Many consumers have long known their favorite lotions and sunscreens contained parabens, or synthetic chemicals used as preservatives. But with more and more products being touted as “paraben-free," many are now wondering, "What, exactly, are parabens, and are they dangerous?" Parabens, which inhibit the growth of bacteria, yeast, and molds, have been used in personal-care products like shampoos, conditioners, deodorants, and sunscreens for years, allowing these products to survive for months, or years, during shipping and on store shelves. Studies have now shown that parabens mimic the activity of the hormone estrogen, which is associated with certain forms of breast cancer. Organic Consumers Association September 4, 2007 from http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2007/09/25/the-hidden-danger-in-lotions-and-sunscreens.aspx
0 Comments
Censorship’s reach in the 21st century knows no bounds, as increasingly repressive tactics are being used to silence and discredit anyone who questions the official COVID narrative. Suppression and censorship have been aimed repeatedly at this website specifically, along with many others in the natural health realm, but anyone who speaks out is at risk of being targeted. This includes C.J. Hopkins, an award-winning American playwright, novelist and political satirist based in Berlin, who is being censored by YouTube and Facebook, which went so far as to even suspend or restrict the accounts of people who tried to share Hopkins’ posts.1 In his reasoning for why he won’t be getting a COVID-19 vaccine, Christian Elliot made a good point, stating, “Maybe I'm weird, but if someone is censored, then I REALLY want to hear what they think. Don't you?” In Hopkins’ case, his criticism of COVID policies has landed him on the list to be silenced. In an interview with Matt Taibbi, Hopkins said:2
What Is the Line To Be Crossed?When censorship happens on social media, it often occurs without warning. In April 2021, for instance, Spotify removed my Take Control of Your Health podcast, citing their rules about “prohibited content.”3 The takedown notification stated my podcast was in violation of their content policies, which include a prohibition of infringing content, illegal content and hate content, none of which apply, but the entire channel was taken down anyway, without recourse. In short, you don’t know what you can’t talk about on any given site until your account is gone. Social media companies need to publish the topics that are forbidden on their platforms, and talk about what people aren’t supposed to communicate. Otherwise, it appears as though each censorship incident is just an arbitrary decision made to ban this person or that, with everyone at risk of being cut out at any moment. What might such a list potentially include? Talk about vaccine injuries, science related to facemasks’ ineffectiveness, harms of lockdowns, anything questioning the safety of an experimental vaccine, discussion of the origins of SARS-CoV-2 — virtually anything is fair game, so it’s impossible to speculate how extensive such a list would become. If you take a look at some of my videos that have been banned from YouTube, you’ll see that the majority are interviews with health experts sharing their medical or scientific expertise and viewpoints on COVID-19, but others include discussions of the World Health Organization, and one in which I provide information about and instructions on how to use hydrogen peroxide therapy as a prophylactic against COVID-19. The reality is, though, that publishing a list of off-limits topics would only shine the light on what these companies would prefer to keep quiet, which is a unified goal of silencing anyone who understands and exposes the global technocratic agenda that is pushing us toward global totalitarianism. Anything that deviates from the standard COVID narrative is at risk, which is where Hopkins got into trouble. Censored Over ‘New Normal’ Art ExhibitEven art, once a protected form of personal expression, is being targeted — that is, if it’s attempted to be shared online. When asked what stories he’s been prevented from sharing on the internet, Hopkins explained:4
It’s not the first time such a comparison has been made. It’s also not lost that at the time of Hitler’s rise to power, the world was unaware that “massively organized information” had “emerged to become a means of social control, a weapon of war, and a roadmap for group destruction.”5 The same can’t be said today, when massive data collection can and is being used to actively manipulate societies worldwide. Therefore, it would be naïve to think that digital vaccine passports, tied to our biometric IDs, banking, credit histories and health data would not end up being used as a tool for social control and a weapon for group destruction. In another example, an interview Hopkins did with Gunnar Kaiser, a German author and YouTuber, titled “Corona Kult,” was also censored by YouTube, which claimed it contained medical misinformation. “The interview contains no medical information at all,” Hopkins said. “It’s just me and another author discussing our views of the Covid-19 restrictions, ‘New Normal’ ideology, global capitalism, totalitarianism, my novel and so on.”6 People have also routinely reported not being able to share Hopkins’ Consent Factory columns7 via Facebook. ‘Anti-Vaxxer,’ ‘COVID Denier’ Are ‘Purely Tactical Terms’A common strategy used by tech platforms and cancel-culture leaders like the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH) is to label people questioning the COVID-19 vaccine or pandemic response as “threats to national security,” “anti-vaxxers” or “COVID deniers.” Hopkins is among those who has been accused of spreading “anti-vaxxer propaganda,” to which he replied:8
Entering Phase 2 of the New NormalWhat is the ‘New Normal’ that Hopkins speaks of? At the root of the agenda is a significant economic and power shift that only a minority of people are aware of. If there were a covert plan for a global takeover, the COVID-19 pandemic presents the perfect scenario for its success. First, a problem is created — coronavirus is released and a global pandemic is declared. Next, a reaction is created — namely, fear. This is ramped up and lockdowns ensue, forcing businesses to close and economies to be destroyed. The final stage is when the “solution” is created, which is part of what Hopkins describes as Phase 2, in which “the pathologization of political dissent will continue, and intensify, both overtly and subtlely”:9
In short, the technocratic elite are using the pandemic to erode liberty, freedom and democracy, but this isn’t something that just appeared in March 2020. It’s been transpiring for some time:10
A Pathologized New WorldDue to months of fearmongering, many now enter a state of hysteria when they see an unmasked person, even if they look perfectly healthy and clearly are not suffering from any kind of respiratory issue. This is a highly irrational state that has no basis in reality. The mass delusion is driving us toward a society devoid of all previous freedoms and civil liberties, and the corrupt individuals in charge will not voluntarily relinquish power once we've given it to them. As Hopkins put it, “Society has been transformed into … an enormous hospital from which there is no escape.” The stark changes that have occurred in one year’s time are visually apparent all around:11
What effects this will have on future generations — the children growing up thinking this is all “normal” — is perhaps the most unsettling question of all. Hopkins believes it’s a form of conditioning, in which the “New Normal children” will grow up reflexively hating and fearing the “threats” being fed to them — viruses, misinformation and vaccine hesitancy among them. Such threats will “fuse into a single Goldstein-like enemy,” Hopkins says, “which ‘New Normal’ children will … want to silence, and quarantine off from ‘normal’ society, or ‘cure’ of their ‘illness’ with government-mandated, ‘safe and effective’ pharmaceutical therapies.”12 Already, the pandemic has succeeded in generating fear and controlling human behavior, and anything that counters its final solution of vaccination is being censored — this is a clue that shouldn’t be overlooked. Even open debate is being silenced, leaving fear-based propaganda, not real information, to become an everyday fixation. from http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2021/05/24/new-normal-critic-gets-censored.aspx In this interview, return guest Stephanie Seneff, Ph.D., a senior research scientist at MIT for over five decades, discusses the COVID-19 vaccines. Since 2008, her primary focus has been glyphosate and sulfur, but in the last year, she took a deep-dive into the science of these novel injections and recently published an excellent paper1 on this topic.
Significant Death Toll Will Rise in Months and Years to ComeFive months into the vaccination campaign, statistics tell a frightening story. Seneff cites research2 showing deaths are 14.6 times more frequent during the first 14 days after the first COVID injection among people over the age of 60, compared to those who aren't vaccinated. That is extraordinary. You can read the full paper here. Other data,3,4 reviewed in the video above, show that after COVID-19 vaccines were implemented, overall death rates have increased, with the exception of a few areas. Interestingly, Seneff believes she may have discovered why. It appears countries in which COVID-19 vaccines have not raised mortality rates are also not using glyphosate.
Ultimately, Seneff believes, as I do, that the COVID-19 “vaccines” will end up killing far more people than the disease itself, and will in fact make the disease worse. Seneff cites a disturbing case history of a cancer patient in the U.K. who was treated for severe COVID-19 for 101 days. The antibody cocktails they gave him didn’t work, and after his death, they concluded that the predominant SARS-CoV-2 variant in his body had a dozen different mutations in the spike protein. Somehow, his body figured out how to evade the antibodies, which is a critical piece of the puzzle. “I think the vaccines are doing the same thing,” Seneff says, adding that, among the immune compromised, only 17% of vaccinated individuals actually produce antibodies.5 Surprisingly, these people may actually have drawn the short end of the stick. The antibodies may not work because their immune function is low, thereby allowing the virus to build resistance and mutate.
COVID-19 Vaccines Are a Public Health DisasterThe typical unprecedented vaccine takes 12 years to develop, and of all the unprecedented vaccines in development, only 2% are projected to ever make it through phases 2 and 3 of clinical testing. The COVID-19 vaccine was developed with Operation Warp Speed in less than one year, which makes it virtually impossible for this vaccine to be adequately tested for safety and efficacy. Hundreds of millions of people are now being vaccinated around the world, based on nothing more than preliminary efficacy data. Disturbingly, while sudden death is one apparent side effect, the vast majority of side effects won’t be known until a decade or more from now. Seneff predicts that in the next 10 to 15 years, we’ll see a sudden spike in prion diseases, autoimmune diseases, neurodegenerative diseases at younger ages, and blood disorders such as blood clots, hemorrhaging, stroke and heart failure.
