Dr. Mercola Interviews the Experts This article is part of a weekly series in which Dr. Mercola interviews various experts on a variety of health issues. To see more expert interviews, click here. Over the years, I've done several interviews with Dave Asprey, a Silicon Valley entrepreneur, founder and CEO of bulletproof.com, including one in which we discuss how ketones may be useful against COVID-19. Here, we discuss his latest book, "Fast This Way: Burn Fat, Heal Inflammation, and Eat Like the High-Performing Human You Were Meant to Be." As the name implies, the book is about fasting and all the magnificent health benefits it provides. Is it for everyone? No, and he will be the first to admit that. But it can benefit most of us, certainly, those of us who are either overweight or obese. In his book, Asprey tells his own journey into fasting and what he's learned along the way.
Breaking the Starvation MythAs noted by Asprey, a common concern is that fasting will put your body into starvation mode, thereby actually preventing fat loss. This is a persistent belief, but it's not true. That said, some strategies will indeed activate starvation mode, such as when you're eating a low-calorie diet for months on end. Asprey tells a personal story that encapsulates this dilemma:
As explained by Asprey, yo-yo weight loss and weight gain occurs because you're on the wrong diet. Key dietary principles for losing the excess weight and keeping it off include:
Key Benefits of FastingSo, what are the main benefits of fasting? Is it just the ease of weight loss? As explained by Asprey, there are many other health benefits to fasting beside the fact that stubborn weight will fall off. Importantly, the primary benefit of fasting is that it makes your body better at making energy. This in turn has several benefits, one of which is improved blood sugar regulation, which will allow you to stave off insulin resistance and metabolic dysfunction and all the diseases of aging associated with that. As noted by Asprey, if you can avoid cardiovascular disease, cancer, diabetes and Alzheimer's disease, you're probably going to live longer, as these are the primary killers. Fasting is also antiaging because it improves autophagy in your mitochondria and cells. Autophagy is a natural process that cleanses and detoxifies your mitochondria and cells. By breaking down old, damaged organelles, fresh, new ones can be made to replace them. And, with healthy, new mitochondria, your body can make more energy, more efficiently.
The Most Important Fat to AvoidAs mentioned, about half or more of your daily calories should come from fats, but it's crucial to avoid certain types of fats. I'm currently writing a book on what I believe might be the primary disease-maker in the Western diet, namely omega-6 linoleic acid (LA). LA makes up the bulk — about 90% — of the omega-6 consumed and is the primary contributor to nearly all chronic diseases. While an essential fat, when consumed in excessive amounts, LA acts as a metabolic poison. The reason for this is because polyunsaturated fats such as LA are highly susceptible to oxidation. As the fat oxidizes, it breaks down into harmful sub-components such as advanced lipid oxidation end products (ALES) and oxidized LA metabolites (OXLAMS). These ALES and OXLAMS are actually what cause the damage. One type of advanced lipid oxidation end product (ALE) is 4HNE, a mutagen known to cause DNA damage. Studies have shown there's a definite correlation between elevated levels of 4HNE and heart failure. LA breaks down into 4HNE even faster when the oil is heated, which is why cardiologists recommend avoiding fried foods. LA intake and the subsequent ALES and OXLAMS produced also play a significant role in cancer. HNE and other ALES are extraordinarily harmful even in exceedingly small quantities. While excess sugar is certainly bad for your health and should typically be limited to 25 grams per day or less, it doesn't cause a fraction of the oxidative damage that LA does. Processed vegetable oils are a primary source of LA, but even food sources hailed for their health benefits contain it, and can be a problem if consumed in excess. Cases in point: olive oil and conventionally raised chicken, which are fed LA-rich grains. To learn more about this hidden source of LA, see "Why Chicken Is Killing You and Saturated Fat Is Your Friend." Many now understand that your omega-6 to omega-3 ratio is very important, and should be about 1-to-1 or possibly up to 4-to-1, but simply increasing your omega-3 intake won't counteract the damage done by excessive LA. You really need to minimize the omega-6 to prevent damage from taking place. For more details about how to track your LA intake and minimize it, please view my recent article on how to do this. Simple Hacks That Make Fasting EasierContrary to popular belief, fasting doesn't have to be difficult or painful. Asprey details three fasting hacks in "Fast This Way." The first one is to increase your ketone level. As explained by Asprey, hunger hormones start shifting when your ketone level hits slightly below 0.5, which is not yet the level at which you enter nutritional ketosis. He explains:
Asprey funded research at the University of Washington with Dr. Gerald Pollack, who determined that when water is mixed with grass fed butter or MCT oil, it creates a very large exclusion zone (EZ) in the water, and this EZ is important during fasting. When you drink regular water, your body takes the water and puts it near your cell membranes, which are made of tiny droplets of fat. Body heat warms the water, converting it from bulk water into EZ water, which your body requires for ATP production and other biological processes, including autophagy and protein folding.
The Importance of Prebiotic FiberA third fasting hack is to make sure you're getting enough prebiotic fiber. According to Asprey, long term fasting and/or eating a carnivore-like, zero-carb diet for extended periods of time without cycling healthy carbs back in can alter your gut microbiota, which in turn can cause sleep disruptions. When you feed your gut bacteria with prebiotics, they convert the prebiotics into propionic acid and butyric acid (butyrate), and butyrate is very pro-ketogenic.
Cyclical Keto and Fasting Are the Safest ApproachesIn the interview, Asprey discusses several of the diet traps that people get themselves into. As a general guidance, Asprey and I both agree that the best strategy to stay out of trouble is to cycle in and out of whatever routine you're doing, be it low-carb keto or fasting. While you may need to be very strict in the beginning, once you're metabolically flexible, mix things up once or twice a week. Eat three meals instead of one and/or spread them out. Add in more carbs.
How Activated Charcoal Can HelpOne reason why fasting is a stressor is because it releases toxins from your fat cells. A simple intervention to address this is the use of activated charcoal when you're fasting. This is particularly beneficial if you're also doing saunas.
Tripling Down on mTORIn his book, Asprey also discusses how to integrate exercise into your fasting regimen. The best time to exercise is at the end of your fast. He explains:
This is why you get more out of exercise when you do it at the end of a fast. I'm convinced this strategy has helped me radically build my muscles and improve my strength. One small tweak that may be helpful if you're doing very heavy exercise is to eat a small amount of food about 30 to 60 minutes before you start, essentially breaking your fast right before your exercise.
More InformationAsprey discusses a number of other antiaging strategies in this interview as well — things like hormone regulation and the use of testosterone, and how fasting affects these levels — so for those details, be sure to listen to the whole interview. He also goes into some of the problems that can occur when you're on a plant-based diet, and/or if your omega-3 to omega-6 ratio is off-kilter, as well as how your diet and exposure to sunlight influence your circadian rhythm, and which supplements are helpful when fasting and which should be avoided. Naturally, you'll also want to pick up a copy of his book, "Fast This Way: Burn Fat, Heal Inflammation, and Eat Like the High-Performing Human You Were Meant to Be," where he covers everything in greater depth. In addition to everything already mentioned, his book also includes information about intermittent hypoxic training and breathing exercises.
Sign Up for a Guided FastTo help you on your way, Asprey also provides a two-week program where he guides you through a 24- or 48-hour fast and answers questions on a daily basis. All you need to do is preorder "Fast This Way," and then send a copy of your receipt to FastThisWay.com and sign up for the program. There's an upload form on the website.
from http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2021/01/31/dave-asprey-fasting.aspx
0 Comments
In April 2020, I interviewed Judy Mikovits, Ph.D., about the potential role played by human gammaretroviruses in COVID-19. Mikovits is a molecular biologist1 and researcher, and was the founding research director of the Whittemore Peterson Institute in Nevada. Her book, “Plague of Corruption,” ended up being a No. 1 best seller on the lists of The New York Times, USA Today and The Wall Street Journal in 2020. Her new book, “Ending Plague: A Scholar’s Obligation in an Age of Corruption,” will hopefully do just as well. It’s available for preorder on Amazon. She may be one of the most censored researchers on the planet at this point, thanks in no small part to her participation in the documentary “Plandemic,” which went viral in a big way (plandemicseries.com). Case in point: YouTube suspended our account for one week as soon as we uploaded today’s interview — even though the video was UNLISTED and not available for public viewing yet. Even worse, Mikovits’ third and most recent book, “The Case Against Masks: Ten Reasons Why Mask Use Should Be Limited,” is so heavily censored, no one can buy it.
Clearly, Mikovits is considered a serious threat to the technocratic status quo, and once you hear what she has to say about COVID-19 vaccines — which as you’ll see is a complete misnomer — you may start to understand why. COVID-19 Vaccines Aren’t Real VaccinesThe COVID-19 vaccine really isn’t a vaccine in the medical definition of a vaccine. It does not improve your immune response to the infection, nor does not limit you from getting the infection. It’s really an experimental gene therapy that could prematurely kill large amounts of the population and disable exponentially more.
Indeed, news and social media reports suggest recipients are starting to drop like flies. Many die of unknown causes within days, sometimes hours of getting the first or second shot. Baseball legend Hank Aaron passed away two weeks after receiving the vaccine, yet this was not ever mentioned in his New York Times obituary. Surely, had he tested positive for SARS-CoV-2, he would have been declared a COVID-19 fatality, whether the virus actually had anything to do with it or not. But when it comes to the vaccine, even eyebrow-raising timing is dismissed as coincidental and irrelevant. Now all of a sudden, old people dying shortly after vaccination are shrugged off with the excuse that they’re old and could have died any day anyway. Old people dying with SARS-CoV-2, however, must be stopped at any cost. Funny how that works. The Problem With Synthetic RNAThe messenger RNA (mRNA) used in many COVID-19 vaccines are not natural. They’re synthetic. Since naturally produced mRNA rapidly degrades, it must be complexed with lipids or polymers to prevent this from happening. COVID-19 vaccines use PEGylated lipid nanoparticles, and PEG is known to cause anaphylaxis.2 Lipid nanoparticles may also cause other problems. In 2017, Stat News discussed Moderna’s challenges in developing an mRNA-based drug for Crigler-Najjar, a condition that can lead to jaundice, muscle degeneration and brain damage:3
However, if they call their drugs vaccines, they can bypass the safety studies. All of a sudden, they expect us to believe that all of these safety issues have been resolved? Another problem is related to how long the mRNA remains stable in your system. It’s encased in nanolipid to prevent it from degrading too rapidly, but what happens if the mRNA degrades too slowly, or not at all? The idea behind mRNA vaccines is that by tricking your body into creating the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, your immune system will produce antibodies in response. But what happens when you turn your body into a viral protein factory, thus keeping antibody production activated on a continual basis with no ability to shut down? In addition, your body sees these synthetic particles as non-self and much of the perpetual antibody response will be autoantibodies attacking your own tissues. Mikovits explains:
These High-Risk Groups Should Avoid COVID-19 VaccineAccording to Mikovits, research shows 4% to 6% of Americans have already been infected with XMRV gammaretroviruses via contaminated vaccines and blood supply for more than three decades, which is driving a number of chronic health conditions. Now, these synthetic gene therapies (the so-called COVID-19 vaccines) will further add to the chronic disease burden by triggering myalgic encephalomyelitis. Making matters worse, the synthetic mRNA also has an HIV envelope expressed in it, which can cause immune dysregulation. “This is a nightmare,” Mikovits says. “I'm angry, as this should never be allowed.” As we discussed in previous interviews, SARS-CoV-2 has been engineered in the lab with gain-of-function research that included introducing the HIV envelope into the spike protein. Mikovits’ hypothesis is that those who are most susceptible to severe neurological side effects and death from the COVID-19 vaccines are those who have previously been injected with XMRVs, borrelia, babesia, mycoplasma, through contaminated vaccines, resulting in chronic disease. (Her book, “Plague of Corruption,” details the science and history of XMRVs, which is a fascinating read.)
