1 Which of the following have synergistic effects that make them useful in the prevention and early at-home treatment of COVID-19?
2 Who owns the patent for SARS-CoV's genome (the coronavirus responsible for the 2003 SARS outbreak)?
3 To improve heart health and lower your risk of heart attack, you should:
4 Which of the following is the oldest and largest consumer-led nonprofit organization in the U.S. that provides accurate and objective information about vaccines to help people make informed health choices?
5 Which of the following is a foundational component of two highly effective protocols developed by Dr. Paul Marik for the treatment of sepsis and COVID-19?
6 According to Hypernormalisation, people willingly go along with living in a fake world because:
7 Which of the following is ever-present in your cells at low levels, ready and waiting to be generated in greater amounts as soon as an infection is detected by your immune system, thereby killing off any pathogen that encounters it?
from http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2020/08/31/week-145-health-quiz.aspx
0 Comments
When it comes to COVID-19, there seem to be a lot more questions than answers. But as we continue to learn about the pathophysiology of the virus, more research is coming out about how to combat and/or prevent it. Researchers from an August 2020 study published in Science of the Total Environment are the first to look at beta-glucans, types of soluble fiber, and how they may be able to protect you from SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19.1 One of the major complications of COVID-19 is pneumonia, which is also accompanied by rapid replication of the virus. During this rapid replication, your immune system releases pro-inflammatory cytokines that lead to an overreaction of the immune response called cytokine storm. Cytokine storm can lead to lung injury, acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and death. In this study, researchers took beta-glucans extract from a form of shiitake mushroom called Lentinus edodes and combined it with a lung injury model in vitro. They found that beta-glucans reduced interleukin 1 beta and interleukin-6, two cytokines that can trigger the cytokine storm that causes ARDS in severe COVID-19 cases. The beta-glucans also reduced oxidative stress and activated immune substances called macrophages that destroy potential invaders like viruses. According to other studies, beta-glucans also enhance the cell activity and function of natural killer (NK) cells,2 a type of white blood cell that plays a critical role in your innate immune system and acts as the first line of defense against viruses.3 Research shows NK cell count and function decrease considerably with COVID-19 infection, especially in those who become critically ill.4,5 Based on this information, researchers suggest that boosting innate immunity through things like beta-glucan supplementation may help mitigate COVID-19 infection and potentially flatten the curve.6 Beta-Glucans May Help Prevent Colds and the FluThe research on beta-glucans and COVID-19 is promising, but since the virus is still new, there are only a limited number of studies available at this time. However, a number of studies have confirmed that beta-glucans offer powerful protection against other viral infections, such as the common cold and flu, which can result in similar immune responses. For example:
Other Health Benefits of Beta-GlucansIn addition to helping combat COVID-19 and other viral illnesses, beta-glucans also come with a number of other health benefits, including the following: • Improved insulin resistance — Beta-glucans have been shown to reduce post-meal glucose and insulin responses, improve insulin sensitivity in diabetic and nondiabetic individuals, and help with glycemic control.11 Although other types of soluble fiber have this effect as well, when compared to the others, smaller amounts of beta-glucans are required to achieve the same results. • Improved microbial diversity in the gut — Beta-glucans may help promote the growth of beneficial bacteria in your gut by acting like a prebiotic. In one study, beta-glucans improved the growth rate of Lactobacillus plantarum in the gut in both unstressed and stressed conditions. Perhaps most importantly, beta-glucans were able to protect the probiotics from gastrointestinal stress caused by low pH, bile salts and digestive enzymes, increasing their survival rate as they traveled through the digestive system.12 • Cancer prevention — Beta-glucans have been used as a cancer treatment in Japan since 1980.13 According to a 2007 report in Medicina, beta-glucans can prevent oncogenesis — the process in which healthy cells become cancer cells — by protecting against carcinogens that damage cellular DNA. The report notes that beta-glucans have also shown to inhibit tumor growth by activating macrophages and NK cells. Beta-glucans also help reduce inflammation associated with cancer and fight against metastasis, cancer recurrence and tumor drug resistance.14 • Reduced appetite and weight loss — In a 2018 animal study in PLOS One, researchers divided mice into two groups. One group was fed a high-fat diet with beta-glucans, while the other was fed a high-fat diet with cellulose, another high-fiber carbohydrate, for 12 weeks. After the test period, the mice given the beta-glucans had significantly less weight gain and fat mass compared to the cellulose group. They also had increased production of short-chain fatty acids, especially butyrate, and higher secretions of the gut hormones peptide YY and GLP-1, which help reduce appetite and improve insulin sensitivity.15 You can find beta-glucans in supplemental form, but, as always, it’s best to get this type of fiber from whole food sources16 such as mushrooms (Reishi, Shiitake, Maitake), baker’s yeast or seaweed. Certain grains such as oats, barley, sorghum, rye and rice also contain it. Other Nutrients That Help Boost ImmunityWhile beta-glucans are important immunomodulators, there are several other nutrients that boost immunity too, including: • Vitamin C — Vitamin C is a potent antioxidant and one of the most powerful nutrients involved in both the innate and adaptive immune system. The vitamin protects against oxidative stress, helps kill microbes and supports the epithelial barrier of your skin, which keeps pathogens from entering your body. Vitamin C also helps clear white blood cells from infection sites and helps decrease potential tissue damage.17 