafety regulations, such as the Cartagena and Nagoya Protocols of the Convention on Biological Diversity, by subtly making changes to GMO regulations, in order to promote GMOs under new acronyms, such as NBT (New Breeding Techniques), NGT (New Genomic Techniques) or TEA (Techniques of Assisted Evolution). These new GMOs have been silently inserted into the agricultural legislation in force in various countries, with the aim of maintaining patent monopolies in the hands of the chemical and biotechnology giants.

Today, our seed sovereignty is threatened by intellectual property rights and new GMO technologies that have transformed seeds from a common good into a commodity under the control and monopoly of multinational agri-food companies. Impositions continue to take place, violating the sovereignty and rights of people and nature, in furtherance of the corporate agenda. While multinationals get rich by stealing our biodiversity. Faced with this, building relationships, based on common struggle and the vision of an ecological future, contributes to creating international networks of resistance and solidarity. Together, as global citizens, we must unite to oppose the bullying of GMOs and defend our seeds.

Citizens are rising up against the unscientific, anti-democratic and anti-ecological imposition of GMOs by multinationals and the US government. The first generation of GMOs failed. But multinationals continue to impose genetically modified organisms, or new GMOs, in centers of diversity. They continue to shift the narrative towards framing nature and biodiversity as commodities to be commercialized and monopolized. In the wake of Mexico’s battle against the United States, it is necessary to support and strengthen international solidarity against the corporate imposition of industrial food systems.

 

Connect with Dr. Vandana Shiva

Cover image credit: Nguyen_Khac




The Garlic Mustard Enigma: Be Like Garlic Mustard

The Garlic Mustard Enigma

by Rosanne Lindsay, Traditional Naturopath, Nature of Healing
April 24, 2024

 

Spring has sprung!  ‘Tis the season of new growth, birdsong, and the pulling of garlic mustard! For those not interested in an interlude into the “weeds,” you can stop reading now.

I offer a brief segue to speak for the plants. Because soon, people will become activists in large groups to pull a plant called garlic mustard (Alliaria petiolata) out of the ground to end its life. Why has this tradition taken root in the greater part of the U.S., before this plant sets seed?

Did Nature get it wrong?

Or is garlic mustard misunderstood?

What is a Weed?

Herbalists know that no plant is a “weed,” since each plant has a purpose. Weeds do not exist in Nature. According to medical anthropologist Ben Belek:

Weeds don’t exist in the wild. They can’t exist. A weed is only a weed when an onlooker says it is. The property of weediness, I reflected, is little more than herbage out of place. Only when a hardworking farmer extends her field to make room for a cauliflower patch, does the hitherto wild flora that lived and thrived there suddenly transform into a nuisance. Only with foreign settlement, does indigeneity become adversarial.

If people uproot garlic mustard, it is because they are convinced it is a non-native, invasive plant. End of discussion. However, if we can align ourselves with the plant kingdom, then we can better understand them. We are not so different from our plant allies. Most humans are transplants. When humans are forced to leave their home, it is called eminent domain.

If Ends of Discussions do not sit right with you, then you might be a contrarian! You might align with garlic mustard, the contrarian of the plant world!  Any good contrarian, anyone who rejects popular opinion, would not let the discussion end.

Our Nature Is Nature

Pulling garlic mustard where it is abundant prolongs its run. It also robs a great deal of nitrogen, macro- and micronutrients, and organic matter from the ecosystem.— Dr. Berndt Blossey, Cornell University

As we have begun this discussion, let us continue with some basic definitions that humans ascribe to the plant kingdom.

Invasive plants are plants that have been introduced to an ecosystem and are poised to take over.  According to Naturalists, invasive plants have aggressive root systems that spread long distances. They may smother other plants in the area. Some produce chemicals which impact the growth of plants around them. Basically, these plants dominate and some claim they don’t offer the benefits to local fauna. [There are politicians who qualify as invasive.]

Consider the Dandelion (Taxacum officinale), a transplant from “somewhere else” that has naturalized itself in every part of the world but Antarctica! Sound similar to human migration? Today, the dandelion is listed as invasive only in Oregon and Alaska. Perhaps more people have come to appreciate her gifts and place in the world.

Dandelions were once native to Eurasia, before they have become native everywhere.  It is generally believed that the dandelion was first brought to North America on the Mayflower for its medicinal uses. In Europe, China, India and Russia dandelions were used to treat skin, infection, liver (root), kidneys (leaf) and digestive problems (the root balances HCL, aids constipation).

In Chinese Medicine, liver is known to be the seat of anger. Thus, dandelion leaves and roots help to detoxify an angry liver. As a flower essence, the sunny countenance of the dandelion works with the solar plexus to release trauma related to fears, ego, self worth, and personal power.

Non-native plants are also introduced plants, but they don’t have the negative reputation that invasive plants do. They could produce foliage or blooms that benefit local wildlife and they don’t take over their habitat. Dandelion qualifies here, too.

Native plants are well adapted to survive in their environment. They typically need less water, less fertilizing, and overall less care to fit in and thrive. Stay long enough in one place, and plants qualify as “native.”

Over time, the dandelion has gathered many names from the locals. In the case of the solar, resilient dandelion, she is known as all three: “native, non-native, invasive.” Beyond human classification, her flowers make a tasty jelly, while her roots make a great coffee alternative as a tea.

Garlic Mustard Misunderstood

Garlic mustard (Alliaria petiolata), too, has a lot to offer humanity. However, she is called pernicious, exotic, and a Class A noxious weed on a list of plants to be controlled. That’s a lot to overcome. With all the publicity, this plant that has captured the attention of plant lovers and haters, alike.  Insults aside, who is she really?

A member of the cabbage and broccoli family (Brassicaceae), garlic mustard grows 2-3 (up to 6) feet tall all over the Northeast and Midwest U.S. Lower leaves are kidney-shaped with scalloped edges. In spring, roots and new leaves smell like garlic, and small, four-petal white flowers appear clustered at stem ends, followed by long, skinny seedpods.

The family Brassicacea does not consider her evil. As a medicinal, the leaves and stems of garlic mustard are: antiasthmatic, antiscorbutic, antiseptic, deobstruent, diaphoretic, vermifuge and vulnerary.

According to Maude Grieve’s, A Modern Herbal, “The leaves used to be taken internally as a sudorific and deobstruent, to promote sweating and to treat bronchitis, asthma and eczema. Externally, leaves are antiseptic in gangrenes and ulcers, and against itching caused by bites and stings. The juice of the leaves taken alone or boiled into a syrup with honey is found serviceable in dropsy. The herb, when eaten as a salad, warms the stomach and strengthens the digestive faculties. The seeds have been used as a snuff to excite sneezing.”

This plant has the spicy tang of mustard with a hint of garlic, and can be used as a base for pesto and sauces, and to flavor salads, soups and other dishes. That qualifies as sassy, not noxious.

However, eating her leaves has not worked well as a control strategy. Plant stands can produce more than 62,000 seeds per square meter, and can self-pollinate, which helps it rapidly spread, to displace native plants along trails, in forests, and on riverbanks.

Out of the way, garlic mustard minds her own business, perfectly happy in a group, not bothering anyone, friend to the deer. After all, in the wilds of Nature, plants with such a bad reputation must work in creative ways to survive.

Self-Regulating Life Style

To survive, garlic mustard populations secrete a compound called sinigrin, a chemical that deters the growth of other plants and decreases competition.  In 2016, researchers at the University of Illinois found that within three decades, “sinigrin concentrations decrease as garlic mustard populations age, demonstrating evolutionary change due to ecological processes.” Garlic mustard declines when it reaches a balance with native species that re-colonize invaded areas.

One of the things we’ve seen over the last 20 to 30 years is that garlic mustard becomes less of an issue, and actually balances out over time.—Adam Davis, ecologist, U of I, and USDA Agricultural Research Service

Garlic mustard is self-regulating. Its life cycle runs about 20-30 years. As the plants age, they die off completely. Other species are then able to move back in.

If humans were to look closer to garlic mustard’s example, we might find we are not so different. Nature is self-regulating, just as we are.

The more deer in the area, the more garlic mustard. The deer are forced to eat the garlic mustard instead of the native plant species. Garlic mustard plays a role in defense of the collective plant world.

Doing Less is More

decade-long Cornell University study of garlic mustard has shown that avoidance is the best way to manage garlic mustard.  Conservation biologist, Dr. Berndt Blossey, says:

Pulling up large swaths of garlic mustard is not only futile, it is worse than leaving it alone. It bears echoing: When well-intentioned people rip out this stuff, it actually prolongs the infestation period because the plant self-limits (more on that below) if undisturbed. Also, these mass garlic mustard-ectomy events do more damage to the ecosystem than the target species itself does. —Dr. Berndt Blossey

The study found (see video): “Side-by-side controlled trials showed that where garlic mustard is “managed,” the plants are considerably larger, and cover a much higher percentage of a site (at times by an order of magnitude) than the sections where nothing has been done. Not only that, but biomass on the managed sites tended to be roughly stable over the ten-year time frame studied, whereas it declined year after year in the unmanaged plots.”

Blossey says people wrongly conclude that “maple sap flows up from the roots during the day; goldenrod causes allergy symptoms; and garlic mustard wipes out native wildflowers and adversely affects salamanders.” Upon closer examination, these conclusions are demonstrably 100% false:

It turns out that while garlic mustard competes with native species, it does not displace them where deer are excluded or drastically reduced in number.  And it is earthworms, not our maligned invasive plant, which make a neighborhood less attractive to salamanders. —Dr. Berndt Blossey

Though it appears that garlic mustard displaces native vegetation with its prolific growth, what is really going on is a lack of cultivation of those native species.

Nature teaches that one can have intellect but not wisdom. Wisdom is not a group activity.  When it comes to the ways of garlic mustard, wisdom beats activism.

Culinary Benefits of Garlic Mustard

Why not eat the Invasives?

Garlic mustard has not only established herself in Nature, as food for deer, but is well known in foraging and culinary circles, and thus, local human economies. You can collect and dry the seeds of garlic mustard to make your own garlic mustard edibles, mayonnaise or dairy-free ranch dressing.  You can also purchase pre-made mustard.

Or take a hint from the Forager Chef and make yourself some garlic mustard shoots with ramp butter! Just make sure you harvest the ramps responsibly, as forager and author, Sam Thayer teaches!

According to Pascal Baudar, author of Wildcrafted Fermentation, a book about lacto fermentation of common wild edibles, stone ground black mustard seeds (Brassica nigra) make plant-based cheeses, fermenting mushrooms, sauces, soups, condiments, and more. Baudar says:

I don’t know why this resource is simply wasted, an L.A. Times article from 2019 called the plant “evil” because it covers our local hills. With such narrative, you’re going nowhere in terms of positive solutions. I wish the city had a special program to look at culinary solutions for the abundant wild food surrounding us.

I mean, instead of spending money on chemicals you probably could make money selling gourmet organic mustard with the profit going back to helping the environment. Why not? Some people would make a point to buy it.

Of course, in spring time you can also do all kinds of recipe with the leaves and flowers.  I think it’s much more creative than spraying Round-Up or wasting this delicious “unwanted” resource by throwing it away.Organic all the way.

Bauder shares garlic mustard recipes on his June 15, 2022 post Facebook page: “These days, I use a different technique. I soak the seeds for 3 days in a mix of 2 parts vinegar and 1 part wine and was able to make this wild “Dijon” mustard in 5 minutes during a class last weekend. Those “Invasive” plants can truly be gourmet food and so easy to procure. It took me 30 minutes to gather enough seeds to fill nearly 2 cups.

Be Like Garlic Mustard

If you have stood by, wondering why people expend so much time and energy on digging up plants in the wild, without understanding their unique qualities, then you, too, are a contrarian. Why not celebrate this unique quality with some garlic mustard, and dandelion tea?

 

Connect with Rosanne Lindsay, Traditional Naturopath

Cover image credit: Noverodus & Hans




From Bird Flu to Climate Snakes

From Bird Flu to Climate Snakes

by Breeauna Sagdal, Brownstone Institute
April 25, 2024

 

Seasoned veterinarians and livestock producers alike have been scratching their heads trying to understand the media’s response to the avian flu. Headlines across every major news outlet warn of humans becoming infected with the “deadly” bird flu after one reported case of pink-eye in a human.

The entire narrative is predicated upon a long-disputed claim that Covid-19 was the result of a zoonotic jump—the famed Wuhan bat wet-market theory.

While the source of Covid is hotly contested within the scientific community, the policy vehicle at the center of this dialectic began years prior to Sars-CoV-2 and is quite resolute in force and effect.

In 2016, the Gates Foundation donated to the World Health Organization to create the OneHealth Initiative. Since 2020, the CDC has adopted and implemented the OneHealth Initiative to build a “collaborative, multisectoral, and transdisciplinary approach—working at the local, regional, national, and global levels—with the goal of achieving optimal health outcomes recognizing the interconnection between people, animals, plants, and their shared environment.”

In the aftermath of Covid-19, the OneHealth Initiative began taking shape, due largely in part to millions of tax dollars appropriated through ARP (American Rescue Plan) funding.

Through its APHIS (Animal and Plant Health Investigation System) the USDA (United States Department of Agriculture) was given $300 million in 2021 to begin implementing “a risk-based, comprehensive, integrated disease monitoring and surveillance system domestically…to build additional capacity for zoonotic disease surveillance and prevention,” globally.

“The One Health concept recognizes that the health of people, animals, and the environment are all linked,” said USDA Under Secretary for Marketing and Regulatory Programs Jenny Lester Moffitt.

According to the USDA’s press release, the Biden-Harris administration’s OneHealth approach will also help to ensure “new markets and streams of income for farmers and producers using climate smart food and forestry practices,” by “making historic investments in infrastructure and clean energy capabilities in rural America.”

In other words, the federal government is using regulatory enforcement to intervene in the marketplace, in addition to subsidizing corporations with tax dollars to direct a planned economic outcome—ending meat consumption.

Climate-Smart Commodities – Planning the Economy through Subsidized Intervention

Under the recently announced Climate-Smart Commodities program, the USDA has appropriated $3.1 billion in tax subsidies to one hundred and forty-one new private Climate-Smart projects, ranging from carbon sequestration to Climate-Smart meat and forestry practices.

Private investors such as Amazon founder Jeff Bezos – who just committed $1 billion to the development of lab cultured meat-like molds, and meat grown in petri dishes, to

Ballpark, formerly known for its hot dogs but is now harvesting python meat, is rushing to cash in on this new industry, and the OneHealth/USDA certification program.

Culling The Herd – Regulatory Intervention in the Marketplace 

Meanwhile, the last vestiges of America’s food freedom and decentralized food sources are quietly being targeted by the full force of the federal government.

The once voluntary APHIS System is poised to become the mandatory APHIS-15, which among many other changes, “the system will be renamed Animal Health, Disease, and Pest Surveillance and Management System, USDA/APHIS-15. This system is used by APHIS to collect, manage, and evaluate animal health data for disease and pest control and surveillance programs.”

Among those “many changes” that APHIS-15 is undergoing, one should be of particular interest to the public—the removal of all references to the voluntary* Bovine Johne’s Disease Control Program.

“Updating the authority for maintenance of the system to remove reference to the Bovine Johne’s Disease Control Program.”

In addition to removing references to the once-voluntary herd culling program, the USDA is also implementing mandatory RFID ear tags in cattle and bison.

According to the USDA/APHIS-15, expanded authority places disease tracing in their jurisdiction and the radio frequency ear tags are necessary for the “rapid and accurate recordkeeping for this volume of animals and movement,” which they say “is not achievable without electronic systems.”

The notice clearly spells out that RFID tags “may be read without restraint as the animal goes past an electronic reader.”

“Once the reader scans the tag, the electronically collected tag number can be rapidly and accurately transmitted from the reader to a connected electronic database.”

However, industry leaders and lawmakers alike have said the database will be used to track vaccination history and movement, and that this data may be used to impact the market rate of cattle and bison at the time of processing.

Centralized Control of Processing/Production via Public-Private Partnership Agreements

In addition to the vast new authority of the USDA funded through the OneHealth Initiative, and the ARP, the EPA has also created its own unique set of regulatory burdens upon the entire meat industry.

On March 25, 2024, the EPA finalized a new set of Clean Water Act rule changes to limit nitrogen and phosphorus “pollutants” in downstream water treatment facilities from processing facilities. While the EPA’s interpretation of authority and jurisdiction over wastewater is concerning long-term, the broader context of consolidated processing under four multinational meat-packing companies is of much greater concern for the immediate future.

With few exceptions, in the United States it is illegal to sell meat without a USDA certification. Currently, the only way to access USDA certification is through a USDA-certified processing facility.

According to the EPA, the new rules will impact up to 845 processing facilities nationwide, unless facilities drastically limit the amount of meat they process each year.

With processing capabilities being the number one barrier to market for livestock producers, and billions of dollars in grants being awarded to Climate-Smart food substitutes, the amount of government intervention into the marketplace becomes very clear.

The Rise of Authoritarianism and Economic Fascism – Control the Supply

The United States, once a consumer-demand free market society, is currently witnessing the use of government force, and intervention tactics to steer and manipulate the marketplace. Similar to 1930’s Italy, this is being achieved by the state within the state, through the use of selectionism, protectionism, and economic planning between public-private partnership agreements.

The long-term and unavoidable problem with economic fascism is that it leads to authoritarian and centralized control, from which escape is impossible.

As each industry becomes centralized and consolidated under the few, consumer choice simultaneously disappears. As choice disappears, so does the ability of the individual to meet their specific and unique needs.

Eventually, the individual no longer serves a role outside of its usefulness to the state—the final exhale before the last python squeeze.

 

Connect with Brownstone Institute

Cover image credit: susan-lu4esm




Raw Milk at the Crossroads… Again

Raw Milk at the Crossroads… Again

by Sally Fallon Morell, Nourishing Traditions (Weston A, Price Foundation)
April 23, 2024

 

Few of us were born when the forces for milk pasteurization launched the first major attack on Nature’s perfect food. In 1945, a magazine called Coronet published an article, “Raw Milk Can Kill You,” blaming raw milk for an outbreak of brucellosis in a town called Crossroads, U.S.A., killing one-third of the inhabitants. The Reader’s Digest picked up the story and ran it a year later.