The chart below lists 35 diseases associated with XMRV infection. If you have any of these, you may want to think long and hard before you line up for an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine, as your chances of severe side effects or death are likely far higher than someone who does not have any of these diseases. This is not a complete list. There may be many other conditions that can put you into a high-risk category. One example is idiopathic thrombocytopenia (ITP), a deadly bleeding disorder. According to Mikovits, her work shows 30% of all ITP are associated with XMRVs. Interestingly, one example is the 58-year-old Florida doctor who recently got the COVID-19 vaccine and died from sudden onset of ITP two weeks later. Dr. Jerry L. Spivak, an expert on blood disorders at Johns Hopkins University, told The New York Times “it is a medical certainty” that Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine caused the man’s death.4,5 Pfizer, of course, denies any connection. Genetic Alterations May Last for LifeSo, just how long will the synthetic RNA in COVID-19 vaccines be maintained within your body, causing your cells to produce this aberrant protein? Mikovits believes it will escape degradation for months, years, maybe even for life in some cases. All of this is eerily reminiscent of previous attempts to create a coronavirus vaccine, all of which failed due to the vaccines causing paradoxical immune reactions, or antibody-dependent immune enhancement. While the animals appeared to have antibodies against the virus, and should theoretically have been protected, when they were exposed to wild coronavirus, they got severely ill and most died. Such failures may be why so many vaccine makers decided to use mRNA rather than following conventional vaccine development strategies, but the end result is likely going to be the same or worse.
Breakthrough Genomics Could Save Millions of LivesAccording to Mikovits, one solution is to use functional genomics technologies like Breakthrough Genomics, a company which uses machine learning to look at full genome sequences to determine which single nucleotide polymorphisms in ACE2 receptors, antiviral pathways like RNASEL and Interferons can make a person most susceptible to harm from these gene therapy “vaccines.”
While one size clearly doesn't fit all in any vaccine strategy, forcing a gene therapy on an entire population when it can be predicted that millions will die and develop deadly diseases like ITP is simply unconscionable. Yet anyone who dares speak about this, as Mikovits knows, risks having their careers and lives destroyed. Symptoms of COVID-19 Vaccine DamageMany of the symptoms now being reported are suggestive of neurological damage. They have severe dyskinesia (impairment of voluntary movement), ataxia (lack of muscle control) and intermittent or chronic seizures. Many cases detailed in personal videos on social media are quite shocking. Equally shocking is that these videos are quickly removed by the social media platforms, ostensibly for violating some term of service. It’s hard to fathom how a personal experience can be considered “false information.”
Side effects are also suggestive of a dysregulated innate immune response and a disrupted endocannabinoid system, which acts as a dimmer switch on your immune system.
Another common side effect from the vaccine we’re seeing is allergic reactions, including anaphylactic shock. A likely culprit in this is PEG, which an estimated 70% of Americans are allergic to. “These instantaneous effects are almost certainly the PEG and that lipid nano particle, the toxic particle that's being injected,” Mikovits says. In the longer term, she suspects we’ll see a significant uptick in migraines, tics, Parkinson’s disease, microvascular disorders, different cancers, including prostate cancer, severe pain syndromes like fibromyalgia and rheumatoid arthritis, bladder problems, kidney disease, psychosis, neurodegenerative diseases such as Lou Gehrig’s disease (ALS) and sleep disorders, including narcolepsy. In young children, autism-like symptoms are likely to develop as well, she thinks. We’ll End Up Killing the Most SusceptibleAside from the chronic diseases listed earlier, others who are at high risk from these COVID-19 gene therapies include those who have gotten seasonal influenza vaccines, Blacks and Hispanics. Blacks and Hispanics are particularly at risk for antibody-dependent immune enhancement, in particular, due to genetics. Tragically, these vaccines are given to the most susceptible under the guise of racial and social justice.
Women of childbearing age may also be at risk for infertility, as syncytin (the gammaretrovirus envelope encoded in the human genome the expression of which can be dysregulated by the synthetic syncytin RNA in the vaccine) is required for proper fusion of the placenta in the uterus and implantation of the egg. Indeed, the World Health Organization is now saying pregnant women should not get the Moderna or Pfizer vaccines due to reports of late-term miscarriages.6 What to Do if You Got the Vaccine and Are Having ProblemsThe primary reason why I wanted to interview Mikovits was to find out her recommendations for those who chose to get the vaccine and now regret it. Interestingly, what I learned is you use the same strategies that you would use to treat the actual SARS-CoV-2 infection. I’ve written many articles over the past year detailing simple strategies to improve your immune system, and with a healthy immune system, you’ll get through it without incident even if you end up getting sick. Below, I’ll summarize some of the strategies you can use both to prevent COVID-19 and address any side effects you may encounter from the vaccine. First of all, you’ll want to eat a “clean,” ideally organic diet. Avoid processed foods of all kinds, as they are loaded with damaging omega-6 linoleic acid that wrecks your mitochondrial function. Also consider nutritional ketosis and time-restricted eating, both of which will help you optimize your metabolic machinery and mitochondrial function. As noted by Mikovits:
With regard to glyphosate, a simple way to block glyphosate uptake is to take glycine. Approximately 3 grams, about half a teaspoon, a few times a day should be sufficient, along with an organic diet, so that you’re not adding more glyphosate with each meal. To improve detoxification, I recommend activating your natural glutathione production with molecular hydrogen tablets. All of these strategies should help improve your resilience against SARS-CoV-2, and may even help your body detoxify if you’ve made the mistake of getting this experimental gene therapy. Another helpful strategy is to maintain a neutral pH. You want your pH to be right around 7, which you can measure with an inexpensive urine strip. The lower your pH, the more acidic you are. A simple way to raise your pH if it’s too acidic (and most people are) is to take one-fourth teaspoon of sodium bicarbonate (baking soda) or potassium bicarbonate in water a few times a day. Improving your pH will improve the resiliency of your immune system and reduce the mineral loss from your bones, thereby reducing your risk of osteoporosis. Helpful SupplementsNutritional supplementation can also be helpful. Among the most important are:
Mikovits also recommends Type 1 interferons.
Nebulized Peroxide — My Favorite Treatment ChoiceMy personal choice for the treatment of COVID-19 symptoms is nebulized peroxide. It’s a home remedy I recommend everyone familiarize themselves with, as in many cases it can improve symptoms in mere hours. You can also use it as a preventive strategy if you know you’ve been exposed to someone who is ill. Nebulizing hydrogen peroxide into your sinuses, throat and lungs is a simple, straightforward way to augment your body’s natural expression of hydrogen peroxide to combat infections and can be used both prophylactically after known exposure to COVID-19 and as a treatment for mild, moderate and even severe illness. Dr. David Brownstein, who has successfully treated over 100 COVID-19 patients with nebulized peroxide, published a case paper18 about this treatment in the July 2020 issue of Science, Public Health Policy and The Law. He also reviews its benefits in “How Nebulized Peroxide Helps Against Respiratory Infections.” Nebulized hydrogen peroxide is extremely safe, and all you need is a desktop nebulizer and food-grade hydrogen peroxide, which you’ll need to dilute with saline to 0.1% strength. I recommend buying these items beforehand so that you have everything you need and can begin treatment at home at the first signs of a respiratory infection. In the video above, I go over the basics of this treatment. Be sure to buy a nebulizer that plugs into an electrical outlet, as battery-driven ones are too low-powered to be truly effective. Also make sure your nebulizer comes with a face mask, not just a mouth piece. If it doesn’t come with a face mask, you can pick one up separately. Just search Amazon for “nebulizer face mask for adults.” More InformationHopefully, we’ve provided enough information to make you reconsider the COVID-19 gene therapy “vaccine.” At bare minimum, do more research before you make your decision. The simple truth is you don’t need it, so it’s an unnecessary risk. To learn more, be sure to preorder a copy of “Ending Plague: A Scholar’s Obligation in an Age of Corruption.” We’re in a crisis in far more ways than one, and getting educated — and then educating others — is absolutely crucial. The lives of millions of people are at stake. So please, take the time to digest this information, understand it, and share it with those you love. from http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2021/01/31/covid-19-vaccine-gene-therapy.aspx In this episode of Full Measure, award-winning investigative journalist Sharyl Attkisson takes on Big Tech and its censorship of the information you see daily on the internet.1 Restriction of free speech has accelerated in recent months, when Facebook, Twitter and YouTube took the unprecedented steps of silencing the U.S. president’s social media accounts. While many welcomed the censorship, others spoke out against the violation of free speech and the precedence it sets for the future. Even Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey said he was uneasy about the decision, tweeting on January 13, 2021:2
Regardless of one’s political affiliations, the move highlights the immense control that corporations have over online information and how it can be yielded to support, or dismantle, certain agendas. Efforts to Combat ‘Fake News’ Ramped Up After ElectionZachary Vorhies was a Big Tech insider for more than eight years. A former senior software engineer at Google and Google’s YouTube, he said everything was great — and then something happened: Donald Trump won the election in 2016. In the first week after the 2016 election, Vorhies told Attkisson, Google had an all-hands meeting. The company’s CFO broke down in tears over the election results, while founder Sergey Brin said he was personally offended by them. In short, the bosses at Google were devastated by Trump’s unexpected victory, and soon after Vorhies said, “The company took a hard left and abandoned liberal principles and went toward authoritarian management of products and services.” Eventually, as Vorhies realized Google is manipulating public opinion and the political landscape, he resigned so he could warn the public that Google appeared to be attempting a coup on the president. He echoed these sentiments during our 2019 interview, and shared his inside knowledge of this global monopoly, revealing why Google is not a reliable source of information anymore. While some of the information revealed is related to politics, you can read about my views about the two-party U.S. federal government. The point of sharing this information is that Google is manipulating search results to reflect its views and influence social behavior while denying this is happening. How Google Is Altering RealityAccording to Vorhies, at the all-hands meeting that took place shortly after the 2016 presidential election, Google CEO Sundar Pichai said that one of the most successful things they had done during the election was applying “machine learning” to hide fake news. Machine learning is a type of artificial intelligence that’s behind Google’s rampant censorship — something they’ve dubbed Machine Learning Fairness, or ML Fairness. “As you imagine,” Vorhies said during our 2019 interview (hyperlinked above), “they're not going to call their censorship regime something bad. They're going to call it something like 'fairness.'” “So, if you're against that, you're against fairness. It's a euphemism. I discovered there was this umbrella project, 'ML Fairness,' and there were these subcomponents like 'Project Purple Rain,' which is a 24-hour response team that is monitoring the internet,” he said. By 2017, Vorhies had uncovered more than 950 pages of confidential Google documents showing a plan to re-rank the entire internet based on Google’s corporate values, using machine learning to intervene for “fairness.” He resigned in June 2019 and turned over the documents to the Department of Justice, then released them to the public via Project Veritas to expose Google’s censorship activities.3 According to Project Veritas:4