In one 2020 study published in Pulmonology, researchers looked at whether high-dose vitamin C administered intravenously could help treat critically ill COVID-19 patients.18 Fifty-four patients were divided into two groups. One group was given 12 grams of vitamin C every 12 hours for seven days and the other group was given a placebo. Patients in the high-dose vitamin C group had lower levels of interleukin-6, a pro-inflammatory cytokine that’s one of the underlying contributors to cytokine storm, and saw a significant reduction in 28-day mortality. As a general rule, I don't recommend high doses of vitamin C unless it's in liposomal form. I also don't recommend long-term or chronic high-dose vitamin C supplementation as this may cause nutritional imbalances. For example, taking large doses of vitamin C (ascorbic acid) on a regular basis lowers your level of copper, so if you are already deficient in copper and take high doses of vitamin C, you can actually compromise your immune system. • Vitamin D — Vitamin D, which is produced in your skin in response to sun exposure, is a steroid hormone with powerful antimicrobial activity capable of fighting bacteria, viruses and fungi. The evidence is clear that the lower your vitamin D level, the higher your risk of contracting a cold or the flu.19 One scientific review confirmed vitamin D supplementation boosts immunity and cuts rates of cold and flu.20 The researchers believe vitamin D offers protection by increasing antimicrobial peptides in your lungs, and that "[t]his may be one reason why colds and flus are most common in the winter, when sunlight exposure (and therefore the body's natural vitamin D production) is at its lowest …”21 According to a 2020 report in The Lancet Diabetes & Endocrinology, vitamin D has been used to prevent or treat acute respiratory infections since the 1930s.22 Recently, similarities between the risk factors of vitamin D deficiency and risk factors for severe COVID-19 infection have led researchers to look at whether vitamin D supplementation could be beneficial for preventing or treating the novel virus. In one Indonesian study, researchers found that the majority of severe COVID-19 cases with inadequate vitamin D levels or vitamin D inadequacy died, leading them to conclude that vitamin D status is strongly correlated with COVID-19 mortality.23 In another study published in Aging Clinical and Experimental Research, British researchers analyzed data from 20 different European countries, comparing rates of COVID-19 and mortality rates against the population’s average vitamin D level.24 They found countries like Spain and Italy that reported higher death rates also had higher levels of vitamin D deficiency in the population. Conversely, countries with lower rates of COVID-19 and mortality, like Sweden and Norway, also had lower rates of vitamin D deficiency. • Zinc — Zinc affects several different parts of your immune system. The nutrient is critical for normal development and function of neutrophils, NK cells and macrophages. Zinc also functions as an antioxidant and helps prevent damage from free radicals during inflammation associated with viral illness.25 Zinc has also been shown to inhibit viral replication of RNA-dependent viruses, which include COVID-19, rhinoviruses (which cause common colds) and influenza. Because of this, researchers from a 2020 report in Medical Hypotheses state that it’s likely that zinc may be beneficial for preventing and treating COVID-19.26 from http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2020/08/31/beta-glucans-may-help-combat-covid-19.aspx The Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI), which is supposed to be a "food police" and consumer advocacy group, was co-founded in 1971 by Michael Jacobson, who is still the executive director to this day. CSPI also manages the National Alliance for Nutrition and Activity, which is the largest nutrition advocacy coalition in the United States.1 CSPI has long proudly proclaimed that it does not accept any corporate money,2 but the general public actually plays a very small role in their funding. The organization is bankrolled by billionaires and their corporate entities, such as the Rockefeller Foundation, the Rockefeller Family Fund and Bloomberg Philanthropies.3 It has also partnered with Bill Gates' agrichemical PR group, the Cornell Alliance for Science,4 one of the most pro-GMO groups in the U.S. In fact, Greg Jaffe, head of CSPI's Biotechnology Project, is also the part-time associate director of legal affairs for the Cornell Alliance for Science.5 In a 2015 statement, Gary Ruskin of U.S. Right to Know commented on the alliance:6
CSPI has also received significant funding from the American Heart Association,7 which in turn has received financial backing by the makers of Crisco.8 In its 2018 Form 990, the AHA reported giving CSPI $49,500 in cash.9 I guess they think you don't have to count it as industry money if you accept that money from a major nonprofit that got its money from corporate and industry dollars. CSPI Has Long History of Misguided Nutritional AdviceAs you'd expect from an organization with funding sources such as those, CSPI also has a long history protecting and promoting foods known for their potentially adverse health impacts. These include artificial sweeteners, trans fats, soy, genetically engineered (GE) foods and fake meats. Considering the suspected (and in some cases well-verified) health hazards of these types of foods and food ingredients, CSPI's desire to protect public health is questionable to say the least. It seems they're more interested in promoting big, profitable industries. For example, it wasn't until 2013 that CSPI finally downgraded the artificial sweetener from its former "safe" category to one of "caution."10 In 2016, they downgraded it again, from "caution" to "avoid."11 Remarkably, CSPI continues to promote diet soda as a safer alternative to regular soda to this day, saying it "does not promote diabetes, weight gain or heart disease in the way that full-calorie sodas do."12 This, despite overwhelming scientific evidence showing artificial sweeteners are just as bad, and in some ways more harmful, than sugar and high fructose corn syrup. CSPI-Monsanto ConnectionIn 2014, the American Soybean Association (ASA) held a legislative and educational forum sponsored by Monsanto.13 While that should come as no surprise, considering Monsanto was one of ASA's biotech working group partners,14 what was surprising was that it featured a special presentation by Jacobson. A few days later, the ASA posted the following comments on Facebook made by Jacobson during his presentation. It has since been taken down, but I did take a screenshot of it:15
