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




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




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




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




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




“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




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




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 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




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




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




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




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




Pretending to be Alternative: Toxic Pharmaceuticals With “Intelligent Surfaces”

Pretending to be Alternative: Toxic Pharmaceuticals With “Intelligent Surfaces”

 

Pretending to be Alternative

by Rosanne Lindsay, Traditional Naturopath, Nature of Healing
March 9, 2024

 

Since the onset of the Covidan Era in 2019, the “alternative media” and its alternative media celebrities, have occupied a greater percentage of center stage.  They didn’t have to push their way into the spotlight since they own part of it, a section further upstage.

The “alternative media” has upstaged the mainstream media in the promotion, and selling, of “alternative remedies ” for COVID-19. Among the many options is Ivermectin.

In 2020, I wrote an article on the dangers of Ivermectin in the article, The Rise of Ivermectin, found here. Additional information was published by Vaccine Impact here. Why bring up yesterday’s news?

Old news is new again when new information becomes available. What the many “alternative” faces did not reveal about their “alternative” products is that they were not alternative at all. They contain the same materials as the standard issue EUA injectables and pills. They only come packaged with a less inflammatory script.

Pretending to be Alternative

Beware of “off label” drugs, such as Ivermectin, pretending to be alternative. They are pharmaceuticals. Today, they are built with intelligent surfaces designed to work with 6G systems for wide-scale global deployment. In 2024, 5G has become yesterday’s news. The new narrative boasts  7G to succeed 5G and 6G.

While we already know these products are prescription drugs, we should know that they work with nanotechnology and are activated by electromagnetic frequencies as part of digital surveillance systems.

This has been true since 2003, when president George Bush signed the 21st Century Nanotechnology Research and Development Act. Since then, over thirty Federal departments, independent agencies, and commissions work together toward a brave new world of cybernetics, cognitive technology, and digital surveillance systems.

But what about the stories of people Ivermectin has helped?

Pharmaceuticals may help the body, before they hurt it. Ivermectin is a known anti-parasitic. If it helps people, then they have parasites. And these days, who doesn’t have parasites? Especially when there are parasites among us, parasites in high places. However, Ivermectin studied in randomized, controlled trials showed no clinical benefit in the prevention or treatment of Covid-19. Toxic effects include: severe confusion, ataxia, seizures, and hypotension.

New oral antibodies are the next “alternative” product being marketed. Yet. alternative science, in 2012, claimed that antibodies, alone, are not enough to mount a natural and true immune response.  The activation of T cells comprise a primary “cell-mediated” immune response to an antigen stimulus.

How much help “alternative” products offer depends upon the individual ingredients, and whether they are injected (vaccine), ingested (pill), or inhaled (airborne).  The most immediate and potentially dangerous delivery system is by injection, since the materials bypass the body’s innate immune system to be delivered directly into the bloodstream.  From the blood, electromagnetic nanomaterials (lipdnanoparticles, graphene, and hydrogels), are carried to organs, tissues and cells, where they take up residence and become embedded into tissue.

Nanobots are self-assembling and self-replicating. They have artificial intelligence (A.I.). They take orders and commands, military-style. The National Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI) has been around for 25 years. NNI is the new supplement to the president’s 2024 budget called for under the provisions of the 21st Century Nanotechnology Research and Development Act (15 USC §7501). If the president is supplementing with A.I. as a budget item, then Americans should be aware of the updated national diet.

The “Alternative” Pharma Products

Choosing an “alternative” medication is still a medication. Thus, it is important to read the labels and do the research.

The REAL McCoy

With definitions ever-changing under a NanoNarrative, we need to return to “REAL.”  “Real” is eating clean with organic, grass fed meat and milk, pastured eggs, locally-grown vegetables and fruits, eating with the seasons. “Real” is connecting to Nature and the world of plants and herbs as medicine. “Real” does not require a label.

Food is the main fuel of the body. Still, in today’s world, food as fuel is not enough due to our many toxic exposures.

It is important to supplement with “real” ingredients, not “alternatives.” Supplementing foods should be food-based, such as fruit freshly harvested, nutrient-rich broths, and herbal preparations, such as teas and tinctures.  For example, when sourcing vitamin C, choose food-based C over ascorbic acid.

Real foods resemble body parts. Citrus fruits have a similar appearance to female mammals’ mammary glands. These fruits support breast health and lymphatic flow into and out of the breasts.

In a world of nanotech, it takes an effort to be natural. Get to know your local ‘small farmer’ as someone not small in stature, but small in commercial operation. The Weston A. Price Foundation connects people to local small farmers to source real foods. Find a local chapter here.

The farther from nature, the closer to synthetic A.I., the door to Cyborgs, and the realm of Transhumanism.

 

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.

 

Connect with Rosanne Lindsay, Traditional Naturopath

Cover image credit: qimono




Tom Cowan & Mark Bailey Issue a New Challenge for Virus-Pushers

New Challenge for Virus-Pushers
It Should Be So Easy for You, if “Viruses” Really Exist

by Christine Massey, Christine Massey’s “germ” FOI Newsletter
March 7, 2024

 

Greetings and Best Wishes,

Drs. Tom Cowan and Mark Bailey have issued a new “virus” challenge (here).

“Please note that the requirements for submission can be found at the following timecodes in this video: 2:16-11:20.”

Tom published a 5 minute follow up the next day: You can do it, send us your videos (here).

Please share this challenge with any/all prominent virus-pushers! Below is the email address for submissions:

“If you or someone you know believe that viruses have been isolated and have a rebuttal or scientific study to show us, please submit a short paper or a short video to conversationswithdrcowan@gmail.com and we will review & address these in a future webinar. Please note that the requirements for submission can be found in this video.”

Background:

Scientific thinking applied to “virus” isolation – Tom and Mark, February 29, 2024 (here).

And let’s not forget:

Samuel Eckert’s long-standing offer of a 1.5 million Euro reward for any:

“virologist who presents scientific proof of the existence of a corona virus, including documented control experiments of all steps taken in the proof”

Tip: Don’t attempt to collect without providing any evidence like Professor Ulrike Kämmerer!

And we still have the Settling The Virus Debate Challenge from Tom, Mark and 18 additional signatories including Professor Timothy Noakes and former Pfizer respiratory division VP, Michael Yeadon, issued in July 2022.

 

 

Tip: Don’t disqualify yourself as “scientist” Kevin McCairn did, by publicly insisting that your lab participate in a challenge where the labs must be blinded to each other’s identities!

*****

FOIs Summary

Freedom of Information Responses reveal that health/science institutions around the world (220 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 220 institutions:
https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/Institution-list-for-website.xls

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 (updated as of December 31, 2022) in 8 compilation pdfs, and my notarized declaration 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

Cover image credit: Abhi_Jacob




Hydrogel, Gel/Plastic and Rubbery Clots

Hydrogel, Gel/Plastic and Rubbery Clots
Are they all the same ‘thing’?

by David Nixon, Nixonlab
March 2, 2024

 

Hi Y’all,

I think that the microscopic findings of hydrogel and structures, the macroscopic finding from a sample of live blood that shows an abnormal protein ‘gel/plastic’ and the rubbery white clots that have been found by embalmers for over two years are all showing the same pathology.

They all showed up at the same time, although the gel/plastic was not recognised until later I bet it would have been there if anybody had looked earlier.

In all three situations I believe we are dealing with proteins that were soluble within hydrogels but have become insoluble and ‘drop’ out of solution.

We are all familiar with adding hot water to a sheet of gelatin and forming jelly.

 

 

Simplistically we are adding heat and forming a hydrogel. Imagine if we extracted heat and produced bits of gelatin sheet.

I think this, or something similar, is what we are observing microscopically. I don’t think the structure below is in the blood in the finger but it develops from the time of the finger prick to the time of viewing. This is a darkfield image, photo-stitch, with 40x objective. I have seen structures with this texture on a few occasions but not often. Clearly there are large amounts of nanoparticles present. I had to turn the gain down which has meant the surrounding red blood cells have largely disappeared.

 

 

Macroscopically, the identified abnormal protein that was identified and investigated by Prof Arne Burkhart we have call ‘gel/plastic’, clearly it is not a gel or plastic but this name serves as a place sitter. Ron Norris and Michael Merrick and more recently Bill from Missouri have led the way with drawing their own blood and centrifuging it as per Ron (please see Ron’s Substack). I have trialled successfully (and this is ongoing) Mike Merrick’s protocol for the oral use of thieves’ oil (LAC microscopy on Telegram). Unfortunately have not made time to write this up but will do so asap, promise!

Lastly, thoughts on the rubbery clots. I think these are mainly protein and form from the hydrogels after death, at least in the main part and I don’t think that they are what is causing death per se. But clearly they are associated with what’s going on.

So what do we do? Minimise EMF exposure. Avoid processed food. Ensure that drinking water is either distilled (then restructured and re-mineralised) or been through a reverse osmosis filter or is from a trusted non-contaminated source. Take regular activated charcoal, sodium citrate and follow the discussions with regard to gel/plastic. Consider other supplements from trusted sources. Consider flu-like symptoms as signs of toxicity. Don’t stick anything up your nose. Masks don’t help.

 

Connect with David Nixon




New Psychotic Technology to Stop Viruses That Don’t Exist

New Psychotic Technology to Stop Viruses That Don’t Exist
Without People’s Informed Consent or Knowledge

by Jon Rappport
February 29, 2024

 

Sounds like a bad horror movie. And it is, in real life.