‘Algorithmic Unfairness’ Tackles the Narrative of RealitySusan Wojcicki, the CEO of YouTube, made pushing down “fake news” and increasing “authoritative news” sound like a good thing, Attkisson reported,5 but when Vorhies looked at Google’s design documents, the fake news they were censoring wasn’t really fake. “I was apolitical,” he said, “but I started to think, is this really fake news? Why are they defining it as fake news in order to justify censorship?” Part of this involved Google’s efforts at social reconstruction to correct “algorithmic unfairness,” which could be any algorithm that reinforces existing stereotypes. Could objective reality be algorithmically unfair? Google says yes. Vorhies used the example of doing a Google search for CEOs, and the images returned included mostly men. Although it’s reality, this could be considered algorithmically unfair and, according to Google, justifies intervention in order to fix it. He also uses the example of the autofill search recommendations that pop up if you do a Google search. Autofill is what happens when you start typing a search query into a search engine and algorithms kick in to offer suggestions to complete your search. If you type “men can,” you may get autofill recommendations such as “men can lactate” and “men can get pregnant,” or “women can produce sperm” — things that represent an inversion of stereotypes and a reversal of gender roles. We've been led to believe that whatever the autofill recommendations are is what most people are searching for — Google has stated that the suggestions given are generated by a collection of user data — but that's not true, at least not anymore. As Vorhies said during our 2019 interview:
Vorhies said his tipping point came when Pichai told Congress the company doesn’t filter based on political bias and blacklist websites. “That’s when I saw that Sundar Pichai was lying to Congress by saying that they don’t use blacklists.”6 Big Tech Fact-Checking Ramped UpThe sudden onslaught of “fact-checking” organizations is another form of censorship that’s interfering with free discourse. Citing data from Duke University Reporters’ Lab, Attkisson says “fact check groups more than quadrupled in number over five years from 44 to 195.” Fact-checking now represents a multimillion-dollar industry that stands to benefit certain interests. “Facebook and Google are major funders of news organizations and fact check efforts,” Attkisson reports, “spending hundreds of millions of dollars.” The problem with labeling something as “false and misleading information” is the damage that occurs if said information is not actually false or misleading. When a banner pops up on social media warning readers that the content is false, most people will not click through. According to the Poynter Institute, one of Facebook’s fact-checking partners, which bills itself as a “global leader in journalism” that believes that a free press is essential,7 once a Facebook post is flagged as false by a fact-checker, its reach is decreased by an average of 80%.8 Further, Facebook’s list of trusted fact-checking partners is also heavily conflicted. Children’s Health Defense sued Facebook, its CEO Mark Zuckerberg and three of its fact-checking partners — Science Feedback, Poynter Institute and PolitiFact9 — alleging, in part, that they are not independent or fact-based, even though they describe themselves as such. Fact Checkers Receive Millions From Political GroupsPolitiFact is a branch of the Poynter Institute that says fact-checking journalism is its “heart,”10 while Science Feedback is a French organization that claims it verifies the “credibility” of “influential” science claims in the media.11 Science Feedback, which often sides with the vaccine industry, was also used to discredit a documentary that tied the coronavirus to a lab in Wuhan, China, but Science Feedback’s source was a U.S. scientist who worked at the Wuhan lab. Further, according to Attkisson, PolitiFact received millions from groups looking to reimagine capitalism, count immigrants in the U.S. census and change voting processes for presidential elections from the electoral system to a popular vote. PolitiFact also received $900,000 from the Democracy Fund, which is a major funder of anti-Trump political efforts, while the left-leaning Open Society Foundations and Omidyar Network gave the Poynter Institute $1.3 million for its international fact-checking network.12 Attkisson says fact-checking censorship ramped up in the final weeks of the 2020 presidential campaign with Twitter censoring or labeling Trump’s tweets and a New York Post exposé on Joe Biden’s son, and, after the election, YouTube banning videos disputing Biden’s victory. Ultimately, what’s wrong with companies trying to keep harmful information or conspiracy theories from reaching people? As Vorhies said, “The problem is that they’re a monopoly. And if they’re going to put their finger on the public narrative, that’s going to be meddling in the election.”13 ‘Jumping From the Fireplace Into a Fire’Section 230 of the 1996 Communications Decency Act provides internet platforms liability protection for user-generated content. Big Tech is pushing for the inclusion of protection mirroring Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act in various free trade agreements, to protect them from foreign regulations. While Section 230 makes free speech online possible for everyone, it also allows Google, YouTube and Facebook to filter out and censor whatever they want while still qualifying as a platform rather than a curator of content. Congress has threatened to punish Big Tech by stripping them of the legal protections in Section 230, but the government stepping in could add another layer of problems, Attkisson says. Cindy Cohn, executive director of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, agreed, noting14:
Efforts to shut down public discussions and information are in full force. So, what can you do? Knowledge truly is power, so look beyond fact-checkers’ labels and the top of Google’s canned search results — and the corporations behind them — in your search for truth. There are alternatives for most if not all Google products, and by using these other companies, we can help them grow so that Google becomes less and less relevant. from http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2021/01/30/sharyl-attkisson-big-tech-censorship.aspx Recent data reveal a nutrient found in salmon and meat may help reduce your risk of bacterial infections.1 This is especially important considering the problems surrounding antibiotic usage. Before antibiotics, the average lifespan was 47 years and infectious diseases like pneumonia were rampant.2 While antibiotics transformed health care, they do carry some risk. For example, data show that from the years 2011 to 2015 there were 69,464 emergency room visits each year for children who had an adverse reaction to taking antibiotics.3 While these numbers sound high, some experts believe it's the tip of the iceberg,4 since this study only included children who went to the emergency room and not those who were treated in the urgent care, doctor's office or at home. Scientists have also been warning that bacteria are developing resistance. In 2013, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention published their first Antibiotic Resistant Threats Report, finding there were at least 2 million people who acquired antibiotic-resistant infections every year, with 23,000 deaths attributed to these infections.5 However, new estimates from 2019 show there are more than 2.8 million antibiotic-resistant infections each year in the U.S., from which 35,000 die.6 Other researchers believe even this estimate is too low and the true number is likely far higher.7 There are options that may help prevent bacterial infections other than drugs, including manuka honey, oregano oil, an intravenous cocktail of vitamin C, thiamine and hydrocortisone, and, as mentioned, a nutrient in salmon.8 Taurine May Help Fight Bacterial InfectionsScientists from five institutes led by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease discovered one way your gut microbiota help protect you from bacterial infections.9 Although scientists have known there are benefits to living harmoniously with beneficial bacteria, the mechanism used to protect you has not been identified. Researchers are seeking ways to harness your gut health to replace antibiotics as more antibiotic-resistant bacteria develop. One study published in the journal Cell10 revealed how pathogens could shape the colonization resistance process that protects you from bacterial infection. The results showed that previous infections help enhance resistance in the gut microbiota, which was associated with altering bile metabolism utilizing the sulfonic acid taurine. When the researchers supplied taurine, it was a sufficient trigger to generate the change in function and therefore enhance resistance. The results of the study revealed “a process by which the host, triggered by infection, can deploy taurine as a nutrient to nourish and train the microbiota, promoting its resistance to subsequent infection.”11 The scientists tested the effect by transferring microbiota from an animal that had experienced an infection with Klebsiella pneumoniae into a germ-free mouse.12 They discovered the transferred microbiota helped prevent an infection with K. pneumoniae. The bacteria involved in fighting the infection were deltaproteobacteria. There are a wide variety of gram-negative pathogens in the phylum (major group) proteobacteria, including Escherichia, Salmonella and Helicobacter.13 Further analysis led the researchers to identify taurine as a compound that triggered activity in deltaproteobacteria. A byproduct of taurine is a poisonous gas, hydrogen sulfide. The researchers theorized that with low levels of taurine, harmful bacteria can colonize the gut. When levels are higher, it produces enough hydrogen sulfide to prevent this from happening. The researchers also found that one mild infection could trigger an adaptation to help the microbiota resist the next infection. When the animals were supplemented with taurine, it helped support the microbiota. They also discovered when the same animals were fed bismuth subsalicylate, an ingredient found in antacids, this protection was reduced since bismuth inhibits the production of hydrogen sulfide. What Is Taurine?The biochemical name for taurine is 2-aminoethanesulfonic acid. Although it's commonly called an amino acid, it is a conditional compound your body does not use to create protein. Instead of a carboxyl group that is found in amino acids, taurine has a sulfide group, thus earning the name amino sulfonic acid.14 Taurine is conditional since an adult can produce it.15 However, infants are unable to produce amino sulfonic acid and thus need a diet rich in taurine to support their neurological development. The compound was first isolated from the bile of an ox, which is likely where the name came from as it is derived from the Latin word taurus, meaning bull or ox. Taurine plays a role in the essential functions of regulating calcium, creating bile salts, balancing electrolytes and supporting the nervous system. People deficient in taurine may experience kidney dysfunction, developmental disorders, cardiomyopathy and damage to the retinal nerves.16 Amino sulfonic acid is found in high concentration in the central nervous system, skeletal muscles and eyes.17 Taurine is found in meat and other natural sources,18 including salmon, seaweed, dark chicken meat, dairy products and beef.19 Taurine levels in your body may drop in certain circumstances such as chemotherapy,20 liver disease,21 surgery, cancer, sepsis22 and diabetes.23 Since rich sources of taurine are found in meat and dairy products, people who practice a strict vegan or vegetarian diet may also be deficient. Taurine Has an Anti-Inflammatory Effect on Your HeartTaurine is an abundant free amino sulfonic acid and plays a critical role in several essential processes; among them is a strong general antioxidant activity.24 Amino sulfonic acid is found in higher concentrations in body tissues exposed to elevated levels of free radicals and oxidants. This has suggested to researchers that taurine plays an anti-inflammatory role. The reaction with hypobromous acid produces a byproduct with anti-inflammatory properties. The anti-inflammatory effect has a known influence on diabetes and has demonstrated benefits on the cardiovascular system, potentially by inhibiting the