Understanding Your Immune SystemAs your cells start producing the viral spike proteins, your immune cells rally to mop up the proteins and dump them into your lymphatic system. This is why many report swollen lymph nodes under the arms. This is also a sign of breast cancer. The antibody response is part of your humoral immunity. You also have cellular immunity, which is part of your innate immune system. Your innate immune system is very powerful. And, if you're healthy, it can clear viruses without ever producing a single antibody. Antibodies are actually a second-tier effect when your innate immune system fails. The problem is your innate immune system is definitely going to fail if you get a COVID-19 shot, because it’s bypassing all of the areas where your innate immune system would be brought to bear. Your body will essentially believe that the innate immune system has failed, which means it must bring in the backup cavalry. In essence, your body is now over-reacting to something that isn’t true. You’re not actually infected with a virus and your innate immune system has not failed, but your body is forced to respond as if both are true. How COVID-19 Vaccine Circumvents Healthy Immune ResponsesBut there’s more. As explained by Seneff, the synthetic RNA in the mRNA vaccines contains a nucleotide called methyl-pseudouridine, which your body cannot break down, and the RNA is programmed to trigger maximum protein production. So, we’re looking at completely untested manipulation of RNA. It is very important to recognize that this is a genetically engineered mRNA for the spike protein. It is in no way shape or form the same that SARS-CoV-2 produces. It’s been significantly altered to avoid being metabolized by your body. Additionally, the spike protein your body produces in response to the COVID-19 vaccine mRNA locks into your ACE2 receptor. This is because the genetically engineered NEW spike protein has additional prolines inserted that prevent the receptors from properly closing, which then cause you to downregulate ACE2. That’s partially how you end up with problems such as pulmonary hypertension, ventricular heart failure and stroke.6,7 As noted in a 2020 paper,8 there’s a “pivotal link” between ACE2 deficiency and SARS-CoV-2 infection. People with ACE2 deficiency tend to be more prone to severe COVID-19. The spike protein suppresses ACE2,9 making the deficiency even worse. As it turns out, the vaccines essentially do the same thing. How Long Might Effects Last?As mentioned, RNA is highly perishable, so to get it past the enzymes that would normally break down free mRNA, it’s encased in a lipid nanoparticle combined with polyethylene glycol or PEG. The PEG helps protect the RNA from breaking down. The RNA can easily enter the cell via natural endocytosis pathways, taking advantage of the nanoparticle design made to look like an LDL particle. They strategically chose a cationic lipid, meaning it’s positively charged. “Usually you have phospholipids in your membranes that are negatively charged,” Seneff explains. The problem with cationic lipids is they disturb the plasma membrane and cause an immune response. However, that may also be a key reason for why they were used. Typically, conventional vaccines contain an aluminum adjuvant to initiate an immune response. Aluminum was not appropriate for the COVID-19 vaccines, but the cationic lipids serve a similar function spectacularly well. Being extremely toxic to the cell membranes, the positively charged lipids trigger immune cells to rush in to aid the cells and mop up the spike protein now being produced, while also being the vehicle that allows the RNA to slip into the cells. Once inside the cell, the mRNA delivers the instructions to produce enormous amounts of spike proteins. Importantly, there’s no telling how long these instructions will persist. Manufacturers are guessing the synthetic RNA may survive in the human body for about six months, but we really don’t know if that’s true or not. Again, the alterations they’ve done to the synthetic RNA are meant to prevent it from breaking down. It could be years or even decades that these spike proteins are being produced, and you will find out shortly why this is a really bad scenario.
Tracing Spike Protein From Cells to Lymph to SpleenAs explained by Seneff, your immune cells mop up mRNA and spike protein and dump them into your lymphatic system. From there, they make their way into your spleen, where they can remain for quite a long time.
Potential Vaccine Shedding Mechanism RevealedSeneff also sheds light on the mysterious reports of unvaccinated individuals experiencing unusual bleeding symptoms after spending time in proximity to a newly vaccinated person. She believes this may be due to exosomes being released from the lungs.
So, to be clear, what's being “shed” or spread by vaccinated individuals is the spike protein — which is itself toxic — not the SARS-CoV-2. So, it’s not an infection but rather the shedding of a toxic protein.
Can mRNA Vaccines Change Your DNA? That Is the QuestionGetting back to the potential issue of gene editing, I’ve been accused of being scientifically ignorant for stating that COVID-19 vaccines are not vaccines but rather a form of gene therapy. But when you delve into the genetics and molecular biology of this vaccine you discover that they are in fact a form of a stealth gene editing tool that can change your DNA and integrate instructions to make even more spike proteins. It’s counterintuitive because, typically, mRNA cannot be integrated directly into your genes because you need reverse transcriptase. Reverse transcriptase converts RNA back into DNA (reverse transcription). Seneff, however, discovered there’s a wide variety of reverse transcriptase systems already embedded in our DNA, which makes this possible. She explains:
LINEs and SINEs are sequences of nucleotides, pieces of DNA, and they make up a huge percentage of the genome. For example, LINE1 is 10% of your genome. Most of the time they're inactive and scientists were puzzled about what they actually do. They’re rather strange, as they fold DNA backward and stick it back in different areas. For example, in people with Alzheimer's, the amyloid beta protein gets duplicated all over the place in their genome.
In a nutshell, LINEs and SINEs appear to be activated when an alternative solution for a problem is needed. One such problem could be glyphosate exposure. When the body is too sick to function normally, it finds a way around the problem by mutating proteins. “It's a process that we use to deal with environmental toxic chemicals that we're confronted with generally,” Seneff says. So, in summary, mRNA can be reverse transcribed and converted back to DNA by LINEs and SINEs in your body. This cloned DNA can then be integrated into your genome. In this way, it truly is genetic editing. Are We Creating a Generation of Super-Spreaders?What comes next is truly chilling. Seneff cites research10 showing that sperm has this ability to take exogenous mRNA, either from a virus or an mRNA vaccine, and reverse transcribe it into DNA and then produce plasmids that contain this cloned DNA. The sperm then releases these plasmids around the egg, which takes them up. The egg hangs on to those plasmids and puts the new code into the cells of the growing fetus. Hypothetically, a man having been vaccinated with a COVID-19 vaccine could produce a child born with the genetic code to make the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein. This is not a good thing, because this means the child will not have antibodies against the spike protein. Since it’s part of their genetic code, it registers as one of their own proteins and their body won’t produce antibodies against it. If that child is exposed to SARS-CoV-2, their immune system won’t react at all. What happens next is anyone’s guess, but it’s bound to be severely problematic in one way or another.
Even if such a child were to be unaffected by the virus, we could be looking at a serious problem, as they could turn into lifelong super-spreaders and a chronic hazard to everyone around them. At least that’s what happened in cows. Seneff recounts a story of herds plagued by a viral diarrhea. They finally realized that “killer calves” were the problem. Calves were being born that had viral protein integrated into their genome. When exposed to the virus, these calves, unable to clear the virus naturally, then spread it to the adult cows, which got sick.
Such children would be true super-spreaders, and the indoctrination we’re currently seeing, where children are told their mere presence could pose a mortal risk to the people they love, would then turn into grim reality. The calves in question were euthanized to safeguard the rest of the herds. How would we address human equivalents? Hopefully, this nightmare scenario will not occur, but it appears biologically possible, and that is the problem. The fact that the available science allows for this kind of speculation is reason enough to put the brakes on this vaccination campaign. We have no clue what the long-term consequences are. We don't even know what the short-term consequences are, other than more vaccinated people are dying, collectively, compared to unvaccinated ones. Spike Protein Appears Highly ProblematicA particularly fascinating part of Seneff’s paper addresses the toxicity of the spike protein. A key problem with all of these gene-based COVID-19 vaccines is that the spike protein itself appears toxic, and your body is now a spike protein-producing factory.
Why Spike Protein May Cause Serious Neurodegenerative DiseaseCreutzfeldt-Jakob disease (CKD), the human version of mad cow disease, is a prion disease. Other human forms of prion disease include Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s and Lou Gehrig's disease (ALS). “You have all these horrible neurodegenerative diseases and each one is tied to specific prion proteins,” Seneff says. The SARS-CoV-2 spike protein also appears to be a prion protein, although this has yet to be thoroughly verified. Disturbingly, the spike protein produced by COVID-19 vaccines, due to the modifications made, may make it more of a prion than the spike protein in the actual virus, and a more effective one.
Why Long-Term Neurological Damage Is To Be ExpectedIn her paper, Seneff describes key characteristics of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein that suggests it’s a prion:11
So, in summary, the take-home here is that COVID-19 vaccines, offered to hundreds of millions of people, are instruction sets for your body to make a toxic protein that will eventually wind up concentrated in your spleen, from where prion-like protein instructions will be sent out, leading to neurodegenerative diseases. Vaccine Remedy May Be Worse Than the DiseaseIn her paper, Seneff goes into far more detail in her description of the spike protein as a metabolic poison. While I recommend reading Seneff’s paper in its entirety, I’ve extracted key sections below, starting with how the spike protein can trigger pathological damage leading to lung damage and heart and brain diseases:13
Commercial Vaccines Are Not as ‘Clean’ as Trial VaccinesSeneff’s paper also highlights the unknown hazard of injecting fragmented RNA, found in greater quantity in the commercially manufactured Pfizer vaccine compared to the vaccine used in the initial trials:14
More InformationSeneff and I cover a great deal more than I’ve covered in this article, including how the vaccines may trigger autoimmune problems by way of molecular mimicry. This includes things like celiac disease, Hashimoto's thyroiditis and lupus. So, if you have ANY interest in learning more about this vaccine I strongly suggest you watch the entire video. We also discuss how the shots are causing idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP), a rare blood disorder in which you end up with blood clots, a drop in platelet count and hemorrhages, all at the same time. Also, be sure to read through Seneff’s paper, “Worse Than The Disease: Reviewing Some Possible Unintended Consequences of mRNA Vaccines Against COVID-19,” published in the International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice and Research.15 How Can You Protect Yourself From the Vaccine or Exposure to Those That Were Vaccinated?Indeed, that is the question of the day. We talked about shedding from the vaccine. Obviously, the vaccine does not classically shed virus particles but it can easily cause people to shed spike proteins, and it is these spike proteins that may cause just as much damage as the virus. While Seneff’s paper didn’t delve deeply into solutions, it provides a major clue, which is that your body has the capacity to address many of these problems through a process called autophagy. This is the process of removal of damaged proteins in your body. One effective strategy that will upregulate autophagy is periodic fasting or time-restricted eating. Most people eat more than 12 hours a day. Gradually lowering that to a six- to eight-hour window will radically improve your metabolic flexibility and decrease insulin resistance. Another beneficial practice is sauna therapy, which upregulates heat shock proteins. I have discussed this extensively in previous articles. Heat shock proteins work by refolding proteins that are misfolded. They also tag damaged proteins and target them for removal. Another vital strategy is to eliminate all processed vegetable oils (seed oils), which means eliminating virtually all processed foods as they are loaded with them. Seed oils will radically impair mitochondrial energy production, increase oxidative stress and damage your immune system. Seed oils also are likely to contain glyphosate, as it is heavily used on the crops that produce them. Obviously, it is important to avoid glyphosate contamination in all your food, which you can minimize by buying only certified organic foods. Finally, you want to optimize your innate immune system and one of the best ways to do that is to get enough sun exposure, wearing in your bathing suit, to have your vitamin level reach 60 to 80 ng/ml (100 to 150 nmol/l). from http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2021/05/23/stephanie-seneff-covid-vaccine.aspx 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. In this interview, Susan Wadia-Ells, Ph.D., discusses breast cancer as an unnecessary U.S. epidemic and how to help prevent it, which is the topic of her book, “Busting Breast Cancer: Five Simple Steps to Keep Breast Cancer Out of Your Body.” This year alone, an expected 300,000 women in the U.S. will be diagnosed with invasive breast cancer. Another 50,000 are projected to be diagnosed with non-invasive breast cancer, which in all likelihood isn't cancer at all. Wadia-Ells has a graduate degree in energy economics and political development (MALD) and a Ph.D. in women’s studies with a focus on women's autobiographical writing. “This really means that I am an investigative reporter,” she says, “and so I've come to this with a very innocent, independent mind.” The inspiration behind the book was Wadia-Ells’ experience of losing several friends to recurrent metastatic breast cancer, meaning cancer that was "successfully treated" at an early stage, only to later return as a terminal stage or metastatic disease.