Just one problem with this piece of “reporting.”  There was no town called Crossroads and no outbreak of brucellosis.  The whole story was a fabrication—otherwise known as a lie.  And lies about raw milk have continued ever since.

Unfortunately, the fictitious Crossroads story paved the way for laws against selling raw milk, starting with Michigan in 1948.

Here’s another example of lies against raw milk (which I referenced in an earlier post,[i] but it is worth repeating). In 2007, John F. Sheehan, BSc (Dy), JD, US Food & Drug Administration, Center for Food Safety & Applied Nutrition (USFDA/CFSAN), Division of Dairy and Egg Safety, prepared a Powerpoint maligning raw milk; it was presented to the 2005 National Conference on Interstate Milk Shipments (NCIMS) by Cindy Leonard, MS.[ii]

As shown in the table below, all of the fifteen reports associating outbreaks of foodborne illness with raw milk that Sheehan cites are seriously flawed. For example, in two of the fifteen, the study authors presented no evidence that anyone consumed raw milk products and in one of them, the outbreak did not even exist. Not one of the studies showed that pasteurization would have prevented the outbreak.

No Valid Positive Milk Sample 12/15 80%
No Valid Statistical Association with Raw Milk 10/15 67%
Findings Misrepresented by FDA 7/15 47%
Alternatives Discovered, Not Pursued 5/15 33%
No Evidence Anyone Consumed Raw Milk Products 2/15 13%
Outbreak Did Not Even Exist 1/15 13%
Did Not Show that Pasteurization Would Have Prevented Outbreak 15/15 100%

Fast forward to the present and the ruckus about bird flu in dairy cows—more lies, very clever lies, but lies nevertheless.

In a press release dated March 25, 2024 ,[iii] the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), as well as state veterinary and public health officials, announced investigation of “an illness among primarily older dairy cows in Texas, Kansas, and New Mexico that is causing decreased lactation, low appetite, and other symptoms.”

The agencies claim that samples of unpasteurized milk from sick cattle in Kansas and Texas have tested positive for “highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI).” Officials blame the outbreak on contact with “wild migratory birds” and possibly from transmission between cattle. The press release specifically warns against consumption of raw milk, a warning repeated in numerous publications and Internet postings.

According to the press release, national laboratories have confirmed the presence of HPAI (Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza) through testing, but it does not reveal the type of test used to detect this so-called viral illness.

THE FIRST LIE:   Researchers have found HPAI virus in the milk of sick cows.

Officials have NOT found any viruses in the milk or any other secretions of the sick cows. The CDC has yet to reply to repeated requests for proof of finding the isolated HPAI virus in any fluid of any sick chicken or other animal.[iv] Nor have health and agriculture agencies in Canada,[v] Japan[vi], the UK[vii] and Europe[viii] provided any proof of an isolated avian influenza virus.

As for all the studies you can find in a PubMed search claiming “isolation” of a virus, not one of them shows the true isolation of a virus, any virus, from the fluids (phlegm, blood, urine, lung fluids, etc) of any animal, bird or human.[ix]

The truth is that “viruses” serve as the whipping boy for environmental toxins, and in the confinement animal system, there are lots of them–hydrogen sulfide, carbon dioxide, methane and ammonia from excrement, for example.[x]  Then there are toxins in the feed, such as arsenic added to chicken feed, and mycotoxins, tropane and β-carboline alkaloids in soybean meal.[xi] By blaming nonexistent viruses, agriculture officials can avoid stepping on any big industry toes nor add to the increasing public disgust with the confinement animal system.

Way back in 2006, researchers Crowe and Englebrecht published an article entitled, “Avian flu virus H5N1: No proof for existence, pathogenicity, or pandemic potential; non-‘H5N1’z causation omitted.”[xii]Nothing has changed since then.

Here’s your homework assignment:  Contact USDA at Aphispress@usda.gov and ask them to provide proof of the isolation of the HPAI virus or any virus in the milk of the sick cattle.

SECOND LIE: National laboratories have confirmed the presence of HPAI (Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza) through testing.

They don’t say anything about the kind of test they used, but it almost certainly the PCR (polymerase chain reaction) test. The PCR test detects genetic material from a pathogen or abnormal cell sample and allows researchers to make many copies of a small section of DNA or RNA. The test was not designed to determine or diagnose disease, it was designed to amplify or increase a certain piece of genetic material.

Each “amplification” is a doubling of the material.  If you amplify thirty times you will get a negative; amplify 36 times or more, and you will get a positive.  At 60 amplifications, everyone will “test positive” for whatever bit of genetic material you believe can cause disease.[xiii] If you want to show that you have a pandemic brewing, just amplify, amplify, amplify. Folks, this is not a valid test, not good science by any stretch of the imagination—especially as there was no virus to begin with.

How many times did our health officials amplify the samples they obtained from the milk of the sick cows?  Be sure to ask them when you email Aphispress@usda.gov for proof of the virus.

THIRD LIE: The “virus” is highly pathogenic.

According to the Wall Street Journal, one—just one–person working in the dairies got sick and tested positive for avian influenza after exposure to dairy cattle presumed to be infected with the H5N1 bird flu.[xiv]  The person reported eye redness, or conjunctivitis, as his only symptom—a symptom that can be explained by exposure to any of the many airborne toxins in confinement dairies.  (How are they treating the illness? With vitamin A and herbal eyedrops?  No, the poor sod is getting treatment with a toxic antiviral drug.)

According to the CDC, the disease in humans ranges from mild infections, which include upper-respiratory and eye-related symptoms, to severe pneumonia.  If the “virus” is so highly pathogenic, we’d expect a lot of workers working around these sick cows to end up in the hospital. . . but we’ve heard of none so far.

FOURTH LIE: You can get avian fly from drinking raw milk, but pasteurized milk is safe

According to medical biologist Peg Coleman,[xv] “Recent risk communications from CDC, FDA, and USDA regarding transmission of highly pathogenic avian influenza virus or HPAI (subtype H5N1) to humans via raw milk include no supporting evidence of viral transmission from raw milk to humans in the peer-reviewed literature. . . An extensive body of scientific evidence from the peer-reviewed literature . . . does not support the assumption by these US government agencies that [non-existent] HPAI transmits to humans via milkborne or foodborne routes and causes disease. Nor does the scientific evidence support the recommendation that consumers should avoid raw milk and raw milk products [emphasis in the original].”[xvi]

Coleman notes the suite of bioactive components in raw milk, including bovine milk, that destroy pathogens and strengthen the gut wall. “Many of these bioactive components of raw milk are . . . sensitive to heat and may be absent, inactive, or present in lower concentrations in pasteurized milks. . . Cross-disciplinary evidence demonstrates that raw milk from healthy cows is not inherently dangerous, consistent with the CDC evidence of trends for 2005-2020 and evidence of benefits and risks. There is no scientific evidence that HPAI in raw milk causes human disease.”

And while USDA, FDA and CDC assure the public that pasteurization will make milk safe, they note that “Milk from infected animals is being diverted or destroyed,” implying that pasteurization alone does not guarantee safety. In any event, sales of industrial pasteurized milk continue their relentless decline.

Fortunately, raw milk drinkers are already skeptical of government pronouncements and are skilled at seeing through lies.  Both large and small raw milk dairy farms report that sales are booming. The current bird flu fracas is just another Crossroads, U.S.A., a bunch of lies fostered by a dishonest dairy industry taking aim at the competition.

The Weston A. Price Foundation administers A Campaign for Real Milk and is the number one advocate for returning to the types of foods that nourished our ancestors.  Consider becoming a member to support this work.



[i] https://nourishingtraditions.com/got-raw-milk-ucla-professor-of-medicine-says-no-thanks/

[ii] https://www.realmilk.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/SheehanPowerPointResponse-UpdatedAug2010.pdf

[iii] https://www.aphis.usda.gov/news/agency-announcements/federal-state-veterinary-public-health-agencies-share-update-hpai/

[iv] https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/CDC-avian-influenza-PACKAGE-redacted.pdf

[v] https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/Canadian-Food-Inspection-Agency-PACKAGE-redacted.pdf

[vi] https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Japan-National-Institute-of-Infectious-Diseases-avian-influenza-virus-PACKAGE.pdf

[vii] https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/UK-Animal-and-Plant-Health-Agency-H5N1-PACKAGE.pdf

[viii] https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/ECDC-H5N1-avain-influenza-PACKAGE-redacted.pdf

[ix] https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/2023-05-11-excel-Papers-NCFAD_and_ADRI-Lehtbridge-ATIP_request.xlsx

[x] https://healthfully.com/effects-breathing-raw-sewage-8372308.html

[xi] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0963996922005488

[xii] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7173052/

[xiii] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F5Htd9CzPYY

[xiv] https://www.wsj.com/health/healthcare/bird-flu-human-infection-texas-cattle-885b00be

[xv] https://www.colemanscientific.org/about

[xvi] https://www.colemanscientific.org/blog/2024/4/7/where-is-the-evidence

 

Connect with Sally Fallon Morell

Cover image credit: uvlik05




FDA Modernization Act 2.0 & The Avatar

FDA Modernization Act 2.0 & The Avatar

by Rosanne Lindsay, Traditional Naturopath, Nature of Healing
April 18, 2024

 

In the Covidian Era, science has moved on to a digital upgrade of itself called Scientism, the religion of science, where science is god, and part of a new global Technocracy.

“Technocracy is the science of social engineering,” says Patrick Wood, author of Technocracy Rising.

Social engineering used to mean molding the minds of people to conform to new norms. This goes back to 1928, Ed Bernays, and his book Propaganda.  However, in a Technocracy, not only minds, but bodies, too, can be molded. If you did not get the memo, Technocracy has brought humanity from Human to Posthuman and Transhuman.

In the 2022 Journal Global Trends, Russian scientists describe the difference between Posthuman and Transhuman:

The fundamental idea of posthumanism is the rejection of biological, ethical, and ontological anthropocentrism. Transhumanism focuses on changing and improving natural human characteristics through biological, technological, and cognitive modifications…Transhumanism has the potential to preserve man as an effective economic and cognizing agent.

In other words, man as an “economic agent” refers to the cybernetic human as a commodity in a modern world. This means the laws of the nations need to change to catch up.

The U.S. FDA is meeting that goal for change with its FDA Modernization Act 2.0.  What is the FDA Modernization Act 2.0?

The new law amends the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act by authorizing sponsors of novel drugs to make use of “certain alternatives to animal testing, including cell-based assays and computer models, to obtain an exemption from the Food and Drug Administration to investigate the safety and effectiveness of a drug.

It is the FDA giving itself permission to transition from testing animal models to directly testing humans.

In the 2023 Journal of Clinical Investigation, authors cite a long list of excuses to change research models:

  1. cost
  2. low approval rates in clinical trials
  3. lack of efficacy in trail outcomes
  4. high rate of failure in therapeutics
  5. species differences between animals and humans

After decades of extrapolating animal studies to humans, suddenly animals are no longer scientifically valid. Does this transition make obsolete more than a century of animal-based research? In one sense, such a transition is long-awaited and frees innocent animals from needless torture. In another sense, it moves the mark to a new target.

Scientists now claim humans are diverse, and therefore require different models.  They propose, “human cell-based models that more accurately reflect the diversity of human genetics may guide the development of treatments that are more reliable and successful in real-world applications.”

In Scientism, humans are considered commodities.  Some Transhumanists propose transferring consciousness to a machine to create a brain-machine interface. The Russian Posthuman authors propose that consciousness may be a feature exclusive to humans. They appear not to know for sure. They state:

Accordingly, it is still possible that there is a fundamental difference between man and other objects of the world.

The new strategy is one of large-scale experiments using pooled cell lines or “cell villages” and bar codes, i.e., human commodities will receive a digital ID. With human-like neural computing, soon humanoid robots will replace humans in the workplace.  The United Nations calls this Biodigital Convergence as part of its Sustainable Goals for Smart™ cities by 2030. CeNSE is the Central Nervous System for the Earth. Networks within networks.

Personalized Medicine & Precision Public Health

Digital IDs reflect a digital avatar in Precision Healthcare. “Precision Healthcare” refers to a remote medical model of healthcare. According to a 2021 study in the Journal of Personalized Medicine:

A digital twin is a virtual model of a physical entity, with dynamic, bi-directional links between the physical entity and its corresponding twin in the digital domain.

In March 2024, Dept. of Defense (DoD) officials testified on its own priorities before the House Armed Services Subcommittee. The digital ID is a natural progression from the trend toward non-binary humans who do not identify with a specific gender.  This makes the transition, from human to digital Posthuman, effortless. All humans with a digital ID belong to an A.I., industrial (not biological) system—Transhumanism.

The rapid development of technology—in particular, artificial intelligence—accelerates the processes of industrial automation. This, in turn, raises the question of the role of man in the economy of the future: if artificial systems can more effectively perform the functions of man, then what place will man, as a potentially inefficient economic agent, take in the economy?

Studying humans in large-scale experiments has already happened. The deployment of COVID EUA medical countermeasures (MCMs), sometimes referred to as vaccines, was tested during the COVID pandemic. However, unlike vaccines, which are FDA-approved, MCMs are not. According to the CDC, MCMs include: biological products, drugs, and devices.

Be aware that MCMs are already recognized in many Federal Acts, including the 21st Century Cures Act, the Medical Countermeasures Surge Capacity Act of 2022, The Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act (PREP Act)The Prioritizing Medical Countermeasures for National Security Act of 2023.

Testing humans in Real Time, as a digital Avatar, puts the Tele in Telehealth. It is a strategy of “emergent technology,” even though emergent technology, such as TeleMedicine, is already 10 years old.  Further, this technology prevents the need for long-term genotoxicological and carcino-toxicological vaccine studies. Any adverse events (AEs) can be released later. Or not.

For example, post-COVID, drugmaker Pfizer was court-ordered to release safety data for its BioNTech EUA ‘vaccine.’ In its first data dump of February 2021, 1300 adverse events were listed among 42,000 serious case reports. With results such as these, the dial from health to disease is turned up, as disease becomes the new normal.

Without defining, ‘modernization 2.o,’ in human terms, science and government have paved the way for a new religion in a Posthuman synthetic, digital world. To maintain the inner human is to be aware of Technocracy, and turn toward the Natural world, and the heart center.

Related articles:

 

Connect with Rosanne Lindsay, Traditional Naturopath

Cover image credit: patrypguerreiro




Prescription Drugs Are the Leading Cause of Death

Prescription Drugs Are the Leading Cause of Death
 And psychiatric drugs are the third leading cause of death

by Peter C. Gøtzsche, Brownstone Institute
April 16, 2024

 

Overtreatment with drugs kills many people, and the death rate is increasing. It is therefore strange that we have allowed this long-lasting drug pandemic to continue, and even more so because most of the drug deaths are easily preventable.

In 2013, I estimated that our prescription drugs are the third leading cause of death after heart disease and cancer,1 and in 2015, that psychiatric drugs alone are also the third leading cause of death.2 However, in the US, it is commonly stated that our drugs are “only” the fourth leading cause of death.3,4 This estimate was derived from a 1998 meta-analysis of 39 US studies where monitors recorded all adverse drug reactions that occurred while the patients were in hospital, or which were the reason for hospital admission.5

This methodology clearly underestimates drug deaths. Most people who are killed by their drugs die outside hospitals, and the time people spent in hospitals was only 11 days on average in the meta-analysis.5 Moreover, the meta-analysis only included patients who died from drugs that were properly prescribed, not those who died as a result of errors in drug administration, noncompliance, overdose, or drug abuse, and not deaths where the adverse drug reaction was only possible.5

Many people die because of errors, e.g. simultaneous use of contraindicated drugs, and many possible drug deaths are real. Moreover, most of the included studies are very old, the median publication year being 1973, and drug deaths have increased dramatically over the last 50 years. As an example, 37,309 drug deaths were reported to the FDA in 2006 and 123,927 ten years later, which is 3.3 times as many.6

In hospital records and coroners’ reports, deaths linked to prescription drugs are often considered to be from natural or unknown causes. This misconception is particularly common for deaths caused by psychiatric drugs.2,7 Even when young patients with schizophrenia suddenly drop dead, it is called a natural death. But it is not natural to die young and it is well known that neuroleptics can cause lethal heart arrhythmias.

Many people die from the drugs they take without raising any suspicion that it could be an adverse drug effect. Depression drugs kill many people, mainly among the elderly, because they can cause orthostatic hypotension, sedation, confusion, and dizziness. The drugs double the risk of falls and hip fractures in a dose-dependent manner,8,9 and within one year after a hip fracture, about one-fifth of the patients will have died. As elderly people often fall anyway, it is not possible to know if such deaths are drug deaths.

Another example of unrecognised drug deaths is provided by non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). They have killed hundreds of thousands of people,1 mainly through heart attacks and bleeding stomach ulcers, but these deaths are unlikely to be coded as adverse drug reactions, as such deaths also occur in patients who do not take the drugs.

The 1998 US meta-analysis estimated that 106,000 patients die every year in hospital because of adverse drug effects (a 0.32% death rate).5 A carefully done Norwegian study examined 732 deaths that occurred in a two-year period ending in 1995 at a department of internal medicine, and it found that there were 9.5 drug deaths per 1,000 patients (a 1% death rate).10 This is a much more reliable estimate, as drug deaths have increased markedly. If we apply this estimate to the US, we get 315,000 annual drug deaths in hospitals. A review of four newer studies, from 2008 to 2011, estimated that there were over 400,000 drug deaths in US hospitals.11

Drug usage is now so common that newborns in 2019 could be expected to take prescription drugs for roughly half their lives in the US.12 Moreover, polypharmacy has been increasing.12

How Many People Are Killed by Psychiatric Drugs?

If we want to estimate the death toll of psychiatric drugs, the most reliable evidence we have are the placebo-controlled randomised trials. But we need to consider their limitations.