Informed Consent Action Network (Feb 14, 2024) (*):

A new class of “encrypted RNA” vaccines are being developed where the RNA would piggyback onto an existing wild virus and spread from person to person without any person’s knowledge or consent.

This so-called “therapy” uses a technology called TIPs (Therapeutic Interfering Particles), which are described as “engineered molecular parasites” that piggyback on a wild virus. If you get the virus, you also get these parasites. Once inside an infected person, the TIPs are supposed to rapidly multiply, hijacking the resources the wild virus needs to multiply and therefore stopping the virus.

Supporters of this technology claim it will “solve” several problems with traditional vaccine delivery, including “behavior barriers” like noncompliance. Meaning everyone gets vaccinated—whether they like it or not.

Let me try to disentangle this.

Some naturally circulating virus (which doesn’t exist) will be captured and outfitted with lab-created molecular parasites.

The virus (which doesn’t exist) plus its attached parasites will enter the body, where the parasites will “hijack the resources” the virus (which doesn’t exist) needs to survive and multiply.

What resources would these be? The bloodstream? The nervous system? The brain? The anus?

And what does “hijack” mean? Destroy? Disable? Wall off from the rest of the body?

The virus (which doesn’t exist) stops multiplying and dies. Then that person is immune from further infection by that type of virus (which doesn’t exist).

I assume, when the wild virus plus the parasites enter the body, even though the virus doesn’t exist it’s a tiny blob of SOMETHING, rather than just an idea.

What would that something be? No idea.

Whatever the parasites are actually doing in the body, we know they’re not aiding in destroying the virus, because the virus doesn’t exist.

Glad we’ve cleared all that up.

 

Connect with Jon Rappoport

Cover image credit: CDD20




The REAL Sexual Revolution Is Loss of Sexuality

The REAL Sexual Revolution Is Loss of Sexuality
 Brought to you by antidepressants

by Jon Rappoport
February 27, 2024

 

I just read a stunner of an article by Freya India. It describes the crushing effects of SSRI antidepressants on young people:

SSRIs (Selective Serotonin Re-Uptake Inhibitors) are a common class of antidepressants used to treat depression, anxiety and other mental health problems. Popular SSRIs include Fluoxetine (Prozac), Escitalopram (Lexapro), and Sertraline (Zoloft). Something well established about these drugs is that they have sexual side-effects. In fact, between 40 and 65% of people who take an SSRI are thought to experience some form of sexual dysfunction. What few people know, though, is these side effects can persist even after coming off of the drugs—a condition called Post-SSRI Sexual Dysfunction (PSSD).

This is more than just low libido. It can be a total loss of libido, genital numbness, erectile dysfunction, an inability to orgasm and complete lack of sexual attraction. Emotional blunting is also common, with sufferers describing a numbing of positive emotions, no romantic feelings, and difficulty connecting with others…

In the UK, 1 in 3 teenagers aged 12 to 18 has been prescribed antidepressants. In 2022 alone, the number of children aged 13 to 19 taking antidepressants rose by 6,000 to 173,000…

And increasingly before puberty! In the UK, antidepressant prescriptions for children aged five to 12 years increased by more than 40% between 2015 and 2021. Aged five! Before they’ve even had the chance to develop normally! Online forums are already full of people sharing their experiences of puberty on SSRIs and now dealing with sexual dysfunction as adults. Stories of starting Zoloft at age 11 and never developing normal sexual sensation. Of being prescribed Prozac at 14 and not knowing what it’s like to have a libido. Of taking Lexapro for less than a month and still having genital numbness six years on.

Loss of sexual feeling, desire, interest.

And on top of that, tons of assurances from the Woke mob that having no sexuality is just fine. It’s a gender identity.

As opposed to a CHEMICAL DISASTER.

I went to Google and typed in “SSRIs loss of sexual feeling.” Here are the entries that sprang up:

NIH: “Sexual dysfunction in [SSRIs].”

Harvard Health: “Some people taking SSRIs aren’t able to have an orgasm at all. These symptoms tend to become more common with age…”

Mayo Clinic: “Effects on sexual function can include: A change in your desire for sex; Erectile problems; Orgasm problems; Problems with arousal, comfort and satisfaction.”

New York Times: “Doctors and patients have long known that antidepressants can cause sexual problems. No libido. Pleasureless orgasms. Numb genitals…”

So it’s no secret.

Except—how many doctors who are about to prescribe antidepressants to children tell their parents, “The drug can have serious sexual side effects”?

So there’s that. Widespread ignorance, because doctors keep their mouths shut about what they know.

And when all sexual feeling shuts down, a child is told, “Non-binary…asexual…gender…trans…it’s all fine…no problem…”

The kid thinks he’s on the cutting edge of a new society, a new culture, a new way of seeing male and female, a revolution.

It’s the drugs. THE DRUGS.

Chemical castration.

 

Connect with Jon Rappoport

Cover image credit: Tilixia-Summer




“Millions of People Have Long COVID”; Pinocchio’s Nose Got Longer, Too

“Millions of People Have Long COVID”; Pinocchio’s Nose Got Longer, Too

by Jon Rappoport
February 20, 2024

 

One new study, supporting the “millions” assertion, claims the most common long COVID symptom people report is tiredness after light physical or mental exercise.

Aha.

As we all know, feeling tired can only be caused by THE VIRUS.

“Doctor, six months ago, I was fine. But since then, I’ve been fatigued.”

“Right, Ms. Jones. You have long COVID.”

“Say what?”

“I diagnosed you with COVID six months ago. The disease is persisting.”

“Oh. Come to think of it, I started feeling tired right after you diagnosed me.”

“A coincidence.”

“I don’t think so. I left your office. I was depressed by the diagnosis, and when I got home I couldn’t run my usual nine miles for the day.”

“Are you saying I made you tired?”

“Yes, I believe I am.”

“I’ll write a note to Homeland Security. Expect a visit to your house. Open the door carefully and assure the agents you have no weapons and no dogs.”

Long COVID is long money. For doctors.

And of course, the virus doesn’t exist. So there’s that.

I’ve felt tired since 1952. I’ve successfully fought it off by limiting my conversations with long idiots.

If I were the predatory CEO of a pharmaceutical company, I’d establish studies proving every disease under the sun can have a long component, which must be treated with drugs and prevented by vaccines. For years.

Long flu, long colds, long eyestrain, long ass ache, etc.

Doctors received special training in medical school so they could make absurd diagnoses with a straight face.

Otherwise, this would happen:

“Doctor, when you just told me I have long COVID, you smiled. Why?”

“Sorry, I was keeping myself from laughing.”

“What?”

“Sometimes it gets to be too much.”

“You lost me.”

“Have you ever said something so stupid you busted out laughing?”

“I’m not sure.”

“Ha-ha. Sorry. I’m trying to be serious, but long COVID? I mean, come on. When I first read about it, I cracked up. I had to go home from the office. Everything started to seem funny. I couldn’t control myself.”

Someday, somebody will come up with Long Pregnancy. Women can remain pregnant for up to three years. But at the end, they don’t give birth. The baby they’ve been carrying is only a few cells. However, this is a serious condition and must be treated for the full duration of the pregnancy. Treated with very expensive drugs. Otherwise the patient could develop Chronic Fatigue, Mononucleosis, Rocky Mountain Spotted Fever, etc.

Some of these women, when untreated, also develop Tourette’s, even speak in tongues—which can be quite embarrassing in social situations. Like Thanksgiving dinner.

There is also a condition known as Long Sermons. People are exposed to it during church services. Some houses of worship may have to be closed down, in order to curb contagion out in the community. Psychiatrists can treat the disorder, with anti-psychotic drugs.

All of these long illnesses can be avoided if we start diagnosing doctors. You don’t need a license to participate. Invent your own disease and disorder labels. Offer the doctors help—at a price. No insurance, no Medicare or Medicaid. Straight cash for your services.

For every diagnosis you make, be sure to attach the word “long.”

You’ll be correct. What these doctors are suffering from, they’ve had for a long time. Possibly since college. Maybe even earlier.

Hell, tell them it’s genetic. Doing that lets you get away with anything.

Remind them of the story about Jesus and the Money Changers. Tell them they’re suffering from Long Money Changing. That’ll hit them where they live.

 

Connect with Jon Rappoport

Cover image credit: Prawny




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

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

Truth Comes to Light editor’s note: Many readers of this site (myself included) have long avoided pharmaceuticals. However, many of us have spent a lot of money on supplements over the years as we attempt to understand the cause of body imbalances. Below you will find a series of posts (translated from German) by Next Level taking a close look at the science behind “vitamins” and the production of supplements. As we are constantly being reminded these days, we must question everything. ~ Kathleen

 

The Vitamin Fraud – When Toxic Brew Is Sold as Effective

by Next Level
translated from German via Telegram translate
February 11, 2024

Preface

The concept of vitamins is a purely human invention. There are no published, controlled experiments in the scientific literature that confirm their natural existence. In fact, no “vitamin” has ever been directly observed in food. The only places where they are “detectable” are the results of laboratory processes (the bottom of a test tube) after a witch’s brew of poisonous chemicals is mixed, leaving a dregs of the substance.

False idea of proof

Vitamins, whose size is estimated to be around 1 to 2 nanometers, are probably 50 to 100 times smaller than the claimed SARS-CoV-2 virus, which has not been isolated and detected to date. If one were to enlarge a vitamin molecule to the size of a tennis ball, at the same scale this would correspond to a tennis ball that would be more than three times the diameter of the Earth. However, the presumed separate structures of these molecules have never been clearly isolated and clearly separated from other components.