Breast Cancer Treatment Is a For-Profit IndustryThe for-profit cancer industry makes a fortune overdiagnosing breast cancer cases and then treating women with inflammatory and toxic remedies that increase your risk of developing real cancer. So, overall, the financial component is a motivating catalyst in the U.S. for much of what we're seeing within the breast cancer industry, including that so-called “Breast Cancer Awareness,” month that can be translated as: “Get Your Mammogram Month.”
I've done extensive articles on mammography in the past, so much so that the State of Illinois Medical Board tried to remove my license, even though I wasn't selling anything related to breast cancer. I was just telling people about the dangers of mammograms and disputing a study published in The New England Journal of Medicine. I appealed and sued the medical board in the Illinois state supreme court and won, on grounds of first amendment freedom of speech, which is progressively being destroyed in real time in 2021. But that just goes to show the lengths to which the industry will go to protect the conventional narrative — a narrative that is ultimately harming more women than it’s helping. Cancer Is a Lifestyle DiseaseAs noted by Wadia-Ells, statistical studies reveal there are a number of lifestyle and environmental issues that raise a woman’s breast cancer risk, including birth control drugs and vitamin D3 deficiency. Yet, the medical industry still has no answer as for why breast cancer occurs. They treat it like it’s a mystery that no one knows anything about, which simply isn’t true. In 2013, Wadia-Ells discovered Thomas Seyfried's book, “The Metabolic Theory of Cancer,” which I have highlighted in many previous articles. Seyfried’s theory on the origin of that first cancer cell allowed her to finally connect dozens of statistical studies on the risks of birth control drugs, progestin menopausal drugs, mammograms, biopsies, environmental toxins and more. She was finally able, for the first time, to develop a clear set of biologically-based effective breast cancer prevention strategies for individual women. “Women need to understand that we can prevent this disease, probably 80%, if not more, of the time,” she says. Lifestyle variables reviewed in Wadia-Ells’ book include the danger of chemical progestin drugs, toxic/unbalanced levels of estrogen from excess body fat, and high cortisol levels from chronic long-term stress. These are all significant assaults that contribute to the suffocation of breast cells’ mitochondria. This suffocation is the first step in the creation of that first cancer cell. Processed foods are another culprit that need to be avoided, foods high in refined and hydrogenated vegetable oils in particular, as they are loaded with an omega-6 fat called linoleic acid (LA). Minimizing LA to pre-1850 levels, or 1% to 2% of your total daily calorie intake, which is 90% to 95% lower than what the average American consumes, is crucial. I believe it's probably the most significant metabolic poison in our diet. Prevention Begins With Shedding Excess Body FatTopping Wadia-Ells’ list of prevention strategies is shedding excess body fat by following a low-carb or ketogenic lifestyle. This type of daily eating helps lower the production of excess or unbalanced estrogen from fat cells, which reduces long term mitochondrial damage. Unknown to many, excess body fat creates an enzyme called aromatase; an enzyme required in the production of natural estrogen. You need to be careful about the types of fat you eat, however. Going on a low carb/high-fat diet, will help only, if you limit your intake of toxic omega-6 fat (linoleic acid) to less than 5% of total calorie intake.
In short, excess or unbalanced estrogen will increase a woman's risk for breast cancer. That's why many who are diagnosed with breast cancer find they are not metabolizing or eliminating this processed or “used” estrogen efficiently, causing an imbalance. Wadia-Ells recommends getting a hormone balancing test to make sure your estrogen and progesterone levels are properly balanced and, if not, get an estrogen metabolite test done to see if you’re efficiently eliminating this now-processed or excess estrogen. If your ability to eliminate your processed estrogen is sluggish, there are supplements and other strategies that can help boost your ability to efficiently eliminate your “used” estrogen, so you don’t end up with toxic levels. Ideally, you’ll want to measure all three types of natural estrogen your body can make: estrone, estradiol and estriol. The ratios among these three are also important. The Dangers of ProgestinProgesterone is a helpful and important natural hormone. Progestin, a chemical that offers a few attributes of natural progesterone, however, can initiate and accelerate breast cancer. Intuitively, it makes sense that synthetic hormones might be more dangerous than naturally-occurring ones made by your body, and in fact they are. Wadia-Ells explains:
Tragically, the medical and scientific professions continue to conflate the terms “progestin,” and “progesterone,” ignoring the fact that these substances are not the same. Chemically, they are very different. So, when reading studies, you have no way of knowing whether a researcher is talking about progestin, the chemical that causes and accelerates breast cancer, or natural progesterone, which when balanced with natural estrogen, does not cause a problem. In fact, natural progesterone appears to work as a tumor suppressor. It’s even used in men with prostate cancer, with significant success. Proper Administration of HormonesThe delivery system of estrogen and/or progesterone is a third issue that plays a role. The worst delivery method is oral delivery, as the hormone must go through your digestive system and liver before it reaches your bloodstream. Transdermal application is also problematic because, over time, your body becomes increasingly resistant to it as it builds up in your cells. The most ideal delivery method is transmucosally, where you apply the cream or suppository either into your vagina or rectum. This will bypass liver metabolism and get the hormone directly into your blood. The Importance of Vitamin D3Vitamin D3 is another crucial factor for cancer prevention. As noted by Wadia-Ells, studies show a vitamin D3 level of 40 ng/mL is protective against prostate and liver cancer, but for breast cancer, you need a level of at least 60 ng/mL (100 nmol/L). “That 60 ng/mL becomes the magical number when a woman is trying to protect herself from developing breast cancer,” she says. Indeed, several studies suggest vitamin D optimization alone can knock your breast cancer risk down by about 80%. Sensible sun exposure is the best way to optimize your level, but for a vast majority of people, a supplement is typically required to reach and maintain a level between 60 ng/mL and 80 ng/mL (100 nmol/L to 150 nmol/L) year-round. Latitude tends to be a limiting factor because most people in the U.S. are unable to get significant vitamin D from the sun between September and May. Even in the middle of summer, you have to spend time outside in a bathing suit, not fully clothed, in order for it to work. Regardless of how you’re getting your vitamin D3, the key is to test your level once or twice a year. This is the only way to ensure that what you’re doing is providing you with the vitamin D you need for optimal health and disease prevention. If you don’t know your D3 blood level, you have no way of knowing whether your immune system is strong enough to protect you from any fast-growing developing breast cancer cells or not. Keep in mind that if you are obese, your body will store about half the vitamin D3 you ingest in your fat cells, which means you’ll need higher doses than someone of normal weight.
Many Breast Cancer Cases Really Aren’t Breast CancerAs mentioned earlier, mammograms can get you into trouble. “One simple mammogram can really take you down a bad path,” Wadia-Ells says. First of all, you’re compressing your breast tissue, which in itself can cause tissue damage, and if you do have a tumor, that tumor could potentially be broken apart, resulting in metastatic breast cancer. “But probably the major concern that I have with mammograms is the fact that they are the only way the cancer industry can diagnose if a woman has atypical cells or a tiny indolent tumor that may never grow,” Wadia-Ells says. The term “atypical cells” later became known as ductal carcinoma in situ or DCIS — a far more frightening term than “atypical cells.” Fear sells, and this is true in the cancer industry as well. DCIS is not actually a tumor. It’s not invasive. It’s not cancer. Studies suggest only about 5% of DCIS will eventually, a decade or more down the line, turn into cancer. Yet DCIS has now been renamed yet again as “Stage 0 breast cancer.”
Why Biopsies Are a Bad IdeaAs mentioned earlier, 20% to 40% of women treated for early stage breast cancer in the U.S. go on to develop recurrent metastatic breast cancer. The question is, what percentage of those cases were actually caused by diagnostics and/or treatment?
Certain Drugs Impact Your Breast Cancer RiskIn her book, Wadia-Ells also details the risks of certain popular drugs. Women who have been on a statin drug for more than 10 years, for example, have been shown to double their risk of breast cancer. This is a drug that 1 in 4 American adults over the age of 40 is on, so it’s a significant issue. Another group of common but hazardous drugs are progestin-based birth control drugs and IUDs or intrauterine devices laced with progestin. A far safer alternative is the hormone-free copper coil IUD. However, today, FDA regulations have created a single monopoly-priced, hormone-free IUD, much too expensive for women who do not have health insurance. While the actual cost of this tiny and simple device is about 50 cents in the U.S., women or their insurance must pay more than $800 to purchase and have the IUD inserted. Wadia-Ells explains:
What’s more, why did no one insist on studying birth control drugs once it was discovered, in 2002, that post-menopausal women using the progestin-based menopausal drug, increased their risk of developing palpable tumors by 26% within three years? After all, contraceptive drugs can have 10 times more progestin than menopausal progestin drugs.