Jacobson's attendance at a paid Monsanto function is perhaps one of the more egregious parts of CSPI's history, and his statements at the forum make it clear that CSPI was fully onboard with Monsanto's GMO agenda. This was also evident in the CSPI's support of the grossly misleading bioengineered (BE) logo.16 Here, again, CSPI sided with the Monsanto-funded ASA. The logo was sharply criticized by organic producers for the fact that it falsely presents GE foods as natural and wholesome. CSPI Was an Early Promoter of GMOsFor years, CSPI has proven it's out of step with democracy and is beholden to the likes of Monsanto and Bill Gates. As reported by Center for Food Safety in 2013:17
1. GE foods do not present either safety or nutrition concerns 2. Processed GE foods do not contain genetically-engineered material 3. Non-GE labels are 'misleading' because they imply a safer or superior food" Believe it or not, but CSPI has been arguing that GE crops are safe to eat for over two decades now, despite the fact that such crops have a more than questionable safety profile and are loaded with health-harming pesticides. Many of the problems associated with GMOs are reviewed in the nine-part documentary series "GMOs Revealed." CSPI was also instrumental in driving the anti-GMO labeling campaign forward, which ultimately resulted in the United States being the only country in the world that does not have clear GMO labeling. In August 2001, the organization actually urged the FDA to take enforcement action against food companies using non-GMO labels, claiming such labels could "deceive consumers." However, as is evident in its press release, CSPI was well aware that Americans preferred non-GMO foods and that accurate labeling would simply inhibit GMO sales:19
CSPI Undermined GMO Labeling MovementJaffe also undermined the GMO labeling movement in his testimony20 at a 2015 Energy and Commerce Committee hearing21 on the Pompeo bill H.R. 1599, the Safe and Accurate Food Labeling Act of 2015. Colloquially known as the Denying Americans the Right to Know (DARK) Act, it stripped states' of their right to implement food labeling laws and regulations that restricts or bans the growing of GMO crops. At the time, polls showed over 90% of Americans wanted GMO labeling, yet Jaffe argued that he's not sure consumers really want to know whether foods contain GMOs, despite polling results. He also claimed there were no studies showing GMOs might be harmful. For a consumer advocate, it was a reprehensibly ignorant position. In a 2014 interview22 with Food Product Design, Jaffe claimed the technology used to create GMO foods simply involves "adding one or two genes in a very precise way to a crop that already has thousands of genes" — falsely insinuating that doing so leads to completely predictable results. He then went on to use the oft-repeated but false industry claim that "there is a strong international consensus ... that the foods made from the current GE crops are safe to eat." Meanwhile, a January 2015 statement23 signed by 300 scientists, researchers, physicians and scholars asserted the exact opposite of what Jacobson and Jaffe claim, namely that there's no scientific consensus on the safety of GMOs, and that the claim of scientific consensus on GMO safety is in actuality "an artificial construct that has been falsely perpetuated." The paper also noted that such a claim "is misleading and misrepresents or outright ignores the currently available scientific evidence and the broad diversity of scientific opinions among scientists on this issue." If the CSPI's mission is to "represent citizens' interests" and "ensure that science and technology are used for the public good," as stated in its mission statement,24 how does it justify its anti-consumer position on the safety of GMOs? It seems fairly irreconcilable. The same can be said about its stance on ultraprocessed fake meat, which it wants to be disguised as regular meat. In a May 2018 letter to the FDA,25 CSPI urges the agency "to reject efforts by the United States Cattlemen's Association to prohibit use of the terms "meat" or "beef" on plant-based and cultured proteins marketed as alternatives to traditional meat." CSPI's Stance on Fats Has Been All WrongCSPI has also been horribly wrong on fats — probably because it was in bed with the soybean industry. In the 1980s, it spearheaded a highly successful campaign against the use of healthy saturated fats, touting trans fats as a healthier alternative. Its "Big Fat Myths" webpage still claims that:26
It was largely the result of CSPI's campaign that fast-food restaurants replaced the use of beef tallow, palm oil and coconut oil with partially hydrogenated vegetable oils,27 which are high in synthetic trans fats linked to heart disease and other chronic diseases. In 1988, CSPI even released an article28 praising trans fats, saying "there is little good evidence that trans fats cause any more harm than other fats" and "much of the anxiety over trans fats stems from their reputation as 'unnatural.'" It wasn't until the 1990s that CSPI reversed their position on synthetic trans fats, but by then the damage had already been done. The group's successful influence on the food industry is discussed in David Schleifer's article, "The Perfect Solution: How Trans Fats Became the Healthy Replacement for Saturated Fats,"29 in which he noted that, "the transition from saturated to trans fats shows how activists can be part of spurring corporations to change." CSPI rarely admits its errors, however. In fact, rather than openly admitting it was flat out wrong about trans fats and had misled the public on this issue, CSPI has simply deleted sections of its previous support of it from the web.30 Notice how their historical timeline31 of trans fat starts at 1993 — the year CSPI realized the jig was up and they had to support the elimination of trans fat. The truth of the matter is that vegetable oils — a primary source of trans fats — are likely worse for your health than excess sugar. If you need a refresher, see Dr. Chris Knobbe's lecture featured in "Are Seed Oils Behind the Majority of Diseases This Century?" and "Why Vegetable Oils Are Carcinogenic." CSPI Helped to Double Unhealthy Skim Milk SalesCSPI has also been a promoter of the thoroughly debunked