renin-angiotensin system.25 This system has an influence on a variety of tissues and cells and is targeted by pharmacological interventions to help manage high blood pressure, heart failure and diabetes.26 According to researchers, nearly 50 years ago it was discovered that a taurine deficiency in cats led to retinopathy and could trigger cardiomyopathy in dogs and cats. Data show that populations of people who eat more meat than seafood have higher death rates from heart disease. Since seafood has higher levels of taurine than meat, it suggested that amino sulfonic acid may play a role in protecting the cardiovascular system. Research has found a correlation between taking taurine supplements and a lower risk of CVD in an animal model. In the lab, scientists observe a direct vasorelaxation when taurine is administered to a thoracic aorta in an animal in a dose-dependent fashion. Since it also plays a role in osmoregulation, it has been proposed the vasorelaxation occurs through this pathway. Further studies have demonstrated taurine exhibits an anti-apoptotic effect on heart cells under ischemic conditions, protecting the heart cells when there is a lack of oxygen. This was demonstrated in an animal model when comparing the heart damage with and without taurine supplementation 30 days after a coronary artery occlusion. In one animal study, researchers testing the heart muscle found that a taurine deficiency impaired energy metabolism and reduced ATP generation.27 The findings supported the hypothesis taurine deficiency starves the heart of energy, suggesting that supplementation could benefit patients who have heart failure. More Health Benefits From TaurineJust like the heart muscle, taurine plays a role in ensuring proper function and protecting against damage in your skeletal muscle.28 The combination of osmoregulation, membrane stabilization and regulation of intracellular calcium concentration may play a role in muscle performance. Evidence appears to support a link between alterations in taurine levels within skeletal muscle and conditions such as muscular dystrophy and atrophy. Lab, animal and human studies also demonstrate the role it plays in the immune system related to the antioxidant properties to protect tissue against inflammation, which researchers believe29 "give[s] support to consider taurine and taurine derivatives as potential drugs in human medicine, including infectious and chronic inflammatory disease." Taurine supplementation may help reduce the potential risk for complications associated with diabetes30 and may help prevent the onset of the condition. The uptake of taurine by pancreatic cells decreased the pancreatic intracellular insulin levels, suggesting to the researchers that it plays a role in regulating the release of insulin from the pancreas and could reduce elevated blood glucose levels. Since taurine plays an essential role in the production of bile salts, which help break down fatty acids, it's essential to metabolism and digestion.31 It is also found in high concentrations in the retina.32 Recent data demonstrated that deficiency triggered by the antiepileptic drug vigabatrin is involved in the retinal toxicity experienced by patients. This led to further investigation:33
Taurine also plays a role in your central and peripheral nervous system. In 2017, a review published in Birth Defects Research noted supplementation helps to promote the proliferation of brain cells required for long-term memory storage.34 An animal study showed supplementation with taurine may improve Alzheimer-like learning and memory deficits35 and seems to play a role in the development of epilepsy and autism.36 Choose Wild-Caught Over Farm-Raised SalmonWild-caught Alaskan sockeye salmon is rich in omega-3 fatty acids. People with the highest levels of omega-3 fats have lived 2.22 more years after age 65 than those with the lowest.37 Salmon is also high in B vitamins38 that are important for energy production.39 Phosphorus and magnesium, important for bone health, are found in salmon, as is astaxanthin, which is an anti-inflammatory antioxidant beneficial for your heart and immune system.40 However, it's important to steer clear of farmed and genetically altered salmon and instead seek out wild-caught Alaskan sockeye salmon. Unfortunately, two-thirds of the salmon in the U.S. is imported, mostly from industrial fish farms and processing factories.41 According to the Organic Consumers Association, farmed fish are raised on a diet of processed feed that can include genetically engineered soybeans and pesticide residues, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), dioxins and antibiotics.42 The toxins can accumulate in the fat of the fish. One study sampled over 2 metric tons of wild-caught and farmed salmon collected from around the world.43 They found farmed salmon had higher concentrations of organochlorine contaminants than wild-caught salmon, and European-raised salmon were significantly more contaminated than fish farmed in North or South America. Similarly, when the Environmental Working Group tested farmed salmon from U.S. grocery stores, they found farmed salmon had, on average, 16 times more PCBs than wild salmon, four times more PCBs than beef and 3.4 times more PCBs than other seafood.44 Farmed salmon also does not have the nutritional profile of wild salmon, as the farmed variety is far higher in omega-6 fatty acids. Often you can tell the difference between wild caught and farmed salmon just by looking at it. The flesh of wild sockeye salmon is bright red, courtesy of the natural levels of astaxanthin. It's also lean, so the white fat stripes you see in the meat should be thin. If the fish is pale pink with wide fat marks, the salmon is farmed. Avoid Atlantic salmon as these are commonly from fish farms. The two designations to look for are “Alaskan salmon” and “sockeye salmon,” as Alaskan sockeye salmon are not allowed to be farmed. Canned salmon labeled Alaskan salmon is also a good, more affordable, option. from http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2021/01/30/taurine-may-help-fight-bacterial-infections.aspx People have asked why I was not blogging about the Covid vaccines. To be honest, I felt there was not enough information for me to be decisive, and I was waiting for more information to become available. However, someone called me and told me about a lot of allergic reactions, including one anaphylactic reaction, at a local hospital after 30 doses were given. Staff were instructed to keep this quiet. Then I watched a nine-minute Ben Swann video1 about the vaccines, in which he read the "declination form" that must be signed by EMTs in Maine who refuse the vaccine. It contained false and misleading statements, and I realized I should no longer delay discussing what I know about the vaccines. 1. Both the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines are made from messenger RNA and lipid nanoparticles containing polyethylene glycol (PEG). a. Messenger RNA (or any RNA) can potentially be converted to DNA in the presence of reverse transcriptase. That DNA potentially, or bits of it, could become linked to your native DNA. While I have no idea how likely this is, I began to take the possibility seriously only after two members of FDA's advisory committee (the Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee, or VRBPAC) asked about it during their meeting to approve the Pfizer vaccine on December 10.2 I watched the entire meeting and took copious notes. Virologists tell us that much of our DNA is, in fact, originally viral DNA that found its way into ours.3 I now consider the potential for vaccine RNA to be converted to DNA and permanently inserted in my DNA a remote possibility — but one that I would like proven wrong before being vaccinated. b. 70% of Americans have pre-existing antibodies to PEG. FDA suspects that these PEG antibodies may be the cause of anaphylaxis post vaccination. The U.K. recommends against people with severe allergic conditions receiving the mRNA vaccines. The CDC, however, recommends people receive it regardless of their allergy history, only asking that those with severe allergies wait an additional 15 minutes (total of 30 minutes) in the clinic in case they need to be resuscitated. Anaphylaxis is occurring at about 1 in 45,000 doses,4 or 17 times the rate CDC has determined it occurs after other vaccines (1.3 episodes per million vaccinations5). Therefore, getting the shot in a drugstore or anywhere that trained physicians are not close by to perform a resuscitation seems like a bad idea. According to the American College of Allergy, "The Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine should be administered in a health care setting where anaphylaxis can be treated."6 California has temporarily halted use of a lot of Moderna's vaccine due to a high rate of anaphylaxis.7 2. No vaccines made from messenger RNA nor this type of lipid nanoparticles have ever been used in humans. We have no idea about their long-term side effects. The clinical trials followed subjects for only two months after two doses of vaccine at the time the vaccines were authorized for use. 3. Neither the Moderna nor the Pfizer trial enrolled many frail elderly subjects. Since both vaccines entered general use less than one month ago, we have heard tales of nursing home residents catching Covid or dying in higher numbers after receiving the vaccines. But we do not know if this is a random event or a reaction to vaccination, since reliable data are not yet available. The elderly often fail to mount an immune response to a vaccine; if this is the case, they should not receive the vaccine, because they will be subject to the side effects without the benefit. UPDATE: Norway has recorded 23 deaths after the vaccinations. Thirteen have been investigated, autopsied and occurred in the frail elderly. Norway has now decided to recommend the obvious: “‘If you are very frail, you should probably not be vaccinated,’ Steinar Madsen at the Norwegian Medicines Agency said at a webinar on corona vaccine for journalists …"8 On January 15 from Bloomberg, "Norway said Covid-19 vaccines may be too risky for the very old and terminally ill, the most cautious statement yet from a European health authority as countries assess the real-world side effects of the first shots to gain approval."9 4. Public health officials have said over and over that they do not know if the vaccines prevent spread. Pfizer's lead representative to the VRBPAC meeting, Kathrin Jansen, Ph.D., said that Pfizer did not test human subjects to see if those vaccinated could get and spread the infection. But Jansen admitted that Pfizer did test primates — and found that vaccinated monkeys did get Covid infections despite being vaccinated. Their duration of infection was shorter than in the unvaccinated monkeys.10 You can watch Jansen first claim that primates did not get infection in the lung but then admit they did get infections, of shorter duration than unvaccinated primates — at 7 hours 30 minutes into the meeting.11 By the way, hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin do exactly the same thing — reduce duration of viral carriage — as shown in a new review article by Didier Raoult.12 5. Are the data from the Pfizer and Moderna clinical trials reliable, especially the claim that both yield 95% efficacy? a. Members of the VRBPAC advisory committee wanted more information. Two of them asked to be given the results between November 14 (the date the data collection ended) and December 10 (the date of the meeting). Separately, at two different times, both FDA and Pfizer refused to provide this to the committee. b. There were relatively few Covid-19 cases in Pfizer's trial (under 200) despite 40,000 enrollees. Peter Doshi, blogging for the British Medical journal,13 noted that 20 times as many subjects had Covid-like symptoms as those who were diagnosed positive using PCR tests, but the much larger group had negative PCR tests. We now know there are large numbers of false positives and negatives with PCR tests. Cycle threshold information was not supplied. No sequencing was done to assure that PCR positive individuals actually had Covid. I don't trust these data. c. Both Moderna and Pfizer provided rudimentary information to the FDA to apply for Emergency Use Authorizations14 — much less than is required to issue a vaccine license, according to US law15 — despite what Drs. Stephen Hahn and Peter Marks at FDA may have claimed to sooth the public. d. FDA made the incomprehensible decision to NOT perform inspections of the manufacturing facilities of the Covid vaccine manufacturers.16 What did FDA not want to find? FDA misled its advisory committee by claiming to have reviewed all the manufacturing paperwork supplied to it. That is a far cry from inspecting the facility. 