More InformationTo learn the details of the five strategies that can radically reduce your risk of breast cancer, be sure to pick up a copy of Wadia-Ells book, “Busting Breast Cancer: Five Simple Steps to Keep Breast Cancer Out of Your Body.” Of net sales of this book, 20% is being donated to the Foundation for Metabolic Cancer Therapies. Aside from optimizing your vitamin D and losing excess weight, other strategies include:
from http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2021/05/23/dcis.aspx Throughout the pandemic, the inconsistencies in public health guidelines not only have been glaring but unsettling. From flip-flops over the effectiveness of mask wearing to rules that seemingly contradict themselves — like it’s “safe” to take your mask off while eating in a restaurant but not while you’re walking to the table, or making small businesses close their doors while big box stores stay open because they’re “essential” — the last year has left many people feeling like they’re living in some sort of altered reality. This feeling isn’t all in your head, however. The state of reality has, in fact, been altered, in more ways than one. A particularly visual and polarizing example is the use of face masks, which some have suggested is nothing more than a form of virtue signaling. A video captured by a citizen journalist suggests as much, as the reporter captured on the video wears no mask, and neither does his cameraman, until the tape starts rolling.1 Reporter Puts on Mask Only When on CameraA citizen journalist begins filming reporter David Kaplan from WTAE in Pittsburg just before he’s about to go on-air for a news segment. When questioned about the authenticity of his report, he states, “We’re purely objective journalists. Truly, truly, sir. From the bottom of my heart … Nobody tells me what to say sir.”2 However, the news station does tell him what to do, which includes putting on a mask while on-air. Again, neither the reporter nor the cameraman are masked until they are about to go on air, at which point the reporter puts his mask on, saying it’s their policy and he wants to set a good example. Throughout the pandemic, the media have been fanning the flames of fear, including with displays like this, in which viewers see an image of a reporter masked up against the virus — who promptly removes said mask as soon as the camera is off. It’s a veritable theater, a show of a person’s willingness to obey, even when the rules seem to defy common sense, like wearing a mask outdoors when you’re far away from other people. Masks Offer Little Protection Except as Symbolic ‘Talismans’In May 2020, a group of doctors and researchers wrote in a perspective piece published in the New England Journal of Medicine that masks offer little protection outside of health care facilities, except to calm people’s nerves. “We know that wearing a mask outside health care facilities offers little, if any, protection from infection,” they wrote, and went on to describe masks as playing a “symbolic role” as “talismans” to increase the perception of safety, even though “such reactions may not be strictly logical.”3 “Expanded masking protocols’ greatest contribution may be to reduce the transmission of anxiety, over and above whatever role they may play in reducing transmission of COVID-19,” they add.4 Since then, masks have indeed taken on a symbolic role, one that presents an outward visible sign that you’re obeying COVID protocols and are acting as a “moral” COVID citizen. Jeffrey Tucker, with the American Institute for Economic Research (AIER), pointed out that this mask orthodoxy is part of what’s driving the rampant censorship online, including by YouTube. “YouTube has taken it upon itself to censor the opinions of esteemed scientists that depart from the orthodoxy on masks. This is not surprising given that masks have become dogma – a visible symbol of compliance and fealty to the medical/political agenda that elevates the coronavirus above all else,” Tucker wrote.5 Now that the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has stated that vaccinated individuals can remove their masks outdoors and in most spaces indoors,6 it moves the playing field to another agenda, one in which only the “impure” unvaccinated individuals must be masked, creating a new form of segregation and second-class citizens. Canned News Is the Real Fake NewsIf you think you’re getting real, unbiased news when you turn on the TV, watch the video above, which shows an unnerving compilation of local affiliate stations owned by Sinclair Broadcast Group reciting the same script as though it’s actual journalism. The newscasters, featured on CBS, ABC, NBC and Fox affiliates, ironically stated, "Unfortunately, some members of the media use their platforms to push their own personal bias and agenda to control exactly what people think … This is extremely dangerous to our democracy."7 It’s time that word got out that it’s extremely difficult to find truly independent, unbiased reporting, whether you’re watching the news on television or online. Take, for instance, the Australian Science Media Centre (SMC), which partnered with Google to create a COVID-19 Vaccine Media Hub that will parrot approved mainstream vaccine information to the press.8 Science Media Centres exist in a number of countries, including the U.K., Canada, Australia and New Zealand, with a reported mission to provide “high-quality” scientific information to journalists. Their mission, as stated on their website, is:9
But SMC is not an independent news agency as it claims to be, as it counts among its biggest funders a number of high-level industry players with worldwide agendas, including the Wellcome Trust, GlaskoSmithKline, CropLife International, Sanofi and AstraZeneca.10 As noted by the U.S. Right to Know (USRTK), “ … The SMC model has been influential in shaping media coverage about science. A media analysis11 of U.K. papers in 2011 and 2012 found that a majority of reporters who used SMC services did not seek additional perspectives for their stories.”12 The analysis concluded that there are “more journalists than there should be” that are relying solely on SMC information instead of consulting independent sources.13 CDC Walks Back Hygiene TheaterIn the early days of the pandemic, bleach cleaners and disinfectant wipes were flying off store shelves in a frenzy to clean away COVID. Now we know that transmission of COVID-19 by fomites — the term used for inanimate surfaces and objects that can transmit a pathogen — has been exaggerated, but the CDC didn’t acknowledge this until more than a year later, in April 2021. In a science brief released that month, they noted:14
Emanuel Goldman, a microbiology professor at Rutgers New Jersey Medical School, suggested this back in July 2020, when he stated that studies suggesting SARS-CoV-2 was easily spread via surfaces did not present in real-life situations.15 “In my opinion, the chance of transmission through inanimate surfaces is very small,” he said, and while period disinfection of surfaces, especially in hospitals, was a reasonable precaution, in public settings, he noted, “this can go to extremes not justified by the data.”16 In February 2021, an editorial in Nature supported Goldman’s work, suggesting that costly and toxic disinfection efforts are misguided. “Catching the coronavirus from surfaces is rare. The World Health Organization and national public health agencies need to clarify their advice,” the editorial reads.17 The New York City Metropolitan Transit Authority alone spent an estimated $380 million annually on COVID-related sanitation, and when it asked the U.S. government whether they should be focusing on fomites or solely aerosols, they were told to continue their focus on fomites.18 Writing in The Atlantic, Derek Thompson described this as a type of “hygiene theater,” in which Americans are going through the motions of dutifully cleaning and, likely, over-disinfecting surfaces when the virus spreads most efficiently through the air.19 Hygiene theater, much like the theater for masks and vaccine passports, provides an illusion of safety, not one grounded in reality. CDC Finally Acknowledges COVID Is AirborneThere’s been strong evidence for months that aerosol transmission is involved in the spread of SARS-CoV-2,20 which are 0.125 μm in size. On 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."21 The CDC then deleted the mention of aerosols and the possibility of spread beyond 6 feet the following Monday, September 21, 2020, saying a draft version of proposed changes had been posted "in error."22 Finally, on May 7, 2021, the CDC updated their guidance to acknowledge that one of the primary ways SARS-CoV-2 is transmitted is via “inhalation of very fine respiratory droplets and aerosol particles.”23 It’s a noteworthy difference, because since SARS-CoV-2 is spread via aerosolized droplets,24 such droplets remain in the air for at least three hours and can travel over long distances of up to 27 feet.25 This adds to the likelihood that cloth masks do little to stop you from getting COVID-19, not to mention calls into question the arbitrary 6 feet social distancing guidelines (which the CDC recently cut down to 3 feet in classrooms26). AAPS explained back in September 2020:27
Little by little, the truth continues to emerge as nonsensical theatrics are exposed. Now more than ever, it’s essential to look beyond canned news reports and censoring fact-checkers’ labels to find real information on which to base your knowledge. If you’d like to get involved, Stand for Health Freedom, a nonprofit advocacy organization, has a number of alerts you can take part in, from saying no to vaccine passports to asking key congressmen to formally investigate the CDC’s conduct during the pandemic.28 from http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2021/05/22/covid-mask-theater-caught-on-camera.aspx In a May 5, 2021, Fox News report, Tucker Carlson asked the question no one is really allowed to ask: “How many Americans have died after taking the COVID vaccine?”1 If you haven’t paid attention, the answer to this verboten (forbidden) question may shock you. Carlson points out (inaccurately, if you ask me) that vaccines have been shown to be generally safe, citing statistics on how many Americans have died after the seasonal influenza vaccine in recent years. Each year, more than 165 million Americans get the flu shot, and according to the U.S. vaccine adverse event reporting system (VAERS), there were 85 reported deaths following influenza vaccination in 2017; 119 deaths in 2018; and 203 deaths in 2019. “How do those rates compare to the death rates from the coronavirus vaccine?” Carlson asks. The answer is, there’s really no comparison. How Many Have Died From COVID Vaccines?Between mid-December 2020, when the first COVID-19 shots were rolled out, and April 23, 2021, at which point between 95 million and 100 million Americans had received their COVID-19 shots, there were 3,544 reported deaths following COVID vaccination.2 That’s 182 more deaths than cited by Carlson. As of April 23, 2021, VAERS had also received 12,618 reports of serious adverse events. In total, 118,902 adverse event reports had been filed. If, like Carlson estimates, about 30 people per day are dying from the shots, these numbers will grow by the hundreds each week. Carlson also cites data from an investigation by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, which found that VAERS catches a mere 1% of vaccine injuries,3,4 primarily because it’s a passive system and reports are filed voluntarily. Many Americans don’t even know that the system exists, or that they can file a report, and most doctors won’t file reports when injuries are brought to their attention because the medical system doesn’t reward such fastidiousness. At most, 10% of vaccine side effects are ever reported to VAERS, according to a 2005 study in the BMJ.5 What this means is that side effects may actually be 10 times or even 100 times higher than reported. We could, in reality, be looking at anywhere from 126,000 to 1.2 million serious side effects, and anywhere from 35,440 to 354,400 vaccine-related deaths. While Carlson refuses to speculate about what the actual death toll might be, he does stress that what we’re seeing is clearly out of the norm, and by a tremendous margin. In just four months, the COVID-19 vaccines have killed more people than all available vaccines combined from mid-1997 until the end of 2013 — a period of 15.5 years. Gamble Your Life or Lose Your Freedom?While