First, they usually run for only a few weeks even though most patients take the drugs for many years.13,14

Second, polypharmacy is common in psychiatry, and this increases the risk of dying. As an example, the Danish Board of Health has warned that adding a benzodiazepine to a neuroleptic increases mortality by 50-65%.15 

Third, half of all deaths are missing in published trial reports.16 For dementia, published data show that for every 100 people treated with a newer neuroleptic for ten weeks, one patient is killed.17 This is an extremely high death rate for a drug, but FDA data on the same trials show it is twice as high, namely two patients killed per 100 after ten weeks.18 And if we extend the observation period, the death toll becomes even higher. A Finnish study of 70,718 community-dwellers newly diagnosed with Alzheimer’s disease reported that neuroleptics kill 4-5 people per 100 annually compared to patients who were not treated.19

Fourth, the design of psychiatric drug trials is biased. In almost all cases, patients were already in treatment before they entered the trial,2,7 and some of those randomised to placebo will therefore experience withdrawal effects that will increase their risk of dying, e.g. because of akathisia. It is not possible to use the placebo-controlled trials in schizophrenia to estimate the effect of neuroleptics on mortality because of the drug withdrawal design. The suicide rate in these unethical trials was 2-5 times higher than the norm.20,21 One in every 145 patients who entered the trials of risperidone, olanzapine, quetiapine, and sertindole died, but none of these deaths were mentioned in the scientific literature, and the FDA didn’t
require them to be mentioned.

Fifth, events after the trial is stopped are ignored. In Pfizer’s trials of sertraline in adults, the risk ratio for suicides and suicide attempts was 0.52 when the follow-up was only 24 hours, but 1.47 when the follow-up was 30 days, i.e. an increase in suicidal events.22 And when researchers reanalysed the FDA trial data on depression drugs and included harms occurring during followup, they found that the drugs double the number of suicides in adults compared to placebo.23,24

In 2013, I estimated that, in people aged 65 and above, neuroleptics, benzodiazepines, or similar, and depression drugs kill 209,000 people annually in the United States.2 I used rather conservative estimates, however, and usage data from Denmark, which are far lower than those in the US. I have therefore updated the analysis based on US usage data, again focusing on older age groups.

For neuroleptics, I used the estimate of 2% mortality from the FDA data.18

For benzodiazepines and similar drugs, a matched cohort study showed that the drugs doubled the death rate, although the average age of the patients was only 55.25 The excess death rate was about 1% per year. In another large, matched cohort study, the appendix to the study report shows that hypnotics quadrupled the death rate (hazard ratio 4.5).26 These authors estimated that sleeping pills kill between 320,000 and 507,000 Americans every year.26 A reasonable estimate of the annual death rate would therefore be 2%.

For SSRIs, a UK cohort study of 60,746 depressed patients older than 65 showed that they led to falls and that the drugs kill 3.6% of patients treated for one year.27 The study was done very well, e.g. the patients were their own control in one of the analyses, which is a good way to remove the effect of confounders. But the death rate is surprisingly high.

Another cohort study, of 136,293 American postmenopausal women (age 50-79) participating in the Women’s Health Initiative study, found that depression drugs were associated with a 32% increase in all-cause mortality after adjustment for confounding factors, which corresponded to 0.5% of women killed by SSRIs when treated for one year.28 The death rate was very likely underestimated. The authors warned that their results should be interpreted with great caution, as the way exposure to antidepressant drugs was ascertained carried a high risk of misclassification, which would make it more difficult to find an increase in mortality. Further, the patients were much younger than in the UK study, and the death rate increased markedly with age and was 1.4% for those aged 70-79. Finally, the exposed and unexposed women were different for many important risk factors for early death, whereas the people in the UK cohort were their own control.

For these reasons, I decided to use the average of the two estimates, a 2% annual death rate.

These are my results for the US for these three drug groups for people at least 65 years of age (58.2 million; usage is in outpatients only):29-32

A limitation in these estimates is that you can only die once, and many people receive polypharmacy. It is not clear how we should adjust for this. In the UK cohort study of depressed patients, 9% also took neuroleptics, and 24% took hypnotics/anxiolytics.27

On the other hand, the data on death rates come from studies where many patients were also on several psychiatric drugs in the comparison group, so this is not likely to be a major limitation considering also that polypharmacy increases mortality beyond what the individual drugs cause.

Statistics from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention list these four top causes of death:33

Heart disease: 695,547

Cancer: 605,213

Covid-19: 416,893

Accidents: 224,935

Covid-19 deaths are rapidly declining, and many such deaths are not caused by the virus but merely occurred in people who tested positive for it because the WHO advised that all deaths in people who tested positive should be called Covid deaths.

Young people have a much smaller death risk than the elderly, as they rarely fall and break their hip, which is why I have focused on the elderly. I have tried to be conservative. My estimate misses many drug deaths in those younger than 65 years; it only included three classes of psychiatric drugs; and it did not include hospital deaths.

I therefore do not doubt that psychiatric drugs are the third leading cause of death after heart disease and cancer.

Other Drug Groups and Hospital Deaths

Analgesics are also major killers. In the US, about 70,000 people were killed in 2021 by an overdose of a synthetic opioid.34

The usage of NSAIDs is also high. In the US, 26% of adults use them regularly, 16% of which get them without a prescription35 (mostly ibuprofen and diclofenac).36

As there seems to be no major differences between the drugs in their capacity to cause thromboses,37 we may use data for rofecoxib. Merck and Pfizer underreported thrombotic events in their trials of rofecoxib and celecoxib, respectively, to such an extent that it constituted fraud,1 but in one trial, of colorectal adenomas, Merck assessed thrombotic events. There were 1.5 more cases of myocardial infarction, sudden cardiac death or stroke on rofecoxib than on placebo per 100 patients treated.38 About 10% of the thromboses are fatal, but heart attacks are rare in young people. Restricting the analysis to those aged at least 65, we get 87,300 annual deaths.

It has been estimated that 3,700 deaths occur each year in the UK due to peptic ulcer complications in NSAID users,39 corresponding to about 20,000 deaths each year in the US. Thus, the total estimate of NSAID deaths is about 107,000.

If we add the estimates above, 315,000 hospital deaths, 390,000 psychiatric drug deaths, 70,000 synthetic opioid deaths, and 107,000 NSAID deaths, we get 882,000 drug deaths in the United States annually.

Many commonly used drugs other than those mentioned above can cause dizziness and falls, e.g. anticholinergic drugs against urinary incontinence and dementia drugs, which are used by 1% and 0.5% of the Danish population, respectively, even though they do not have any clinically relevant effects.1,2

It is difficult to know what the exact death toll of our drugs is, but there can be no doubt that they are the leading cause of death. And the death toll would be much higher if we included people below 65 years of age. Moreover, from the official number of deaths from heart disease, we would need to subtract those caused by NSAIDs, and from accidents, deaths by falls caused by psychiatric drugs and many other drugs.

If such a hugely lethal pandemic had been caused by a microorganism, we would have done everything we could to get it under control. The tragedy is that we could easily get our drug pandemic under control, but when our politicians act, they usually make matters worse. They have been so heavily lobbied by the drug industry that drug regulation has become much more permissive than it was in the past.40

Most of the drug deaths are preventable,41 above all because most of the patients who died didn’t need the drug that killed them. In placebo-controlled trials, the effect of neuroleptics and depression drugs has been considerably below the least clinically relevant effect, also for very severe depression.2,7 And, despite their name, non-steroidal, anti-inflammatory drugs, NSAIDs do not have anti-inflammatory effects,1,42 and systematic reviews have shown that their analgesic effect is similar to that of paracetamol (acetaminophen). Yet, most patients with pain are recommended to take both paracetamol and an NSAID over the counter. This will not increase the effect, only the risk of dying.

Most tragically, leading psychiatrists all over the world do not realise how ineffective and dangerous their drugs are. A US psychiatrist, Roy Perlis, professor at Harvard, argued in April 2024 that depression pills should be sold over the counter because they are “safe and effective.”43 They are highly unsafe and ineffective. Perlis also claimed that depression drugs do not increase the risk of suicide in people older than 25, which is also wrong. They double suicides in adults.23,24

Perlis wrote, “Some still question the biological basis of this disorder, despite the identification of more than 100 genes that increase depression risk and neuroimaging studies showing differences in the brains of people with depression.” Both of these claims are plain wrong. Genetic association studies have come up empty-handed and so have brain imaging studies, which are generally highly flawed.44 People are depressed because they live depressing lives, not because of some brain disorder.

References

1 Gøtzsche PC. Deadly Medicines and Organised Crime: How Big Pharma Has Corrupted Health Care. London: Radcliffe Publishing; 2013.

2 Gøtzsche PC. Deadly Psychiatry and Organised Denial. Copenhagen: People’s Press; 2015.

3 Schroeder MO. Death by Prescription: By one estimate, taking prescribed medications is the fourth leading cause of death among AmericansUS News 2016; Sept 27.

4 Light DW, Lexchin J, Darrow JJ. Institutional corruption of pharmaceuticals and the myth of safe and effective drugs. J Law Med Ethics 2013;41:590-600.

5 Lazarou J, Pomeranz BH, Corey PN. Incidence of adverse drug reactions in hospitalized patients: a meta-analysis of prospective studies. JAMA 1998;279:1200–5.

FAERS Reporting by Patient Outcomes by Year. FDA 2015;Nov 10.

7 Gøtzsche PC. Mental Health Survival Kit and Withdrawal From Psychiatric Drugs. Ann Arbor: L H Press; 2022.

8 Hubbard R, Farrington P, Smith C, et al. Exposure to tricyclic and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor antidepressants and the risk of hip fracture. Am J Epidemiol 2003;158:77-84.

9 Thapa PB, Gideon P, Cost TW, et al. Antidepressants and the risk of falls among nursing home residents. N Engl J Med 1998;339:875-82.

10 Ebbesen J, Buajordet I, Erikssen J, et al. Drug-related deaths in a department of internal medicine. Arch Intern Med 2001;161:2317–23.

11 James JTA. A new, evidence-based estimate of patient harms associated with hospital care. J Patient Saf 2013;9:122-8.

12 Ho JY. Life Course Patterns of Prescription Drug Use in the United States. Demography 2023;60:1549-79.

13 Gøtzsche PC. Long-term use of antipsychotics and antidepressants is not evidence-based. Int J Risk Saf Med 2020;31:37-42.

14 Gøtzsche PC. Long-Term Use of Benzodiazepines, Stimulants and Lithium is Not Evidence-Based. Clin Neuropsychiatry 2020;17:281-3.

15 Forbruget af antipsykotika blandt 18-64 årige patienter, med skizofreni, mani eller bipolar affektiv sindslidelse. København: Sundhedsstyrelsen; 2006.

16 Hughes S, Cohen D, Jaggi R. Differences in reporting serious adverse events in industry sponsored clinical trial registries and journal articles on antidepressant and antipsychotic drugs: a cross-sectional study. BMJ Open 2014;4:e005535.

17 Schneider LS, Dagerman KS, Insel P. Risk of death with atypical antipsychotic drug treatment for dementia: meta-analysis of randomized placebo-controlled trials. JAMA 2005;294:1934–43.

18 FDA package insert for Risperdal (risperidone). Accessed 30 May 2022.

19 Koponen M, Taipale H, Lavikainen P, et al. Risk of Mortality Associated with Antipsychotic Monotherapy and Polypharmacy Among Community-Dwelling Persons with Alzheimer’s Disease. J Alzheimers Dis 2017;56:107-18.

20 Whitaker R. Lure of Riches Fuels Testing. Boston Globe 1998; Nov 17.

21 Whitaker R. Mad in America: Bad science, Bad medicine, and the Enduring Mistreatment of the Mentally Ill. Cambridge: Perseus Books Group; 2002:page 269.

22 Vanderburg DG, Batzar E, Fogel I, et al. A pooled analysis of suicidality in double-blind, placebo-controlled studies of sertraline in adults. J Clin Psychiatry 2009;70:674-83.

23 Hengartner MP, Plöderl M. Newer-Generation Antidepressants and Suicide Risk in Randomized Controlled Trials: a Re-Analysis of the FDA Database. Psychother Psychosom 2019;88:247-8.

24 Hengartner MP, Plöderl M. Reply to the Letter to the Editor: “Newer-Generation Antidepressants and Suicide Risk: Thoughts on Hengartner and Plöderl’s ReAnalysis.” Psychother Psychosom 2019;88:373-4.

25 Weich S, Pearce HL, Croft P, et al. Effect of anxiolytic and hypnotic drug prescriptions on mortality hazards: retrospective cohort study. BMJ 2014;348:g1996.

26 Kripke DF, Langer RD, Kline LE. Hypnotics’ association with mortality or cancer: a matched cohort study. BMJ Open 2012;2:e000850.

27 Coupland C, Dhiman P, Morriss R, et al. Antidepressant use and risk of adverse outcomes in older people: population based cohort study. BMJ 2011;343:d4551.

28 Smoller JW, Allison M, Cochrane BB, et al. Antidepressant use and risk of incident cardiovascular morbidity and mortality among postmenopausal women in the Women’s Health Initiative study. Arch Intern Med 2009;169:2128-39.

29 O’Neill A. Age distribution in the United States from 2012 to 2022. Statista 2024;Jan 25.

30 Olfson M, King M, Schoenbaum M. Antipsychotic Treatment of Adults in the United States. Psychiatrist.com 2015;Oct 21.

31 Maust DT, Lin LA, Blow FC. Benzodiazepine Use and Misuse Among Adults in the United StatesPsychiatr Serv 2019;70:97-106.

32 Brody DJ, Gu Q. Antidepressant Use Among Adults: United States, 2015-2018. CDC 2020; Sept.

33 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Leading Causes of Death. 2024; Jan 17.

34 Drug Overdose Deaths. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 2023; Aug 22.

35 Davis JS, Lee HY, Kim J, et al. Use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in US adults: changes over time and by demographic. Open Heart 2017;4:e000550.

36 Conaghan PG. A turbulent decade for NSAIDs: update on current concepts of classification, epidemiology, comparative efficacy, and toxicityRheumatol Int 2012;32:1491-502.

37 Bally M, Dendukuri N, Rich B, et al. Risk of acute myocardial infarction with NSAIDs in real world use: bayesian meta-analysis of individual patient dataBMJ 2017;357:j1909.

38 Bresalier RS, Sandler RS, Quan H, et al. Cardiovascular Events Associated with Rofecoxib in a Colorectal Adenoma Chemoprevention Trial. N Engl J Med 2005;352:1092-102.

39 Blower AL, Brooks A, Fenn GC, et al. Emergency admissions for upper gastrointestinal disease and their relation to NSAID use. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 1997;11:283–91.

40 Davis C, Lexchin J, Jefferson T, Gøtzsche P, McKee M. “Adaptive pathways” to drug authorisation: adapting to industry? BMJ 2016;354:i4437.

41 van der Hooft CS, Sturkenboom MC, van Grootheest K, et al. Adverse drug reaction-related hospitalisations: a nationwide study in The Netherlands. Drug Saf 2006;29:161-8.

42 Gøtzsche PC. Big marketing hoax: Non-steroidal, anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are not anti-inflammatory. Copenhagen: Institute for Scientific Freedom 2022;Nov 10.

43 Perlis R. The time has come for over-the-counter antidepressants. Stat News 2024;April 8.

44 Gøtzsche PC. Critical Psychiatry Textbook. Copenhagen: Institute for Scientific Freedom; 2022. Freely available.


Dr. Peter Gøtzsche co-founded the Cochrane Collaboration, once considered the world’s preeminent independent medical research organization. In 2010 Gøtzsche was named Professor of Clinical Research Design and Analysis at the University of Copenhagen. Gøtzsche has published more than 97 papers in the “big five” medical journals (JAMA, Lancet, New England Journal of Medicine, British Medical Journal, and Annals of Internal Medicine). Gøtzsche has also authored books on medical issues including Deadly Medicines and Organized Crime. Following many years of being an outspoken critic of the corruption of science by pharmaceutical companies, Gøtzsche’s membership on the governing board of Cochrane was terminated by its Board of Trustees in September, 2018. Four board resigned in protest.

 

Connect with Brownstone Institute

Cover image credit: DawidC




Bio-imperialism vs. Bio-diversity

Bio-imperialism vs. Bio-diversity

by Navdanya International
April 15, 2024

 

Global Context: Seeds and GMOs 

Seeds are emblematic of the connections between our lives, our food, our health and our freedom. They are the first link in the food chain. They embody our heritage and enfold the future evolution of life. The cultivation of seeds and their free exchange among farmers is the core foundation of our biodiversity and our food security. To have control over seeds is to have control over our lives, our food and our freedom.

Bio-imperialism severely threatens this freedom today through intellectual property rights. Old and  new GMO technologies that have transformed seeds from a commons shared by farmers, to a commodity under the control and monopoly of agribusiness corporations. This imperialism seeks to appropriate the world’s seeds, destroying the lives and livelihoods of peasant communities, as well as biodiversity, but more seriously, in territories recognized as centers of origin. These centers of origin of biodiversity are the cradles of the world’s food supply, and the protection against plague, climate challenges, natural disasters or other hindrances to food production.


Also read: Resisting GMO Imperialism – Events in Mexico – March 2024


Over the last few decades, GMO crops have been imposed in countries all over the world, advertised as a solution to food insecurity and the malnutrition crisis. However, hunger, disease and malnutrition have increased, while biodiversity has declined and toxins have spread. Corporations have forced the introduction of genetically manipulated seeds to impose Food Imperialism through various tools such as regulatory frameworks for intellectual property of seeds, such as UPOV 91, and other legal mechanisms like Trade Dispute Settlement Panels. GMO imperialism has destroyed the lives and livelihoods of small farmers and biodiversity around the world and especially in these centers of origin.