low-fat myth. In 1995, CSPI launched a "1% or Less" campaign that urged everyone over the age of 2 to switch from whole and 2% milk to skim milk (also known as nonfat or fat-free milk) in order to reduce their saturated fat intake.32,33,34 It was another successful campaign that resulted in the doubling of skim milk sales.35 However, just like their trans fat campaign, this was equally ill advised. Research36 shows full-fat dairy actually lowers your risk of death from diabetes and cardiovascular causes such as stroke. Indeed, the evidence overwhelmingly demonstrates that consuming whole fats can be an important part of maintaining optimal health and actually fights heart disease and other diseases prevalent today rather than causing them. In one analysis37 of blood fats in more than 2,900 adults, published 2018, the mortality rate over 22 years was identical regardless of the levels. This finding is just one of many that exonerates whole milk as a health wrecker. Another aspect of the CSPI's advice that doesn't necessarily make sense is the fact that the fat removed from the milk during the making of skim milk38 isn't thrown away. It's made into cream, butter and other food products, so it's still in the food supply and still being consumed. Can You Trust CSPI?Considering how they've misled the public on such important health issues such as artificial sweeteners, trans fats, soy, GMOs and ultraprocessed fake meats, the CSPI needs to go the same way as the Grocery Manufacturers Association, which also fought against your right to know the truth about your food. CSPI's campaign in the '80s switched Americans onto heart disease causing trans fats. They fought against GMO labeling and is partnered with Bill Gates' agrichemical PR group, Alliance for Science. Now CSPI is calling for regulatory enforcement action against companies selling vitamins and supplements with antiviral effects,39 saying they're exploiting the COVID-19 pandemic for their own gain. They're even trying to bring an end to the mercola.com website, simply because we're reporting published research relating to potential COVID-19 remedies. So please, share the truth about this dangerous group that is bankrolled by billionaires. Email, tweet, text and share by any method possible and help expose CSPI's dangerous lies. from http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2020/08/31/center-for-science-in-the-public-interest.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. Patrick Wood — an economist, financial analyst and American constitutionalist — has devoted a lifetime to uncovering the mystery of what is controlling most of the craziness we're currently seeing, and which has been exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic. He's written two books on this topic: "Technocracy Rising: The Trojan Horse of Global Transformation" and "Technocracy: The Hard Road to World Order." I was intrigued by his work as my own approach is to seek to understand the foundational cause of any given problem.
Wood's foray into the ideology of technocracy began with a chance meeting with Anthony Sutton at a gold conference in the early 1970s. Sutton has written several books about political science, primarily about the Trilateral Commission, which Wood had studied from a financial angle. They developed a relationship and eventually wound up collaborating on a newsletter and two books, "Trilaterals Over Washington: Volumes 1 and 2," which have recently been re-released.
Definition of TechnocracySo, what is "technocracy"? As explained by Wood, technocracy is a movement that got started in the 1930s during the height of the Great Depression, when scientists and engineers got together to solve the nation's economic problems. It looked like capitalism and free enterprise was going to die, so they decided to invent a new economic system from scratch. They called this system "technocracy." It was to be a resource-based economic system. Rather than basing the economic system on pricing mechanisms such as supply and demand, this system is instead based on energy resources and social engineering. In a nutshell, under this system, companies would be told what resources they're allowed to use, when, and for what, and consumers would be told what to buy.
Scientists Stand Above All Other IndividualsAs explained by Wood, the technocrats "had this crazy idea that they were better than everybody else." This philosophy and mindset can be traced back to Henri de Saint-Simon, a French philosopher from around 1800. Saint-Simon is considered the father of scientism, social sciences, transhumanism and technocracy. He said in one of his essays, "A scientist … is a man who foresees. It is because science provides the means to predict, that it is useful, and the scientists are superior to all other men." This was the mindset of technocrats in the 1930s, and it's the same today. In essence, science is used to manipulate society and keep the economic engine running. Top Technocrats Rescued Through Operation PaperclipWhile technocracy began in the U.S., the first country to ever implement it was Nazi Germany under Hitler. However, it's important to realize that technocracy is not Republican or Democrat. It's not Marxist or Capitalist. It's not a Nazi philosophy. It's an independent ideology. When technocracy first began in the U.S., it was a membership organization. At its peak, there were more than 500,000 card-carrying, dues-paying members in the United States and Canada. Incidentally, the head of technocracy in Canada was the grandfather of Elon Musk, founder of Tesla and SpaceX. Around the same time, a technocratic organization also got started in Germany.
Beauty and the BeastThe Trilateral Commission's co-founder Zbigniew Brzezinski, a Columbia University professor, brought the concept of technocracy into the Commission in 1973, with the financial support of David Rockefeller.
The Trilateral Commission more or less took over the Jimmy Carter administration, and has dominated the political structure ever since. Regardless of their party affiliations, U.S. presidents have been members of the Trilateral Commission. Carter, Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton were all members. Within two weeks of his inauguration, Barack Obama appointed 11 Trilateral Commission members to top-level positions in his administration, equivalent to 12% of the Commission's entire U.S. membership.1 The ramifications of this are described in Wood's article,2 "Obama: Trilateral Commission Endgame."