the data show there are clear risks, Americans are urged, cajoled, shamed and threatened into getting the shot in any number of ways. President Biden recently warned that people who are not fully vaccinated against COVID-19 “can still die every day” from the infection, adding “This is your choice: It’s life and death.” Carlson accurately points out that while unvaccinated people can indeed die of COVID-19, not everyone is at equal risk of complications and death. Old and chronically ill individuals are at greatest risk, while young and/or healthy individuals have a very low risk, and those who have had COVID-19 and recovered are immune. For those who are young and/or healthy and/or immune, risking death or injury from the “vaccine” doesn’t make much sense. I would argue it makes no sense whatsoever, as there are also several proven-effective treatments, both early at-home treatments and in-hospital treatments. So, there’s no need to risk your health and life by taking COVID gene therapy. As noted by Carlson, the young, healthy and already immune can add up to hundreds of millions of people in the U.S., yet policy makers are “not even acknowledging that these categories of people exist,” he says. They’re pretending that everyone’s risk is the same and, therefore, everyone must get vaccinated, or at bare minimum, they want 70% of the American adult population vaccinated by July 4, 2021. Carlson points out that this policy might be deemed acceptable if it could be conclusively shown that the “vaccines” are safe, and if we had a thorough understanding of the long-term effects of these mRNA and viral vector DNA shots. However, we can’t and we don’t. Thousands have died, and many of the side effects reported defy easy explanation. For example, COVID shots now account for one-third of all tinnitus side effects in VAERS. Oxford and UCLA researchers, who are now tracking side effects across eight different countries, report finding that “women aged 18 to 34 years had a higher rate of deep vein thrombosis than men of the same age,” Carlson says. Why? No one knows. Stunning Lack of Reaction to Mounting Death TollPerhaps most stunning of all is that these thousands of deaths and serious reactions are receiving no attention whatsoever. In 1976, the U.S. government vaccinated an estimated 45 million people against pandemic swine flu. The program was canceled, Carlson reports, after only 53 people died. Authorities decided the vaccine was too risky to continue the campaign. Now, health authorities are shrugging off more than 3,500 deaths after COVID-19 vaccination as either coincidental or inconsequential. Folks, this is 70 times more deaths than the swine flu vaccine, which was halted. If this isn’t insanity on steroids, please tell me what is. Maybe murder? This doesn’t even include the deaths of thousands, and potentially tens of thousands of miscarriages, which is now becoming rapidly recognized as a possible complication of COVID-19 “vaccines.” In fact, an April 2021 report in The New England Journal of Medicine6 said that miscarriage was the most common condition reported after a COVID vaccine, and that “there is probably substantial underreporting of pregnancy- and neonatal-specific adverse events” connected with the vaccine. But rather than posting a warning that the vaccine may be causing miscarriages, health officials simply urged “continued monitoring” of the issue. EU Reports Hundreds of Thousands of Side EffectsIn the European Union, we find more of the same. Its EudraVigilance system, to which suspected drug reactions are reported, had as of April 17, 2021, received 330,218 injury reports after vaccination with one of the four available COVID vaccines (Moderna, Pfizer, AstraZeneca and Johnson & Johnson), including 7,766 deaths.7 Of these, Pfizer’s mRNA injection accounted for the largest number of deaths at 4,293, followed by Moderna with 2,094 deaths, AstraZeneca with 1,360 deaths and Johnson & Johnson with 19 deaths. The most commonly reported injuries were cardiac-related problems and blood/lymphatic disorders. In related news, the Israeli People Committee (IPC), a civilian body of health experts, has published a report detailing side effects from the Pfizer vaccine, concluding “there has never been a vaccine that has harmed as many people.” The Committee received 288 reports of death, 90% of which occurred within 10 days after the vaccination; 64% of them were men. This contradicts data from the Israeli Ministry of Health, which claims only 45 deaths were vaccine related. According to this report (translated from Hebrew):8
Reproductive EffectsIn the U.S., we’re now starting to see thousands of reports of menstrual problems among women who have received the COVID-19 vaccine. As reported by The Defender:9
Even more bizarre, there are hundreds of anecdotal reports of women who have not gotten the vaccine, but spent time in close proximity to someone who did, who are experiencing the same kind of abnormal menses and bleeding irregularities. Some doctors are hypothesizing that some sort of shedding may be taking place, although the mechanism is unknown. As yet, it’s too early to speculate further. Interestingly, a Chinese study10 published in Reproductive BioMedicine Online, which looked at sex hormones and menstruation in unvaccinated women of reproductive age who were diagnosed with COVID-19, found 28% had a change in the length of their cycle, 19% had prolonged cycles and 25% had a change in menstrual blood volume. The researchers hypothesize that “the menstruation changes of these patients might be the consequence of transient sex hormone changes” caused by a temporary suppression of ovarian function during infection. Dr. Natalie Crawford, a fertility specialist, told The Defender11 that the menstrual irregularities seen in female COVID-19 patients may be linked to a cellular immunity response, and since the vaccine instructs your body to make the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, which your immune system then responds to, the effects of the vaccine may be similar to the natural infection. Death Tally May Spike During Fall and WinterWhile the death toll from COVID-19 vaccines is already at a historical level, I fear it may shoot far higher as we move through fall and winter. The reason for this is because one of the greatest risk factors and wild cards of these vaccines is antibody‐dependent enhancement (ADE) or paradoxical immune enhancement (PIE). I’ve detailed this issue in several articles, including “How COVID-19 Vaccine Can Destroy Your Immune System” and “Will Vaccinated People Be More Vulnerable to Variants?” In summary, ADE means that rather than enhance your immunity against the infection, the vaccine actually enhances the virus’ ability to enter and infect your cells, resulting in more severe disease than had you not been vaccinated.12 The 2003 review paper “Antibody-Dependent Enhancement of Virus Infection and Disease” explains it this way:13
Fall and winter are the seasons in which most coronavirus infections occur, be it SARS-CoV-2 or other coronaviruses responsible for the common cold. If ADE does turn out to be a common problem with these injections, then vaccinated individuals may be at significantly higher risk of severe COVID-19 and a potentially lethal immune reaction due to pathogenic priming. Another potential risk is that of Th2 immunopathology, especially among the elderly. As reported in a PNAS news feature:14
Recognize Cheap Brainwashing Propaganda for What It IsCarlson ends his segment with a crude, cuss-filled ad “brought to you by people who are smarter than we are,” in which people who are supposedly doctors and nurses belittle those who read about side effects online or hear about risks from friends, and demand, while giving you the finger, that you just “grow up and get the vaccine.” If you did not watch Carlson’s report, you need to STOP now and watch the video below to see this unbelievable ad. It is queued up to start at the ad. It is beyond shocking that they believe they can get away with this type of abuse.
In my view, there are still so many potential avenues of harm and so many uncertainties, I would encourage everyone to do your homework, keep reading and learning, weigh the potential pros and cons, ignore all pressure tactics and take your time when deciding whether to get any of these COVID-19 gene therapies. Last but not least, if you or someone you love has already received a COVID-19 vaccine and are experiencing side effects, be sure to report it, preferably to all three of these locations:15
from http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2021/05/22/tucker-carlson-covid-vaccine-deaths.aspx When it comes to the treatment of COVID-19, many Western nations have been hobbled by the politicization of medicine. Throughout 2020, media and many public health experts warned against the use of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), despite the fact that many practicing doctors were praising its ability to save patients. Most have been silenced through online censorship. Some even lost their jobs for the “sin” of publicly sharing their successes with the drug. Another decades-old antiparasitic drug that may be even more useful than HCQ is ivermectin. Like HCQ, ivermectin is on the World Health Organization’s list of essential drugs, but its benefits are also being ignored by public health officials and buried by mainstream media. Ivermectin is a heartworm medication that has been shown to inhibit SARS-CoV-2 replication in vitro.1 In the U.S., the Frontline COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC) has been calling for widespread adoption of Ivermectin, both as a prophylactic and for the treatment of all phases of COVID-19.2,3 In the video above, Dr. John Campbell interviews Dr. Tess Lawrie about the drug and its use against COVID-19. Lawrie is a medical doctor and Ph.D. researcher who has done a lot of work in South Africa. She’s also the director of Evidence-Based Medicine Consultancy Ltd.,4 which is based in the U.K., and she helped organize the British Ivermectin Recommendation Development (BIRD) panel5 and the International Ivermectin for COVID Conference, held April 24, 2021. Ironically, as a consultant to the World Health Organization and many other public health organizations, her largest clients are the very ones who are now actively suppressing the use of this drug. Ivermectin Useful in All Stages of COVIDWhat makes ivermectin particularly useful in COVID-19 is the fact that it works both in the initial viral phase of the illness, when antivirals are required, as well as the inflammatory stage, when the viral load drops off and anti-inflammatories become necessary. According to Dr. Surya Kant, a medical doctor in India who has written a white paper6 on ivermectin, the drug reduces replication of the SARS-CoV-2 virus by several thousand times.7 Kant’s paper led several Indian provinces to start using ivermectin, both as a prophylactic and as treatment for COVID-19 in the summer of 2020.8 In the video, Lawrie reviews the science behind her recommendation to use ivermectin. In summary: • A scientific review by Dr. Andrew Hill at Liverpool University, funded by the WHO and UNITAID and published January 18, 2021, found ivermectin reduced COVID-19 deaths by 75%. It also increased viral clearance. This finding was based on a review of six randomized, controlled trials involving a total of 1,255 patients. • Lawrie’s meta-analysis, published February 8, 2021, found a 68% reduction in deaths. Here, 13 studies were included in the analysis. This, she explains, is an underestimation of the beneficial effect, because they included a study in which the control arm was given HCQ. Since HCQ is an active treatment that has also been shown to have a positive impact on outcomes, it’s not surprising that this particular study did not rate ivermectin as better than the control treatment (which was HCQ). • Adding two new randomized controlled trials to her February analysis that included data on mortality, Lawrie published an updated analysis March 31, 2021, showing a 62% reduction in deaths. When four studies with high risk of bias were removed during a subsequent sensitivity analysis, they ended up with a 72% reduction in deaths. Sensitivity analyses are done to double-check and verify results. WHO Still Refuses to Recommend IvermectinCuriously, when the WHO finally updated its guidance on ivermectin at the end of March 2021,9,10 they gave it a thumbs-down, saying more data are needed. They only recommend it for patients