There is no real gold standard

There is no single study that documents the clean isolation and biochemical characterization of a vitamin molecule to establish it as a pure, isolated standard for comparison. Instead, it analyzes the dregs of a byproduct of food that has been broken down by numerous harsh and toxic chemicals.

The extraction process (“isolation”) of a vitamin molecule

To isolate vitamin C from lemon juice, you start with a simple glass of juice and take it through an alchemical odyssey: first it is charged with lead, only to laboriously remove the lead later. Then you juggle with ammonia, acetic acid and a parade of solvents – from butyl to ethyl alcohol, to acetone to petroleum ether. After it has been heated, dried, reheated and dried again, the whole thing is served to the animals. If they don’t get scurvy, you’ve got it: ascorbic acid, better known as vitamin C, extracted through an impressive party of chemicals. Voila, science!

Synthetic production of vitamin supplements – a toxic chemical cocktail

The synthetic vitamins are made from petrochemicals (chemical products obtained from petroleum and natural gas), heavy metals and other toxic substances!

Professor Goran Nicolic and Dr. In 2015, Dragana Markovic explained some of the ingredients in commercially available vitamin pills.

  • Vitamin A = methanol, benzene, petroleum sulfonates; Acetylene; refined oils
  • Beta-carotene = methanol, benzene, petroleum sulfonates; Acetylene; refined oils
  • Vitamin B-1 = coal tar derivatives, hydrochloric acid; Acetonitrile with ammonia
  • Vitamin B-6 = Petroleum esters & hydrochloric acid mixed with formaldehyde
  • Vitamin B-12 = Cobalamin reacts with cyanide (salt of hydrogen cyanide)
  • Vitamin D = Irradiated animal fat/bovine brain or solvent extracted
  • etc
Reasons for a positive experience?

Some experience positive effects when taking vitamin supplements, in part because of the placebo effect, which is reinforced by the expectation of a positive effect. But the variety and type of chemicals in the manufacturing process result in a complex mixture, not a pure vitamin molecule. This mixture contains harsh chemicals and byproducts that the body must neutralize. A state of high alert. This sympathicotonic state can interrupt other regenerative processes, where symptoms are present through the recovery phase (see UniversalBiology), often resembling a feeling of exhaustion. Taking vitamin supplements can lead to a short-term feeling of improvement, similar to taking antibiotics. However, in the long term, exposure to these substances can be harmful.


The vitamin fraud – a billion dollar business without evidence

by Next Level
translated from German via Telegram translate
February 11, 2024

Cochrane Collaboration: No positive effect from taking specific “vitamins”

Critics in particular like to cite the renowned Cochrane Collaboration in other cases to support their statements. You must have missed this extensive meta-study on antioxidants & vitamins.

The results of the Cochrane Collaboration study on antioxidant supplements is further evidence and deserves special attention, not only because of its size, but also because of the quality and methodology of the research included. With 78 randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and a total of 296,707 participants, it is one of the most comprehensive analyzes on this topic. Its particular value lies in its exclusive consideration of RCTs , the gold standard of clinical research , all of which were conducted with control groups . This guarantees high reliability and accuracy of the results.

Another notable highlight of this study is the finding that antioxidant supplements, including beta-carotene, vitamin A, vitamin C, vitamin E and selenium , had no positive effect on health. On the contrary, the results suggested that certain antioxidants such as beta-carotene and vitamin E may even significantly increase mortality . These findings are particularly important because they challenge the common assumption that antioxidants are beneficial to health.

Source: Cochrane Collaboration (study)

“Vitamin molecule” – A misleading term

The term “vitamin” is misleading. It suggests the idea of a specific, single molecule that is about 1 to 2 nanometers in size. However, the assumption that these molecules exist in an isolated form and occur precisely in nature is a misinterpretation forced by the concept of molecules.

In reality, natural foods like apples, cucumbers, fish, etc. work in their entirety – not through the idea of isolated molecules like “vitamins”. The idea that vitamins act as single, isolated molecules is a simplistic and therefore misleading concept.

What is sold as “vitamins” is actually a newly created product. It is created through a manufacturing process that uses numerous toxic and aggressive chemicals and is based on a raw material.

The artificial product “Vitamin”

A key problem in the current debate is that many people’s molecular understanding is not sufficiently developed. There is often a misconception that the end product – actually a completely new product that has never existed in natural food – is a single, pure molecule. This molecule, so the misconception goes, was isolated from a food source through extensive purification procedures, and its effects have been unequivocally proven in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). In reality, the final product is the result of a complex, multi-stage manufacturing process. The result is a new product or even a by-product that is created through many complex processes with toxic chemicals and through processes such as cooking, steaming and drying – in short, a kind of “substance residue.


The Vitamin Swindle – If it’s not a vitamin molecule, then what is it

by Next Level
translated from German via Telegram translate
February 14, 2024

Misconception of a vitamin product

Many users of vitamin supplements mistakenly assume that the extraction process is very simple: they imagine that specific “vitamin molecules” – similar to the seeds of a watermelon – are gently isolated from a fruit and then collected together to form a pure concentrate. In their imagination, these molecules then exist in an unmixed form in the end product and, detached from any other fruit tissue, have the same effect as in their natural state.

But this assumption is far from reality!

What is really the final product?

When people talk about “vitamins” and talk about individual molecules that are only 1 to 2 nanometers in size, it is more of a theoretical idea.

Let’s take the production of ascorbic acid (vitamin C) for dietary supplements as an example: In the laboratory, a process called the Reichstein process is often used, which involves several complex steps:

1. First, D-glucose , obtained from genetically modified corn (properly created through breeding), is converted into D-sorbitol using nickel as a catalyst.

2. This D-sorbitol is converted into L-sorbose by the bacterium Acetobacter .

3. L-sorbose is then converted into diacetone L-sorbose using acetone (known from nail polish remover) and an acid .

4. In the next step , potassium permanganate converts the diacetone-L-sorbose into diprogulic acid.

5. The diprogulic acid is converted into gulonic acid by heating and adding water .

6. This gulonic acid is ultimately converted into ascorbic acid via a reaction catalyzed by platinum .

7. The resulting ascorbic acid is then mixed with other excipients to produce vitamin C powder and tablets.

In short: The end product does not represent the pure isolation of individual molecules – comparable to the seeds of a watermelon – but is a completely new product or a by-product. It is a mixture (substance) that is created from a raw material through numerous processing steps with sometimes toxic and aggressive chemicals – basically the residue in a test tube.

Synthetically produced ascorbic acid cannot possibly resemble the postulated model of a “vitamin” of natural origin in an organism. Therefore, eating real food is the best choice.

To think about:

While formaldehyde in vaccines is rightly criticized, it is accepted completely uncritically in the production of “vitamins”.


The vitamin fraud – How safe are the supplements really?

by Next Level
translated from German via Telegram translate
February 16, 2024

Why “Vitamin D3 (cholecalciferol)” is also known as rat poison (source)

Did you know that “Vitamin D3” – an often praised “miracle cure” for health and well-being – can have an extremely toxic effect in quantities of just 1.5 ml (equivalent to around 300,000 IU)? In comparison, ibuprofen, an everyday painkiller that no one would claim is good for the body in small amounts daily, seems almost harmless.

Imagine: For a rat, a dose of just 8 drops of a “vitamin D3 supplement” containing 10,000 IU per drop can be fatal . In humans, 30 drops, i.e. just 1.5 ml, can lead to dangerous toxicity. But with ibuprofen we are talking about more than 2400 mg that is needed to be potentially dangerous – an amount that is the equivalent of 320 times higher!

How can it be that we talk so lightly about the health benefits of “vitamin D3” when the line to toxicity is so narrow?

Isn’t it paradoxical that we are cautious about the dosage of a drug like ibuprofen, but often consider uncritically high doses of “vitamin D3” to be harmless or even healthy?

To think about

The creation of a synthetic substance “Vitamin D3” is obtained by irradiating animal fat using toxic solvents such as hexane, acetone, ethanol and aggressive catalysts such as palladium, a process that does not mimic the reality in the biological organism, but that of the natural one The body’s balance with questionable chemicals is disrupted.

There is a saying: “The dose makes the poison.” But the fact is that poison always remains poison – even in smaller doses. The only thing that varies is the damage caused and the amount of effort the body has to clean. From a health perspective, it is definitely not advisable to take a toxic substance.


The vitamin fraud – A critical look at the irony of the health market

by Next Level
translated from German via Telegram translate
February 19, 2024

In today’s society, where distrust of the pharmaceutical industry is growing, many tend to turn to alternative health products in the hope of making a more natural choice. Ironically, however, many of these alternatives, including vitamin supplements, are in the hands of the same pharmaceutical companies that have come under increasing criticism.

The irony of consumer behavior

There is a remarkable discrepancy between the desire to understand the machinations of the big pharmaceutical companies and purchasing behavior. Many consumers invest in vitamin pills that are manufactured by the same corporations they believe they are against. The belief that just because a product is labeled ‘natural’ or ‘organic’ it is automatically better or healthier often overlooks the reality of the manufacturing processes. These products are not manufactured in an idyllic natural landscape, but in laboratories – the same ones that work for pharmaceutical companies.

What is really in vitamin supplements?

The production of vitamins uses a variety of chemicals, including those used in the production of military chemical weapons or known as industrial toxicants – formaldehyde, cyanide (hydrocyanic acid), sulfuric acid, ammonia, acetone, palladium, to name a few. This information is publicly available and can be found in scientific publications on the synthesis or extraction process of these substances.