Personal Freedom Is the Enemy of TechnocracyIt's important to realize we're fighting an enemy that has literally spent the last several generations compiling their power base. They've done it progressively, slowly and very consistently over time with the endgame in mind at all times. They engineered circumstances that allow them to amass more and more power. Their last great power grab in the U.S. was the 9/11 tragedy. It allowed them to push through the Patriot Act, which sacrificed many of our freedoms in one fell swoop. They're in the process of doing it again with the current pandemic. It's quite clear the pandemic is being used to move us toward an authoritarian tyranny. However, the COVID-19 pandemic has provided a platform that will dwarf their 9/11 power-grab and radically increase their ability to continue to erode our civil liberties and control our society. If you find this line of reasoning interesting, I think you will enjoy the video below from Really Graceful, which reviews whether or not you'd even notice if you were living under tyranny. Technocratic InfrastructureIt's also crucial to understand that the only reason they've not yet been able to overtake the U.S. is because of our Constitution. We're the biggest barrier worldwide to implementing technocracy, which is why there's been so much focus on dismantling the freedoms of Americans.
To give you just one rather hilarious real-world example of the technocratic "science says" strategy, here's a sentence from a recent article in The Sun:3 "People who refuse to wear a face mask to reduce the risk of coronavirus have lower cognitive ability, new research has found." Not only is it laughable because it's illogical, it's also completely irrelevant, since there's not a single well-designed study showing that mask wearing lowers the spread of viral infections. For the scoop on this, see my interview with Denis Rancourt. Rule by AlgorithmInitially, science is used to issue suggestions, but those suggestions rapidly turn into mandates. We've repeatedly seen that with vaccines, for example. But the COVID-19 pandemic has also revealed there's a much larger plan that includes implantable digital identifications, medical records and vaccine passports, digital currency and banking — all of which will ultimately be tied together so that algorithms and automation will be able to keep everyone in line, everywhere, all the time.
Data Is the New OilIn her book, "The Age of Surveillance Capitalism," professor Shoshana Zuboff exposes the stunning capacities currently available to surveil, analyze and manipulate our behavior. It's crucial to realize that as bad as it is today, the predictive power of technology is advancing at an exponential rate, which means their ability to manipulate behavior is increasing at a pace we cannot fully comprehend.
What's the Ultimate Goal?For instance, years ago, if you searched for a holistic medicine topic, many of my articles would appear at the top of your search. In June 2019, Google quietly started to eliminate Mercola.com from search results. I discussed this in "Google Buries Mercola in Their Latest Search Engine Update, Part 1 and Part 2."
Sustainable Development Isn't What You ThinkWood also explains why "sustainable development" goals, which sound like a good thing, really aren't. The United Nations has declared that sustainable development is going to be the new economic system of the future. It's a resource-based economic system based on energy.
Taking Back Local Government Is KeyImportantly, what the technocrats are doing is making an end run around national sovereignty. Rather than a frontal assault on the system, which has never been successful, they've simply eroded national sovereignty piece by piece. Wood also reviews what we can do to save our republic and thwart the steady march of technocracy:
One of the most important elected local officials that you should concern yourself with is your sheriff. They are responsible for enforcing tyrannical edicts from local, state and federal government, and if they choose not to, government has no power. City councils also have a lot of power. They can pass binding resolutions to protect citizens against the technocratic agenda.
What is Agenda 21? It is the keystone document for Sustainable Development. It was developed in 1992 at the Rio de Janeiro conference of the United Nations' first Earth summit. This became the agenda for the 21st century. The doctrine that came to be known as Agenda 21 came from a book written by Trilateral Commission member Gro Harlem Brundtland, called "Our Common Future." Citizens for Free SpeechWe cover a lot of information in this interview, so be sure to listen to it in its entirety, or read through the transcript for more. Also consider picking up one or both of his books, "Technocracy Rising: The Trojan Horse of Global Transformation" and "Technocracy: The Hard Road to World Order." Wood's nonprofit organization, Citizens for Free Speech, is another excellent resource where you can learn more about your constitutional rights and how to communicate your ideas to others. For a small donation, Citizens for Free Speech also offers a laminated No Mask Card that you can wear on a lanyard, explaining your First Amendment Right to disobey local mask mandates.
from http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2020/08/30/patrick-wood-technocracy.aspx Dr. David Brownstein, who has a clinic just outside of Detroit, has successfully treated over a hundred patients with what has become my favorite intervention for COVID-19 and other upper respiratory infections, namely nebulized hydrogen peroxide. He has published the results of his work in a study that you can download here. Since I first wrote about it at the beginning of April 2020, I've received impressive testimonials of its effectiveness from friends and acquaintances who got severely ill and used it. Brownstein is probably best known for his promotion of iodine and its supplementation. He was also an early adopter of vitamin D optimization and nebulized peroxide. He explains the background that led him to his current regimen:
Hydrogen Peroxide and OzoneWhile attending an oxidative medicine course, Brownstein learned about hydrogen peroxide. At that point, he and his staff started using nebulized hydrogen peroxide and intravenous (IV) hydrogen peroxide. That was back in the mid-1990s. So, he has been using nebulized peroxide clinically for 25 years now, which is longer than anyone I know of. With each revision of his original protocol, patients seemed to fare better. Fast-forward another couple of years, at another medical course, he learned about the benefits of ozone.