who are enrolled in a clinical trial. Yet they based their negative recommendation on a review that included just five studies, which ended up showing a 72% reduction in deaths. Lawrie points out discrepancies in this WHO analysis, such as two studies deemed by Lawrie to have a high risk of bias being listed by the WHO team to have a low risk of bias. (In the interview, she explains why she considers them to have a high risk of bias.) What’s more, in the WHO’s summary of findings, they suddenly include data from seven studies, which combined show an 81% reduction in deaths. The confidence interval is also surprisingly high, with a 64% reduction in deaths on the low end, and 91% on the high end. What’s more, their absolute effect estimate for standard of care is 70 deaths per 1,000, compared to just 14 deaths per 1,000 when treating with ivermectin. That’s a reduction in deaths of 56 per 1,000 when using ivermectin. The confidence interval is between 44 and 63 fewer deaths per 1,000. Despite that, the WHO refuses to recommend this drug for COVID-19. Rabindra Abeyasinghe, a WHO representative to the Philippines, commented that using ivermectin without “strong” evidence is “harmful” because it can give “false confidence” to the public.11 As noted by Daniel Horowitz in an April 1, 2021, article in The Blaze,12 “That sure sounds a lot like telling people if they wear a mask indoors, they won’t get COVID. Tragically, when they invariably do get the virus, the global health elites have nothing to treat them with.” Doctors Urge Acceptance of Ivermectin to Save LivesAs mentioned earlier, in the U.S., the FLCCC has also been calling for widespread adoption of ivermectin, both as a prophylactic and for the treatment of all phases of COVID-19.13,14 FLCCC president Dr. Pierre Kory, former professor of medicine at St. Luke’s Aurora Medical Center in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, has testified to the benefits of ivermectin before a number of COVID-19 panels, including the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs in December 2020,15 and the National Institutes of Health COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines Panel January 6, 2021.16 As noted by the FLCCC:17
A one-page summary20 of the clinical trial evidence for Ivermectin can be downloaded from the FLCCC website. A more comprehensive, 31-page review21 of trials data has been published in the journal Frontiers of Pharmacology. At the time of this writing, the number of trials involving ivermectin has risen to 55, including 28 randomized controlled trials. A listing of all the Ivermectin trials done to date, with links to the published studies, can be found on c19Ivermectin.com.22 The FLCCC’s COVID-19 protocol was initially dubbed MATH+ (an acronym based on the key components of the treatment), but after several tweaks and updates, the prophylaxis and early outpatient treatment protocol is now known as I-MASK+23 while the hospital treatment has been renamed I-MATH+,24 due to the addition of ivermectin. The two protocols25,26 are available for download on the FLCCC Alliance website in multiple languages. The clinical and scientific rationale for the I-MATH+ hospital protocol has also been peer-reviewed and was published in the Journal of Intensive Care Medicine27 in mid-December 2020. NIH Loosens Restrictions, FDA Warns Against Prophylactic UseIn mid-January 2021, the NIH did revise its guidelines on ivermectin, in large part thanks to the data presented by Kory and others. However, while the NIH no longer warns against its use, they also do not outright recommend it, and they did not grant ivermectin emergency use authorization. As a result, many patients in the U.S. still struggle to access the drug, as many doctors are unwilling to prescribe it off-label against health officials’ recommendations. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has adopted an even less favorable stance, March 9, 2021 actually issuing a consumer warning March 5, 2021, to not use ivermectin as a prophylactic.28 The FDA also has not approved ivermectin for prevention of or treatment for SARS-CoV-2.29 The International Ivermectin for COVID ConferenceApril 24 through 25, 2021, Lawrie hosted the first International Ivermectin for COVID Conference online.30 Twelve medical experts31 from around the world shared their knowledge during this conference, reviewing mechanism of action, protocols for prevention and treatment, including so-called long-hauler syndrome, research findings and real world data. All of the lectures, which were recorded via Zoom, can be viewed on Bird-Group.org.32 In her closing address, Lawrie stated:33
During the conference, Lawrie proposed that doctors around the world join together to form a new people-centered World Health Organization. "Never before has our role as doctors been so important because never before have we become complicit in causing so much harm,” she said. from http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2021/05/21/ivermectin-for-covid-19.aspx Whether you are for or against vaccines of any kind, it is hard to ignore the seismic changes that have affected how vaccines have been developed, licensed and regulated during the COVID-19 pandemic.1,2 Some researchers are taking the next step, hoping to develop a new type of vaccine that self-spreads through the environment.3 Since the pandemic was declared by the World Health Organization in early 2020, federal and state lawmakers have been persuaded to build a pandemic response around a single experimental biological product, which has generated billions of dollars in profit for liability-free drug companies.4,5,6 Yet, as soon as pharmaceutical companies announced they were developing the vaccine, doctors, scientists, researchers and other experts began raising warnings7,8 about the historical problems of creating a coronavirus vaccine and the propensity it has to produce antibody-dependent enhancement, which made vaccinated individuals more susceptible to infection by the virus or a variant. Subsequently, one study9,10,11 found the South African variant of SARS-CoV-2, which accounted for 1% of all cases of COVID-19 in Israel in April 2021, caused greater illness in people vaccinated with Pfizer’s mRNA vaccine than in unvaccinated people. To ensure more are vaccinated, no matter the cost, vaccine passports are being rolled out across the world, including the U.S. As reported by former U.S. Rep. and physician Ron Paul in his Liberty Report12,13 that streamed live March 29, 2021, the Biden Administration is “seriously looking into establishing some kind of federal vaccine passport system, where Americans who cannot (or will not) prove to the government they have been jabbed with the experimental vaccine will be legally treated as second-class citizens.” Paul warns that this system “will quickly morph into a copy of China’s ‘social credit’ system, where undesirable behaviors are severely punished.” I’ve been saying the same thing for many months now, and there’s every reason to suspect that this is indeed where we’re headed. The newest Frankenstein iterations of vaccine development are those that self-disseminate through humans and wildlife. Using this technology, which researchers say already exists,14 the government wants to strip away one more layer of your civil rights. This Prevention May Be Far Worse Than the Illness or CureThe headlines read: “Vaccines of the Future Could Be as Contagious as Viruses”15 and “COVID-19 cure: Scientists Plan to Develop 'Self-Spreading' Coronavirus Vaccine.”16 Scott Nuismer and James Bull, authors of a paper in Nature17 calling for “Self-Disseminating Vaccines to Suppress Zoonoses,” told a New Scientist reporter, “Prevention is better than cure, so we should start using genetic techniques to stop dangerous animal diseases jumping to humans.”18 Some scientists are publicly19 calling for self-disseminating vaccines to spread vaccinations for infectious diseases that start in wild animals and may make the leap to humans. They cite diseases like SARS, MERS and COVID-19.20 This vaccination program would ostensibly be a complementary approach to reduce or eliminate the prevalence of the infectious agent within the wildlife communities. To make the case, they cite the example of rabies vaccine programs that have significantly reduced the transmission of rabies in the U.S. and Europe and compare them to how rabies continues to affect people living in Africa and Asia, where the cost of vaccinating wild carnivores prevents the countries from attaining a sufficient level of immunity. Apparently, the solution is to create a self-disseminating vaccine that relies on a radical change in development and production. The idea is to insert a small piece of genetic material into another virus that already spreads within the animal community, thus immunizing the animals that acquire the new virus. The technology to achieve this has been used in field trials in wild rabbits to protect them from a viral hemorrhagic fever. Researchers are now investigating prototypes for Ebola and Lassa virus. The public relations approach is to call for an ounce of prevention,21 weighing it against the ongoing costs of finding a cure for COVID-19. However, cost effective treatment protocols for COVID-19 already exist. The problem is they are so cost-effective for pharmaceutical companies to generate enough revenue using them. Opinion pieces22 begin by touting the effectiveness of the current vaccine programs against smallpox, rubella, tetanus and measles. What they fail to mention is that those vaccine programs are vastly different from the genetic experiments being proposed. The idea is to:23
Self-Spreading Vaccine Virus Is a Ticking Time BombYou should know there is a drawback to these types of vaccines. The live vaccine may mutate to revert to the virulent form, which increases the risk of the illness for which the vaccine was developed. This has happened with the oral polio vaccine.24 Although it was not intentionally designed to transmit vaccine-derived polio viruses, there is a version of the oral polio vaccine that briefly spreads to other people. The polio strain that had been eradicated in the wild may have mutated and reverted to its virulent form. The World Health Organization subsequently switched the oral polio vaccine,25 but also played down the issues from circulating vaccine-derived poliovirus26 saying the strain could be rapidly stopped by immunizing “every child several times with the oral vaccine to stop polio transmission, regardless of the origin of the virus.”27 Since they are still using the oral polio vaccine in some countries, today vaccine-derived polio infection numbers far exceed natural case numbers. In 2020 by the end of October there had been 200 wild polio cases and 600 vaccine-derived cases, according to an NPR report.28 With self-spreading vaccines, the chance of an intentionally designed transmissible vaccine to revert to the more virulent form is higher than in regular vaccines since there is the chance to replicate more times before dying. Scientists think that altering the transmissible vaccine to make it weaker may not eradicate the disease, but could reduce the risk the virus would revert and would require less people to be directly vaccinated.29 Nuismer postulates that using benign viruses to carry the genetic material may prove effective. For example, cytomegalovirus (CMV), which is common in humans and mammals, often creates no symptoms. If genetic material were injected into CMV, the vaccine would only lose effectiveness if the CMV reverted. However, since CMV spreads easily and up to 80% of adults in the U.S. have been infected by age 40, using it as a vector may not work. Researchers are also investigating a transmissible vaccine for HIV intended for people who are infected. The “vaccine” would act as a parasite to compete with resources inside an infected cell. The hope is these therapeutic interfering particles (TIPs) would lower the level of circulating viruses, prevent the spread of HIV and slow the progression to full-blown AIDS. Yet even the researchers who are attempting to develop such a vaccine acknowledged there are possible monstrous aberrations.30 For example, since the TIP can replicate it can also evolve. This is another way of saying it can develop a mutant variant that could become uncontrollable. If the TIP should revert to HIV, the researchers think that it would simply infect the person who was already carrying the virus. However, because the TIP is transmissible, it can spread to people without HIV. In the initial development, the TIP cannot replicate in the body without HIV. However, after several generations of replication and possible reversion, is that a risk worth taking? Scientists Are Blatantly Ignoring Informed ConsentSetting aside the health risks, it's important to note that scientists and experts who are proposing the use of transmissible vaccines are blatantly ignoring your right to informed consent. This is a federal law,31 which says you have a right to receive information about the treatment you're undergoing so you can make a well-informed decision about your medical care. Medical practitioners are bound by ethical and legal obligations to disclose the risks and benefits of medical treatments before you receive them. To meet the legal standard, every person in the U.S., and in fact the world, would have to provide informed consent before a transmissible vaccine is released into the wild. This kind of blatant disregard for your civil rights reared its ugly head in human testing for the COVID vaccine. Considering the unprecedented speed32 in which the vaccines were developed and released, it is not possible to provide participants in studies, or those taking the vaccine, a full list of the potential risks. One of those significant concerns that researchers and doctors are aware of is antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE). Anyone receiving this experimental genetic procedure would want to be informed of the potential to worsen the very disease they're trying to avoid. Despite researchers' strong recommendation in October 2020 that this risk should be “prominently and independently disclosed,”33 it was not part of the informed consent disclosure. The International Journal of Clinical Practice researchers wrote:34