The intertwining of pharmaceuticals and nutritional supplements
It is a fallacy to believe that all companies operate exclusively under the name of the group to which they belong. Reality shows that large pharmaceutical companies play a significant role in the nutritional supplements market:

– Pfizer and Wyeth : With the acquisition of Wyeth, Pfizer has expanded its portfolio to include the Centrum brand, a leading multivitamin brand worldwide.

– BASF and Cognis : By purchasing Cognis, BASF specialized in specialty chemicals for health products, including nutritional supplements.

– Nestlé Health Science : Nestlé has invested in the medical nutrition and dietary supplements market through its Nestlé Health Science division, including through the acquisition of Atrium Innovations, whose brands include Garden of Life and Pure Encapsulations.

These examples illustrate how closely pharmaceutical companies and the nutritional supplement market are intertwined. It shows that the search for a more “natural” alternative often leads to the same actors from whom many want to distance themselves.

Conclusion

The decision for health products and nutritional supplements should be based on sound knowledge and a critical assessment of the origin and production of these products. The irony of opposing the pharmaceutical industry while remaining loyal to its products underscores the need for informed choice and a deeper exploration of health and wellness.

 

Connect with Next Level at Telegram

Cover image credit: stevepb




Psychiatrists Attempt to Edit Childhood Out of Existence

Psychiatrists Attempt to Edit Childhood Out of Existence

by Citizens Commission on Human Rights UK
February 8, 2024

 

When it’s Children’s Mental Health Week, it’s ironic that attention isn’t actually focused on children’s mental health. Instead the focus is on mental illness and the host of psychiatric ‘disorders’ being used to label various aspects of childhood.

It would be more accurate to call it children’s mental illness week. Rather than label children mentally healthy, psychiatrists have for decades been unscientifically labelling them as mentally ill.

Through the redefinition of difficulties associated with the early years, psychiatrists have been editing childhood and adolescence out of existence. Challenging behaviour has gone under the psychiatric microscope, redefined, before being categorised as criteria for so-called mental ‘disorders.’

It’s an obsessive habit resulting in the regular use of meaningless and stigmatising psychiatric labels that can create even more difficulties for young people. Nothing appears to be off limits for editing psychiatrists.

Reading, writing and maths have been included in diagnostic manuals. They have been unscientifically classified as “impairment in reading,” “impairment in written expression” and “impairment in mathematics.”

The habit, which includes the use of labels like “ADHD” and “conduct disorder,” lead a young person down the road of mind-altering prescribed drugs. It demonstrates a focus on mental illness, not on mental health.

Children and adolescents are being chemically restrained, some for lengthy periods of time. Consequently, they experience the debilitating effects that go hand-in-hand with the drugs. The saddest and most tragic aspect of it all is some children don’t make it. They take their own lives after taking antidepressants known to cause suicidal thoughts and suicidal behaviour.

If psychiatric solutions worked, we wouldn’t keep hearing the psychiatric mantra that more and more children are suffering with mental illness. They fall into the category of having mental difficulties on the basis that boisterous or argumentative childhood behaviour has been redefined.

Parents who have lost their children have said they would never have let their children take the psychiatric drugs if they had been fully informed and knew the truth. It’s therefore vital we keep on beating the drum to expose damaging psychiatric habits.

In Children’s Mental Health Week, we must be reminded that children are not experimental animals. They are human beings who have every youthful right to expect protection, care, love and the chance to reach their full potential in life.

 

Connect with Citizens Commission on Human Rights United Kingdom

Cover image credit: titouhwayne


See Related:

New Diagnostic Manual With ADHD Listed Could Turn Childhood Into a Mental Disorder

 

Supply of Psychiatric Rhetoric Equals Demand for ADHD Drugs




Next Level Researchers Challenge the Theory That Graphene Oxide Has Been Found in Vaccines

Next Level Researchers Challenge the Theory That Graphene Oxide Has Been Found in Vaccines

 

Graphene Oxide in Vaccines: Why They Don’t Exist!

by Next Level (Knowledge Rethought)
translated from German via Telegram translate
February 4, 2024

 

The claimed existence of graphene oxide in vaccines has been mainly reported by La Quinta Columna (Campra) and Dr. Noack spread. From razor blades to antennas for a global cloud in the style of the fourth industrial revolution à la Klaus Schwab.

Introduction

Claim: Graphene is theoretically composed of an invisibly thin, 0.1 nanometer-thick layer of carbon atoms in a hexagonal pattern, making it a two-dimensional material. If the number of layers exceeds nine, graphite with different properties is created instead.

Graphene vs. graphite

The debate surrounding graphene tends to mistakenly confuse it with graphite. While graphite, known from pencils, is a fragile, natural structure with no special properties, graphene is described as being 200 times stronger than steel and harder than diamond. However, studies have never clearly identified graphene; observed materials are often just thin layers of graphite, incorrectly interpreted as graphene.

La Quinta Columna (Campra) Missing evidence

1. Conflicting interpretations : In one place it is said that larger peaks in micro-Raman spectroscopy indicate graphite, in another place the opposite (narrower peaks).

2. Subjective selection of data: Out of 110 objects, only 28 were selected based on the contradictory peaks of micro-Raman spectroscopy, which showed inconsistency, without performing further biochemical analysis.

3. Impossible distribution of graphene in vaccines: The statement that graphene was present selectively in certain aliquots of vaccines contradicts the understanding of solution behavior and distribution in liquids and suggests measurement errors.

Scientific contradictions

High-resolution TEM images of materials claimed to be graphene reveal significant defects in the structure. Instead of a perfect hexagonal arrangement of carbon atoms, as should be characteristic of graphene, one observes large holes and a distortion of the hexagonal structure towards round or even heptagonal patterns. These observations directly contradict theoretical assumptions about graphene as extremely hard and resilient. If graphene were actually 200 times stronger than steel and harder than diamond, such structural changes and defects should not occur under the influence of an electron beam.

The invisibility of graphene and atoms

The idea of isolating and manipulating “graphene” has no basis when the 3D representation of molecules such as “proteins” is an impossible task and even much larger structures such as SARS-COV-2 (1200 times larger) were never isolated. Considering that atoms, estimated at 0.1 nanometers, have never been seen directly and their “solid” part, the proton, is still tens of thousands of times smaller, and electron spins are said to be so tiny that they cannot even be considered “solid” particles can be viewed in the traditional sense, but rather as quantum states, the use of graphene appears to be pure fiction.

Conclusion

In our three-dimensional world, the idea of a two-dimensional layer, as assumed in graphene, is more of a theoretical construct than a physical reality. The idea that two-dimensional structures exist outside of mathematical models represents a logical stretch. Categorizing graphene as a “two-dimensional semimetal” therefore stretches the boundaries of what can exist in our real, three-dimensional environment.

To date, there is no method that makes it possible to specifically reconstruct a large piece of graphite in the sense of a macroscopic, three-dimensional block from the claimed isolated graphene layers smaller than 1 nanometer.

 

Connect with Next Level at Telegram

Cover image credit: PhotoLizM




Cutting, Pasting, Splicing DNA; Welcome to the New World—Oops, Full of Mistakes

Cutting, Pasting, Splicing DNA; Welcome to the New World—Oops, Full of Mistakes
 “I thought the technology was supposed to be perfect. What the hell is going on here?”

by Jon Rappoport
January 23, 2024

 

The bright new dawn of genetic engineering of life has a few problems. My, my.

Of course, the engineering companies pitching investors for money downplay the problems, and so do governments. Remember when Biden issued a release glorifying “overwriting cells of the body” (*) to achieve new breakthroughs in…something or other?

From Gene Watch UK, here are documented cases of genetic editing screw-ups. The language is technical, but you can grasp the essentials. Scientists are playing with fire.

“Petri et al. (2022) reported unintended genetic insertions and deletions in zebrafish following prime editing…Prime editing does not induce double stranded breaks and thus is often proposed to be safer than standard CRISPR/Cas systems. Nonetheless, integration of guide RNA derived DNA sequences was detected, showing that even using a technique without introducing foreign DNA, or double-stranded breaks, the technique does not rule out the potential for unintended insertion of exogenous DNA.”

“Tao et al. (2022) reported insertions of transposable elements in human cells in vitro following both standard CRISPR/Cas9 and prime editing systems, though these unintended changes were more common with CRISPR/Cas9 systems. Moreover, hundreds of integrated copies of vector plasmid DNA used to deliver the prime editing machinery were also detected…Moreover, insertions occurred at induced DNA breaks where CRISPR/Cas9 has been applied for controversial therapeutic editing…”

“Weiss et al. (2022) reported that in Arabidopsis plants, the DNA repair pathway chosen by the plant cells to repair the CRISPR-induced DNA breaks was influenced by the epigenetic status of the genome, including DNA methylation status… This in turn, influences the final mutational outcomes. This paper highlights limitations in relying on predictive tools that only take into consideration sequence information when trying to predict efficiency, specificity and mutational outcomes of genome editing. Bigger complexities beyond the level of the genome are also involved.”

“Höijer et al. (2022) reported large structural unintended on-target changes, including 4.8kb deletions to 1.4kn insertions, in zebrafish. This study showed the passing down of these mutations to the next generation.”

“Huang et al. (2022) reported that following CRISPR/Cas12 editing in fungal species, doublestranded breaks are repaired with multiple DNA repair pathways, each with different mutational profiles. This study highlights the lack of current understanding around the various DNA pathways that exist in various species, and how they may impact editing outcomes. Rather than being able to predict or even control CRISPR mutations outcomes as is often presented by GMO proponents, this study instead shows how CRISPR is being used in research to try to understand the basic mechanisms and complexities of DNA repair. Without a full understanding of the underlying science, assertions of precision and thus safety are unfounded.”