107 Patients — One Hospitalization, Zero DeathsBrownstein and the other physicians in his practice first started treating COVID patients in the middle of a Detroit winter under full social distancing and lockdown restrictions. As a result, he had to treat patients who were ill in a drive-through manner in his clinic parking lot. They'd stick their arm out their car window, and Brownstein and his colleagues would do an IV of hydrogen peroxide and vitamin C and intramuscular shots of ozone.
The case report,1 "A Novel Approach to Treating COVID-19 Using Nutritional and Oxidative Therapies," was published in Science, Public Health Policy, and The Law in July 2020. For a couple of months, Brownstein would post video interviews with his patients, in which they told their story. He removed all of them after receiving a warning letter from the Federal Trade Commission, saying that because there's no established prevention, treatment or cure for COVID-19, any mention thereof falls in violation of FTC law.
Boosting Your Immune Function Is ImperativeInterestingly, as explained by Brownstein, in addition to having direct viricidal effects, iodine also stimulates and supports the immune system. It increases the killing effect of hydrogen peroxide production in your white blood cells by improving white blood cell and thyroid function, which is one way our immune system works to kill pathogens. Vitamin C directly increases hydrogen peroxide production when used at high doses, he says, while vitamin A helps modulate your immune system.
How to Do Nebulized Hydrogen Peroxide — The BasicsNebulized hydrogen peroxide is extremely safe. Brownstein has used it for 25 years with no ill effects being found. It's also incredibly inexpensive, and you can administer it at home, without a prescription. In my view, it is one of the absolute best therapies for viral infections like SARS-CoV-2 or even worse respiratory viruses that will likely be unleashed in the future. You need to buy a desktop nebulizer (it needs to produce a very fine mist and desktop versions are stronger than handheld battery operated models). The one I use is the Pari Trek S Compressor Aerosol System, which is available on Amazon or less expensively on eBay. The large battery option is unnecessary as you can simply plug in the device to run it when you need it. Please understand, though, that the Pari Trek S is designed to treat asthmatics and as such only comes with a mouthpiece. While this would get the peroxide in the lungs where it is needed, it does nothing to reach the sinuses, which are also likely infected. This is why it would be worth pick up some face masks on Amazon to use instead of the mouthpiece as they are only about $10. It is important to acquire this BEFORE you need it, as the sooner you treat the infection the better your results will be, although the testimonials are unbelievably impressive even in late stage illness. It is not necessary to treat yourself preventively, but only if you are sick or exposed to someone who is. While I've been using a 0.1% dilution, Brownstein uses an even lower concentration of just 0.04%. Neither Brownstein nor I recommend using commercial 3% hydrogen peroxide found in most grocery stores, however, as it has potentially toxic chemical stabilizers in it. Since you are not using full strength 3% peroxide and diluting it by 30 to 50 times, it is unlikely the stabilizers will present a problem, but to be safe it is best to use FOOD-GRADE peroxide. Also remember not to dilute it with plain water as the lack of electrolytes in the water can damage your lungs if you nebulize that. You will need to use saline or add a small amount of salt to the water to eliminate this risk. Brownstein also dilutes the peroxide with sterile water and saline rather than distilled water. Using saline prevents the osmotic differential that can cause damage to lung cells. Brownstein dilutes the 35% food-grade peroxide as follows. When nebulizing, Brownstein also adds one drop of 5% Lugol's solution to the nebulizer as well.
Sample Case HistoryBrownstein relates the case of a 67-year-old male patient. The man developed COVID-19 symptoms, and after seven or eight days could not breathe and went to the hospital where he was diagnosed with bilateral pneumonia. After two days of treatment, which included oxygen, he felt only slightly better, but was released from the hospital due to a shortage of beds.
Nebulized Peroxide Typically Improves Symptoms Within HoursThis story echoes the experiences of personal acquaintances who have tried the treatment. After two treatments, they felt significantly better. After the third treatment, their breathing was restored and they were well on their way to a full recovery. You'd be hard-pressed to find another treatment that works within hours. Brownstein agrees that this scenario is consistent with what he has encountered among his own patients. "Usually, everything feels better within a couple of hours of starting nebulizing," he says. When asked about how others in the medical community have responded to his blog posts about the treatment, he replies:
Hydrogen Peroxide FactsIn my April 2020 article, "Could Hydrogen Peroxide Treat Coronavirus?" I reviewed some of the basic science of how hydrogen peroxide works, as well as some of the studies assessing its therapeutic potential. The most relevant study2 was published in March 2020 in the Journal of Hospital Infection. They studied 0.5% hydrogen peroxide, and found it killed human coronaviruses, including the coronaviruses responsible for SARS and MERS. Here are a few additional facts that explain how and why hydrogen peroxide works so well for respiratory infections: 1. Hydrogen peroxide freely crosses cell membranes and does not readily oxidize biological molecules, including lipids and proteins.3 It does however react with iron. The presence of free, unbound iron in high concentrations in pathogens is what allows them to be selectively targeted by hydrogen peroxide. High concentrations of iron result in a rapid breakdown of hydrogen peroxide into hydroxyl radicals and water. The hydroxyl radical, a potent oxidizing agent, kills any pathogens present. (Under normal, healthy circumstances, hydrogen peroxide merely breaks down into oxygen and water.) 