We are on a slippery slope. Unless researchers, pharmaceutical companies and governmental agencies are held accountable and watched closely we will continue to lose more and more of our civil rights until they have completely eroded. How Will Big Pharma React to Losing $50 Million Each Year?Nusimer estimates the cost savings from a transmissible vaccine may be roughly $50 million every year. He said, “It's astronomical the amount of money you would save, even with a weakly transmissible vaccine.”35 However, that number is likely far from the financial loss pharmaceutical companies would experience. For example, if the flu vaccine were to be transmissible it would put a big dent in the $3 billion a year36 they reap from a vaccine with an overall effectiveness of 30%. By February 2021, Pfizer had estimated their COVID-19 vaccine was worth $15 billion and would be the “second highest revenue-generating drug anytime, anywhere.”37 AstraZeneca’s COVID vaccine netted $275 million in the first quarter of 2021, despite being one of the more controversial of the four released under an emergency authorization for use.38 As has been reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System,39 there are thousands of people who have reported vaccine injuries and deaths, and likely hundreds of thousands who have not.40 In fact, the Johnson & Johnson vaccine was previously paused to teach doctors how to report vaccine injuries. As Dr. Anne Schuchat, principal deputy director for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, said:41
The pause has since been lifted and vaccination with the Johnson & Johnson COVID vaccine has resumed in the U.S.42 It’s important to remember, meanwhile, that once a transmissible virus vaccine has been released, it cannot be recalled. Any variant or mutation that causes devastating damage, disability and death is irreparable. The financial cost and the cost in human life may reach apocalyptic levels. COVID-19 Uses Metabolic Poison to Bind to Human CellsIn late 2020, a different group of researchers from the University of Bristol revealed they had discovered groundbreaking information that the virus had a pocket on the surface into which they hoped to be able to inject antiviral drugs.43 The virus uses linoleic acid (LA) to attached itself to human cells and then begins to replicate. According to the original laboratory research,44 the linoleic acid stabilizes the locked SARS-CoV-2 spike to the cell and that reduces angiotensin-converting-enzyme 2 (ACE2) interaction. One of the lead researchers said:45
I believe that LA is likely the contributing cause of nearly every chronic disease from the last century. In my interview with Tucker Goodrich in December 2020, we discussed the health benefits of avoiding omega-6 fats as a key component to good health. Specifically, omega-6 fats found in vegetable oils and conventionally raised chicken, which are fed LA rich grains. Linoleic acid accounts for up to 80% of all omega-6 fats, which according to research Goodrich cites makes up nearly 20% of all the energy in a western diet. As Goodrich noted, levels of linoleic acid in the diet are associated with an increased potential for cancer, obesity, heart disease and even sunburn. Evidence suggests that LA plays a role in severe COVID-19 disease as it helps the virus attach to human cells, giving it the opportunity to replicate and grow. You can see the interview and read more about the significant damage associated with consuming LA in my article, “How Linoleic Acid Wrecks Your Health.” from http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2021/05/21/self-spreading-vaccines.aspx Media organizations occasionally contact Mercola.com, sometimes to challenge us on the researched, fact-checked articles we post for our readers. This was the case when Isobel Cockerell, a reporter with Coda Story, requested comments on our coverage of COVID-19, and specifically on my decision to remove COVID-related content, for an article she was writing. Her request was made on the same day the article was published. In the interest of transparency, below I’ll post the email exchange so you can read our response to her questions firsthand, as — unsurprisingly — none of it made it into the article. May 7, 2021, Coda Story published Cockerell’s false article, claiming that “pressure from lawmakers and antidiscrimination groups” prompted me to remove COVID-19 content from Mercola.com, in order to “avoid social media ban.”1 Not only is this wrong, but we provided the real reasons why COVID-19 content was removed from our site directly to Cockerell in the email exchange. She chose to ignore it and included nothing about the personal threats or counteroffensive assault by global terrorist and cyberwarfare experts against Mercola.com, instead stating:2
Coda Story Published Outright LiesIn the current climate, if you are not compliant about blindly promoting mandatory vaccinations and their safety, you will be silenced. Digital dictatorship is escalating, and people are increasingly being conditioned to think it’s not only necessary for “misinformation” to be removed but that it’s the obligation of these essential information carriers to do so. Twice in a one-week period, Mercola.com was hit by cyberwarfare, taking the site down. Still, the “threat of a social media ban” had nothing to do with my reasoning for permanently removing select content from Mercola.com, as Cockerell implied. Further, the article, which is really nothing more than a propaganda piece for the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH), makes a number of additional, blatantly false, statements. Among them, “Mercola, who has over a million followers on Facebook, has promoted a number of unproven treatments or cures for COVID-19, including the inhalation of bleach,” Cockerell wrote.3 Not only have I not advocated inhaling bleach, but I’ve warned against its use even in cleaning products due to its link to lung damage. The “source” Cockerell uses as “evidence” of this statement is a nonworking link to the CCDH “Anti-Vaxx Playbook.” In its “Anti-Vaxx Playbook,”4 CCDH identified six leading online “anti-vaxxers,” which include yours truly along with Barbara Loe Fisher, Del Bigtree, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Dr. Sherri Tenpenny and Dr. Andrew Wakefield. In the playbook, the CCDH details the messages shared by me and others during the Fifth International Public Conference on Vaccination, held online October 16 through 18, 2020, such as:
The CCDH report presents these messages without any counterarguments. It does not negate or even debate the accuracy of any of them. It just brushes them aside as “misinformation” and “lies” without providing any proof whatsoever, and in doing so, it actually ends up strengthening our messaging. In fact, the report summarizes our concerns so well that I’d encourage everyone to read it. Self-Censoring? Anti-Science Movement? More LiesIn a petty move, Cockerell did not identify me as a doctor or osteopathic physician, which is just one more attempt to diminish credibility in a smear campaign. Some of the other outrageous claims made in Cockerell’s Coda Story article is a quote from Imran Ahmed, CCDH’s CEO, which states, “Joseph Mercola is a superspreader of antivaccine and COVID disinformation. The fact that he has said he will self-censor shows the impact of penalizing antivaccine propagandists.”5 The idea that I am self-censoring due to some form of unnamed penalty is quite a stretch, and makes it clear that Ahmed did not read the article I published explaining my reasoning for removing select content. Cockerell also implies that I’m part of an “anti-science movement” — another lie that’s easily “fact-checked,” considering one of the driving forces behind Mercola.com is to share science-backed health information — including the science that not everyone wants you to hear. NewsGuard Also Reached Out for CommentIn its ongoing scrutiny and “grading” of the Mercola.com website, NewsGuard, the self-ascribed arbiter of the trustworthiness of internet websites, asked for information on our COVID-19 articles so NewsGuard can update its rating of Mercola.com’s coverage of the pandemic. The email from John Gregory, NewsGuard’s deputy editor on health, follows:
• The article stated: "In January 2018, China's first maximum security virology laboratory (biosecurity level 4) designed for the study of the world's most dangerous pathogens opened its doors — in Wuhan. Is it pure coincidence that Wuhan City is now the epicenter of this novel coronavirus infection?” There is no evidence that the Wuhan Institute of Virology was the source of the outbreak, and genomic evidence has found that the virus is "96% percent identical at the whole-genome level to a bat coronavirus.” • The article also stated that "the hysteria being drummed up follows a now well-worn pattern where the population is kept in a perpetual state of anxiety and fear about microbes so that drug companies (aided by federal health officials) can come to the rescue with yet another expensive (and potentially mandatory) drug or vaccine.” It later suggested the outbreak was timed to coincide with the presidential budget request in order to benefit "the Pharma and public health lobby." No evidence is provided to back this conspiracy, nor does any appear to exist. Why did Mercola.com publish these claims, despite the lack of evidence backing them up?” NewsGuard previously classified Mercola.com as fake news because we reported the SARS-CoV-2 virus as potentially having been leaked from the biosafety level 4 (BSL4) laboratory in Wuhan, China, the epicenter of the COVID-19 outbreak. According to NewsGuard, “There is no evidence that the Wuhan Institute of Virology was the source of the outbreak, and genomic evidence has found that the virus is 96% identical at the whole-genome level to a bat coronavirus.”6 But NewsGuard’s position is in direct conflict with evidence suggesting this virus was created in a lab and not zoonotically transmitted. For those who aren’t aware, NewsGuard is another threat to the free sharing of information. It claims to rate information as reliable or fake news, supplying you with a color-coded rating system next to Google and Bing searches, as well as on articles displayed on social media. If you rely on NewsGuard’s ratings, you may decide to entirely skip by those with a low “red” rating in favor of the “more trustworthy” green-rated articles — but NewsGuard is in itself fraught with conflicts of interest, as it’s largely funded by Publicis, a global communications giant that’s partnered with Big Pharma, such that it may be viewed more as a censorship tool than an internet watchdog. Full, Transparent Coda Story Email ExchangeSince Cockerell’s article on behalf of Coda Story gives no inkling of our email response, it’s published in its entirety below. You’ll see that important details were omitted from the article, like calls for cyberwarfare experts to be enlisted against vaccine safety advocates, without which it’s virtually impossible to gain an understanding of what’s really going on. FROM: Isobel Cockerell