“Park et al. (2022) reported high levels of on-target unintended changes, when assessed using a new analytical tool that can sequence larger segments of the target site. Long range sequencing was able to detect a variety of changes including large deletions, highlighting the need for detailed analytical tools to assess on-target impacts.”

“Geng et al. (2022) report on-target unintended changes including genomic inversions, duplications, rearrangements and integration of exogenous DNA at the target-site in human cells, resulting in alterations in cell proliferation. This study highlights the potential impacts of unintended changes on target cell function, with implications for both edited plants and animals.”

But don’t worry, be happy. These genetic engineers all over the world may be bulls charging through shops shattering objects…but I’m sure they’ll eventually fix all their mistakes. Right?

For a final note—I’m not confident these genetic madmen even know what they’re playing with in the first place. When they see their errors, what are they really looking at? They make so many basic assumptions and guesses about DNA and genes, they could be operating in the dark, clueless and lost.

“Here’s a break in DNA where the repair after the cut failed.”

“Really? Are you sure that’s DNA?”

“It has to be.”

“Why?”

“Because if it isn’t, we have no idea what we’re doing.”

You know, THAT kind of thing.

The same kind of thing that happens when biologists trying to alter a virus fail to realize there isn’t any virus there…

These awesome problems can only be ignored in one way: by deciding that the 8 billion people on planet Earth are merely subjects in a vast ongoing experiment. And therefore have no reason to complain.

— Jon Rappoport

 

(*) FURTHER READING:

The Biden White House Executive Order: “Executive Order on Advancing Biotechnology and Biomanufacturing Innovation for a Sustainable, Safe, and Secure American Bioeconomy” (September 12, 2022). The link to this EO is hereMy comments on this EO are here—as a “breaking news” update—at the very beginning of this podcast.

See also this podcast: “DARPA/Pentagon research projects to create future humans,” here.

 

Connect with Jon Rappoport

Cover image credit: OpenClipart-Vectors




Dawn Lester on “Measles Threat”: Who Do They Think They’re Fooling?

Dawn Lester on “Measles Threat”: Who Do They Think They’re Fooling?

by Dawn Lester, Dawn’s Writing
January 21, 2024

 

And so here we are again with yet another ‘health scare’ story hitting the headlines. This time it’s measles.

Although this is a UK storyline, I would point out that the WHO published a News Release dated 16 November 2023 entitled Global measles threat continues to grow as another year passes with millions of children unvaccinated.

So I suppose it shouldn’t be at all surprising to see reports about an upsurge in measles cases in the UK, such as the BBC article entitled Measles: Why are cases rising and what are the symptoms?

The article gets straight to the point in the opening sentence,

“Measles cases are likely to spread rapidly unless more people are vaccinated, the UK Health Security Agency has warned.”

The next sentence states,

“Pop-up clinics are being opened to get more children vaccinated.”

Another BBC article, entitled Get measles vaccine to avoid rapid spread, says UK health boss, refers to Helen Bedford, professor of children’s health at University College London, and states, under the heading What is causing the drop in vaccinations?

“The pandemic also had an impact, with “some parents afraid to attend clinics for fear of catching Covid or because they were not clear that vaccination services were continuing”, Prof Bedford adds.”

Could it also be that some parents have actually started to earnestly research the real nature of vaccines and have decided not to subject their precious babies to that procedure?

Both BBC articles describe measles as ‘highly contagious’ and state that,

“It normally clears up after seven to 10 days.”

This raises the obvious question of why the alleged increase in cases is of such concern if it is a condition that is self-limiting and only lasts about a week or so?

The first cited article professes to address this issue by claiming that,

“…it can lead to serious problems if it infects other parts of the body, such as the lungs or brain.”

This is followed by the claim that,

“Complications can include pneumonia, meningitis, blindness and seizures.”

Although the article claims that ‘measles can be fatal’, it recognises that ‘this is rare’.

So why is this being reported as a serious problem when the number of deaths from ‘measles or related infections’ between 2000 and 2022 was 23? I am not denying that children and adults experience illness, and I would add that a single death is one too many. What I am contending is that claims that any death is caused by an ‘infection’, whether measles or something else, is grossly misleading, which is putting it mildly, because there is no evidence for the existence of any ‘infectious virus’.

I would point out that, by comparison, almost nothing is reported about the very real information relating to the much greater numbers of adults and children who have died as the result of the Covid-19 injections.

Nevertheless, the following claim is found under the heading Why are measles cases rising and where are outbreaks?

“Some 85% of children in 2022-23 had received two MMR doses by the time they were five years old, the lowest level since 2010-11. The goal is 95%.”

The idea of a required ‘target’ percentage of vaccination coverage is based on the concept of ‘herd immunity’. In order for ‘herd immunity’ to be valid, there needs to be evidence that the disease in question fulfils certain criteria, which are: that it is caused by a virus; that it can be prevented by a vaccine; and that one person’s ‘immunity’ – which really means their health status – affects another person’s health status.

These criteria have never been proven in reality. Herd immunity is a fallacy.

The advice, under the heading What should you do if you get measles? includes,

“rest and drink plenty of fluids.”

This is actually sound advice – although I must add that I am not providing anything that should be construed as ‘medical advice’.

The symptoms that are labelled ‘measles’ are part of the body’s normal processes of self-healing.

Unfortunately, the core message of both articles is to promote the MMR vaccine using propaganda rather than actual evidence of its efficacy, because there is none. No vaccine has ever been proven to prevent any ‘disease’ and all vaccines produce side effects, which the article claims to address under the healing What are the side effects of the MMR jab? with the comment that,

“Most side effects are mild and do not last long.”

The propaganda continues within the statement that Andrew Wakefield ‘wrongly’ claimed that the MMR vaccine was associated with autism. Although he was struck off the register as the result of his work, which was the discovery of a link between autism and gut issues, Andrew Wakefield was never against the use of vaccines, he merely questioned the use of multiple vaccines, like MMR, instead of single ones.

What IS conspicuous by its absence in either of these articles, is any reference to the Stefan Lanka court case in 2016, the result of which was a clear demonstration that the study papers that are used as ‘proof’ that measles is caused by a virus, do not actually provide that proof. In other words, it has never been proven that measles is caused by a virus.

It is obvious that this is another case of fear-mongering aimed mainly at parents of young children with the objective of increasing vaccine uptake and thereby boosting the profits of Big Pharma.

The question is: How many will comply?

I would also ask: Have enough people seen through the lies regarding the claims of safety and effectiveness of vaccines? Is that why the vaccination uptake has reduced?

I suppose only time will tell.

I am ever hopeful that there is an increasing number of people who are awakening to the truth about the so-called ‘healthcare system’ we are supposed to follow; and learning how they really can take back control of their own health and the health of their family, especially their babies.

 

Connect with Dawn Lester

Cover image credit: pixundfertig




The CDC Doctor Responsible for Hiding Myocarditis and Promoting Vaccines

The CDC Doctor Responsible for Hiding Myocarditis and Promoting Vaccines

by Brownstone Institute
January 20, 2024

 

The CDC withheld an “alert on myocarditis and mRNA vaccines” warning of the connection between heart inflammation and Covid-19 shots in May 2021, the Epoch Times has revealed.

The agency never published the alert; instead, its authors pushed vaccines on all age groups across the country.

Dr. Demetre Daskalakis was the author of the draft. He gained minor celebrity status during the response to Covid and Monkeypox, appearing on magazine covers dressed in bondage and posting shirtless photos demanding Americans wear masks.

The proposed alert came in response to two fatal post-Pfizer vaccination myocarditis deaths in Israel and repeated warnings from the Department of Defense.

Despite voicing private concern, Daskalakis publicly promoted the products. In the same month he sent the warning, he wrote, “Data over dogma. Vaccines Work,” in response to a CDC tweet allowing “fully vaccinated” Americans to “resume activities without wearing a mask or staying 6 feet apart.” He then posted, “Highly effective prevention means fewer barriers, physical or social. #Covidvaccine.”

At the time, the overwhelming majority of American teenagers had not received Covid shots. No state had a vaccination rate above 20% for 12- to 17-year-olds. In California, 90% of that age cohort remained unvaccinated. Indeed, the age gradient of risk was so steep – medically significant outcomes from the virus centered on the age and infirm – there was never a reason to push them on the general population.

Over the following two years, Dr. Daskalakis and his colleagues pushed the shots on every age group and deliberately withheld publishing its alert on myocarditis. Instead, the CDC sent repeated alerts encouraging Covid-19 vaccination for everyone.

Two months after the unpublished warning, the CDC sent an alert to doctors to “remind patients that vaccination is recommended for all persons aged 12 years of age and older, even for those with prior SARS-CoV-2 infection.”

The propaganda efforts, in conjunction with President Biden’s mandates, succeeded. By May 2023, a large majority of American teenagers had received at least one dose of a Covid vaccine. The vaccination rate for 12 to 17-year-olds in California skyrocketed from 10% to 84%, with one in five receiving an additional booster, according to CDC data.

The rate of vaccination for 12 to 17-year-olds went from 3% to 47% in Mississippi, 15% to 87% in Virginia, and 19% to 94% in Vermont from May 2021 to May 2023.

During that time period, Dr. Daskalakis repeatedly avoided voicing concerns over the risk of myocarditis. “I am so excited for my #Covid19 booster on Monday! I love vaccines!” he posted on Twitter in September 2022. In October 2023, he posted a photo of him receiving another Covid shot.