Most recently, agribusiness and biotech giants are attempting to bypass existing biosafety regulations, such as the Convention on Biological Diversity’s Cartagena and Nagoya Protocols by quietly making changes to GMO regulation around the world, in order to promote these new GMOs under new acronyms, such as NBTs (New Breeding Techniques), NGTs (New Genomic Techniques), or TEAs (Techniques of Assisted Evolution). These new GMOs have been silently dovetailing into different countries’ existing agricultural legislation, with the aim still being patent monopolies in the hands of the big chemical and biotechnology giants.

This deregulation would allow gene edited crops to:

  • Be commercialized with no environmental or consumption safety testing
  • Require no labeling
  • Have little to no traceability
  • Be free from public disclosure of gene edited organisms
  • Mass deregulation
  • Be patented without disclosure

These new GMOs are leaving farmers, and citizens completely in the dark as to what is in their food and are an attempt to subvert sovereign governments, the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity and biosafety laws, with their imposition. The biotech industry has claimed that their gene edited products, including seed, plants, microorganism, and animals, are to be considered the same as their conventional counterparts. This deregulation of old and new GMOs absolves the biotech industry from any responsibility and is a continued attack on food sovereignty.

Agribusiness companies have not solved any issue for humanity on the pretext of false narratives around GMOs solving problems of food supplies. The true basis of the world’s food supply is free seeds, the heritage of humanity that contain the answers to pests, climate challenges and other threats to the world’s production of healthy and sufficient food, not GMOs and Bio-Imperialism. GMOs cannot be forced upon communities, violating norms of democracy and freedom.

All over the world, citizens are rising against the unscientific, undemocratic, anti-ecological imposition of GMOs by corporations. The first generation of GMOs has failed, but corporations continue to impose gene-edited organisms, or new GMOs, in centers of diversity. They continue to shift their narrative towards framing nature and biodiversity as commodities for commercialization and patent monopolies.

Imposition of GM corn in Mexico has global ramifications

In Mexico, which is the center of origin of maize, just as in other centers of biodiversity, there has been a long struggle by society and organized communities against GMO imperialism threatening the subsistence and culture of  its peoples. To date, Mexican society has achieved a ban on the planting of GM maize in Mexico through a class action lawsuit filed against the companies like Bayer-Monsanto, Syngenta and Cortiva Agriscience. This ban is still in force, which since 2013 has prevented the planting of genetically manipulated maize in Mexican territories.

Mexican NGOs have bravely continued to resist genetically modified maize to strengthen access to healthy, sustainable and culturally appropriate food for all people; to defend the food sovereignty of peasant and indigenous communities, responsible for developing the 59 breeds and thousands of varieties of maize existing in Mexico, which are also part of the milpa, a holistic, sustainable and biodiverse system that involves other staple foods such as beans, chili peppers, squash, quelites and amaranth.

Recently, the Mexican government issued an executive order that proposes the gradual prohibition of the use of glyphosate and the use of GM maize in food products, such as tortillas, a staple food for Mexicans. GMOs compromise access to healthy, sustainable, culturally appropriate foods free of genetically modified organisms. Faced with this decision, the U.S. government, based on the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Free Trade Agreement (USMCA), and under the duress, of agribusiness lobby, installed a dispute settlement panel to reject the Mexican government’s decision to restrict the use of genetically manipulated (modified) maize in human food and the importation of glyphosate, citing lack of scientific evidence of their harm. This Dispute Settlement Panel neglects the risks to human health, the environment and biodiversity associated with genetically manipulated maize. In addition, it jeopardizes the food sovereignty of the entire Mexican population, since maize is an indispensable food.

In response to this omission, on March 15th, non-governmental organizations from Mexico presented their Technical Opinions before the Panel, arguments based on reliable scientific evidence, including new found evidence by Mexico’s scientific advisory board CONAHCYT, rooted in scientifically rigorous evidence from academic institutions. This evidence points out and warns about the multiple risks that make it pertinent and urgent to stop the presence of genetically manipulated maize in the food of the Mexican population, and as raw material for other industries.

In stark contrast, the US refused to do new experiments and engage in real science and continued to stick to pseudo-science funded by the same agribusinesses that produce this GM corn and make the unscientific claim that it is safe to consume this GM corn.

The case of Mexico is a people’s attempt to guard their biodiverse cultures, inheritance, food, health and fields. It is a case of a people demanding their sovereignty be respected. It is a statement to the world and to agribusiness that they cannot continue to impose their system that violates and destroys sovereignty at all these levels, and has wave after wave destroyed health, the land and biodiversity.

On March 5, 2024 Mexico published its formal response to the dispute where its submission presented evidence supporting the implementation of precautionary measures aimed at safeguarding consumers from potential health risks associated with imported GM corn from the U.S. and residues of glyphosate. They noted that the scientific data regarding the safety of GMOs presented by the U.S. was outdated, with a significant portion originating from industry-sponsored studies lacking peer-reviewed support. They pointed out that the regulatory process in the U.S. lacks sufficient stringency to guarantee the safety of products for consumption by Mexicans. Furthermore, the Mexican submission highlighted that Genetically modified (GM) corn, designed to eliminate insect pests, has strong potential to pose negative effects on non-target animals with research that has demonstrated that mammals can experience harm to their digestive systems due to a GM trait that targets the guts of pests, leading to unintended consequences.

While the US claimed that Mexico’s ban is “unscientific”, IATP Senior Advisor Timothy A. Wise highlighted that Mexico’s response “refutes that claim, presenting hundreds of academic studies that show cause for concern about human health and the threat to native corn diversity.”

Significantly, The US claim that Mexico’s ban is unscientific is completely unjustified as the US never signed onto the Convention on Biological Diversity and the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety. It has no biosafety regulatory organism to judge the safety of these GM foods.  It is based instead on “substantial equivalence” which is not enough to be considered as a safety assessment in itself. This principle doesn’t prioritize consumer protection from health risks nor does it provide consumers with comprehensive information regarding the actual level of risks and hazards associated with “novel foods” (in this case GMO foods) compared to traditional ones.

In its formal submission to the trade dispute panel, Canada aligned itself with the arguments presented by the US government, claiming the safety of genetically modified (GM) corn for consumption in Mexico. However, CBAN’s (Canadian Biotechnology Action Network)’s response refuted this stance by asserting that scientific evidence supported Mexico’s precautionary measures, particularly due to the extensive use of minimally processed corn in the daily diet of the majority of Mexicans.

Lucy Sharratt of the Canadian Biotechnology Action Network (CBAN), stated that, “Mexico is a sovereign nation with the right to determine the future of its food supply and its needs to take action to protect native corn from GM contamination.”

Globally, Mexico’s case is important due to the current context of the world. Due to the industrial food system, we are seeing the rise of chronic diseases rooted in metabolic disorders, increasing ecological disasters, lack of water and declining biodiversity. Mexico defending its cultural and food heritage is equivalent to a country taking a stand, backed by scientific evidence and government support, against the continuation of these multiple crises.

Furthermore, the significance of this case is that an unfavorable resolution for Mexico in this Panel, would limit Mexican people’s right to decide which seeds to plant and which types of maize to feed themselves with. This directly jeopardizes the traditional Mexican cuisine which is central to the cultural identity of the communities that practice and transmit it from generation to generation and has been recognised as Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity by UNESCO.

This in turn also has the potential to devastatingly affect all other centers of biodiversity and interconnected food cultures around the world who will continue to face such attacks on their sovereignty.

Mexico holds the legacy of being one of the first constitutions globally to incorporate enforceable social rights, encompassing health and a clean environment (Article 4). Thus, a right to health is a legally enforceable provision under its national constitution. This along with achieving universal health coverage (UHC) for its 100 million citizens makes Mexico a country that continues to stand up for biodiversity, for health, for the environment.

Convergence: Interconnected strength, interconnected resistance

In the face of this local and global Bio-imperialism, Navdanya International joined together with the campaign Sin Maiz No Hay País, and Via Orgánica, along with the Ministry of the Environment and Natural Resources (SEMARNAT), the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development (SADER) and the Ministry of Culture, along with other Latin American movements to organize events from March 12th to 16th in Mexico City to carve a common strategy against the further imposition of new and old GMOs around the world, sharing experiences, struggles and solidarity in defense of Biodiversity, Food and Seed Freedom, through strengthening the support and solidarity, in cultivating and connecting different organizations, movements and people.

These meetings and convergences helped create a gathering place for solidarity by bringing together representatives from movements from all over Latin America and beyond to demonstrate that this struggle goes beyond individual borders. All over the world the impostions continue to take place, directly violating the sovereignty and rights of people and nature, in favor of corporate agenda.

José Bernardo Magdaleno Velazco (Nino), President of the Peasant Union, Totikes, Chiapas emphasized that “we are not alone in this fight”. Together with activists and organizations such as the Campaña Nacional Sin Maíz No Hay País, Semillas de Vida, Vía Organica, Regeneration International, Bloque Verde, Probioma, Naturaleza De Derechos, and Semillas de Identidad- Colombia, Navdanya International joined the demand for governments around the world to stop genetically manipulated seeds, which threaten the survival of food and agricultural systems based on biological and cultural diversity.

These events carved a convergence of movements, to stand in defense of our biocultural diversity and food heritage across the world, in resistance to old  GMOs and new GMOs.

It is in this coming together of different movements and voices united in their goal of food and seed sovereignty that these events in Mexico led to the emergence of an interconnected strength and resistance. Where the nurturing of solidarity and a reminder of a common resistance despite varied contexts, echoed and re-iterated that together, we are all more than the sum of the parts. Building relationships and connections, across organizations, across movements and beyond countries is necessary for effectively resisting this GMO imperialism. This interconnected strength is what we have to tap into, to continue our struggle in defense of life, diversity and freedom.

Significance: Food sovereignty as a driving force for political sovereignty 

The current socio-political context of Mexico’s demand of autonomy based on being a center of diversity and cultural heritage is unique because food sovereignty is the driving force behind the political sovereignty of the people. This reiterates that every kind of autonomy  is rooted in food and seed.

At the event held on March 12, 2024 at Mexican Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development (SADER), Mexico City called “In Defense of Food Sovereignty”, Dr. Vandana Shiva, President of Navdanya International in her keynote lecture on food sovereignty, mentioned that it was so important to celebrate  cultures where cultural diversity and biodiversity are not seen as separate. She added that “Food sovereignty is a high level concept, because it implies the sovereignty of beings to manage and organize themselves toward health.” The cultivation of biodiversity has to imply sovereignty at all levels. Sovereignty is needed at all levels for organisms to be able to freely develop and evolve, self organize toward health.

Leydy Pech, evocatively added in the same event that “In Maya, we have no word for GMO, we call them instead seeds that have no heart, seeds with no life.” Furthermore, she asked a significant question, potent for everyone around the world: “Our seeds, our knowledge is our inheritance, with this destruction what will we inherit in the future?”

As also highlighted by Jesús Ramírez Cuevas, general coordinator of social communication and spokesperson for the Government of the Mexican Republic, “Mexican sovereignty starts with food sovereignty.” It is food sovereignty and the sovereignty of all interconnected beings to self-organize and grow with health that holds the power of resistance politically, economically and socially.

GMO imperialism is an attack on this sovereignty of all interconnected beings at all levels of self organization. It is an attack on life itself.

As Leydy Pech echoed: “You cannot call what goes against life, development”. Dr. María Elena Álvarez-Buylla Roces, general director of the National Council of humanities, sciences and technologies (CONAHCYT) said that “On a global level the deregulation and imposition of GMOs and toxic food systems is a denial of sovereignty and right to health on multiple levels.” She added that Mexico’s success in asserting its own sovereignty on seeds and food policies would be a beacon for other countries to be able to assert their food sovereignty and seed freedom in turn.

Biodiversity at all levels

A Seminar on Biodiversity Protection titled “Protection and Conservation of Biodiversity in Centers of Origin” was held on March 15, 2024 at the Mexican Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources (SEMARNAT) Headquarters, Mexico City. This seminar analyzed and discussed strategies to conserve and protect natural resources in countries that are centers of origin and genetic diversity of species, through a dialogues, work round tables, and discussions for common strategy with key actors of the Mexican government, representatives from Latin America, Asia, the United States, and others in the protection and conservation of biodiversity in Latin America and other regions.

Maestro Iván Rico López, Subsecretary of Environmental Planning and Policy, SEMARNAT highlighted that “Megadiverse countries, the centers of origin of crop varieties, have greater responsibility in protecting the world’s biodiversity. We have learned that our plant genetic heritage is our cultural heritage. Natural and Social aspects go hand in hand, as those who have preserved the genetic diversity are the indigenous peoples.”

Columba López, Director of the Commission for Natural Resources and Rural Development, CORENADR, emphasized the key to this biodiversity being in the hands of the farmers. It is the farmers who are the custodians of  these biodiverse foods, cultures, seeds, knowledges. She said that “We work on native seeds in our Seed Houses. We cultivate and replicate seeds through agroecological practices in the field. We develop seeds that adapt in the mountains or near the water, that are climate resilient and we do it through farmers’ participatory breeding.”

Biodiversity at all levels produces health, diversity in our farms, our seed, our foods, our cultures etc. having a biodiverse field in line with local ecosystem and cultural heritage, gives us a diversity of foods, and a diversity of food cultures. This is how we create health first in our fields all the way to our plates and our guts.

Dr. Vandana Shiva, of Navdanya International highlighted that, “Indigenous peoples and communities know that seeds continuously evolve. By turning biodiversity into technology they (corporations) deny the creativity of biodiversity, they go against how nature works. Diversity is a living necessity.” She further reiterated that, “The colonizing mentality considers living beings as disposable and nature as raw material to be extracted. Mexico is recovering the dignity of natural resources, which are the basis of our health and well-being & the health of the planet.”

Similarly, at the event held on March 16, 2024 held at Cencalli, Museo de maíz y centro de la cultura alimentaria, Los Pinos, Ciudad de México, in the presence of the Alejandra Frausto Guerrero, from the Ministry of Culture, Victor Sanchez reaffirmed the need to resist the food imperialism that destroys our cultures by defending our biodiversity and strengthening seed freedom. Navdanya International co-organized this event with Campaña Nacional Sin Maíz No Hay PaísVia Organica and Regeneration International. Andre Leu, Director of Regeneration International, discussed the latest evidence of negative health effects caused by exposure to glyphosate: “There’s scientific evidence about the correlations between the introduction of glyphosate and transgenic crops and the increase in diseases such as cancer, obesity, kidney failure and autism.”

Mercedes López Martínez from Vía Orgánica, Mexico, discussed the great importance of protecting small farmers and indigenous communities as the backbone of a thriving food culture. Miguel Ángel Crespo of Probioma, Bolivia shared how, “The fight to protect biodiversity and genetic resources is also political, legal and scientific.”

It is this interconnection of diversity at all levels, including diversity of organizations and movements reflecting the interconnection and sovereignty of organisms that is needed to resist GMO imperialism from the ground up.


Also read:

Vandana Shiva makes an International call to support Mexico in the defense of Seed Freedom and Biodiversity

Events in Mexico: Resisting GMO Imperialism

Joint Declaration in Defense of our Biodiversity, Seed and Food Freedom – Resisting GMO Imperialism

Open Letter from Diverse Women for Diversity to World Leaders

US pressure to impose GM corn in Mexico threatens global genetic heritage of Maize Diversity

 

Connect with Navdanya International

Cover image credit: GildAix




Dr. Mark Bailey: Virology’s Event Horizon

Virology’s Event Horizon

by Dr. Mark Bailey
April 5, 2024

 

Along with our allies we have spent the last four years dismantling every aspect of the virus model whether it concerns “isolation”, antibodies, genomics, PCR, proteomics, electron microscopy, or animal and human studies. In 2022, I published A Farewell to Virology, to date one of the only treatises that outlines a formal refutation of the entire virus model. This was inspired The Perth Group’s 2017 epic HIV – a virus like no other, the most comprehensive document refuting the existence of ‘HIV’ specifically.

In my recent webinars with Dr Tom Cowan we have been discussing the scientific method, along with the concepts of independent variables and controlled experiments. Clearly the virologists have resorted to anti-scientific practices to make their various claims including the foundational claim of virus existence.

It motivated me to write an essay specifically addressing the apical logical fallacy in the cell culture technique – something that has been noticed previously but perhaps not formally expressed. The virologists have claimed they perform control experiments and sometimes describe these as ‘mock-infected’ cultures. In recent months we have also been contacted by people in the ‘no virus’ community asking whether John Enders inadvertently performed a control experiment in his 1954 measles paper. Dr Stefan Lanka exposed the lack of a control experiment in this paper in the Stuttgart Higher Regional Court in 2016 and I make some further comments expanding on this in note 20.

The pivotal issue is that the virologists do not have an independent variable and their experiments cannot make a hypothetical particle real. The ‘gold standard’ technique for “isolation” cannot possibly determine the presence (or existence) of viruses no matter how they attempt to control it. The paradigm that was created in the 1940s to keep virology alive was dead on arrival because the technique relies on a reification fallacy and logical errors that disqualify the entire process from being scientific.

We have had some feedback that although fairly brief, this paper is difficult to follow in some parts. (It helps to read all the endnotes.) If you have not already seen it, I would recommend watching Kate Sugak’s excellent presentation at the XXII Russian Scientific Conference: “The scientific vacuum: The scientific method and its absence in virology“. Kate covers the crucial scientific considerations articulated in my paper in an easy to follow format and shows that the virologists have nowhere left to hide.

I would like to acknowledge Christine Massey and Steve Falconer for their helpful suggestions.

Please download the paper below.

 

Loader Loading...
EAD Logo Taking too long?

Reload Reload document
| Open Open in new tab

Download [2.00 MB]

 

Connect with Dr. Mark Bailey (and Dr. Sam Bailey) 

Cover image based on creative commons work of naobim & OpenClipart-Vectors




The Fury of Europe’s Farmers Shocks EU Technocrats

The Fury of Europe’s Farmers Shocks EU Technocrats

by Fraser Myers, sourced from Technocracy News & Trends

 

The continent-wide fury of EU farmers is blazing a trail straight to the heart of Technocracy, namely, the green agenda, net zero, and the war on energy and food. The late Rosa Koire warned Europe between 2010-2015 about “the blueprint, the comprehensive plan of action for the 21st century to inventory and control all land, all water, all plants, all minerals, all animals, all construction, all means of production, all energy, all law enforcement, all health care, all food, all education, all information, and all human beings in the world.” 