FROM: Mercola PR
Coda Story Response: We ‘Consider the Matter Closed’Coda Story claims that it “tells you stories you never heard before, shows you connections you never knew existed, and investigates the nuance and complexity of the world.”7 Surely, then, its reporters would be eager to dive into the counterpoints provided in our email, in order to explore, investigate and share these connections with the world. In reality, they revealed their true colors, both with the blatant lies they published and their refusal to explore the truth further, even after it was clearly presented. In the final email response from Coda Story, Burhan Wazir, managing editor, wrote:
from http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2021/05/20/media-publishing-blatant-lies-about-mercola.aspx After 27 years of marriage, Bill and Melinda Gates are calling it quits. The May 3, 2021, divorce filing cites the marriage as “irretrievably broken,”1 which is standard legal jargon in a no-fault divorce. The philanthropic mission of the Bill & Melinda Gates foundation, worth an estimated $50 billion despite having doled out $45 billion since its inception, will continue as before. Combined, the couple has a total net worth of about $146 billion in personal assets, including large swaths of prime farmland.2,3 Gates’ Halo Is Starting to TarnishA number of rumors began swirling after the couple’s divorce announcement, many of which are bound to be off-target. What we can be fairly certain about, however, is that any information coming out about Bill and Melinda in the future is bound to be carefully crafted PR, and if my suspicion is correct, we’ll start seeing Melinda being portrayed as the saint in the relationship, as Bill’s halo gets walloped off his head. I suspect the split may have less to do with irreconcilable differences and far more to do with protecting the Gates Foundation and other assets as the truth about Bill’s true character starts seeping out. Facing mounting criticism and potentially embarrassing exposure on multiple fronts, it may be just a matter of time before his reputation turns to dirt, just like it did a little over a decade ago when his heartless, unethical business dealings4 and abuse of monopoly power5 became known. Gates’ situation was similar to that of John D. Rockefeller, the widely-disliked oil baron who transformed his reputation from ruthless industrialist to generous philanthropist by creating the Rockefeller Foundation. Gates followed the same playbook when reestablishing his image. He created the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and started buying favorable press, as detailed in “Gates’ Keepers of Journalism.” If I were to venture a guess, Gates’ divorce might well be a preemptive maneuver to salvage the family legacy in case Bill gets ensnared in too many major scandals. I could be wrong, of course, but I wouldn’t be surprised if in the future, as Bill’s star fades, Melinda’s will rise and she’ll become the new face of the Gates Foundation’s philanthropic wheeling and dealing. Sadly, I don’t foresee the goals of the Gates Foundation improving. It’ll probably remain a self-serving enterprise, dishing out “solutions” to problems that make the Foundation lots of money while making the situation they’re trying to fix all the worse. Gates — The Father of Health ApartheidSo, what are some of the scandals that might knock Bill off his self-made pedestal as the global savior? For starters, Gates is increasingly being blamed for the introduction of health apartheid around the world. He’s been a primary spokesperson for vaccine passports, repeatedly stating that the whole world must get vaccinated or else we’ll never get back to any semblance of normal life. In an April 2020 blog post, he stated, “We need to manufacture and distribute at least 7 billion doses of the vaccine … possibly 14 billion, if it’s a multidose vaccine.” He also said, “I suspect the COVID-19 vaccine will become part of the routine newborn immunization schedule.”6 What he doesn’t openly share is that he stands to make enormous amounts of money on this global vaccination program, as he’s heavily invested in COVID-19 vaccines. This is the same scheme the Gates Foundation has become infamous for. Gates invests in businesses and industries and then tells us the best or only way to solve a problem is by using the services and products of those same industries and businesses. It’s nothing but a self-serving racket. As noted by Vandana Shiva, Ph.D., for well over a decade Gates has engaged in business schemes that undermine vitality and life in all its form, in an effort to seize control over and profit from it. By funding research and financing public institutions, he’s been able to force those institutions down a path where they’re forced to use his patented intellectual property. The more Gates tries to “save” the world — be it through GMO crops and chemical-driven monoculture, synthetic beef and fake food, or vaccines for every ailment — the closer he drives us toward our extinction. While mainstream media insist Gates is a target “simply because he is rich and famous,”7 that’s hardly the case. There are many rich and famous people that aren’t the target of global outrage, and there’s a reason for that. They didn’t get rich by pushing false and dangerous “solutions” into the world while pretending to be a savior and hiding their support of eugenics. Patent Controversy Heats UpAs reported by The Nation,8 there have been growing calls to suspend COVID-19 vaccine patents and open them up so that vaccine production can be expanded. Lifting the patent protection would open the doors for generic versions to be manufactured, which would increase supplies and lower costs — and ultimately get more vaccines to middle- and low-income nations. Not surprisingly, Gates has been an outspoken defender of Big Pharma’s monopoly control.
Global Health Is Another Gates Monopoly GrabThe Gates Foundation also has the ability to influence vaccine markets — and hence its own profits — through a number of other networks, including the World Health Organization, which it is one of the largest funders of. According to The Nation, Gates:10
Gates also sits on the boards of the GlobalFund and Unitaid, has a close relationship with the World Bank, and personally supported and participated in Event 201, which simulated a worldwide pandemic triggered by a novel coronavirus. As noted by The Nation:12
The Nation quotes Rohit Malpani, a global health consultant and board member of the global health initiative Unitaid, who said:
Gates — A Not-So-Equitable TechnocratJames Love, director of the advocacy group Knowledge Ecology International, told The Nation:13
Indeed, as noted in a recent Jacobin Magazine article14 by staff writer Luke Savage, if the COVID pandemic doesn’t call for international cooperation, nothing does. Yet, Gates is choosing “patent rights over human lives.” Don’t get me wrong. I believe these mislabeled vaccines are a disaster in the making and don’t recommend them. The point here is that Gates is showing his true colors. When push comes to shove, and the world is asking for true generosity — there are to date more than 100 countries that haven’t administered a single dose of COVID vaccine15 — Gates offers up a firm no. Gates is in it for the money. It is patently obvious he doesn’t believe that vaccines are going to actually save the world. If he did, and were he a true philanthropist at heart, he’d advocate for the removal of patent rights and help blanket the world in vaccines. Instead he fights for patent rights and focuses on amassing intellectual property for all his global solutions. Gates Is Lying About Need for Vaccine Patent ProtectionTV political commentator Krystal Ball doesn’t mince any words when she says Gates is lying when he says that lifting patent protections on COVID vaccines won’t help developing countries. As the self-appointed global vaccine czar, Gates says there aren’t enough vaccine factories available to assure safety in the manufacturing process. But that’s not true, Ball points out. An Associated Press investigation found three factories on three continents that have the capacity to produce hundreds of millions of COVID-19 vaccines “if only they had the blueprints and technical know-how.”16 It’s all about greed, Ball says — and keeping Pharma profits as high as possible. The bottom line is that, despite his insistence that he wants to get vaccines as quickly as possible to developing countries, Gates is purposely holding up the manufacturing and distribution processes. Big Pharma’s goal is to keep their profits high. They lobby heavily in the U.S. and EU to protect patent monopolies so generic versions of their products cannot be manufactured. According to Corporate Europe Observatory:17
Big Pharma Reaps Profits of Taxpayer-Funded ResearchDrug companies claim that patents are necessary to protect their intellectual property rights so they can continue to research and produce lifesaving treatments, but they’re largely reaping the profits of taxpayer-funded research. In a working paper18 released by the Institute for New Economic Thinking, it’s revealed that funding from the U.S. National Institutes of Health — $230 billion in total — contributed to research associated with every new drug approved in the U.S. from 2010 to 2019. What’s more, 22,000 patents resulted from the taxpayer-funded research, which allowed for marketing exclusivity for 8.6% of the new drugs approved during the study period. “It also demonstrates the limited mechanisms available for recognizing the value created by these early investments and ensuring appropriate public returns,” the paper noted. Even the mRNA technology that’s being used in COVID-19 vaccines is the result of federally funded basic research conducted by the NIH and the Department of Defense.19 “This is the people’s vaccine,” Peter Maybarduk, director of Public Citizen’s Access to Medicines program, told Scientific American.20 “Federal scientists helped invent it and taxpayers are funding its development … It should belong to humanity.” Pfizer’s COVID vaccine has already generated $3.5 billion in revenue in the first three months of 2021,21 and the company said it expects “durable demand” for the vaccine to continue in coming years, similar to flu vaccines. Estimates suggest revenue will reach $26 billion for Pfizer’s COVID vaccine by the end of 2021.22 What Might Come Out of the Maxwell Trial?There’s also the possibility of shadier aspects of Gates’ life coming into light. According to one MSN report,23 Melinda made inquiries with divorce lawyers in October 2019 — the same month The New York Times published an article about Gates’ repeated dealings with the notorious child sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein.24 The New York Post25 and the Daily Mail26 recently dedicated articles to Gates’ “womanizing” ways premarriage, citing information from Gates biographer James Wallace, who claims Gates had a penchant for strippers and naked pool parties. The Washington Examiner goes a step further, stating the “Gates divorce [is] partially motivated by dealings with Jeffrey Epstein.”27 A spokesperson for Gates responded to questions about his meetings with the pedophile ring leader, saying:
While Epstein died under suspicious circumstances in his prison cell in August 2019, his business partner, Ghislaine Maxwell was arrested in July 2020, charged with transporting a minor for the purpose of criminal sexual activity and conspiring to entice minors to travel to engage in illegal sex acts. Additional charges of sex trafficking and recruitment of underage girls were later added. Maxwell’s trial is scheduled to begin this fall. Time will tell whether her trial will end up revealing further details about Gates’ involvement with Epstein. Either way, the timing of the Gates’ split is interesting, considering how Bill’s reputation as a global do-gooder is suddenly slipping. from http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2021/05/20/the-surprising-reason-for-bill-gates-divorce.aspx |
Nia Pure NatureThe Provider of premium Quality Health Products To Live Better Lives Archives
March 2022
Categories |