6. No one knows how long immunity lasts, if in fact the vaccines do provide some degree of immunity. (Should it be called immunity if you can still catch and spread the virus?) For every known vaccine, the immunity it provides is less robust and long-lasting than the immunity obtained from having had the infection. People who have had Covid really have no business getting vaccinated — they get all the risk and none of the benefit. It is said that Israelis who had Covid are not being vaccinated.17 The Maine EMT Declination DocumentThis is a document designed to force EMTs to take the vaccine by using false information and veiled threats. For example, the document claims with certainty that one can asymptomatically spread Covid, even up to 10 days. That has not been shown to be true. Even Dr. Anthony Fauci was recorded18 as saying that asymptomatic spread has never driven an epidemic, although it might occur rarely. We still don't know with certainty how much asymptomatic spread contributes to cases, but probably very little. CDC made a claim that asymptomatic spread could contribute to 59% of cases.19 CDC, however, made this claim based on its own researchers using modelling and estimates alone. CDC loves to publish its models of illness, cases and spread, instead of providing real data. Models can be easily manipulated to support whatever narrative is desired, as we have seen with the Neil Ferguson and University of Washington/BMGF models of the pandemic. The declination document20 claims that the clinical trials were rigorous. I doubt few who read the trial documents would agree with that. The trials are still in progress. And FDA explicitly said these two vaccines have not been approved. They have instead been "authorized." But the most pernicious thing about the EMT document was that it was intended to make the decliner feel awful for letting down the team and the community. In fact, based on the monkey data, the only data we have, you can probably still spread the virus even after being vaccinated. So the declination was built on a lie. And, lying document that it is, it is not signed. You don't know who wrote it. Why are EMTs being made to sign it, and initial every paragraph? Here is just one of its passages:
When a product is good for you, there is no need to scare or threaten people into taking it. If you are being coerced to do something, that should be a strong clue to avoid it. If you become injured by one of these experimental vaccines, the chance of receiving any financial benefit is tiny.21 The U.S. government has waived the liability of everyone involved, from manufacturers to vaccinators. Luckily, the drugs and vitamins/supplements that are effective for Covid are safe and have been used for many decades. See earlier blog posts for details. UPDATE: 1/13/21 from FiercePharma:22 "Aside from J&J, coronavirus vaccines from Novavax and AstraZeneca are in late-stage trials, and a host of other companies are in various stages of research. At a Fierce JPM Week panel, experts said there will be plenty of need for a “second wave” of coronavirus vaccines." UPDATE: 1/14/21 First, both mRNA vaccines are comprised of mRNA that codes for the spike proteins. However, the spike itself may have inherent toxicity and cause serious Covid symptoms, according to a very thoughtful review of the literature23 sent to FDA by Dr. Patrick Whelan, Ph.D. at UCLA. Second, an article published by Kanduc and Shoenfeld in September 2020 termed "Molecular mimicry between SARS-CoV-2 spike glycoproteins and mammalian proteomes: implications for the vaccines"24 showed that "a massive heptapeptide sharing exists between SARS-CoV-2 spike glycoprotein and human proteins." The sharing of peptides between SARS-CoV-2 and humans also occurred with mice but no other animals, and other human coronaviruses lacked this commonality of peptide sequences with humans. What does this mean? "A massive peptide commonality is present with humans and mice, i.e, organisms that undergo pathologic consequences following SARS-CoV-2 infection." The authors suggest molecular mimicry as a reason for the massive autoimmune phenomena that occur in late-stage Covid-19. The paper concludes:
In other words, vaccines need to eliminate the regions of the spike protein that mimic human proteins in order to avoid triggering autoimmunity. Whether this paper provides evidence that SARS-CoV-2 may have been grown in humanized mice, or designed to deliberately mimic human peptide sequences to induce autoimmunity in humans, I leave to the imagination. from http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2021/01/29/pfizer-admits-vaccine-does-not-prevent-covid.aspx In the video above, Dr. Ted Noel is among the latest to use common sense and reason to argue that masks don’t work to stop aerosol virus transmission. He uses a vaping device and several different types of masks — including disposable and cloth — to illustrate his point, as the vapor clearly passes around and through the masks. “Aerosols will not be stopped by masks,” he says. “You don’t need a big study. All you need is this [holding up a vaping apparatus]. The [vape] aerosol is actually larger in molecular size than the aerosol from your breath,” yet it still passes easily through the mask. This demonstration provides visual evidence that masks may be useless against SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, but if you’re looking for further support, a growing number of studies comparing U.S. states with mask mandates to those without mandates suggest the same.1 Are Double, or Triple, Masks Needed?If one mask isn’t enough, The New York Times suggested in January 2021 that perhaps doubling up would offer better protection. “Double-masking isn’t necessary for everyone,” the Times wrote. “But for people with thin or flimsy face coverings, ‘if you combine multiple layers, you start achieving pretty high efficiencies’ of blocking viruses from exiting and entering the airway.’”2 They cited commentary by Linsey Marr of Virginia Tech, which recommended layering two types of masks or using a three-layer mask to keep particles out.3 There’s just one pesky problem. “At some point, ‘we run the risk of making it too hard to breathe,’ she said.” If you can get past that trade-off, the rationale seems to be that if you add enough layers of material, infectious droplets must travel through an obstacle course of sorts, and eventually you’ll stop something from getting through. Marr and co-author Monica Gandhi from the University of California said that in studies of dozens of mask materials, filtration effectiveness ranged from less than 10% (for polyurethane foam) to nearly 100% for a vacuum cleaner bag. But in tests on humans wearing homemade masks, they were only 50% to 60% effective at protecting the wearer from pollution particles.4 Based on their own studies, Marr and Gandhi said they recommend “a high-quality surgical mask or a fabric mask of at least two layers with high thread count for basic protection,” but for “maximal protection,” doubling up on masks or using a triple-layer variety is necessary:5
But layering up on masks that provide good filtration, or wearing more than two masks at once, may have diminishing returns, the Times noted, again highlighting the obvious that covering your mouth and nose with multiple layers of fabric and filtration material could “make it much harder to breathe normally.”6 COVID-19 Spreads Via Aerosolized ParticlesThere’s growing evidence that aerosol transmission is involved in the spread of SARS-CoV-2,7 which are 0.125 μm in size. September 18, 2020, the CDC posted updated COVID-19 guidance on its "How COVID-19 Spreads" page that, for the first time, mentioned aerosol transmission of SARS-CoV-2, saying "this is thought to be the main way the virus spreads."8 The CDC then deleted the mention of aerosols and the possibility of spread beyond 6 feet the following Monday, September 21, saying a draft version of proposed changes had been posted "in error."9 It’s a noteworthy difference, because if SARS-CoV-2 is spread via aerosolized droplets, which research suggests,10 such droplets remain in the air for at least three hours and can travel over long distances of up to 27 feet.11 This adds to the likelihood that cloth masks do little to stop you from getting COVID-19. AAPS explained:12
Face Masks Don’t Reduce COVID-19 Infection RateThe first randomized controlled trial of more than 6,000 individuals to assess the effectiveness of surgical face masks against SARS-CoV-2 infection found masks did not statistically significantly reduce the incidence of infection.13 Among mask wearers, 1.8% ended up testing positive for SARS-CoV-2, compared to 2.1% among controls. When they removed the people who did not adhere to proper mask use, the results remained the same — 1.8%, which suggests adherence makes no significant difference. Among those who reported wearing their face mask “exactly as instructed,” 2% tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 compared to 2.1% of the controls. A case-control investigation of people with COVID-19 who visited 11 U.S. health care facilities also showed little benefit of mask usage. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention report revealed factors associated with getting the disease,14 including the use of cloth face coverings or masks in the 14 days before becoming ill. The majority of them — 70.6% — reported that they “always” wore a mask, but they still got sick. Among the interview respondents who became ill, 108, or 70.6%, said they always wore a mask, compared to six, or 3.9%, who said they “never” did, and six more, or 3.9%, who said they “rarely” did. In other words, of the symptomatic adults with COVID-19, 70.6% always wore a mask and still got sick, compared to 7.8% for those who rarely or never did.15 Further, the cloth masks most of the public are wearing may have a pore size of 80 to 500 μm,16 which is far larger than viruses or even respiratory droplets, which range from 5 to 10 μm.17 Researchers writing in PeerJ said such masks have “poor filtering efficiency” that “may have arisen from larger and open pores present in the masks.” This got even worse after washing, with filtering efficiency dropping by 20% after the mask was washed and dried four times.18 Policy Review: Face Masks Don’t Affect Flu TransmissionIn May 2020, researchers reviewed the evidence of nonpharmaceutical personal protective measures against pandemic influenza, including 10 studies that analyzed the effectiveness of face masks in reducing flu virus infections in the community. “We found no significant reduction in influenza transmission with the use of face masks,” they wrote,19 citing the following research:
While the researchers suggested there could be some benefit from wearing tight-fitting respirators that are properly fit-tested, loose-fitting face masks, such as disposable masks, are much less likely to offer protection and could even increase the risk of transmission with improper use:24
COVID-19 Cases Higher in Areas With Mask MandatesWidespread mask mandates were rolled out despite a lack of solid evidence to support their use among the general population. In an attempt to add some science into the equation, computer scientists, actuaries and data analysts from Rational Ground25 looked at COVID-19 cases from May 1, 2020, to December 15, 2020, in all 50 U.S. states. They calculated how many cases per day occurred by population with and without mask mandates.26 Among states without a mask mandate, 5,781,716 cases were counted over 5,772 days. This works out to:27
In short, COVID-19 cases were higher with mask mandates than without. As noted by Daniel Horowitz, a senior editor of The Blaze:28