The farmers got it and are now fighting for their lives and livelihoods. Technocrats spin out these suicidal policies using their oracle of pseudoscience as their god. However, it is no god but rather base scientism, which C.S. Lewis laid bare in his Abolition of Man (1943). 

These are those whose intent is to destroy the earth (Rev. 11:18). Will we stop them before it is too late?

~ Technocracy News Editor



Europe’s farmers are rising up – and the elites are terrified. In France, farmers recently staged a four-day ‘siege of Paris’, blocking major roads around the French capital. In January, thousands of tractors descended on Berlin in Germany, lining the streets leading up to the Brandenburg Gate. In Brussels, farmers have gathered from all over Europe to demonstrate against the EU and pelt the European Parliament with eggs. In the Netherlands, tractors have caused the longest traffic jam in the nation’s history, as part of a years-long battle between farmers and the government. This farmers’ revolt is now truly Europe-wide. From Portugal to Poland, from Ireland to Italy, almost every EU country has been rocked by protests. So what is driving this populist uprising? What do the farmers want?

Farmers in each country have their own specific grievances, of course. But there is a common root to their anger. What connects them is the European Union’s green agenda, which has been imposed on agriculture from on-high. It has made farmers’ lives a misery, sacrificing their livelihoods at the altar of climate alarmism. Bureaucrats who have no idea how farmers work and live, have essentially been condemning farms – many of them run by families for generations – to oblivion, all at the stroke of the regulator’s pen. And farmers are simply not putting up with it anymore.

The first stirrings of revolt began in 2019, in the Netherlands, with the so-called nitrogen crisis. The Dutch Supreme Court ruled that the government was failing to cut nitrogen pollution to EU-approved levels. In response, the Dutch government promised ‘drastic measures’ to cut nitrogen emissions. In all but name, it declared war on its nation’s farmers. Suddenly, the government had turned against one of its most important and impressive sectors. You see, the Netherlands, despite its small size, is the second-largest exporter of food in the entire world, thanks to the world-beating efficiency of its farms. And nitrogen is intrinsic to this efficiency. Fertilisers are rich in nitrogen, and farmers need fertilisers to maximise their crop yields. Nitrogen is also an inevitable byproduct of animal farming. Livestock release ammonia, a compound of nitrogen and hydrogen, through their excrement. The Netherlands has over four million cows, 13million pigs and 104million chickens. Which is a lot of manure and a lot of nitrogen. Any crackdown on nitrogen emissions was always going to hit farmers hard. Even so, the Dutch government’s proposals went even further than anyone could have imagined. It said it would buy out thousands of the most polluting farms and simply shut them down. Other farms would have to cull a proportion of their animals. This would mean slaughtering around half of all the livestock in the Netherlands. In all, this represented an unthinkable act of national economic self-harm.

Thus, the farmers’ revolt was born. Huge protests erupted in 2019. After a brief hiatus during the Covid pandemic, they came roaring back in 2021 and 2022. Dutch farmers blocked roads, railways and canal bridges with tractors and hay bales. They defied government bans to bring tractors into the Hague. Tens of thousands took part in the demonstrations. But the Dutch government did not back down. It kept proposing new targets, new measures and new restrictions on nitrogen. In 2022, the government’s own figures revealed that around 30 per cent of farms would have to close to meet their targets. And last year, it drew up a list of the 3,000 farms that it wants to forcibly close within the next few years.

All of this has been done with the approval and encouragement of the EU. And there is worse to come in the Netherlands and beyond. The absurd nitrogen rules that are threatening Dutch farms come from an EU environmental directive that dates back to the 1990s. But the EU’s eco-mania has intensified massively since then. Farmers now have to contend with the drive to Net Zero, too. According to Laurence Tubiana, chief executive of the European Climate Foundation and the architect of the Paris Climate accords, Net Zero will require ‘the biggest overhaul of farming since the Second World War’. And yet, once again, farmers haven’t been consulted on this. Targets have simply been drawn up by the technocrats and rubber stamped by national governments, without any consideration for their impact on farmers and their ability to produce food.

Under the EU’s so-called Green Deal, every EU member state has to reach Net Zero carbon emissions by 2050. And the EU’s emissions rules for agriculture are especially, insanely, stringent. The punishing green policies don’t stop there, either. The Farm to Fork strategy, announced in 2020, calls for 10 per cent of farmland to be set aside for non-agricultural use. It says that at least a quarter of EU farms should become organic. It says fertiliser use must fall by 20 per cent. Pesticide use must be cut by 50 per cent. And all of this should be done by 2030. Each of these demands would be enough to put thousands of farms out of business on their own. When combined, they pose an existential threat to European agriculture. And if the EU’s laws weren’t bad enough, member states are actually gold plating these regulations. The EU had already demanded the impossible of farmers. Now national elites in Berlin, Paris and The Hague want to go even further.

This is why farmers are out on the streets across the continent. It’s why they’re taking matters into their own hands. It’s why they feel they have no choice but to block roads with their tractors, bring life to a standstill and dowse public buildings with manure. They are determined to remind the powers-that-be just how essential they are to the functioning of modern life.

At first, the elites tried to dismiss the protests. They resorted to their usual playbook. They called the farmers fascists, far right and pawns of online disinformation. But this propaganda campaign has flopped. Not only have these smears failed to demoralise the farmers, they have also failed to turn the public against the protests. In country after country, European peoples are backing their farmers, even as the protests disrupt daily life.

In the Netherlands, where our story began, a farmers’ party briefly managed to storm electoral politics, too. The Farmer-Citizen Movement – or BBB – was set up in 2019 amid the nitrogen-crisis demonstrations. Less than four years later, the BBB swept the board in the Dutch provincial elections. It won the popular vote in all 12 provinces – the first time any party had achieved this in Dutch history. While the farmers’ protests managed to bring tens of thousands on to the streets, the farmers’ party managed to mobilise almost 1.5million voters.

The fury of the farmers has now become impossible to ignore. The usually tin-eared elites across Europe have been forced to listen and respond. In Germany, farmers have got their government to delay planned cuts in subsidies for agricultural fuel. And they have managed to keep their tax breaks on tractors and farm vehicles, which were also under threat. In France, farmers have extracted millions of euros in additional grants. And they’ve put paid to government plans to hike fuel taxes. In Ireland, a deranged government proposal to cull 200,000 cows has quietly been shelved. Even at the EU level, farmers have already chalked up some significant victories. Remember that plan to halve the use of pesticides by 2030? It’s now been torn up.

But the protests aren’t going to stop anytime soon. How could they? These concessions, though welcome, do not go nearly far enough. The green agenda is diametrically opposed to the interests of agriculture. So long as European politicians are committed to Net Zero, then the farmers will always be in their sights. What’s more, the farmers’ cause will continue to resonate with ordinary people, who are also served poorly by their environmentalist leaders, whose policies are pushing up prices and obliterating food and energy security. The farmers are merely the canaries in the coalmine. They were just the first group of people to be pushed to breaking point – and to get organised in response.

The farmers offer a cautionary tale to Europe’s rulers. The green elites assumed that farmers would take their bitter medicine. They had no idea just how devastating their regulations would be to farmers’ way of life. They failed to see the human beings behind the emissions figures on their spreadsheets. And the broader push for Net Zero could soon generate much more resistance, from a much broader section of society. After all, under the current plans, our energy bills are set to soar, as we replace reliable fossil fuels with unreliable renewables. Our trusty gas boilers could soon be ripped out, replaced with expensive and inefficient heat pumps. Older, cheaper vehicles are being banned or taxed off the road in the push towards electric cars. Yet again, the establishment seems to think it can change our way of life and shred our living standards without a peep of discontent. This is bound to provoke an almighty backlash. And the farmers have shown us the way.

Long may the farmers’ revolt continue. And here’s hoping it inspires many more people to take a stand.

 

Connect with Spiked

Connect with Technocracy News & Trends

Cover image credit: European Commission (Christophe Licoppe)
Demonstration of farmers in the European Quarter in Brussels, Feb 1, 2024
Creative Commons




The Psychological Battle for Truth — and the Power of the Farmers’ Uprising

The Psychological Battle for Truth — and the Power of the Farmers’ Uprising

by Julian Rose
sourced from Activist Post
April 1, 2024

 

The ‘deep state’ has no power over you. None. It can only try and make you believe it does.

And in this it is very clever, using sophisticated psychological techniques that give the impression of holding the dominant position and exercising the dominant power.

But this is a chimera; and immediately one sees it as such one manifests the authoritative position and the deep state is in check; it can only operate defensively.

This it does by putting up ever greater barriers to freedom of expression, movement and choice.

It knows it’s on the losing side, so has to pull all the tricks in the trade to make itself appear to be in control. It’s a psychological battlefield.

Edward Bernays, the founder of modern advertising, has had much to do with weaponising the powers of perception and deception. He found that you can get people to believe and do almost anything once you learn how to exploit their psyche with carefully chosen imagery and words.

Once you tap into people’s widespread subconscious attraction to the trappings of seductive consumables.

The deep state’s corporate/banker led ‘seeming’ global dominance draws on Bernays’s cunning, using advanced insights concerning how to influence the functions of different areas of the human brain.

The objective is to come up with a blanket like web of virtual signposting pointing to the direction life must go in in order to overcome some purposefully manufactured crisis. A crisis that is claimed will otherwise cook, starve or destroy people and the planet.

People in a state of funk take all this to be real, of course, and plod on with their tunnel vision acceptance of the pathological diktats of the status quo.

The deep state cabal has a mental hold over their perception of what is and is not true, and rolls out the moderators, fact checkers and ‘sudden silencers’ to counteract anything that emerges as an emissary of truth. Many of us have had firsthand experience of this executioner formula.

Nevertheless, ‘we the purposeful people’ are winning through. There is simply too much informative material on the loose for the thought/surveillance police to cover, in spite of their algorithmic interventions.

Their tactic is therefore to try to gain the upper hand by pushing harder on the ‘disaster agenda.’ This is exemplified by the global dissemination of the dystopian agenda laid out in Klaus Schwab’s Fourth Industrial Revolution.

The most ubiquitous cooked-up disaster is, of course, ‘man-made global warming’ – with its stated solution to be the Transhuman. All steps in between are sold as vital to advancing the speed and efficiency of the ‘human to inhuman’ transformation process.

The digitalisation of life is central to the architects of control argument that humanity is incapable of managing itself and that, without their intervention, the outcome will be the complete breakdown of planetary life.

Only a race of soulless computer assisted ‘super beings’ can save the day, say the likes of Yuval Noah Harari, Elon Musk and Klaus Schwab.

Consider how this agenda plays on the psychology of those who have yet to find in themselves the self-assurance to discard that which has no practical sense of purpose and no foundation in basic common sense.

The architects of control count on the majority remaining unresistant to the rolling out of their high-tech hegemonic master plan. So much so that they can freely announce that by following it “You will own nothing and you will be happy.”

In the psychological battle for truth, the perpetrators of the lie have access to a vast storehouse of mind-bending persuasion techniques to make their agenda seem the only choice.

They recognise that when a high percentage of individuals believe themselves to be unable to operate without a mobile phone – they will be sufficiently unfocussed and distracted so as to be unable to rebel against a fateful acceptance of slavery to the big brother of convenience.

Easily manipulated victims of digital mass hypnosis.

Here lies the rub: if the upwardly mobile urban ‘educated’ segment of society sees no problem conducting their lives within a credit card bubble of hypermarket convenience shopping, digital EMF communication systems, computer fed entertainment packages and a well-paid job in a global or trans national corporation – where is the resistance going to come from?

If this genre of people is already too far gone to register an internal kick when faced by a high-level plan to ‘happily’ have all their material assets taken away from them – then who or what is going to raise the alarm?

It looks to me as though only a small percentage of mankind can read the script being outlined for their future behind bars. Only a few can grasp the psychology of the insentient psychopath and his soulless urge to possess and control, at any price.

But once one moves outside the world of Godless urban shopping obsessed nine to fivers and ‘well-educated’ university trained job hunters, a potential to get real starts to emerge.

Amongst those working people who regularly get their hands dirty, who till the fields; build shelters; repair cars; mend pipes; fix electrics and dig drains, the virtual reality digital cybernetic future of the Fourth Industrial Revolution – and Green New Deal – looks like pure fantasy. The ravings of the unhinged.

They don’t need to mentally struggle in order to try to grasp the twisted logic being broadcast by the global media mafia. They simply know in their gut that it’s so much ‘bull’.

It is those who form the foundation of pyramid who hold society together. Who glue together the basic infrastructure which supports our daily lives. And it is from here that an increasing percentage reject the psychology of mental indoctrination and the promotion of a digitalised virtual future.

The ‘Throw out Green Deal’ remarkable, unified farmer uprisings happening in all parts of Europe and beyond are testimony to this. They are rising up against the imposition of phony ‘Net Zero by 2045’ rules that demand an end to farmers working the land and an end to the livestock that keep that land fertile.

These farmers are out in their tens of thousands. In Poland they are mounting month long tractor blockades of cities, supermarkets and border crossings. Coals miners, faced by being shut out by large scale ‘stop global warming’ redundancies, are joining the uprising.

Farmers say they will not cease their disruptions until their demands are met by government and by the EU.

This is the refreshingly undiluted language of genuine defiance.

It has the authorities rattled. Green Deal is, after all, the very backbone of the agenda to enslave us all to a Brave New World of synthetic everything – from food to nature to people.

The general public are in sympathy with the farmers’ actions.  Approximately 80% of European citizens are on their side according to opinion surveys.

Getting a solid core of consumers to rise up and participate in this bottom-up movement for the survival of real food and real farming will be vital to maintaining the momentum.

Coming from an unlikely place, a solid earthed uprising is gathering pace. The farmers’ demands are essentially for economic fairness, respect and recognition of the vital roll they play in the food security of the nation.

Under ‘Green Deal’ none of these demands are taken seriously. The WEF solution is not to support the agricultural community but to destroy it!

In the 2024 battle for truth, everyone should behave as resolutely as the farmers. The need is to be uncompromising in one’s face to face dealings with political liars and hypocrites.

We are the trustees of Planet Earth. In order to maintain its balance and equilibrium – we have no choice other than to enter into a pactless fight against all opposing forces.

Those who have land, can grow food and draw water from the well, are the last independent individuals on the planet. They are not about to capitulate to a bunch of psychos in Brussels, London, Warsaw, Washington or Paris – and nor are we.

Everyone’s life is dependent upon having access to nourishing food. Therefore, everyone’s life is dependent upon the survival and future prosperity of the farmer.

Support them now in their hour of need. Their need is also your need.

They have no future – and nor do we – without a lifesaving revolution that re-establishes the priorities for what is actually important in life. Think deeply about this and then act on it without delay.

And if you’re left in doubt – ask farmers who actually controls the food chain. Who is really in the driving seat when it comes to feeding the world?

Rise up, all good people. Take your destiny in both hands. Vigorously join together in forging a great victory for humanity over inhumanity.

Allowing oneself to slide into a state of abject slavery is a doctrine of the graveyard.

All those retaining some life-giving red blood corpuscles know that the road to truth accepts no compromise and can never be subverted by the orchestrated opium of mass indoctrination.

Julian Rose is an organic farmer, writer, broadcaster and international activist. 

 

Connect with Julian Rose

Cover image credit: European Commission (Christophe Licoppe)
Tractors parked and road traffic at a standstill in the European Quarter in Brussels, February 1, 2024 — creative commons




Fluoride — The Poisoned Chalice

Fluoride — The Poisoned Chalice

by UK Column
March 21, 2024

 

 

Fluoride—The Poisoned Chalice: In Plain Sight 

How safe is our drinking water? Do you even know what is in it? What would you say if you were told you were being medicated with a very dangerous chemical, without consent, through your drinking water? No doubt the majority of us would be up in arms, but in 2024 this is exactly what the UK Government is planning on doing. Already in the UK, six million people drink fluoridated water, but the addition of fluoride at source is about to be expanded throughout the whole of England.

Debi Evans is joined by Joy Warren, National Coordinator of Fluoride Free Alliance UK. She has been active against water fluoridation since soon after gaining a BSc (Hons) in Environmental Science in 2002. Her catalyst for action was attending a Friends of the Earth meeting in early 2003 at which a medical doctor gave an account of her long struggle against hypothyroidism after moving to fluoridated Coventry. After researching the issue of fluoride’s negative effect on the endocrine system and much else, Joy became convinced that the practice of adding a medicine to drinking water was a thoroughly unethical medical practice. Part of her journey has involved excluding fluoride from her environment—which was no mean feat, living as she does in a fluoridated city.

Joy joined the National Pure Water Association in 2005 and soon became an Executive Director. In 2010, she left NPWA to start West Midlands Against Fluoridation and ran a very successful website and fluoride analysis service. During this time, she gained a Certificate in Health and Nutrition. In 2018, encouraged by friends, she set up the Fluoride Free Alliance UK (FFAUK), which became the national organisation campaigning on the issue, NPWA having been wound up a few years earlier.

There have been several attempts to add fluoride to English drinking water since 2003 and Joy Warren has been actively involved in ensuring that each attempt failed. The current climate is more challenging, with the Conservative government and advisors since 2022 trying to get England and Wales fluoridated, and this has meant Joy exercising her coordination and IT skills to the full.She has been involved against all attempts since 2004 to fluoridate a population and has a 100% success record.

This interview covers what fluoride is and how dangerous it is. What is a neurotoxin? Can you stop your area from being fluoridated? Joy Warren reveals the extent of the Government’s plan to medicate us with fluoride through our drinking water, without our consent. Why has the Government taken this potentially disastrous decision, and how will it affect you and future generations?

Fluoride is also present in many medicines and foods; are you aware of how much fluoride your body is ingesting? Do you know the dangers to children and babies? Dental vans will be visiting primary schools to paint children’s teeth with fluoride varnish. Do you consent?