Daskalakis sent the draft alert to Henry Walke and John Brooks, both senior officials at the CDC. Their social media accounts do not share the same penchant for nudity and mRNA shots as Dr. Demetre’s, but, like Daskalakis, they continued to promote the shots without mentioning the discarded myocarditis alert.

In January 2022, Walke joined Dr. Rochelle Walensky in a CDC telebriefing that recommended a “safe and effective vaccine” for “all children five and older.” Brooks blamed “people who are not vaccinated” as “the source of new emerging [Covid] variants” in March 2022.

To this day, the CDC recommends children begin receiving Covid vaccines once they are six months old. It is not possible for immigrants to obtain legal permission to work in the US without one.

Fifty years ago, the most incisive questions from the Watergate hearings came from Senator Howard Baker: “What did the President know, and when did he know it?” The inquiry, ostensibly simple, encompassed the entire scandal.

The corruption of our public health apparati demands a similar probe. What did they know, and when did they know it? As the Covid regime demands “a pandemic amnesty,” the report from the Epoch Times adds to the plethora of evidence that their misdeeds were not mere mistakes; they were deliberate acts of fraud and deceit.

They knew of the risks, and they withheld the information from the American people. Stripped of informed consent, millions of citizens took the shots while doctors like Demetre Daskalakis denied them the right to know the risks of the product.

 

Connect with Brownstone Institute

Cover image based on creative commons work of: NoPixelZone




17 Million Murdered by Covid Vaccines and Voodoo Death

17 Million Murdered by COVID Vaccines and Voodoo Death

 

[TCTL editor’s note:

In spite of the mention of “spike protein” which seems to have a mythology all of its own within medical freedom groups, Greg Reese’s latest work is worth watching.

Here Reese shares the important work of Denis Rancourt wherein Rancourt analyzes death data during “covid” and demonstrates clearly how the cures for this made-up disease, along with cruel external force and mind control, were the actual cause of increased deaths.

Humanity historically has been bewitched and held spellbound by political and religious leaders, faux science and fear-based beliefs into cooperating with its own enslavement, self-harm and death.

As so many great researchers continue to look at what the so-called mRNA vaccines are about, what the actual contents are, and how they affect our biology, we do know that ALL vaccines have always been toxic and that NO virus has ever been isolated. All vaccines are forced upon us via lies and are all part of an incredibly ignorant (and nefarious) agenda.

Greg Reese has a unique way of writing and producing short impactful videos as he continues expanding his own awareness. This one is worth sharing.

~ Kathleen]

 

17 Million Murdered by COVID Vaccines and Voodoo Death

The groundbreaking research of Denis Rancourt

by Greg Reese, The Reese Report
January 11, 2024



Transcript:

Denis Rancourt has a PhD in Physics, he is a former tenured Full Professor, and has published over one hundred articles in leading science journals. Rancourt and his team have used all-cause-mortality data to prove there have been about seventeen million deaths as a result of official COVID-19 measures, but not from Covid, which was a lie.

As far as I can tell, from the all cause mortality data that we’ve been studying extensively for a long time, there’s no such thing as a viral respiratory pandemic. (Denis Rancourt)

He explains this all in his essay entitled, “There Was No Pandemic” which you can find on his SubStack.

There was no pandemic in the sense that there was not a particularly virulent new pathogen that was spreading and causing death. That is not what happened. What happened was huge assaults against vulnerable people by many different methods. And every time you did that, you caused excess mortality. In all the countries where they were not doing that, there was absolutely no excess mortality, even if it was a jurisdiction that was right beside the one that was doing this. (Denis Rancourt)

Rancourt explains a science of psychological murder that has been officially studied and documented for well over a century. It wasn’t just the spike protein that killed us, it was the whole damn thing.

Psychological stress and social isolation are dominant determinants of an individual’s health that causes a suppression of your immune system. And you’re going to get some kind of infection, cancer, heart disease. And very often the lungs are very exposed to the environments and they’re subjected to all the bacteria that you live with all the time. You get bacterial pneumonia and it’s a huge killer when a society is stressed, meaning all of its individuals are stressed. The kind of psychological stress that kills you is when you’re entire world is turned upside down. Your whole life you thought you had a place in the world and it’s gone. That will kill you within a very short time.

We always occupy a dominance hierarchy, a social dominance hierarchy. That is how we organize our societies because we are social animals. It is a fundamental truth of how we organize societies. The stress that is intended to keep you in your place within that dominance hierarchy is an everyday chronic stress, and the stressors have to keep changing how they’re going to stress you because you get habituated to the stress. So they have to randomly hit you with hard things every once in a while to really make sure you understand what your place is. That stress is one of the biggest determinants of health.

But we have to admit that medicine itself is a massive killer. It’s a massive cause of premature death of individuals. (Denis Rancourt)

Modern Western medicine is officially recognized as the third highest cause of death. It was designed to be a way of controlling the population.

It was designed to be a way of controlling the population. The role of medicine as an institution in our society is to maintain the dominance hierarchy, is to keep people sick and to put them in their place. It’s just part of that institutionally. (Denis Rancourt)

Financed by the Carnegie Foundation and published in 1910, the Flexner report was used to outlaw natural medicine practices in America. The Rockefeller foundation then funded a new kind of medicine. An inverted form of heath care that utilized petrochemical drugs and experimental surgery to keep people sick, and in many cases, kill the patient. As Denis Rancourt has pointed out, this is how societies have been run for centuries.

A de-classified document entitled, “Geomagnetic Factors In Spontaneous Subjective Telepathic, Precognitive And Postmortem Experiences”, as well as decades of Trauma Based Mind Control research, shows us that the CIA and our governments are well aware of the deadly effects that traumatizing a population can induce. They are killing us with fear and trauma.

This is known as psychogenic death or psychosomatic death, It is the phenomenon of sudden death brought about by strong emotional shock. Chairman of the Department of Physiology at Harvard Medical School, Walter Cannon, called it Voodoo death because mind control is the main method used in Voodoo rituals. Which is well understood by our world leaders. Bill and Hillary Clinton spent their honeymoon in Haiti at a Voodoo ritual which Bill claims inspired him to run for political office.

I was particularly intrigued by the Voodoo religion.

Voodoo’s central ritual is a dance during which spirits possessed believers. On the most interesting day of the trip, I got the chance to observe voodoo in practice. After several minutes of rhythmic dancing to pounding drums, the spirits arrived, seizing a woman and a man. The man proceeded to rub a burning torch all over his body and walk on hot coals without being burned. The woman in a frenzy, screamed repeatedly, then grabbed a live chicken and bit its head off.

By the time we got back from Haiti, I had determined to run for attorney general.

(Bill Clinton)

 

Connect with Greg Reese

Cover image based on creative commons work of: Desertrose7




DOD Ran Warp Speed From Its Inception, Sidelining the FDA and Drug Companies

DOD Ran Warp Speed From Its Inception, Sidelining the FDA and Drug Companies
DoD’s unprecedented role in running Warp Speed as a military operation–the military framework and leadership of Operation Warp Speed 

by Dr. Peter and Ginger Breggin, Exposing the Global Predators
January 9, 2024

 

On January 7, 2024, my research uncovered an official Department of Defense publication (DoD) from May 15, 2020, describing the masterplan for Operation WARP Speed, confirming DoD’s unprecedented role in running Warp Speed as a military operation:(1)

U.S. Department of Defense

IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Trump Administration Announces Framework

and Leadership for ‘Operation Warp Speed’

May 15, 2020 |The opening paragraph of the release places the U.S. military at the center of developing and controlling WARP Speed:(2)

On Friday, the Trump Administration announced the appointment of Moncef Slaoui as chief advisor and General Gustave F. Perna as chief operating officer of Operation Warp Speed (OWS), the administration’s national program to accelerate the development, manufacturing, and distribution of COVID-19 vaccines, therapeutics, and diagnostics (medical countermeasures).
Dr. Slaoui is a venture capitalist and, formerly, Chairman of Global Research and Development and Chairman of Global Vaccines at GlaxoSmithKline, where he led the development of five major novel vaccines. As the four-star general in charge of the U.S. Army Materiel Command, General Perna oversees the global supply chain and installation and materiel readiness for the U.S. Army, including more than 190,000 military, civilian, and contract employees.

From the start, Warp Speed was a Great Reset operation with the chief advisor, a “venture capitalist,” and the man in charge was a four-star general in the U.S. Army. This is an extraordinary example of the military-industrial complex at work, this time directing and organizing the greatest assault ever made on the lives of Americans and the U.S. Constitution. It is the U.S. Army acting as the assault troops for the global predators.

The DoD release describes how the heart of the defense establishment is fully geared up for Warp Speed:

“In addition to deploying 62,000 military service members in direct support of fighting COVID-19 on frontlines across the globe, the Department of Defense is racing towards a vaccine,” said Defense Secretary Mark T. Esper. “Through our research and development labs, such as DARPA and the Defense Health Agency, and our massive logistical knowledge and capacity, we are committed to achieving the goal of Operation Warp Speed for the American people.”

DoD Controls the Entire “Approval” Process for Safety and Effectiveness

The DoD press release makes clear that the FDA, which supervises and evaluates pharmaceutical industry studies for safety and effectiveness, is no longer in charge of vaccine development. The entire process is in the hands of the “government,” meaning the military:

The protocols for the trials will be overseen and set by the federal government, as opposed to traditional public-private partnerships, in which pharmaceutical companies decide on their own protocols.