A working paper released by the National Bureau of Economic Research29 concurred, finding that for all the countries and U.S. states studied, once the region experienced 25 cumulative COVID-19 deaths, the growth rates of daily COVID-19 deaths fell from initially high levels to close to zero within 20 to 30 days. This occurred regardless of what type of nonpharmaceutical interventions, including mask mandates, travel restrictions, stay-at-home orders, quarantines and lockdowns, were put in place. “[T]hose policies have varied in their timing and implementation across countries and states, but the trends in outcomes do not,” the American Institute for Economic Research reported.30 Do You Have to Wear a Mask?Many people believe that wearing a mask should be an individual choice, but a majority of U.S. states and cities have made mask-wearing mandatory. Some private businesses have done so as well. This isn’t necessarily a case of “wearing something is better than nothing,” as some research suggests mask usage could lead to physical and psychological harm.31 The U.S. nonprofit Stand for Health Freedom is among those calling for peaceful civil disobedience against mandatory masks, and has a widget you can use to contact your government representatives to let them know wearing a mask must be a personal choice. While you may be forced to wear a mask in order to enter certain places of business, if you live in an area with a mask mandate there is usually a caveat that states “unless you can maintain a 6-foot distance.” If you can maintain this distance, you can forgo a mask and still comply with the mandate. from http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2021/01/29/is-wearing-three-masks-better-than-one.aspx In January 2021, after months of political tension and red tape, a 10-person team from the World Health Organization arrived in Wuhan, China to investigate the origins of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19.1 Wuhan is known as the epicenter of the global pandemic and, arguably, the most important research into COVID-19, outside of finding a cure, is how the pandemic started. There are currently two such investigations underway — one by WHO and another by The Lancet's COVID-19 commission2 — but both are essentially “fake,” as they’re riddled with conflicts of interest. Namely, Peter Daszak, EcoHealth Alliance president, is part of both of these investigations, despite working closely with the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) — the laboratory in question that possibly leaked the virus — and dozens of others on controversial gain-of-function research, which involves manipulating pathogens, including coronaviruses, to make them more infectious or lethal. Daszak told The Associated Press in November 2020 that SARS-CoV-2 could have passed from a wildlife poacher to a trader who brought it to Wuhan.3 He also has openly and repeatedly dismissed the possibility of the pandemic being the result of a lab leak.4 WHO Has No Plans to Investigate Possible Laboratory LeakWill the WHO team thoroughly investigate WIV and its potential role in COVID-19? A scientific audit and review of safety measures would seem to be a routine activity, according to Mark Woolhouse, an epidemiologist at the University of Edinburgh speaking with The Associated Press.5 But, the AP noted, “According to WHO’s published agenda6 for its origins research, there are no plans to assess whether there might have been an accidental release of the coronavirus at the Wuhan lab.” Taking it a step further, GM Watch reported that Daszak “has already poured cold water on calls for a forensic investigation”:7
Although the Chinese government already approved WHO’s 10-member investigatory team, some were initially denied entry into Beijing, prompting WHO to issue a “rare” criticism. Still, their “investigation” is centered on reports from Chinese scientists rather than an actual independent investigation. As The Wall Street Journal reported:10
WHO Investigator Wants to Karaoke With Wuhan Lab DirectorAnother clue that WHO’s investigation won’t touch WIV is Daszak’s close ties to Shi Zhengli, Ph.D., the director of WIV’s Center for Emerging Infectious Diseases, also known as “bat woman.” She has been studying bat-borne viruses since 2004, including SARS-like coronaviruses. According to the World Society for Virology, “One of her great contributions is to uncover genetically diverse SARS-like coronaviruses in bats with her international collaborators and provide unequivocal evidence that bats are natural reservoirs of SARS-CoV.”11 As reported by Alexis Baden-Mayer, political director for the Organic Consumers Association, Daszak’s EcoHealth Alliance lists WIV and the Wuhan University School of Public Health as subcontractors under a $3.7 million NIH grant12 titled, “Understanding the Risk of Bat Coronavirus Emergence.” EcoHealth Alliance also used millions of dollars of a sub-grant13,14,15 from the University of California at Davis to fund a gain-of-function experiment by Shi and colleague Ralph Baric from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, involving the use of genetic engineering to create a “new bat SARS-like virus … that can jump directly from its bat hosts to humans.” Now here’s where it gets really interesting. According to Baden-Mayer in the previously linked gain-of-function research article above:
In case there were any doubt of their close ties, The Sun,20 a tabloid paper in the U.K., featured a Twitter conversation in which Daszak “appears to say he is looking forward to an alcohol-fueled karaoke party in a bat cave with Shi Zhengli,” GM watch noted.21 Daszak tweets, “Looking forward to that special moment when we hit the baiju and the karaoke with Zhengli & Linfa [likely referring to Wang Linfa, aka ‘batman,’ another bat researcher and WIV’s chairman of scientific advisory22].” He adds, “Right now a party in a bat cave sounds just right to me!!”23 Daszak Calls Lab Leak ‘Conspiracy Theory’Is it a coincidence that when SARS-CoV-2 first emerged in Wuhan, China, the EcoHealth Alliance was providing funding to WIV to collect and study novel bat coronaviruses — and now Daszak has been the primary expert chosen by the mainstream media to explain the origin of the pandemic as being zoonotic in nature?24 You be the judge, but in November 2020, U.S. Right to Know (USRTK), an investigative public health nonprofit group, reported that emails obtained via Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests prove Daszak played a central role in the plot to obscure the lab origin of SARS-CoV-2 by issuing a scientific statement in The Lancet condemning such inquiries as "conspiracy theory."25,26 Five other members of The Lancet Commission also signed the February 18, 2020, Lancet statement,27 which puts their credibility in question as well. Meanwhile, a number of government officials have given credence to the lab-origin theory, including U.S. deputy national security adviser Matthew Pottinger, who in January 2021 stated that the lab-escape theory is the most credible, based on a growing body of evidence.28 A fact sheet released by the U.S. Department of State on January 15, 2021, further calls on WHO investigators to access WIV’s records that related to research on bat and other coronaviruses prior to the COVID-19 outbreak:29
The previously undisclosed information in the fact sheet notes that accidental laboratory infections have cause several previous virus outbreaks and the Chinese government has prevented investigators and journalists from interviewing WIV researchers. What’s more, WIV researchers have been conducting experiments involving the bat coronavirus RaTG13 — the closest known relative to SARS-CoV-2, with 96.2% similarity — since at least 2016. An Ongoing Cover-Up?Alina Chan, a molecular biologist at the Broad Institute of Harvard and MIT, has been outspoken about China’s apparent efforts to hide information about the source of SARS-CoV-2.30 According to Chan, the database on bat and mouse viral pathogens, which had been managed by Shi, has been taken offline, restricting scientists and researchers’ ability to analyze the potential origins of SARS-CoV-2.31 The U.S. Department of State fact sheet also states, “As part of a thorough inquiry, they [WHO investigators] must have a full accounting of why the WIV altered and then removed online records of its work with RaTG13 and other viruses.”32 Other reports claim that WIV was carrying out research infecting humanized mice with a novel bat SARS coronaviruses in 2019, and years earlier video was released showing WIV scientists working with little or no protective gear while working with live viruses. According to GM Watch:33
Given the glaring need for a thorough and independent investigation into a possible laboratory leak, many have called for Daszak to step down from the WHO investigatory team,34 as evidence ramps up that a laboratory leak cannot be ruled out. In an editorial published in the Journal of Human Security, Colin Butler of the Australian National University, a former WHO adviser who not only worked in China but also previously worked with Daszak, argued there is “striking” evidence that COVID-19 may have leaked from a lab.35,36 If the theory is proven, Butler concluded, “then it should be considered an equally powerful, indeed frightening, signal that we are in danger, from hubris as much as from ignorance.”37 As for Daszak, Butler noted, “He probably sincerely believes in his work but he has built an empire around the idea that zoonoses [animal to human infections] are the most important thing in the world.”38 from http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2021/01/28/covid-research-fake-investigation.aspx Dr. Gregory Michael, an obstetrician in private practice at Mount Sinai Medical Center in Miami Beach, received a first dose of the Pfizer/BioNTech experimental mRNA COVID-19 vaccine on December 18, 2020 and died 16 days later of a cerebral hemorrhage (stroke).1 Within three days of taking the shot, he developed symptoms of a severe autoimmune bleeding disorder, idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP), often referred to as immune thrombocytopenia.2 According to his wife, the 56-year old OB/GYN physician was healthy when he received the COVID-19 vaccine and began exhibiting symptoms of bleeding under the skin within 72 hours. He was hospitalized in the intensive care unit but none of the treatments were able to stop the internal bleeding.3 The case is being investigated by the Miami-Dade County medical examiner, which is working with the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and Florida Department of Health.4 According to the Miami Herald, as of January 7, 2021, a Pfizer official said Michael died of a “highly unusual clinical case of severe thrombocytopenia, a condition that decreases the body’s ability to clot blood and stop internal bleeding.” The Pfizer spokesman added, “We are actively investigating this case but we don’t believe at this time that there is any direct connection to the vaccine.”5 A CBS report quoted the Pfizer spokesman as saying:6
Wife: Gregory Michael ‘Loved by Everyone in the Community’The well-known and popular obstetrician, who was a Miami native, Michael had operated a private OB/GYN practice in Miami Beach for 12 years and also worked as a clinical instructor and faculty member for the physician assistant program at Barry University and Miami Dade College. He was the father of a 15-year-old daughter. His wife, Heidi Neckelmann, made a heartfelt post online7 calling her husband “the love of my life” who was “loved by everyone in the community, delivered hundreds of healthy babies and worked tirelessly through the pandemic.” When informing her friends about his death, she asked them to share her post so the public is more aware that the COVID-19 vaccine is not risk-free. She said:
CDC: ‘Potential Benefits’ of COVID Vaccines ‘Outweigh Risks’A CBS report quoted Dr. Nancy Messonnier, director of the CDC’s National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, as saying, “The known and potential benefits of the current COVID-19 vaccines outweigh the known and potential risks of getting COVID-19. That doesn’t mean, however, that we couldn’t see potential serious health events in the future.” Reportedly, CDC officials told reporters they had not seen any serious reactions beyond 29 cases of severe allergic reactions — or about 11 cases of anaphylaxis per 1 million doses of COVID-19 vaccinations administered.8 ITP Caused by Autoantibody-Mediated Platelet DestructionIdiopathic or immune thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP) is a complex autoimmune disorder caused by autoantibody-mediated destruction of platelets, which are cells in the blood that help stop bleeding.9 Basically, the immune system malfunctions and produces antibodies that attack the body’s platelets. In some cases, T-cells (a type of white blood cell) will directly attack and destroy the platelets.10 ITP has been reported to develop after infections, including SARS-CoV-2 infection;11 reactions to prescription drugs and over-the-counter medications,12 pregnancy, exposure to chemical toxins,13 vaccination,14 or as a complication of autoimmune disorders like rheumatoid arthritis and lupus, but all the causes of ITP are still not known. A normal platelet count is between 150,000 to 450,000 platelets and ITP can drive the platelet count down to less than 10,000 platelets, which causes significant internal bleeding. Symptoms of ITP may begin with the appearance of tiny red dots under the skin, which indicate very small bleeds, and progress to purple blotches and bruises on large areas of the skin, as well as nosebleeds, bleeding in the mouth and around the gums, and blood in the vomit, urine or stool, which indicate much more serious internal bleeding. The most dangerous complication of ITP is bleeding in the brain causing a cerebral hemorrhage and catastrophic brain damage or death.15 Treatments that try to slow or stop the destruction of platelets during ITP are limited and include intravenous gamma globulin (IVGG) and platelet infusions, steroids and several other medications, or removal of the spleen.16 ITP in children, which occurs in 1 in 20,000 children, can be more easily reversed than ITP in adults, which occurs in about 1 in 15,000 adults in the U.S. and is more common in women and individuals over age 60.17,18 The majority of children recover from acute ITP but approximately 30% of adults have chronic disease after developing ITP and 5% die from hemorrhage.19 ITP Reported After and Causally Related to VaccinationsIn 1991, an Institute of Medicine committee at the National Academy of Sciences stated in its report titled “Adverse Effects of Pertussis and Rubella Vaccines” that there were too few scientific studies published in the medical literature investigating ITP following whole cell pertussis (DPT) vaccination or rubella (MMR) vaccination for the committee to determine whether or not DPT or MMR vaccine causes ITP in children.20,21 However, reports continued to be published in the medical literature.22 In 2001, a study was published in Archives of Disease in Childhood confirming a causal association between measles-mumps-rubella vaccine and ITP. Study authors said, “The absolute risk within six weeks of immunization was 1 in 22,300 doses, with two of every three cases occurring in the six-week post-immunization period being caused by MMR.”23 The CDC’s website currently states:24