Joy Warren discusses what the public can do to object to the fluoridation of water. Fluoride is invisible, and the Government would like it remain that way. It is up to every one of us to inform others of the dangers of fluoride.

 

Contact Details:

Joy Warren, National Coordinator, Fluoride Free Alliance UK

Website: www.ukfffa.org.uk

 

Connect with UK Column 

Cover image credit: 165106/pixabay




Vaccine and Related Biological Product Manufacturing as US Government-Licensed Poison Manufacturing.

Vaccine and Related Biological Product Manufacturing as US Government-Licensed Poison Manufacturing.

Evidence From November 1986 ‘Mandate for Safer Childhood Vaccines’ Codified at 42 USC 300aa-27, and July 2018 Stipulation by HHS.

by Katherine Watt, Bailiwick News
March 21, 2023

 

Summary of legal history findings to date

The development since 1944, of American statutes and regulations governing US-Food and Drug Administration product licensing functions and non-functions, along with international Mutual Recognition Agreements and public health emergency/emergency use authorization/medical countermeasures law, support the conclusion that all biological products allegedly regulated by the FDA for compliance with manufacturing quality standards, distributed and used on the American population — and through MRAs, exported to countries around the world for use on populations worldwide — are in fact, unregulated.

Laws have been written to enable operators of biological product manufacturing facilities to legally make and distribute poisons. Legalized poisons are produced by US military-public health contractors working under black box conditions inside pharmaceutical factories in the US and in countries occupied by US financial, public health and military forces.

FDA, DoD and military-pharmaceutical manufacturing contractors don’t take every opportunity to adulterate every production run. They have vested interests in keeping the public in the dark about their legal access to production lines, and the availability of some harmless and/or beneficial products makes it more difficult for people to understand that the chemical and biological weapons emerging from the same factories are weapons.

The toxicity of vaccines and vaccine-related biological products has been incrementally increased over time.

Injuries and deaths caused by vaccines are falsely attributed to communicable disease, inherited genetic disorders and environmental exposures by the same public health, military and pharmaceutical manufacturing executives jointly running the intentional poisoning programs.


One of the most striking features of this almost-unimaginably vast military/public-health/pharmaceutical deception program is how the things that don’t happen matter as much as — and often more than — the things that do happen.

The records that can’t be located are as revealing as, and often more revealing than, the records that can be found.

One vivid example: blank pages enclosed as package inserts with Covid-19 vaccines.

Another example: if there had ever been any legal requirement for FDA to prevent Covid-19 vaccines from harming clinical trial subjects, and from later harming recipients in what many still irrationally insist is a consumer product market, FDA officials would have denied all of the Covid-19 vaccine manufacturers’ licensing applications submitted starting in February and March 2020.

FDA would have denied the applications based on evidence accrued since genetic engineering research began, about harms caused to animal and human recipients of cell- and gene-based compounds, lipid nanoparticles, and other components listed on and/or redacted from application documents.

FDA did not deny manufacturers legal access to human targets.

Instead, FDA authorized legal access to several thousand targets in spring, summer and fall 2020, and then authorized legal access to everyone else in the world in December 2020.

Following FDA’s failure to deny manufacturers’ authorization to conduct what have since been revealed as fake clinical trials, if FDA had held a legal obligation to protect the public from biological product poisons, FDA officials would have immediately halted the alleged clinical trials in mid-2020 upon the first reported adverse effects and deaths.

Failing that, a drug manufacturing regulator with a legal obligation to protect people from harm would have immediately recalled all Covid-19 vaccines as soon as general public recipients in December 2020 and early 2021 started having anaphylactic reactions, developing heart damage and turbo-cancers and dropping dead; as soon as women started shedding decidual casts and miscarrying babies in the womb; and as soon as all the other injuries, diseases and deaths became clearly observable worldwide. (See, for example, Pfizer 5.3.6 Cumulative Analysis of Post-Authorization Adverse Event Reports received through Feb. 28, 2021, Table 1 at p. 7)

FDA did not halt the pretend clinical trials, and has not recalled the vaccines, ordered the manufacturers to cease production, or ordered pharmacists, nurses and doctors to stop using them.


National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act

The “mandate for safer vaccines” section of the 1986 National Vaccine Act and the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program offers another good example of events that should have taken place but didn’t, and records (recording those events) that should have been produced but weren’t.

In November 1986, Congress and President Reagan passed the State Comprehensive Mental Health Services Plan Act.

The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act section of the act (Title III) amended the 1944 Public Health Service Act to establish and fund a National Vaccine Program; grant vaccine manufacturers legal immunity for injuries and deaths caused by their products; and establish and fund a National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, all of which was codified at 42 USC 300aa et seq.

At 42 USC 300aa-27, Congress established a “mandate for safer vaccines.”

(a) General rule. In the administration of this part and other pertinent laws under the jurisdiction of the [HHS] Secretary, the Secretary shall—

(1) promote the development of childhood vaccines that result in fewer and less serious adverse reactions than those vaccines on the market on December 22, 1987, and promote the refinement of such vaccines, and

(2)  make or assure improvements in, and otherwise use the authorities of the Secretary with respect to, the licensing, manufacturing, processing, testing, labeling, warning, use instructions, distribution, storage, administration, field surveillance, adverse reaction reporting, and recall of reactogenic lots or batches, of vaccines, and research on vaccines, in order to reduce the risks of adverse reactions to vaccines.

(b) Task force

(1) The Secretary shall establish a task force on safer childhood vaccines which shall consist of the Director of the National Institutes of Health, the Commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration, and the Director of the Centers for Disease Control.

(2) The Director of the National Institutes of Health shall serve as chairman of the task force.

(3) In consultation with the Advisory Commission on Childhood Vaccines, the task force shall prepare recommendations to the Secretary concerning implementation of the requirements of subsection (a).

(c) Report. Within 2 years after December 22, 1987, and periodically thereafter, the Secretary shall prepare and transmit to the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Labor and Human Resources of the Senate a report describing the actions taken pursuant to subsection (a) during the preceding 2-year period.


The 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act gave manufacturers immunity from liability for injuries and deaths caused by vaccines listed on the government-recommended childhood immunization schedule.

One of the justifications used to exempt manufacturers from liability was that the US government, through the Department of Health and Human Services, would monitor the childhood vaccine program, collect safety data, report the data to Congress to provide oversight, and take harmful vaccines off the market.

Safety monitoring and reporting as called for in the 1986 law did not occur.

In August 2017, the Informed Consent Action Network (ICAN) filed a FOIA request with HHS, requesting copies of the biennial reports that should have been prepared and submitted to House and Senate committees between 1987 and 2018.

In June 2018, HHS responded to ICAN’s request:

“The [Department]’s searches for records did not locate any records responsive to your request. The [HHS] Immediate Office of the Secretary (IOS) conducted a thorough search of its document tracking systems. The Department also conducted a comprehensive review of all relevant indexes of HHS Secretarial Correspondence maintained at Federal Records Centers that remain in the custody of HHS. These searches did not locate records responsive to your request, or indications that records responsive to your request and in the custody of HHS are located at Federal Records Centers.”

Informed Consent Action Network v. US-HHS, (1:18-cv-03215-JMF), resulted in a July 9, 2018 stipulation signed by Attorney Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

The stipulation quoted the June 2018 acknowledgement, by HHS, that HHS had no record of any safety monitoring activity or public, Congressional reporting of the childhood vaccination program, under the 1986 law, between 1986 and 2018.

Later two reports were located, filed on May 4, 1988 and July 21, 1989 (partial, no appendices). The 1988 and 1989 reports addressed vaccine promotion, vaccine supply, vaccine research activity (see, for example, pp. 67-78 of 1988 report), and set-up of reporting and data analysis programs.

Since 1989: nothing.

HHS has never systematically collected or reported information from parents, pediatricians, toxicologists, manufacturers, or anyone else about harms caused by childhood vaccines administered in single doses, combined doses (i.e. measles-mumps-rubella), or cumulative doses (the childhood schedule), and HHS has never collected or reported information about the harmful effects of biological components, chemical adjuvants, preservatives or any other ingredients.


What would a true vaccine monitoring, reporting and product safety program have looked like?

It would have included detailed records of:

  • Date, time and location of vaccine administration, including the name of the nurse or other health care worker who administered the vaccine, and the doctor who ordered the vaccine.
  • Parent and doctor observations of symptoms of injury in the baby and child post-vaccination: what the symptoms were, when they occurred in relation to the vaccine, how long they lasted, how severe they were, whether they were transient or chronic, and whether the parent was subsequently advised to refrain from further vaccination of the child.
  • Serial number of the vaccine vial, identifying the manufacturing facility by name and address, lot number, batch number, date of manufacture, and names of production line workers who prepared the batch, separated out the lot, and filled the vial.
  • Dates, times and shipping methods through which the vaccine vial was shipped from the factory and received by the doctors’ office, hospital or pharmacy.
  • Storage and handling of the vaccine vial by the employees at the doctors’ office, hospital or pharmacy.
  • Each chemical and biological component listed or not listed on the vaccine label, including chemical and molecular structure, raw materials, cell lines, active ingredients, adjuvants, preservatives and all other components.
  • Each manufacturing protocol used at each step in the production process, fully describing the chemical and biological reactions, procedures and methods used to make each component of the vaccine, including the final, finished product.
  • Names of the suppliers of each chemical and biological ingredient; date and time at which each ingredient was delivered to the vaccine factory; name of the employee who received the delivery.
  • FDA inspections of the manufacturing facility during the period when the vaccine was manufactured, including date and time of inspections and names of the inspectors.
  • Samples and protocols from the lot, submitted by the manufacturers to the FDA Bureau of Biologics, including date, time, shipping method and name of the person who submitted the samples and protocols.
  • Samples and protocols from the lot, received by the FDA Bureau of Biologics, including date, time, shipping method and the name of the person who received the samples and protocols.
  • Results of sample and protocol testing, by FDA inspectors, validating that the sample contained the compounds listed on the label; did not contain any compounds (adulterations or contaminants) not listed on the label; and that the protocol the manufacturer reported using, in fact yielded a chemically and biologically identical final product when applied by an FDA inspector to the same ingredients in the same sequence using the same methods.
  • FDA written certification of each lot for release, distribution and use, including names of FDA inspectors, signatures and dates of lot-release.

The July 2018 ICAN-HHS stipulation supports the conclusion that none of those regulatory functions have been performed, no records of vaccine manufacturing regulation have been produced by FDA or regulated manufacturers, and no records have been collected, assessed or used by HHS.

No vaccine manufacturing safety regulation has been conducted by FDA, NIH, CDC or any other HHS department, at any time since Congress passed the 1986 “mandate for safer vaccines.”

Or, if such evidence has been collected, it’s been collected under classified military data collection systems, to confirm and refine national vaccination programs as an effective chemical and biological weapons production and distribution system capable of deniably inducing rapid death (i.e. Sudden Infant Death Syndrome) and chronic diseases including asthma, allergies, neurological disorders, gastrointestinal disorders, autoimmune disorders, heart disease, diabetes, obesity, cancer and other immune-mediated diseases.

 

 Connect with Katherine Watt

Cover image based on creative commons work of: KLAU2018 & cocoparisienne




Vaccines Have Always Been Heterogeneous Mixtures of Toxins Used to Intentionally Sicken People and Animals.

Vaccines Have Always Been Heterogeneous Mixtures of Toxins Used to Intentionally Sicken People and Animals.
Public health and regulatory systems have consistently hidden those truths behind false claims about the effects of vaccines, and behind legalized non-regulation of biological product manufacturing. 

by Katherine Watt, Bailiwick News
March 20, 2024

 

The US Food and Drug Administration and other drug manufacturing regulators claim that drug manufacturing regulation is about assessing product purity, sterility, potency, safety and efficacy to protect humans and animals from impure, adulterated, contaminated, impotent, harmful, and/or ineffective products.

Biological products can be defined as a subset of the larger category of drugs. Biological products are drugs manufactured through biological processes that take place within living organisms. Drugs that aren’t biological products are manufactured through chemical processes. Vaccines are included in the biological products class of drugs.

A defining characteristic of biological products, in legal terms, is their rule-governed exemption from regulatory oversight that applies to and is enforceable for drugs manufactured using chemical processes.

One of several defining characteristics of biological products as murder weapons, is their ability to biologically incorporate into the target’s body, such that weapons become indistinguishable from victims. Empty vials, syringes and other residual evidence disappears into garbage dumps and medical waste incinerators.


Eleanor McBean published a book in 1957 called Poisoned Needle.

She carefully documented the history of vaccination lies prior to and since Edward Jenner’s cow-pox and smallpox lies. She collected dozens of doctors’ observations throughout the 1700s, 1800s and early 1900s, supporting the conclusion that vaccines have always been nothing more than toxic slurries introduced into healthy people and animals for the purpose of making them weaker and sicker and dead, while enabling the poisoners to lie to themselves and to their victims about what they’re doing, how and why.

One example from Poisoned Needle:

Dr. J. W. Hodge had considerable experience with vaccination before he denounced it and wrote a book on his collected data. In his [1902] book The Vaccination Superstition (p. 41) he states:

“After a thorough investigation of the most authentic records and facts in harmony with the physician’s daily observations and experiences, the conclusion is drawn that instead of protecting its subjects from contagion of smallpox, vaccination actually renders them more susceptible to it.

Vaccination is the implantation of disease — that is its admitted purpose. Health is the ideal state to be sought, not disease . . . Every pathogenic disturbance in the infected organism wastes and lowers the vital powers, and thus diminishes its natural resisting capacity.

“This fact is well known and so universally conceded that it seems superfluous to cite authorities. Nevertheless, I shall mention one. The International Textbook of Surgery – Vol. 1. p. 263, is authority for the following statement: ‘Persons weakened by disease or worn out by excessive labor yield more readily to infection than healthy individuals.’

“If this is true, it explains why, in various epidemics, smallpox always attacks the vaccinated first, and why these diseases continue to infest the civilized world while its allied (unvaccinated) ‘filth diseases’ have disappeared before the advance of civilization, through the good offices of sanitation, hygiene and improved nutrition.”



For the last few years, I’ve been documenting the development of American public health emergency anti-law as a distinct layer of statutes, regulations, executive orders and court cases that overrides and suspends good laws criminalizing (among other crimes) intentional use of poisons, including vaccines, to injure and kill people.

Public health emergency law as a tool to enable deniable, spatially-distant, time-shifted homicide became more visible because public health emergency law was used to start the Covid-19 killing programs and is still being used to maintain the Covid-19 killing programs.

Public health emergency statutes, regulations, executive orders and court cases govern, among other things, non-regulation of poisons (i.e. emergency use authorization/EUA countermeasures) during declared emergencies.

In December 2023, I located a Federal Register Notice of Final Rule through which then-FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb shut the doors of all biological product manufacturing facilities to FDA inspections, effective May 2, 2019, eight months before public announcement of Covid-19, and more than a year and a half before the Covid-19 mass vaccination campaign got underway in December 2020.

This fact helps to answer the question: How could hundreds of millions of doses be manufactured, shipped and ready for use a few weeks after the FDA’s December 2020 “emergency use authorization” decisions? Manufacturing began well before Covid was announced, inside factories not subject to inspection. That’s how.

Reading Gottlieb’s rule-change a few months ago, I realized that non-regulation of biological product manufacturing under routine, non-emergency conditions, had been in effect — or, rather, non-effect — since long before Covid, and will still be in effect/non-effect even if emergency declarations about Covid and other fake communicable disease and public health threats are revoked someday.

So for the last couple of months, I’ve been thinking about and collecting more legal evidence that biological product anti-law under non-emergency conditions also suspends or overrides good laws criminalizing (among other crimes) intentional use of poisons to injure and kill people, just as effectively as public health emergency anti-laws do.

The legal history of routine non-regulation of all biological products can be assembled in the same way the legal history of emergency-predicated non-regulation of EUA countermeasures has been assembled.

Such a collection would document how, over time, built-in exemptions from otherwise applicable, enforceable manufacturing rules, along with rule changes, and explicit notices from FDA to manufacturers (called Guidance for Industry) that FDA would not, will not and does not enforce rules, have rendered biological product non-regulation more non-regulatory as each year has passed.

However, sifting through hundreds of rule changes to track each rule as it’s become increasingly inapplicable and unenforceable, is an exercise in grasping at smoke. So I’m not planning to pursue it further, unless an attorney contacts me with a credible proposal for a case that would be strengthened by detailed accounts of FDA Federal Register rule-making activities over the past half-century or so.

As an example, in November 1973, just after regulation of biological products transferred from NIH Division of Biologics Standards to the FDA Bureau of Biologics, FDA published a revised, consolidated set of biological product manufacturing regulations at 21 CFR 600 to 21 CFR 680.

At 21 CFR 610.11, the 1973 FDA rules established that the only “general safety” test (GST) required to claim a biological product was safe, was to inject a sample into two mice and two guinea pigs. If the two mice and two guinea pigs didn’t get “significant symptoms” or die within seven days, “the product meets the requirements for general safety.”

FDA authorized “exceptions to this test…when more than one lot is processed each day” and “variations of this test…whenever required.” Manufacturers were directed to apply to the Bureau of Biologics (now the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research) for exemptions.

After a series of revisions, FDA eliminated general safety test requirements for biological products, effective Aug. 3, 2015 (80 FR 37971).

FDA has made dozens of similar rule changes, weakening and eliminating rules about samples, protocols and lot-by-lot release; establishment and product licensing applications; post-approval manufacturing process changes; mixing, diluting and repackaging and more, including the elimination of facility inspections Gottlieb put in place effective May 2, 2019.

It’s important to understand that the acts FDA officials have committed, to eliminate applicability and enforceability of drug manufacturing regulations for biological product manufacturing, have not been acts to eliminate actual regulation of medicines.

They have been acts to eliminate what has, from the start, been pretend-regulation to enable unimpeded manufacture, distribution and use of intentional poisons, so that their true character as poisons could be hidden from and invisible to the public.