The “protocols” for the trials are the entire basis of how and by what standards the clinical trials will be performed if they are performed at all. The “government,” in this case, is the DoD with some advisory input from HHS, neither of which has the legal right or the capacity to take this role.

Meanwhile, when discussing the organization of WARP Speed in 2020, Paul Mango, HHS deputy chief of staff for policy, disavowed any government role for testing the vaccines, stating, “Quite honestly, we are not conducting any science whatsoever inside the government to support Operation Warp Speed, none.”(3,4)

So, from the start, the government was completely in charge of the protocols for drug company research, removing the drug approval process from the hands of the FDA and the drug companies; but the “government” itself was doing none of the scientific work. That made a catastrophe inevitable because no one was authorized to conduct a scientific evaluation of the safety and efficacy of the mRNA platform injections that are causing so much death and destruction—and none has ever been done!

As we demonstrated in our book, COVID-19 and the Global Predators: We Are the Prey, and elsewhere,(5) it was well-known in the scientific community by 2020 that efforts to make vaccines for SARS-CoVs in animal experiments had such deadly results they were too lethal to the animals to ever attempt to test on human beings.

Proving the lethality of the mRNA platform and the “vaccines,” the death toll has been climbing since the opening day of the jabs, now with 20,000 reports to the VAERS reporting system monitored by both the CDC and FDA, with most of the deaths occurring in the first three days of the injection. For reasons I’ve already analyzed, based on scientific research and my forensic research experience, fewer than 1 in 100 serious adverse vaccine reactions are reported. Thus, 20,000 reports of death to VAERS indicate a real death toll of 2,000,000 or more.(6) Not only did they fail to do the preliminary scientific evaluation on humans, but they then also ignored and denied the death toll that continues to grow in the U.S. and around the world.

The Military Masterplan Chart Gets Leaked

In September 2020, the journal STAT published an article by Nicholas Florko, which displayed a leaked organization in July 2020 elaborate schematic for Operation Warp Speed, further documenting the vast military involvement. The chart divides responsibility for Warp Speed between “HHS” and “Defense.” The print is too small for a legible reproduction in this column but can be easily found at this link.(7)  STAT reported:

The labyrinthine chart, dated July 30, shows that roughly 60 military officials — including at least four generals — are involved in the leadership of Operation Warp Speed, many of whom have never worked in health care or vaccine development. Just 29 of the roughly 90 leaders on the chart aren’t employed by the Department of Defense; most of them work for the Department of Health and Human Services and its subagencies.

Confirming the Groundbreaking Work of Sasha Latypova and Katherine Watt

Although we just located this May 2020 DOD Press Release, the role of the DoD in Operation Warp Speed has been under diligent examination for some time by brilliant researchers in the health freedom movement, including Sasha Latypova and Katherine Watt.

Sasha Latypova has recently published her “Summary of Everything and Quick Links, Updated –Year End 2023,” which covers research on the militarization of Warp Speed, including her work as well as Katherine Watt’s.(8)

Katherine Watt recently cut to the heart of the matter in regard to the sham role played by the drug companies:

All FDA activity that appeared to be license-related, pertaining to all biological products manufactured since May 2019, has been fraudulent, performative, charade, pretextual, and any other word or phrase that means not real, not substantive, not legally relevant.(9)

Implications for Robert Malone’s Role

Among the Deep State organizations described in the DoD press release as collaborators was “NIH’s ACTIV partnership for vaccine and therapeutic development.” ACTIV is essentially a Great Reset Center in the federal government for these collaborations between government and outside sources of wealth of power. Representatives on NIH ACTIV include The Gates Foundation, many top drug companies, and key government agencies.

In a sworn statement for a legal case dated October 21, 2021, Robert Malone, MD declared himself an “active member of NIH ACTIV” (p. 4 ) and further listed his participation in “Accelerated COVID-19 Therapeutic Interventions and Vaccines: ACTIV Therapeutics Clinical Working Group, NIH. Invited Participant. June, 2020-present” (p. 16).(10)

We were the first to make public Dr. Malone’s participation in NIH ACTIV, and more recently Dr. Malone has declared he is no longer a member. It seems probable that his role on ACTIV made him aware from early on that Operation Warp Speed was, in fact, a DoD operation and the drug companies had a sham role, but we are not aware of his bringing that information to the health freedom movement when he arrived.

As documented in his same sworn statement dated October 21, 2021, Malone also has a long and very active business and professional involvement with the Department of Defense, including managing large contracts and sitting on important committees at DoD and DTRA, The Defense Threat Reduction Agency, a defense and a combat support agency within DoD. Malone also denies any more recent or current involvements with DoD and DTRA.

Our earlier disclosures about Malone’s background were among his reasons for bringing a $25 million defamation lawsuit against us and against Dr. Jane Ruby, on whose show I discussed related issues. The judge has recently dismissed Malone’s defamation suit against all of us. The judge has also warned Malone that he might declare his lawsuit “frivolous,” and he has ordered Malone to explain why he should not be forced to pay the legal expenses of the Breggins and Dr. Ruby.(11)

Overall Implications of DoD Running WARP Speed

The implications of the DoD’s role in Operation WARP Speed are complex and require continuing unraveling. But these investigations may not substantially change the big picture because the ultimate villains are higher up the totalitarian totem pole and remain the same: the international governance being imposed upon the world by the global predators, including many multi-billionaires and the institutions they have captured from the UN and the World Health Organization (WHO) to the global banking system and the military-industrial complex—all of which we thoroughly document in our book, COVID-19 and the Global Predators: We Are the Prey.

1 https://www.defense.gov/News/Releases/Release/Article/2310750/trump-administration-announces-framework-and-leadership-for-operation-warp-speed/

2 https://www.defense.gov/News/Releases/Release/Article/2310750/trump-administration-announces-framework-and-leadership-for-operation-warp-speed/

3 https://www.statnews.com/2020/09/28/operation-warp-speed-vast-military-involvement/

4 There is a fascinating Government Accounting Office (GAO) memo from January 2022, stating that HHS took over control from the defense department in early 2022 and that GAO found that HHS itself did not have the ability to manage Operation WARP speed. https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-22-104453

5 Since our book was published, we also discovered a scientific paper with Robert Malone as coauthor that demonstrated and concluded that mRNA “vaccines” were too dangerous to be tested on humans. https://gingerbreggin.substack.com/p/could-this-man-have-saved-the-world

6 Peter and Ginger Breggin (2021, November). COVID-19 and the Global Predators: We Are the Prey. Available at www.WeAreThePrey.com.  Also see Peter Breggin column, https://gingerbreggin.substack.com/p/jab-induced-immune-fatigue-adex-an

7 https://www.statnews.com/2020/09/28/operation-warp-speed-vast-military-involvement/

Sasha Latypova: Summary of Everything and Quick Links, Updated – Year End 2023

9 Katherine Watt: On the continuing effort to fit a square peg (legalized manufacturing and use of biological weapons) into a round hole (FDA drug, device and biological product regulation).

10 https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/60650721/30/6/navy-seal-1-v-austin/

11 Breggin.com | Judge Dismisses Malone’s $25 Million Defamation Lawsuit

 

Connect with Peter and Ginger Breggin Substack | Website

Cover image credit: Duffman-commonswiki




Vaccine Damage Has Three Known Causes

Vaccine Damage Has Three Known Causes

by Next Level (New Medicine)
translated from German via telegram translate
January 6, 2024

 

Harmful effects of toxic adjuvants and preservatives in vaccines

Since the poisons in the vaccine mixture are defined as auxiliary substances, as an adjuvant to the protein component of the vaccine, they are considered harmless substances and are not subject to strict pharmaceutical law.

The known and typical effects of these poisons are systematically ignored when assessing vaccine damage because the vaccine is only considered to have an immunological effect. The actual vaccine, the little protein in the vaccination mixtures, actually has no toxic potential.

Allergies to the “protein” components in the vaccination mixtures

All protein components in all vaccines are misinterpreted as parts of pathogens or as weakened viruses. In reality, the proteins in the vaccination mixtures are components of completely normal and harmless bacteria and their “waste products” that occur in every human being.

Also included are components of chicken embryos, human and animal tissues/cells and their cell organelles. Under certain circumstances, allergies to these proteins can be triggered in anyone. Allergies can cause processes called autoimmune reactions.

Brain psychosomatic processes through the personal feelings accompanying the act of vaccination

These processes — originally designed as meaningful biological special programs — are triggered when the act of vaccination is perceived as existentially threatening and overwhelming. The brain-psychosomatic triggers and processes were determined by Dr. Hamer discovered and described.

The allergic and toxic reactions of the vaccine mixtures can chronicle the brain psychosomatic programs, intensify them and make therapy more difficult. Typical examples of these brain psychosomatic programs triggered by vaccinations are autism, depression, mania, epilepsy, convulsions and others.

 

Connect with Next Level at telegram (German)

Cover image credit: RichardsDrawings




Fake Science Vs Science – Be Cautious

Fake Science Vs Science – Be Cautious

by Dr. Saeed Qureshi, PhD, Bioanalyticx
January 5 2024

 

When people, including “experts,” describe science, they usually mean “medical science,” which is a nonexistent or imaginary thing like viruses, but imply they are referring to actual science (chemistry, physics, and mathematics, mainly chemistry). Generally, they cannot talk directly about the actual science because they have not studied or practiced it significantly. In most cases, they lack understanding, even at the basic level.

So, when reading articles and comments about science from such “expert” or their “research,” make sure to know which science is referred to, the fake one (like medicine, virology, etc) or the actual one.