During the past decade, there have been a number of published studies from the U.S. and other countries that ITP develops after receipt of vaccines, including HPV25 and influenza vaccines,26,27 with authors calling for more research into the association between vaccination and ITP.28,29,30 One group of researchers looking at the relationship between ITP and vaccinations said in 2014:31
An editorial in the October 2020 International Journal of Infectious Diseases titled “ITP Following Vaccination” pointed out that “the term ‘mosaic of autoimmunity’ indicates that immune mediated disorders can involve different sources, including genetics, environmental factors and hormonal or immune defects.”32 The editors noted that vaccination is one of the “environmental triggers” that has been described in the medical literature in association with ITP. The journal editors, who called for more research into the vaccination-ITP association, stated:33,34
FDA: Moderna COVID-19 Vaccine Trial Had ITP CasePfizer did not report a case of ITP occurring in clinical trials of its experimental COVID-19 mRNA vaccine, which was the vaccine that Michael received.35 However, in a briefing document prepared for the December 17, 2020, Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee meeting, where members of the committee voted on granting Moderna an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) to distribute its mRNA COVID-19 vaccine in the U.S., the FDA did note a case of ITP in a 72-year-old clinical trial participant who was hospitalized with thrombocytopenia and obstructive kidney stone disease after receiving the experimental vaccine and died of multiorgan failure. In discussing deaths that occurred in the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials, the FDA stated:36
from http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2021/01/28/dr-gregory-michael-covid-vaccine-death.aspx The “fog of war” is a term used to describe the uncertainty, chaos and confusion that can occur during battle. What you thought was true entering into the battle may be turned upside down, clouding your judgment as you try to make decisions in a sort of suspended reality. You’re living in a fog of war right now — a fog of COVID war — according to Jeffrey Tucker, editorial director of the American Institute for Economic Research (AIER): “It is often unclear who is making decisions and why, and what the relationships are between the strategies and the goals. Even the rationale can become elusive as frustration and disorientation displace clarity and rationality.”1 This description is typically reserved for the disorientation of battle but now applies disturbingly well to the fog surrounding COVID-19 disease mitigation. If you’d like a concrete example, watch the video timeline above, which takes you from January 2020, when mask use was discouraged, to December 2020, when masks have become mandatory in many areas.2 March: Face Masks Cannot Protect Against the New CoronavirusIn February 2020, Christine Francis, a consultant for infection prevention and control at the World Health Organization headquarters, was featured in a video, holding up a disposable face mask. She said, “Medical masks like this one cannot protect against the new coronavirus when used alone … WHO only recommends the use of masks in specific cases.”3 Those specific cases include if you have a cough, fever or difficulty breathing. In other words, if you’re actively sick and showing symptoms. “If you do not have these symptoms, you do not have to wear masks because there is no evidence that they protect people who are not sick,” she continued. In March 2020, the U.S. Surgeon General publicly agreed, tweeting a message stating, “Seriously people — STOP BUYING MASKS!” and going on to say that they are not effective in preventing the general public from catching coronavirus.4 As of March 31, 2020, WHO was still advising against the use of face masks for people without symptoms, stating that there is “no evidence” that such mask usage prevents COVID-19 transmission.5 June: Public Should Wear a Face MaskBy June 6, 2020, the rhetoric had changed. Citing “evolving evidence,” WHO reversed their recommendation, with Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, WHO’s director general, advising governments to encourage the general public to wear masks where there is widespread transmission and physical distancing is difficult.6 This encouragement turned into mandates in many areas, with threats of fines for those who did not comply. In Humboldt County, California, for instance, anyone who violated the order to wear face coverings in public could be fined $50 to $1,000 and/or face 90 days in jail for each day the offense occurred.7 In Salem, Massachusetts, you could also be fined for not wearing a mask in public, including the common areas inside an apartment building.8 What’s the evolving evidence WHO referred to that made them reverse their position on masks for the healthy general public over a period of just two months? This remains unclear, but an interesting development did occur. WHO: Asymptomatic Transmission ‘Very Rare’During a June 8, 2020, press briefing — just two days after Ghebreyesus advised healthy people to start wearing masks — Maria Van Kerkhove, WHO’s technical lead for the COVID-19 pandemic, made it very clear that people who have COVID-19 without any symptoms "rarely” transmit the disease to others.9 WHO’s interim guidance from June 5, 2020, supports Kerkhove’s statement, noting, “Comprehensive studies on transmission from asymptomatic individuals are difficult to conduct, but the available evidence from contact tracing reported by Member States suggests that asymptomatically-infected individuals are much less likely to transmit the virus than those who develop symptoms.”10 If this is the case, though, the recommendation that healthy, asymptomatic people wear face masks or be locked down in their homes makes no sense, highlighting just one instance of the ongoing “COVID fog.” Not to be called out on their blatant contradictions, on June 9, 2020, Dr. Mike Ryan, executive director of WHO’s emergencies program, quickly backpedaled Van Kerkhove’s statement, saying the remarks were “misinterpreted or maybe we didn’t use the most elegant words to explain that.”11 Van Kerkhove also stated that the data she mentioned only came from a “small subset of studies,” and added:12
10 Million People, Not One Case of Asymptomatic TransmissionAfter WHO’s asymptomatic spread debacle, talk of this topic died down considerably.13 But, quietly, a landmark study involving 9,899,828 million residents of Wuhan, China, was published in Nature Communications.14 The participants were tested for COVID-19 between May 14, 2020, and June 1, 2020. No new symptomatic cases, and 300 asymptomatic cases, were identified. Among the 300 asymptomatic cases, 1,174 close contacts were identified, and not one of them tested positive for COVID-19. Additionally, of the 34,424 participants with a history of COVID-19, 107 individuals (0.31%) tested positive again, but, importantly, none were symptomatic. As noted by the authors, "Virus cultures were negative for all asymptomatic positive and repositive cases, indicating no 'viable virus' in positive cases detected in this study.”15 Tucker explained:16
A meta-analysis of 21,708 at-risk people, of which 663 were COVID-19 positive and 111 were asymptomatic, also found that asymptomatic transmission rates may actually be “lower than those of many highly-publicized studies.”17 They suggested the prevalence of asymptomatic COVID-19 cases is 1 in 6, and found the relative risk of asymptomatic transmission was 42% lower than the risk of symptomatic transmission. In a preprint version of their study, the researchers noted, “Our estimates of the proportion of asymptomatic cases and their transmission rates suggest that asymptomatic spread is unlikely to be a major driver of clusters or community transmission of infection …”18 As Tucker noted:19
If Asymptomatic Spread Is Rare, Why Masks and Lockdowns?Widespread asymptomatic spreading is the only reason that lockdowns and mask usage among the healthy make sense. For months, health officials have been perpetuating the myth of asymptomatic spreading to escalate fear. Now, as people are increasingly eager to return to some sense of normalcy, a mutated SARS-CoV-2 strain, which is supposedly more virulent, is said to have emerged and resulted in new, more severe lockdown restrictions in the U.K.20 This perpetuation of fear has extended far beyond the initial purpose of the lockdowns, which was to flatten the curve and avoid overstressing hospitals. As Tucker pointed out, however, this has gradually changed such that now we’re facing lockdowns indefinitely:21
Science is what should be used to dictate policy, but this isn’t what’s occurring. Ongoing testing of asymptomatic people is adding to the problem, as positive reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) tests are also being used as justification for keeping large portions of the world locked down. The problem is a positive PCR test does not mean that an active infection is present. The PCR swab collects RNA from your nasal cavity. This RNA is then reverse transcribed into DNA. However, the genetic snippets are so small they must be amplified in order to become discernible. What this does is amplify any, even insignificant sequences of viral DNA that might be present to the point that the test reads "positive," even if the viral load is extremely low or the virus is inactive. These “positive” cases are keeping the pandemic narrative going. Case in point, between March 22 and April 4, 2020, 215 pregnant women admitted to a hospital in New York City were screened on admission for symptoms of COVID-19 and tested for the virus. Only 1.9% of the women had fever or other COVID-19 symptoms, and all of those women tested positive. Of the remaining women who were tested even though they had no symptoms, 13.7% were positive. This means that, overall, 87.9% of the women who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 had no symptoms,22 and the overwhelming research suggests they likely wouldn’t have transmitted the virus to others, either. Masks Are IneffectiveWhat does the science say about masks for preventing COVID-19 infection? The first randomized controlled trial of more than 6,000 individuals to assess the effectiveness of surgical face masks against SARS-CoV-2 infection found masks did not statistically significantly reduce the incidence of infection. The “Danmask-19 Trial,” published November 18, 2020, in the Annals of Internal Medicine,23 found that among mask wearers 1.8% (42 participants) ended up testing positive for SARS-CoV-2, compared to 2.1% (53) among controls. When they removed the people who reported not adhering to the recommendations for use, the results remained the same — 1.8% (40 people), which suggests adherence makes no significant difference. Rational Ground also looked at COVID-19 cases from May 1, 2020 to December 15, 2020, in all 50 U.S. states, with and without mask mandates. Among states with no mask mandates, 17 cases per 100,000 people per day were counted, compared to 27 cases per 100,000 people per day in states with mask mandates24 — COVID-19 cases were higher in areas with mask mandates than without. The findings further call into question the effectiveness of mandated masks for preventing COVID-19, as does a case-control investigation of people with COVID-19 who visited 11 U.S. health care facilities. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention report revealed factors associated with getting the disease,25 including the use of cloth face coverings or masks in the 14 days before becoming ill. The majority of them — 70.6% — reported that they “always” wore a mask, but they still got sick. Among the interview respondents who became ill, 108, or 70.6%, said they always wore a mask, compared to six, or 3.9%, who said they “never” did, and six more, or 3.9%, who said they “rarely” did. Taken together, this shows that, of the symptomatic adults with COVID-19, 70.6% always wore a mask and still got sick, compared to 7.8% for those who rarely or never did.26 Seeing Through the FogAn abundance of evidence suggests that locking down the healthy and mandating mask usage for those without symptoms is irrational, at best, and dangerous, at worst, considering both masks and lockdowns are associated with ill effects of their own.27 According to Tucker:28