A few weeks ago, I located Mutual Recognition Agreements. MRAs are international trade treaties. When signed and ratified by national governments, MRAs authorize national regulators — including drug regulators — to be “relieved of” their regulatory obligations and instead, recognize and rely on the regulatory decisions of other countries’ regulators, especially the US Food and Drug Administration.

The two systems interlock.

Under the legal terms of MRA treaties, US-FDA can be legally construed as the sole regulator for worldwide drug manufacturing and distribution systems.

Under the legal terms of the US-FDA drug regulation system, all biological product manufacturing can be legally conducted with no substantive disclosure, monitoring or enforcement of rules controlling purity, sterility, safety, potency, efficacy, raw materials, manufacturing processes, or chemical and biological composition of finished, packaged, distributed products.

Also note, the legal structure of Mutual Recognition Agreements plus FDA-non-regulation-of-biological-products, operates separate from and in addition to the UN-World Health Organization, International Health Regulations system.

National governments interested in shielding their populations from intentional poisoning must withdraw from the United Nations and WHO treaties; must withdraw from the IHR treaty; and also must withdraw from each Mutual Recognition Agreement treaty that subordinates their own federal drug regulation to other countries’ regulators, including the US-FDA non-regulation, poison-facilitation system.


It’s plausible that some simpler biological products (insulin, for example) may have historically been manufactured, and may still today be manufactured, to meet measurable, achievable standards of safety and batch-to-batch consistency, because doing that would help US-FDA and pharmaceutical companies maintain public confidence and reduce the likelihood that the public would begin to see and understand the biological-product-based intentional poisoning program.

It’s also plausible that biological products labeled as vaccines have had, for many decades and still today, a high degree of batch-to-batch variation ranging from low to high toxicity, because that also would be a sensible way for US-FDA and pharmaceutical companies to maintain high levels of public ignorance, complacency and compliance with vaccination programs.


Related Bailiwick reporting and analysis

 

 

Connect with Katherine Watt

Cover image credit: Dimhou




The Fallacies of Virology and the Inversion of Natural Health

The Fallacies of Virology and the Inversion of Natural Health
Germ theory -vs- Terrain theory 

by Greg Reese
March 19, 2024

 

 



Transcript:

Isolation means the separation of one thing from everything else. This is the only way to scientifically identify a thing. This is done with everything from large organic material to the smallest nano-particles. It is done with Gold and Silver. And it is done in basic chemistry, but it has never been done with a virus. Several have claimed to have done so, but have since been exposed as frauds. And today, virologists claim that isolation is not possible because of the obligate intracellular nature of a virus. This means that they cannot exist outside of a living cell. But if this were true, then it would also be true that they can not spread from one person to another. The pseudo-science of virology is full of logical fallacies that any inquisitive person can recognize.

Scientific studies require a control group. Meaning that two samples are needed where every factor is the same except for the presence of the thing being studied. But this can not be done in virology because a virus has never been isolated. When virologists claim they are isolating it, they are lying. This is evident today with the latest so-called proofs that SARS-CoV-2 has been isolated.

In both the “Isolation and rapid sharing of the 2019 novel coronavirus” published by the Medical Journal of Australia. And in the “Viral isolation analysis of SARS-CoV-2” from Japan’s Journal of Infection and Chemotherapy, the titles suggest that they isolated a virus. But they clearly did not.

They took material from the most contaminated source possible, the nose, which acts as a filter by capturing particulates inhaled from the environment. And at no point did they isolate a virus from this sample. What they did was run the entire mix of unknown material through a PCR test, and claimed that it tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. But we know that the PCR test is not capable of isolating a virus, and we know it’s been deliberately adjusted to give false positive results. So this is not science, it is fraud. They then inoculated a culture of cells with the entire mix of nose material, added in unspecified material, and the cells died. At no point in these experiments was a virus ever isolated. They in fact did the opposite of isolation by adding foreign material to a mix of unknown material from a person’s nose. So even if the cells died as a result, there is no way of knowing what killed them.

There is an alternative theory that does not have massive funding from spurious foundations and Nobel Peace prizes to convince the public of it’s validity.

Terrain theory tells us that most of what we are told is a disease, is nothing more than the symptoms of a natural bodily process of healing and repairing tissues damaged from stress and external toxins. Cells naturally die and break down in a way that is identical to how virologists claim a virus behaves. And the very same foundations pushing the theory of the virus, have been simultaneously creating a more toxic world with petrochemical drugs that earn billions in profits. There are far more so-called diseases today than existed before this pseudo science was unleashed on society.

In 1859 Florence Nightingale published, Notes on Nursing, where in she wrote that “all disease… is more or less a reparative process… an effort of nature to remedy a process of poisoning or of decay, which has taken place… sometimes years beforehand.” She is saying that what we are told today are symptoms of a disease, are actually natural processes of the body healing itself from damage.

Manly P Hall, known best for his 1928 publication, The Secret Teachings of All Ages, gave a lecture in 1989 called, Magnetic Fields of the Human Body. In this lecture he described this same sentiment.

He said that each human body is surrounded by its own magnetic field which provides tremendous protection. And as long as the individual takes proper care of this magnetic field, it will heal all wounds and recover all bodily functions and organs. He said that the law of the energy field is also the law of integrity. When we break the laws of nature, we damage this flow, which in turn damages the individual’s vitality. This magnetic field can be damaged by negative attitudes such as fear, and destructive attitudes towards others. It can be damaged by drugs and alcohol, toxic substances, and any action contrary to the common good.

He went on to say that in ancient times looking upon objects perfect and complete in structure was therapeutic because looking upon them inspired an acceptance of perfect symmetry that positively effects our energy field. And conversely, when we accept discord as inevitable, our energy field is damaged.

For the past hundred years the same families and foundations have created a world of chaos and discord. And perhaps Terrain theory is correct, and the ancients were right, and we have been given a perfect divine vessel that will protect us so long as we look after it and live in accordance with the common good.

 

Connect with Greg Reese

Cover image credit: rachyt73




Dr. Tom Cowan on the Use of Chlorine Dioxide, Ozone, Methylene Blue, Carbon 60 (C60), Zeolite & Turpentine in the Context of “New Biology”

Dr. Tom Cowan on the Use of Chlorine Dioxide, Ozone, Methylene Blue, Carbon 60 (C60), Zeolite & Turpentine in the Context of “New Biology”

by Dr. Tom Cowan
video recorded March 13, 2024

 

A Discussion on Chlorine Dioxide, Ozone and Methylene Blue – 3/13/24

Video available at Dr. Tom Cowan Rumble & Odysee channels.

 

Truth Comes to Light editor’s note:

Below you will find some excerpts from Tom Cowan’s presentation. For additional details on any of the protocols he mentions, listen to the full video. The first part of the video covers the recently renewed “no virus” challenge. At approximate 18 minutes in, he begins to discuss the protocols mentioned in the title. Emphasis (bold) is mine. ~ Kathleen

 

 

Excerpts: 

So, a lot of people have asked, and they’ve heard me mention and talk about in the New Biology Clinic (practitioners), a number of medicines, or so-called medicines — and they are rightfully so, the people, wondering how these fit into New Biology principles, because some of them are so-called natural substances, but some of them are actually what you would call chemicals.

So the list includes chlorine dioxide, or chlorine dioxide solution, and methylene blue, ozone, turpentine, C-carbon, zeolite, and there’s probably others.

And so there’s a lot of controversy, I think, within our group as to, well, everything from ‘these are amazing healing substances which everyone should have in their therapeutic handbag’…

[…]

And another position is, ‘I would never use something like those, because they’re basically chemicals’ — or ‘Maybe they’re from natural things, but they can only repress symptoms and anyways aren’t they meant to kill organisms like viruses and bacteria and fungi? And I thought that we’re not about killing stuff, because all these organisms are really out there to help us.’

So I thought I would take a look at that and give us a certain point of view that hopefully will make this question easier to understand and maybe hope give us some guidance on this…

[…]

So, let’s look at the first one which was chlorine dioxide. And not so long ago we had a conversation with Andreas Kalcker who I would say probably knows more about the use of chlorine dioxide than anybody else alive right now.

[Here Tom reads descriptions of what chlorine dioxide is and shares one of several protocols available for preparing and using it.]

So, what is it doing?

So if we, (and I would say this was more or less in agreement with what Andreas was telling us in our our conversation with him) that basically chlorine dioxide is a charge, or what he would call electron donor.

Now, that already is a little bit problematic in a sense… because we’re taught, and we’ve gone through what does it mean to be an oxygen donor. So we talked about Gerald Pollock’s very interesting research that we don’t actually absorb oxygen from the air. What we absorb and in his view were electrons.

I would actually change the word of electrons, since as I’ve been over, if you look at the model of the atom that we’re told, which is that the atom has a nucleus with protons and neutrons and then has electrons circling around it. So, basically a make-believe model…

[…]

And I think the word calling something a negative charge is an inappropriate terminology. So it’s not a negative charge, but it’s a certain kind of charge, which is opposite or different than other kinds of charge, which we call positive charge.

And that gets into a little bit of semantics. So let’s just say that the reason we need oxygen is because oxygen is a strong donor of the charge, which is what we need to produce energy and to create actually life.

So now we’re talking about a fundamentally different view of what a living system is, or even what substance is.

And I think what I’m talking about is at the end of the day, and the bottom line is, we have a very unclear and primitive and unformed, and I would even use the word ‘incorrect’. about what physical substance actually is.

So we know, for instance, with very clear experiments and accurate measurements. that if you shine a coherent beam of light into a very thin layer of some solid object like gold or silver or something, that 99% of the volume of that silver sheet or gold sheet, the light will go through unimpeded as if there is nothing there.

In other words, 99% of the area of a solid substance like a sheet of gold, there’s nothing there.

Now that led them to create the model that there’s these atoms linked together and they have nuclei. And what’s circling around them is electrons. And then there’s other people who dispute that. I’ve gone over that. And they say that that little part, that less than 1% that actually scatters the light (that’s the only part that scatters the light) that is the whole atom.

Now, whichever those two it is, you’re still left with the question of how come this chair or this desk or this sheet of very thin gold feels, seems, appears, and by every sensory observation appears to be a solid structure.

It’s not made of 99% of nothing. So even if it’s a nucleus that’s less than 1% of the mass, or even if it’s the whole atom that’s less than 1% of the mass, either way, you’re left with the dilemma of: So what is it made of?

And that includes us. So what are we made of? It appears that we’re not made of substance, because that doesn’t make any sense at all.

So we’re essentially made of charge. We’re like a battery. And we use certain processes to recharge our battery.

Interestingly, if you look at the work of Wilhelm Reich and others, you know, the whole phenomena of sexual activity and orgasm is a simply a way to recharge your battery. It’s an interesting way of looking at it. And connecting with the sun and the earth is another fundamental polarity that recharges our battery. And breathing in the air is a way of absorbing the some charge that we erroneously or (some other word) call oxygen.

So we’re actually absorbing charge from the sort of plasma or ether field around us. And that is what gives us life.

As well as exposure to the sun and the earth, which creates a fundamental polarity of the earth donating so-called negative charges, which again isn’t really a negative charge, and the sun donating a sort of positive charge. This is the male/female polarity, which also comes to a sort of fruition, like I said, in this sexual act.

So it’s possible, and I think the real way to understand what chlorine dioxide does, is it’s simply a molecule that has been somehow configured to be a very strong donor of this so-called electronegative or polar charge.

And since, in a sense, the root of all disease is a loss of the charge and your battery is running down and becoming dead, you can understand why giving somebody a very strongly donating substance, like chlorine dioxide, which is exactly how Andreas Kalcker described it to us — it has a very strong ability to donate this electronegative so-called charge, and therefore promote healing.

Now, it looks like that it kills bacteria or viruses or fungi, but that itself is an illusion because it’s not killing anything.

What it’s doing, like Florence Nightingale said, this decay process is a function of your battery running out. So if you allow — if you donate this charge and sort of recharge your battery, then the tissue stops decaying, and your decay process, once it stops, then the bacteria don’t have to come to feed off the decay.

And that which we erroneously call viruses which are just a misunderstanding of these decaying particles that are coming from your tissue, they obviously stop or are lessened.

And so you think you’ve killed the virus or killed the bacteria when you’ve done no such thing. You’ve actually restored the health of the tissue. And then the bacteria don’t need to feed off the decaying tissue, and there’s no viruses that are produced.

They’re not actually viruses anywhere. There’s only decaying tissue.

The fungi go away because they don’t have to eat up your decaying tissue to help you out, and then you seem a whole lot better.

Now, I think if you frame it like that, then you have a realistic understanding.

I’m not saying that I or anybody else knows… I mean, we still have this fundamental sort of dilemma of how electromagnetic phenomena, waves, frequencies, create a solid stuff called ‘you’.

I don’t know how that happens, but I know that that seems to be all we’re actually made of or all anything is made of, because the particles have been shown not to exist, and the electromagnetic waves and frequencies have.

So that’s what this world, this universe that we’re living in is made of, so we might as well accept that, and we might as well work with it.

Now, here’s the bottom line. If you think like this and understand the world in this way, and then you don’t want to end up having to use a chemical substance like chlorine dioxide, you would understand that a better strategy is to reserve your charge through eating living food, and through regular constant movement (not constant, but regular movement) in the outdoors, in the sunshine with bare feet or somehow connected to the earth, and to avoid toxic radiation fields or electromagnetic fields as much as possible.

Use other grounding devices and other tools like seawater and other plants and other extracts and other things, breathing better to do harmonious breathing or the breathing that we’re teaching in the clinic, or the Wim Hof breathing.

All these are regular normal ways that you can preserve your health so that you don’t need to get into the position of ‘now I have this horrible, quote, urine infection, and I need to do something right away’.

Now, having said that, and having worked almost four decades as a doctor, I don’t particularly have a problem with using a very safe substance, which is what all these appear to be, like chlorine dioxide solution, to temporarily relieve somebody suffering who’s got urinary tract infection, or a whole lot worse.

I mean, every illness, so-called, is a manifestation of decay and poisoning and a loss of charge, and in particular this loss of charge due to exposure to electropositive toxic substances in our world.

And so, if you can, in addition, and I would be very clear, in addition or on top of doing all the other things, like the food and the movement and the sunshine, and the, you know, not succumbing to repeated negative thought pattern and all the other things, and using, you know, other breathing techniques that help you put you in a state where you’re charged and working on your intimate relationships so you can recharge your battery, all these things, that should be first.

But again, I have no problem with somebody using chlorine dioxide solution in the way that I just described to help them out, because I see very little downside reported or something that I’ve observed…

[…]

I think the more important principle is to understand what it’s doing, which I think I have just described. Then you can see how it fits in, and that it is a wonderful and appropriate tool to help us out, as we’re also doing all the things to regain our charge.

Now, interestingly, if we go to the next one, which is methylene blue, which I never even heard of until maybe a few months ago, you find almost the same thing…

[…]

So when you realize that this substance has been effectively used to treat this and works in a reductive sort of way similar to how oxygen works, you start realizing…that this is a oxygen, i.e. a charge donor.

And it just happens to be a different chemical, which happens to, for whatever kind of molecular (it’s the wrong word, probably) reason, able to donate charge more effectively than most other things, you could see why it has become an interesting treatment for all sorts of degenerative neurodegenerative disease, particularly memory problems, depression, Parkinson’s pain, Alzheimer’s, all these things, which are basically just a losing of the of the electrical charge in the deepest, most profound area where the charge has to work, which is our nervous system.

It does this in the same way that oxygen would, but in this case, as they say, the oxygen therapy isn’t strong enough. So there happens to be this chemical, which seems to have very low or almost no toxicity that is able to strongly donate a negative charge and make a seemingly dramatic difference in people suffering from these sorts of conditions.

Now, again, I haven’t used it and maybe somebody will convince me that there is some negative effects from this. There may be that I couldn’t find any documentation of this so far…

[…]

One of the places I think we need to be sure I know they use methylene blue also widely with animal medicine with good effects. And there is some concern that some of the methylene blue that’s sold over the Internet is not really methylene blue. And so I would be careful about that. One place that I know you can get it that claims that it’s exactly the same chemical and they put it in structured water and they put some so-called healing frequencies is a website onlyresultscount.com. And they have a fairly inexpensive product, which you can easily get and they have a lot of directions on how to use it…

[…]

So I have some other things here like ozone, but I think you can start to see that there’s a pattern here. So ozone is just adding extra oxygen, which is adding another form of delivering this that oxygen provides to us, which is this so-called electronegative charge, which is the reason we’re sick in the first place…

[…]

Turpentine, we’ve been over a fair amount, and I would refer you to the interview that I did with our friend Andy Kaufman and the work of Jennifer Daniels…

I’m not aware of any analogy you could make with restoring the charge. But my guess is if you really looked into it, you would find something like that as well….

Zeolite and Carbon C60 seem to be things that have negative charge or a certain structure that helps to bind with these positively charged so-called toxins. You know, Andreas Kalker essentially made the comment that every toxic substance is basically a positively charged molecule. I’m not sure if that’s true, but Carbon C60 is these sort of buckyball things which is loaded with these negative charges which attracts this toxic stuff and essentially captures them inside the carbon structure and allows your body to eliminate them. The same thing with zeolite. There’s of course many arguments about what form of zeolite and how to use it…

[…]

I think all these things are interesting and positive approaches to the question of what it all boils down to is how can we help detoxify and how can we help prevent our tissues from decaying.

And that has all goes back to we’re essentially like a living battery. And our living battery is charged through the food and through the way we think and through connection with movement and through connection with the sun and the earth…

 

Connect with Dr. Tom Cowan




Nano Drug Delivery Systems in Smart Healthcare

Nano Drug Delivery Systems in Smart Healthcare

by Rosanne Lindsay, Traditional Naturopath, Nature of Healing
March 14, 2024

 

In the interest of answering questions generated by the article, ”Pretending to be Alternative,” I am expanding on nano delivery systems. Buckle your seatbelts!

Are all brands of Ivermectin alike?

There are many formulations of Ivermectin on the market. If Ivermectin is used ‘off-label’ then it can be prescribed for unapproved uses. Ivermectin was intended as an anti-parasitic medication, for repeated use, since it only kills adult parasites, not the eggs.