There is hardly any critique from knowledgeable people about the well-established and well-understood principles and practices of the actual science.

Viruses, variants, PCR testing, sequencing, RNA, mRNA, spike protein, vaccines, gain of function research, etc., are all fake science inventions. They can ONLY be resolved, and quickly, by applying the well-understood and well-established principles and techniques of actual science.

Fake science and its promoters are confusing and hindering resolving the issues – be cautious and seek help from actual science experts or scientists (link).

 

Connect with Dr. Saeed Qureshi

Cover image credit: popmelon




Science Fraud in Medicines – Vast Majority Does Not Know

Science Fraud in Medicines – Vast Majority Does Not Know

by Dr. Saeed Qureshi, PhD, Bioanalyticx
January 2, 2024

 

If someone has not studied and practiced chemistry, physics and/or mathematics in exhaustive detail and does not have hands-on experience but claims to be a science expert or scientist, in that case, they are fake and must be ignored. (link)

Viruses and their existence and isolation, RNA, spike protein, sequencing, PCR testing, and developing vaccines resulted from fake science/scientists. The science (chemistry) does not support any of these claims. There should not be any debate or argumentation about it.

Furthermore, whenever you see the word “study” or “research,” including those published in peer-reviewed “scientific” journals concerning the virus and its RNA, spike protein, mRNA and/or vaccine, consider that you are presented with false and fraudulent information.

Nobody can do such studies or research as none of the above items are available. No study has ever been done or can be done until they are available in physical form and pure from somewhere. It is not an opinion but a scientific fact.

You are not a fool, but fake scientists have fooled and tricked you with scientific-sounding jargon.

Medical experts, particularly physicians, are often presented as science experts or scientists, which is categorically a false and invalid claim. It is not just my claim or observation; anyone can form this opinion by studying the curriculum of any medical/medicine (M.D.) degree program. (linklink)

You will quickly observe an absence of science teaching and training. The medical degree emphasizes memorizing some physiological and chemical terms to associate with the patient’s symptoms to prescribe well-established allopathic medicines (mostly pure chemicals and non-physiological). There is no actual science or its research anywhere.

Therefore, it is not difficult to understand that medical experts can not follow the concepts and practices of isolation, purification, and characterization of viruses, RNA, spike protein, and vaccines. These are chemistry-based substances or molecules. Furthermore, it is unfortunate that they do not even try to understand the shortcomings (link) but demean the others, the genuine and actual scientists. The real tragedy!

Unfortunately, the public suffers from fake and false science propaganda, and so do the countries. The tragic mindset needs to be addressed – and quickly.

Information on my training, expertise, and experience is provided here.

 

Connect with Dr. Saeed Qureshi

Cover image credit: Juhele




On the Fairytale of Deadly Viruses Emerging From Hot Zones in Far Away Lands…

On the Fairytale of Deadly Viruses Emerging From Hot Zones in Far Away Lands…

 

My Crushing “Hot Zone” Virus Story No One in the Press Wants to Understand

I haven’t even seen alternative reporters picking up on it

by Jon Rappoport
January 3, 2024

 

Let’s start here:

1957 Asian Flu epidemic: origin, East Asia.

1980s AIDS: origin, Africa.

2009 Swine Flu epidemic: origin, Mexico.

2014 Ebola outbreak: origin, West Africa.

2015 Zika outbreak: origin, Brazil.

2020 COVID pandemic: origin, China.

Each of these supposed (fake) viruses traveled. In each case, they traveled from a foreign country to the US.

Name several viruses that, during the past 65 years, traveled from the US to foreign nations caused epidemics there.

No?

Can’t?

Why not?

Purported viruses can originate anywhere. They can travel anywhere. What’s the problem?

On top of all this, we have the “Hot Zone” theory/prediction of emerging deadly viruses:

They come from jungles and rainforests far away, and because modern travel is so frequent, they come to America, and…

Because our immune systems have no previous history of encountering these viruses, the germs sweep through our population and create pandemics.

Given that description, why haven’t the proponents of the theory cited viruses that originate in the US and travel to jungles and rainforests in other nations and cause deadly epidemics there? The people in those remote places have no experience with OUR viruses.

What’s the problem?

What’s going on is really quite simple. STORIES are being told about supposed viruses. The stories inevitably feature origins in foreign lands, and the germs travel to the US.

By any measure, we should have heard press reports, over the past 65 years, of the Chicago or New York or Miami or San Francisco or Des Moines Flu showing up in Germany, France, Brazil, West Africa, China, India…

But we haven’t.

And the reason is, those aren’t the STORIES. That’s all. This has nothing to do with science.

Nothing at all.

Therefore, all the stories of foreign viruses landing here are on the level of man in the moon and Cinderella and Snow White.

If these US outbreaks of illness in the US were caused by foreign viruses, we would have witnessed similar viral outbreaks in other countries that originated here.

 

Connect with Jon Rappoport

Cover image based on creative commons work of: Prettysleepy & GDJ




Dr. Saeed Qureshi to Dr. Meryl Nass: “Why Does This Fairytale Keep Growing New Legs?”

“Why Does This Fairytale Keep Growing New Legs?”

by Dr. Saeed Qureshi, PhD, Bioanalyticx
January 1, 2024

 

Last night, as an unpaid subscriber, I received an email from Dr. Meryl Nass Substack titled “The “No Viruses exist” cult has been out in force lately.”  (link)

After reading it, I am confused about whether to cry with the absurd logic presented or laugh at the arguments (hilarious science). I could not decide, so in my frustration, I am leaving it to you to decide – my thoughts or questions are highlighted in bold.

@ “I told Christine Massey over and over that her FOIAs were answered by all countries in the same manner because a) the countries lie about everything related to COVID, …”

So, why is it difficult to accept that they lied about the virus existence as well?

@ “These people want everything to be isolated the way they decide it should be isolated.”

No, the question is where this (the virus) has been isolated as claimed. The result of an isolation step is an isolated item, in this case, the virus – where is it?

@ “Some things require indirect measurements.”

True, but those things have to exist first. Where is that thing (the virus)? Please provide (scientific) evidence of its existence. Moreover, the measuring instrument must be calibrated/validated independently to show that it can measure lengths or distances. Where is the (“indirect”) test/method independently calibrated/validated to measure the viruses? There is none, and it is a fact.

@ “But here is the kicker. Have none of these pseudo-scientists ever had a cold? Have they never had flu? No cold sores? No genital herpes? No warts? All these are due to viruses.”

That is the question. How have these observations been linked to the viruses? Where are these viruses? Who has them (samples or specimens of the isolated viruses)?

Please bring these questions/thoughts to Dr. Meryl Nass’s attention.

 

Connect with Dr. Saeed Qureshi, PhD

Cover image credit: artdewoli




Italian Health Minister Gave Orders to Conceal Vaccination Deaths – Now Under Investigation for Murder

Italian Health Minister Gave Orders to Conceal Vaccination Deaths – Now Under Investigation for Murder
They knew the shots were killing people from the start and gave orders to conceal deaths 

by Greg Reese, The Reese Report
December 12, 2023

 

Transcript:

Former Italian Health Minister Roberto Speranza is under investigation for homicide after emails reveal that, from the very start of the vaccinations, he knew the shots were killing people and gave orders to local health authorities to conceal deaths and serious side effects in order to reassure Italian citizens of their safety and to not jeopardize the vaccination campaign.

The story has been reported on both German and Italian news networks.

I will now provide an English translation.

The Rome Public Prosecutor’s Office is investigating Roberto Speranza, the Italian government’s health minister, during the time of COVID measures. He was responsible for the vaccination campaign.

The investigations are the result of complaints related to the so-called AIFA emails from the Italian Medicines Agency. The former director of AIFA, Nicola Magrini, is also under investigation.

The publication of these internal emails revealed that they had been aware of the dangers of the COVID vaccination from the start.

The accusation is that the responsible minister and the head of the drug authority knowingly and deliberately exposed the unsuspecting Italian population to this risk. Yes, they encouraged Italians to get vaccinated.

Vaccination was even made mandatory for certain professional groups. Consequently, many side effects, including fatal ones, came to light.

The investigations are for murder, serious bodily harm, and more, because Speranza and Magrini evidently gave instructions to the local health authorities to conceal the deaths and serious side effects that occurred immediately after the vaccinations began, in order not to jeopardize the vaccination campaign and to reassure the citizens about their safety.

The responsible minister and the head of AIFA are now expected to answer for these actions.

According to the complaints from the police unions and the financial police, as well as from the private organization Listen to Me, which represents 4,200 people damaged by vaccines.

In Italy, police officers and teachers were subjected to mandatory COVID vaccination.

Here is the former health minister, Roberto Speranza, proudly announcing vaccination statistics in Italy.

“We have now reached a massively significant percentage of vaccinated people in Italy, 89.41%. Therefore, currently in Italy, just over 10% of the population remains unvaccinated.”

Well, today Roberto Speranza is under investigation for lies he allegedly told about vaccines.

Among the crimes he is accused of are ideological falsehood and murder.

“Look, this is the document we are showing you tonight exclusively. It states the former minister Roberto Speranza, along with Nicola Magrini, the former general manager of AIFA, are both registered in the investigative records of the Rome Prosecutor’s Office.”

Last week, the House of Representatives of the Philippines passed a resolution to investigate over 260,000 unexplained excess deaths in 2021 and 67,000 unexplained excess deaths in 2022.

The next day, they were hit by a 7.6 magnitude earthquake.

 

Connect with Greg Reese