Living in such a fog can be intimidating, but the purpose of this article is not to spread more fear but, rather, to empower you with information. The fog of war, after all, is not always an impediment. It can also be used to gain advantage,29 and seeing through the fog is the first step to winning the war. from http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2021/01/27/fog-of-covid-war.aspx In a peer-reviewed study, researchers found global data do not support lockdowns to restrict the spread of SARS-CoV-21 but, rather, suggested less restrictive interventions could reduce the growth of tested “cases.” As I’ve written, PCR tests don’t distinguish between live viruses and noninfectious viral particles. But, the rising number of positive “cases” have been used to generate fear and control behavior. The first country to initiate a lockdown to presumably protect public health was China, prompted by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).2 Despite protests, the Chinese government used this unprecedented strategy to control the movements of their citizens. This was only the beginning of global mandatory lockdowns and mask-wearing, business failures, growing unemployment and rising suicide rates. As data continue to demonstrate, the decision to lock down and force citizens to endure different, and potentially more dangerous, consequences has not been the right choice to protect public health. More Evidence Lockdowns Are Dangerous and IneffectiveA peer-reviewed study by Stanford University showed lockdowns have not provided the expected benefits.3 The team set out to determine if the restrictive non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPI) enacted to control the spread of COVID-19 were potentially less effective than anticipated. The Stanford team evaluated data from 10 countries4 that had used less restrictive nonpharmaceutical interventions (lrNPI) and compared those against other countries that implemented mandatory stay at home and business closures, or more restrictive NPIs (mrNPI).5 In nine out of the 10 countries studied, the research found data supported a reduction in the number of cases when any type of NPI was implemented. However, after analysis, they did not find a significant beneficial effect using more restrictive interventions over less restrictive strategies in any of the countries studied. In other words, the countries that implemented lrNPI such as mask wearing and voluntary social distancing experienced little difference from those implementing mrNPI. They concluded:6
Political scientist and author Wilfred Reilly, Ph.D., evaluated the data in early 2020 and wrote there's no empirical evidence the lockdowns have had any effect in reducing the spread of the virus.7 He used publicly available data to compare seven states that had not adopted shelter-in-place orders against those that imposed restrictive interventions. He found the numbers did not support lockdowns as a means of limiting the spread of the contagion. He also discovered that large, densely populated cities had a higher rate of COVID-19, without respect to the strategy they used. He wrote:8
Early in the pandemic, quantitative scientist John Ioannidis observed that “we are making decisions without reliable data.”9 But, as Reilly points out, these decisions have continued, despite evidence they are not effective. Over 6,000 scientists and 60,000 citizens have signed the Barrington Declaration, calling for a halt to lockdowns, citing “irreparable damage.”10 Food Insecurity and Minority-Owned Businesses Take Big HitHow is it logical that shutting small businesses while allowing big box stores to stay open can help stop the spread of SARS-CoV-2? The only rhyme or reason to that decision is to move wealth out of the hands of small, privately held businesses into the coffers of multinational corporations. December 9, 2020, attorney Michael P. Senger published a 30-point post on Twitter, detailing many of the individual and business consequences suffered worldwide from the COVID-19 pandemic lockdowns.11 The post included a Yelp report that 60% of business closures by September 2020 were now permanent, representing 97,966 businesses.12 Those that have taken the largest hit, according to an article in Forbes published in August 2020, are minority-owned businesses.13 By the end of April 2020, nearly half of all Black-owned small businesses had been eliminated. According to the New York Fed, a nationally representative data set on small businesses showed an overall drop in active businesses of 22% from February to April 2020, the largest drop recorded. However, during that same time, the number of businesses owned by Blacks dropped by 41%, by Latinos 32%, by Asians 26% and by whites 17%. Unemployment and small business closures have contributed to long lines at food banks across the U.S. Photos published in an April 12, 2020, article in The New York Times showed miles-long lines in multiple cities outside food pantries that “have become glaring symbols of financial precarity, showing how quickly the pandemic has devastated working people's finances.”14 Nearly nine months later during the Christmas holiday shopping season, without sufficient evidence that restrictive lockdowns work better than social distancing, governments again initiated lockdowns for small businesses, creating yet another financial hurdle from which more individuals and businesses will have trouble recovering.15 The Harmful Psychological Effects of LockdownsAs this short film demonstrates, lockdowns and forced shelter-in-place orders not only can be mind-numbing, but can increase the risk of depression and anxiety. A survey done by Mental Health Research Canada16 in early October 2020 found 22% of those surveyed experienced high anxiety levels, which was four times higher than before the pandemic. In an American Psychological Association survey in August 2020, they found Gen-Zers (born from 1997 to 2015) in the U.S. have been among the hardest hit in regard to mental health.17 Young adults from 18 to 23 reported having the highest level of stress and depression, and 51% of teenagers from 13 to 17 surveyed said the pandemic is making it impossible to plan for the future. Not surprisingly, the American Medical Association has found the drug overdose epidemic has “grown into a much more complicated and deadly” epidemic.18 In an Issue Brief updated December 9, 2020, the AMA said, “More than 40 states have reported increases in opioid-related mortality as well as ongoing concerns for those with a mental illness or substance use disorder.”19 There has been an unexpected and rising number of young people who have died during 2020.20 Despite their low risk for COVID-19 death, adults from 20 to 44 years had the largest increase in “excess” deaths. This number is defined as “the number of persons who have died from all causes, in excess of the expected number of deaths for a given place and time.”21 Excess deaths in this age group jumped by 26.5%, surpassing the number of excess deaths in older Americans who are at higher risk for a COVID-19 fatality. According to the CDC, these excess deaths were not linked to the coronavirus but, as the Daily Wire reports, it has been suggested they were “largely attributable to deaths of ‘despair,’ or deaths linked to our ‘cure’ for the disease: lockdown measures.”22 During the first four months of the pandemic, Rape Crisis Network Ireland reported rape and child sex abuse had increased sharply and the number of survivors who contacted crisis centers for counseling jumped by 98% from March through the end of June 2020, as compared to 2019.23 CNBC reports that data collected from the British group Women's Aid revealed 61% of domestic abuse survivors reported their abuse had worsened during lockdown.24 The number of women killed by their domestic partners also doubled during the first three weeks of lockdown in the U.K.25 Suicides Happening During the Pandemic in Greater NumbersData from a hospital in Massachusetts showed a dramatic jump in patients who were seeking emergency care after being battered by their domestic partner in the nine weeks from March 11 to May 3, 2020, when schools had been ordered closed by the state.26,27 During those nine weeks, 26 were seen for treatment of domestic abuse injuries including strangulation, stabbing, burns and gunshot wounds, accounting for one less than the number in the same period in 2018 and 2019 combined. In September 2020, Cook Children's Hospital in Fort Worth, Texas, admitted a record number of 37 pediatric patients who had tried to commit suicide. Dr. Kia Carter, medical director of psychiatry at Cook Children’s, told CBS:28
No Historical Precedence for LockdownsThe sheer number of people whose lives have dramatically and irrevocably changed during the forced lockdowns with COVID-19 will affect the mental, financial and physical health of the world for years to come. However, as you’ll discover in this short video based on an extensive open letter,29 there has been no historical precedence set for a population-wide lockdown.30 The letter was addressed to the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation with courtesy copies sent to the U.K. Security Service, Australian Security Intelligence Organization, Canadian Security Intelligence Service, the German Foreign Intelligence Service and the U.S. Department of Justice. In it the writers call for an investigation into major policy decisions, writing:31
Infectious disease specialist Donald Henderson, credited with eradicating smallpox, wrote in Biosecurity and Bioterrorism in 2006 about mitigating the effects of pandemic influenza. The paper concludes:32
The open letter also points out that as of 2019, the World Health Organization’s own guidance did not advise border closures, contact tracing or even quarantining people who were known to have been exposed under any circumstance.33 As each state in the U.S. accepted lockdowns and shuttering businesses, the governor of South Dakota stood firm that the state would remain open and practice social distancing.34 While the rest of the country is floundering financially, South Dakota's Gov. Kristi Noem revealed in December 2020 that the state “closed the 2020 budget year in June with a $19 million surplus, and our general fund revenues are up by 19.4% right now compared to the same time last year."35 Added to the state’s financial standing, according to the Johns Hopkins Coronavirus Resource Center, as of January 19, 2021, South Dakota was the 40th state in a list of deaths and recovered cases.36 This is in line with their state ranking by population, which is No. 46.37 Now Is the Time to Fight Against Global RestructuringTechStartups reported in September 2020 that six companies owned 90% of the news media.38 This means that 90% of the news being consumed is filtered through the lens of large corporations that are intent on protecting their financial interests. I would caution you to fully evaluate the information being disseminated in the news and on television before accepting it as truth. There are few independent journalists whose focus is on bringing you an unbiased view of events and research, which I discussed in a revealing interview with Sheryl Attkisson in late 2020. Some of the information you’ll find in my newsletter is not shared through the general media. In fact, it is not in the best interest of the media and those who control the news for you and your friends to have this information. To halt the repercussions of this planned event it will be necessary for you to act on accurate information. I encourage you to share my newsletter with your friends and family so more people are informed about how they can take control of their health, including what interventions and treatments are effective and which are not. It’s important to understand that now’s the time to fight back: to resist any and all unconstitutional edicts. Once controlling strategies are in place, it will be too late. Read more about the strategies you can use in your community in “Why Lockdowns Don’t Work and Hurt the Most Vulnerable.” from http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2021/01/27/more-evidence-proves-lockdowns-are-a-dangerous-lie.aspx |
Nia Pure NatureThe Provider of premium Quality Health Products To Live Better Lives Archives
March 2022
Categories |