Several pharmaceutical companies manufacture and supply Ivermectin on a global scale. Unless you, as a patient, request the package insert of the drug, you will not necessarily know the specific lot# or ingredients to ask questions of the medical doctors who dispense them.

Today, as an ‘off-label’ drug, Ivermectin is sold for many different symptoms.  In Australia, since June 2023, the prescribing of oral ivermectin for ‘off-label’ uses will no longer be limited to specialists such as dermatologists, gastroenterologists and infectious diseases specialists. In the U.S., Ivermectin is still not FDA-approved to treat COVID.

Most people who choose to take Ivermectin, do so because it is marketed as “alternative” and is “not FDA-approved.” These phrases seem to hold special powers to some people, even though Ivermectin is still a pharmaceutical drug.

At the same time, pharmaceuticals have been upgraded to keep up with “advances” in technology.

Do All Ivermectin drugs contain Nano Lipid Particles (NLPs)?

Little is known about when lipid nanocarriers first appeared on the Ivermectin scene, but lipid and nano-drug delivery systems have been used in pharma-drugs since at least 1995. A 2017 study used nano lipid carriers as an Ivermectin delivery system for head lice.

Ivermectin was not well publicized before doctors began prescribing it ‘off-label,’ as an “alternative” treatment for COVID-19.

To assess the efficacy and safety of Ivermectin for COVID, a 2021 study reported: “Of the 41 study results contributed by included studies, about one third were at overall high risk of bias.”  The study concluded:

Overall, the reliable evidence available does not support the use ivermectin for treatment or prevention of COVID-19 outside of well-designed randomized trials.

Generally, if scientists are writing about a protocol in their research, it implies it is used in practice as an industry standard. How else are these drugs delivered to the right part of the body? A 1995 study described the Nano Lipid Carrier delivery method:

Nano lipid carriers are a delivery system composed of a solid matrix that contains liquid nano-fatty particles. These nanoparticles are approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and European Medicines Agency (EMA) and possess a controlled and continuous release capability, have a cellular dimension and are compatible with tissues and cells

Did Ivermectin, in 2021, contain NanoLipid Carrier (NPC)  Delivery Systems?

It is confusing to know for sure whether Ivermectin, or other “alternative” pharmaceutical drugs, of 2021 or earlier, used lipid nanoparticles as a drug delivery system. From the the 2019 study featured in my earlier article on Ivermectin, this statement is noted under “Methods:”

To overcome the limitations observed in some drug formulations and resistance, we used nano lipid carriers (NLCs) as a targeted and sustained drug delivery system for IVM.

This statement does not make known whether NLCs are standard practice in the market, or typical for this drug. However, we can assume this methodology is standard practice at least in the last few decades. According to this 2023 study:

Over the past several decades, liposomes have been extensively developed and used for various clinical applications such as in pharmaceutical, cosmetic, and dietetic fields, due to its versatility, biocompatibility, and biodegradability, as well as the ability to enhance the therapeutic index of free drugs.

Per this 2016 study: the authors wrote: “Nanomedicine is an emerging field that employs nanosized materials for applications in disease diagnosis and therapeutics. For example, nanotechnology-based methods and materials have been developed for the diagnosis and treatment of cancer. Nano-carrier delivery systems are also used in the treatment of Neuropsychiatric disorders and as targeted therapy in chronic diseases since 2019. Further, off-label medications for psychiatric disorders are frequently used for unapproved indications.

To be clear, my article on Pretender Alternatives focused on nanotechnology in general not only on NLCs. Whether products are lipid-based-nano or Beeswax-based-nano, it is still “nano.”

The doctors who prescribe nano-drugs are not trained in nanomedicine or their delivery systems. By plausible deniability, doctors can deny any knowledge of nanotech in their drugs. Thus, they are not responsible for disclosing known health effects of nanobots to patients.

Nano-electric Delivery Systems

Nano-medicine implies electronics.

In the 1990s, research conducted in the microelectronics industry was applied to the design of immunoassays, and since then the applications for immunoassays have expanded using nanotechnology.

This movement has been dubbed as microfluidic and lab-on-a-chip technology. Research in LOC systems is expected to extend towards downscaling of fluid handling structures as well, by using nanotechnology.

In 2024, the National Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI), celebrates 25 years of nanotechnology. That suggests 25 years in products, medicines, and food. It is also floats in the air as Smart Dust and microplastic rain.  Cloudy with a chance of plastics? The purpose of Smart Dust Smart rain, and Smart Healthcare is for wireless monitoring and surveillance.

Smart dust is a system of tiny electromechanical sensors that detect and wirelessly transmit real-time data from their environment. Measured at one cubic millimeter or less, these devices are dispersed in large quantities as a networked cluster suspended in mid-air.

Point of Care Diagnostics

Biosurveillance, through biosensors, implies remote access to the body as part of the global Smart Health evolution.  This happens through point of care diagnostics:

Glucose meters can also be used by diabetics at home to monitor levels and to adjust their insulin if necessary.

Biosensors are electrochemical transducers found on, and inside, the body that turn biological signals into wireless electrical signals. See Timeline here.

There is no reason to look for chip technology as RFID chips, or implantable chips. In a digital-nano world chips are invisible. Biosensors are now wireless and non-invasive, used in Point of Care applications to monitor people in biomedical healthcare settings such as Telehealth and Biotelemetry.

What about binders, such as zeolites? 

Zeolites are advertised to remove toxic metals by binding to them for removal from the body. Would zeolite be of assistance when it comes to nanotech?

The industry has already thought of that. Today, zeolite binds, while also building its own system.  Zeolites are used in many biomedical applications from detoxification to Diabetes and bone formation, including biosensors. This way, a biosensor map of the world can identify people in real-times, whether you are pharmaceutical-friendly or “alternative.” Biosensing is basis of Smart Delivery, Monitoring, Surveillance, and Healthcare.

Usage of zeolites improves characteristics of the biosensors. In particular, sensitivity, linear range, and limit of detection are enhanced.

Everyone must do their own research to understand the world of electronics, its applications, and its implications for the future of health.

 

Rosanne Lindsay is a Traditional Naturopath, Herbalist, Writer, and Author of the books The Nature of Healing, Heal the Body, Heal the Planet and Free Your Voice, Heal Your Thyroid, Reverse Thyroid Disease Naturally. Find her on Facebook at facebook.com/Natureofhealing. Consult with her remotely at www.natureofhealing.org.

 

Connect with Rosanne Lindsay, Traditional Naturopath

Cover image credit: CDD20


See related:

Pretending to be Alternative: Toxic Pharmaceuticals With “Intelligent Surfaces”




“Incubus Project” – Second Evaluation (96 Hours of Exposure)

“Incubus Project” – Second Evaluation (96 Hours of Exposure)

by La Quinta Columna
March 11, 2024

 

Growth formation of material from the Comirnaty Pfizer injectable under certain conditions (using a reptile incubator).

After 96 hours of exposure at 37 degrees Celsius (simulating human body temperature) and constant ultraviolet light stimulation, we proceed to analyze the result again by optical microscopy.

Haxon Achilles II Microscope, bright field
Magnification: 120 X – 1800 X.

 

Collaborate with La Quinta Columna:
https://www.laquintacolumna.info/colabora-con-la-quinta-columna/

 

For background see:

La Quinta Columna’s Incubus Project: Continuing Analysis of Big Pharma’s “Vaccine” Injectables




Nisa Khan With Jeremy Nell: Why LED Lighting Is Harmful to All Life

Nisa Khan With Jeremy Nell: Why LED Lighting Is Harmful to All Life

 

by Jeremy Nell, Jerm Warfare
originally published February 16, 2024

 

Nisa Khan is a scientist with a strong focus on lighting and, specifically, LED lighting and its dangers.

LED stands for Light Emitting Diode. It is a semiconductor device that emits light when an electric current passes through it. LEDs are used in a wide range of applications, from indicator lights on devices to street lighting to cars and large display screens. They are known for their efficiency, long life, and low energy consumption compared to traditional light sources like incandescent bulbs.

 

 

Up until this conversation with Nisa, I was in a committed relationship with LED lighting. Now, however, our relationship is on rocky ground.

Isaac Newton (1642 to 1727)

Newton and Gauss

Isaac Newton was a British mathematician and physicist, known for developing the laws of motion and universal gravitation.

Carl Friedrich Gauss, a German mathematician and physicist, made big contributions to many fields, including number theory, algebra, statistics, and astronomy. In fact, he is generally believed to be one of the greatest mathematicians of all time.

Carl Friedrich Gauss (1777 to 1855)

Newton’s Principia introduced the law of gravity as philosophy, which later Western scientists interpreted as experimental philosophy.

However, Nisa suggests that he lacked the advanced calculus needed for an analytical proof and did not empirically prove the law himself; Henry Cavendish attempted this much later, but his justification was incomplete.

Meanwhile, she says that a deeper understanding of Gauss’s laws should be mandatory.

Newton’s Principia introduced the law of gravity as philosophy, which later Western scientists interpreted as experimental philosophy.

However, Nisa suggests that he lacked the advanced calculus needed for an analytical proof and did not empirically prove the law himself; Henry Cavendish attempted this much later, but his justification was incomplete.

Meanwhile, she says that a deeper understanding of Gauss’s laws should be mandatory.

Nisa Khan on Newton and Gauss — Download PDF

Mathematics is the queen of sciences, and arithmetic the queen of mathematics.

~ Carl Gaus

Why does this matter?

It’s quite scientific and, therefore, complicated.

 

Halogen is slightly less artificial than LED

 

As somebody who colours in pictures and talks to people for a living, I struggle with complex scientific discussions like this, but here’s my summary for those of you who are like me:

  • LED lighting is different from natural light sources like the sun and fire, and it is light pollution when it does not emit pure white light.
  • The three-dimensional nature of light and the two-dimensional nature of artificial light make a huge difference to our health.
  • Understanding Gauss’s law can lead to better illumination and healthier environments.
  • LED lighting is harmful because it is two-dimensional.
  • Mainstream science lacks a comprehensive understanding of light.
  • The use of natural light sources, such as fire and candles, is optimal for human health.

I think that covers the gist of everything.

 

Connect with Jeremy Nell, Jerm Warfare




La Quinta Columna’s Incubus Project: Continuing Analysis of Big Pharma’s “Vaccine” Injectables

La Quinta Columna’s Incubus Project: Continuing Analysis of Big Pharma’s “Vaccine” Injectables
Ricardo Delgado Presents Questions & a Hypothesis

 

Incubus Project

by Ricardo Delgado, La Quinta Columna
the video below is an English translation provided by La Quinta Columna

March 10, 2024

 

Growth formation of the material from the Comirnaty Pfizer injectable after being subjected to certain conditions (using a reptile incubator).

After 48 hours of exposure to 37 degrees Celsius (simulating human body temperature) and constant ultraviolet light stimulation, we proceeded to analyse the result again by optical microscopy.

Haxon Achilles II microscope, bright field.

Magnification: 120 X – 1800 X


Video, translated from Spanish to English by La Quinta Columna, is available at La Quinta Columna Rumble & Odysee channels.

 

Collaborate with La Quinta Columna:
https://www.laquintacolumna.info/colabora-con-la-quinta-columna/

 


 

Transcript prepared by Truth Comes to Light
[images are screenshots from video]

 

Based on what we know about the contents of the so-called vaccines, the COVID vaccines, they contain graphene and nanotechnology.

Here we have some images obtained via optical microscopy.

Well, we’re seeing formations that you’re used to seeing with not a lot of magnification, around a hundred magnification. And showing you points under the light of the condensator, we can see that these are little crystals that Dr. Roger Leir called orthorhombic crystal structures that are radio-modulable in a scalar manner via 5G.

In scientific literature, they correspond to graphene nanostructures, plasma, micro antennae. We have microfilaments, strands, and you’re used to seeing all of this, of course.

This is before putting the sample through the incubation process.

 

 

We’ll give it a little bit more magnification so that you can see those quadrangular patterns over here. We’ve got some over here. You can see that they’re those little squares.

 

 

Here’s a big piece of a graphene microfoil, and we’ve got hundreds in a single drop in just one centimeter squared, with about 800 magnification.

This is more graphene. Here you can see those quadrangular patterns. This is in profile. Sometimes they turn on the sample, and they even assemble themselves. Later on you’ll see some examples of those that have already assembled. And unfortunately, we’re quite used to seeing all of this.

 

 

This is another quadrangular pattern. This is a micro, almost nanoparticle, and we’ve got about a 1000 something magnification. And this is all normal, which shouldn’t be normal, based on what we know.

This is more graphene.

 

 

This is very characteristic, isn’t it?

Take note here. It is true that we’ve got around a 1000 magnification.

 

 

We’re just taking a look at a single drop here.

 

 

Here we go back to 100-120 magnification only. What we’re trying to do is find those ovoid shape structures.

We’re used to seeing this type of filament and strands, even the quadrangular patterns that you can see on the left.

 

 

It’s incredible that all of this is in a single injectable, as you can see here. And that metallic junk is in everybody — that everybody can see and that nobody says anything.

Now they’re talking about microplastics. But don’t worry because the video will be uploaded onto La Quinta Columna info’s website. It’s the Incubus Project.

Here what we’re seeing is another assembled structure of graphene. You’ve got a quadrangular pattern here.

 

 

And for those that said these were salt crystals (you remember that) or sugar crystals, it’s incredible all of this. This is such a determined attack against the whole of humankind. And this is in plain sight of everybody.

And nevertheless, all this is still going forward. There are still people that talk about vaccine, about RNA.

Here we have another assembled structure, a little bit more elaborate. Obviously none of this is normal. None of this should be in any injectable. but now that we have acquired this knowledge since 2021, none of this surprises us. Although unfortunately, most of the planet is not aware of this. They think that we’re talking in terms of vaccines still.

 

 

Now the good things come along. We’re going to place the sample of two drops of Comirnaty Pfizer in an incubator for reptiles.

The new environmental conditions are 37 degrees centigrade with a constant temperature and ultraviolet light. After 48 hours, we analyze the sample again via optical microscopy. And these are the results that we have obtained.

First of all, what we can see is that the graphene is kind of like more diluted. That’s the feeling we get. But this is not what draws our attention.

Here we can see a formation that you’ll see in just a second. Take note of this.

This is new. I’m just going to stop there. And this is what has appeared after exposure to ultraviolet radiation, to constant heat.

And you’ll see this with a greater magnification later. But one gets the feeling that there’s a kind of generation of a tree. And you can see a series of nodules or nodes. And you’ll see that from each nodule or node, there are three strands that come out.

 

 

It’s similar to what Franc Zalewski, electron microscopy found with an electron microscopy.

We’re going to do the same with the similar system with 25 — this is 25 microns, which is about 25,000 nanometers. And there’s just two days that have gone by, 48 hours. And the day after tomorrow, that will make four days, which are 96 hours. And we’ll have a look at it again then.

I’m not sure whether these are neural networks. The carbon nanotubes are, but these aren’t nanotubes. So anyhow, we’ll see this later. Let’s continue.

 

 

One gets the feeling that there’s a hatching or eclosion happening.

A little bit more magnification now.

 

 

Somebody said that if the sample dries up, there’ll be no evolution, but it doesn’t dry up because there’s hydrogel.

Let’s have a look at it now with a clear or light field.

This is what I want you to observe now. There’s a nucleus that looks metallic in nature, and each node has three limbs or extremities.

There’s the third one. Can you see it?

 

 

And this coincides exactly with what Dr. Franc Zalewski said. And we’re going to do everything possible to get in touch with him. Let’s remember what he said.

“I marked the vials numbers one, two and three. Only the third one was that thing inside. And it grew and developed for four days. And then I put it into a sputtering chamber. There the temperature is high so that the graphite is sputtered or pulverized…”

Similar to the habitat we have created inside the incubator.

Another thing is that we don’t know whether inside the incubator we’re going to be able to recreate the conditions inside the human body in terms of temperature and exposure to ultraviolet light. I think though we will be able to.

And about the intake of insects, not sure there.

“There’s another one. If there were only one, but here we can see another one. We can see the head and legs coming out of it. The scale is 30 microns.

‘The thing’ has found fertile ground. And here we have ‘the thing’. That thing is smiling at us.”

 

 

From La Quinta Coluna, we are studying the evolution of the sample submitted to the new incubation environmental conditions.

We suggest as a starting hypothesis that there will be a transformation during the exposure of the content of the Comirnaty Pfizer vial.

The sample will be submitted to evaluation via optical microscopy every 48 hours. So that’s the video. This is what we have.

And this is based on what we can get to know from what we’ve done. And we will not hide this information. We will make this information public.

And as and when we get more samples and as and when more time goes by, this will hopefully give us the key to what is evolving in that.

The question, not the conclusion we’ve reached, far from it, but the question is, are they using human bodies as incubators?

And is that why they don’t want to get rid of our bodies and biologies or human beings in general?

When they obtain biomedical or biometric data from individuals, is it really to monitor human beings or is it rather to monitor the conditions of the human beings as incubators?
These are just questions I’m asking.

In order to incubate, if anything is being incubated or if something is germinating, what is it incubating? Those are the questions that I’m asking.

Why do they want human beings to eat insects? Is it to normalize the feeding of insects so that they can survive or is it to feed something that they have introduced previously?

Why heat? They’re clearly generating artificial heat via geoengineering to everybody’s surprise. Because they precisely need that heat.

They need blue ultraviolet light and at the same time as this technological implementation of ultraviolet light is being implemented all over the world. There are many casualties or things that just seem to be there by chance.

So these are just questions.

And so we’re using the descriptive format just as they do based on everything we observe. The day after tomorrow we’ll have further images.

 


See Related:

La Quinta Columna: The Game is Over — Putting It All Under the Microscope: The Transhumanist Agenda, ‘Covid-19’, Graphene Oxide & The Human Brain Project, WiFi Radiation… & the Hidden, Historical Manipulation of Humanity

 

Cover image credit: TheDigitalArtist