2. Peroxide is generated by activated phagocytes (pathogen-killing immune cells) at sites of inflammation.4 Phagocytes also contain high amounts of ascorbate (vitamin C), which directly donate electrons to peroxide to generate the pathogen-killing hydroxyl radical inside the infected cells. Vitamin C also helps generate increased amounts of extracellular hydrogen peroxide, which further boosts the elimination of pathogens.5 3. Hydrogen peroxide is continually generated inside all cells in your body, including the epithelial lining of your lungs. (Hydrogen peroxide is present in the air exhaled by healthy human subjects, and when inflammation is present, more peroxide is found in the exhaled breath.6) The presence of excreted peroxide on these surface cells in the airways is part of a healthy, at-the-ready immune response.7 4. Aside from its anti-pathogen properties, hydrogen peroxide is also recognized as an important signaling molecule, both intracellular and extracellular, influencing and modulating multiple metabolic processes.8 In summary, hydrogen peroxide sits inside and outside your cells in low levels, ready and waiting to be generated in greater amounts as soon as a pathogen is detected by the immune system by NADPH Oxidase (NOX). Its presence in your human body (at varying amounts depending on whether infection is present), and the lack of toxic metabolites, are indicative of its safety and nontoxic nature. Similarly, as noted by Brownstein, hydrogen peroxide is extremely safe to use and nebulize at the diluted levels suggested. It's also effective. All pathogens studied to date have been found to succumb to hydrogen peroxide, albeit at varying concentrations and for different amounts of exposure. So, nebulizing hydrogen peroxide into the sinuses, throat and lungs is a simple, straightforward way to augment your body's natural expression of hydrogen peroxide to combat infection. While individual sensitivities to inhaled peroxide vary, even very low concentrations (below 3%) have been shown to reliably kill most pathogens.9,10,11,12 Through trial and error, Brownstein found 0.04% was the lowest concentration at which patients report significant improvement, which is why he recommends that level of dilution. Summary of TreatmentTo summarize, here's how I would treat myself or a family member:
The key is to have everything you need readily available. Have it in your possession before you need it. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure, so procure the nebulizer, peroxide and iodine before you get ill. If you're exposed to someone who is sick, you can use the nebulized peroxide as a prophylactic, but if you're healthy, it's not recommended to nebulize daily. For prevention, also make sure your vitamin D level is above 40 ng/mL. In the later stages of disease, NAC may be really useful. The MATH+ protocol developed by Dr. Paul Marik uses methylprednisolone, vitamin C, thiamine (vitamin B1) and heparin. Heparin is administered because COVID-19 is a blood disorder too. There are clotting complications, and the heparin seems to improve that. NAC also prevents platelet aggregation and abnormal blood clotting. It also reduces oxidative stress and increases glutathione levels, both of which play important roles in this disease. In my view, quercetin, zinc, glutathione, vitamin D and nebulized peroxide is a home run.
from http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2020/08/30/how-to-nebulize-hydrogen-peroxide.aspx Documentary filmmaker and BBC journalist Adam Curtis has developed a cult following for his eccentric films that combine BBC archival footage into artistic montages combined with dark narratives that create a unique storytelling experience that’s both journalistic and entertaining. His latest film, “HyperNormalisation,” came out in 2016 and is perhaps even more apropos now, as many have the feeling that they’re waking up to an unprecedented, and unreal, world anew each and every day — and so-called fake news is all around. The term “HyperNormalisation” was coined by Alexei Yurchak, a Russian historian.1 In an interview with The Economist, Curtis explained that it’s used to describe the feeling that comes with accepting total fakeness as normal. Yurchak had used it in relation to living in the Soviet Union during the 1980s, but Curtis used it in response to living in the present-day U.S. and Europe. He said:
Living in a Fake, Simple World“HyperNormalisation” tells the story of how politicians, financiers and “technological utopians” constructed a fake world over the last four decades in an attempt to maintain power and control. Their fake world is simpler than the real world by design, and as a result people went along with it because the simplicity was reassuring. The transition began in 1975, when the film describes two world-changing moments that took place in two cities: New York City and Damascus, Syria, which shifted the world away from political control and toward one managed instead by financial services, technology and energy companies. First, New York ceded its power to bankers. As noted in The New Yorker:
In Damascus, meanwhile, conflict between Henry Kissinger and Syrian head of state Hafez al-Assad grew, with Kissinger fearing a united Arab world and Assad angered that his attempts at transformation were fading. “Kissinger’s theory was that instead of having a comprehensive peace for Palestinians, which would cause specific problems, you split the Middle Eastern world and made everyone dissatisfied,” Curtis said.4 Further, “In Curtis’ view, the Syrian leader pioneered the use of suicide bombing against Americans,” The New Yorker explained, which then spread throughout the Middle East, accelerating Islamic terrorism in the U.S. While the roots of modern society can be traced back much further — millennia — Curtis chose to start “HyperNormalisation” in 1975 due to the economic crisis of the time. “1975 is when a shift in power happened in the Middle East at the same time as the shift in power away from politics toward finance began in the West,” he told Hyperallergic.5 “It’s arbitrary, but I chose that moment because those two things are at the root of a lot of other things we have today. It’s a dramatic moment.” The film then takes viewers on a timeline of recent history that appears as though you’re seeing bits and pieces of a scrapbook, but which ultimately support the larger message that the world is being controlled by a powerful few while the rest of us are willing puppets in the play, and we’re essentially living in an unreal world. Being Managed as IndividualsAccording to Curtis, mass democracy died out in the early ‘90s, only to be replaced by a system that manages people as individuals. Politics requires that people be in groups in order to control them; parties are established and individuals join the groups that are then represented by politicians that the group identifies with. The advancement of technology has changed this, particularly because computer systems can manage masses of people by understanding the way they act as groups — but the people continue to think they’re acting as individuals. Speaking to The Economist, Curtis said:
He compares it to a modern ghost story, in which we’re haunted by yesterday’s behaviors. By predicting what we’ll like based on what we did yesterday, we’re inundated with messages that lock us into a static, unchanging world that’s repetitive and rarely imagines anything new. “And because it doesn’t allow mass politics to challenge power, it has allowed corruption to carry on without it really being challenged properly,” he says,7 using the example of extremely wealthy people who don’t pay taxes. Although most are aware that this occurs, it doesn’t change:
A Complex Documentary for an Oversimplified TimeWhile the crux of “HyperNormalisation” is that people have retreated into a simplified world perception, the documentary itself is complex and borderline alarming. Its intricacies can be well explored, however, as it was released directly on BBC iPlayer, then passed around on the internet, such that it’s easy to replay it — or sections of it — again and again, something that wasn’t always possible with live television. Speaking with “HyperNormalisation,” Curtis said:
Watching “HyperNormalisation,” you’ll be confronted with seemingly unrelated snippets ranging from disaster movies to Jane Fonda, which will make you want to rewind and reconsider what you’ve just seen. And perhaps that’s the point. The gaps in the story compel viewers to do more research and ask more questions, and those willing to watch all of its nearly three hours of footage may find themselves indeed feeling like they’re climbing through a dark thicket, being led by only a flashlight, as the film’s opening portrays. Meanwhile, the theme of an overriding power funneling information to the masses in an increasingly dumbed-down format is pervasive, right down to the censorship being fostered by social media. Curtis narrates in the film:
Giant Corporations Behind the Internet’s Superficial Freedom“HyperNormalisation” also touches on the irony behind the “freedom” provided by the internet, which is that giant corporations are largely controlling it. “… [B]ehind the superficial freedoms of the web were a few giant corporations and opaque systems that controlled what people saw and shaped what they thought. What was even more mysterious was how they made their decisions about what you should like and what should be hidden from you,” the documentary states. And as Curtis noted, “I’m not trying to make a traditional documentary. I’m trying to make a thing that gets why you feel today like you do — uncertain, untrusting of those who tell you what is what. To make it in a way that emotionally explains that as much as it explains it intellectually.”10 On the topic of social media, Curtis described social media as a scam, telling Idler Magazine:11
Technology, largely in the form of social media, feeds into the forces at play that are spreading a state of powerlessness and bewilderment around the world, according to Curtis.12 This is fueled by anger, which prompts more intense reactions online, hence, more clicks and more money being poured into social media. It’s Curtis’ goal to create an emotional history of the world, which he plans to create using decades’ worth of BBC footage from around the world. His next project is to explore Russia, then China, Egypt, Vietnam and Africa, telling stories that people want to hear but probably won’t otherwise, due to the altered state of reality we’re living in. To explore more, check out Curtis’ past works, which include “The Power of Nightmares,” which explores the use of fear for political gain, and “The Century of the Self,” which explores Edward Bernays’ — Sigmund Freud’s nephew — use of his uncle’s theories to create the public relations industry and gain political power.13 from http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2020/08/29/hypernormalisation-documentary.aspx Whether or not to wear a mask has become one of the most hotly contested debates of the COVID-19 pandemic. While the question of whether or not school children should wear them is causing divisions among parents and within neighborhoods, potentially sparking legal challenges, it's become an added layer of stress on the children.1 As most public health officials are pushing face masks, social distancing and a potential vaccine, by and large they are ignoring the role a healthy lifestyle plays in reducing the severity of COVID-19 illness. In fact, this disquieting pandemic has presented a unique opportunity for public health officials to create better awareness about healthy lifestyle choices that improve overall health, reduce the risk of infection and lessen the severity of any infectious disease. Unfortunately, it appears as if their focus is not on health and wellness of the people they serve, but rather on creating an environment in which pharmaceutical agendas can be pushed as better options. For example, Reuters writes that the public can expect an “overwhelming” vaccine campaign in November, and includes comments from an unnamed senior administration official:2
As time marches forward, and pharmaceutical companies scramble to release the first vaccination for public distribution, it’s important that members of the public are suitably groomed to accept and even welcome a vaccine that may well come with a high price tag. So far, keeping the mask debate front and center has worked to the advantage of Big Pharma. NEJM Reverses Opinion and Sends Mixed MessagesIn May 2020, five authors published an article in the New England Journal of Medicine in which they explored the need for personal protective equipment in a public setting. By the second paragraph they had acknowledged several facts:3
They concluded by saying:
Within months, three of the authors began to backpedal. In a subsequent letter to the editor it appears as if they are calling for universal masking at home rather in a public place, such as the grocery store or department store. They wrote:4
The newest letter highlights the mixed messages the public is being fed and appears to contradict their newest call for universal public masking since they underscore the knowledge there is a higher transmission in households. What Does the Evidence Show?The debate about the effectiveness of masks had been going on long before COVID-19. Nearly a century ago, surgical masks were introduced to help protect patients during surgery. Yet, the question remains as to whether this established routine is necessary.5 In one study published in 2016, scientists found no difference in the infection rates of patients who were undergoing clean surgery, whether the surgical team was masked or unmasked.6 A clean surgery was defined as one in which the lungs, gut, genitals and bladder were not involved. The authors of another study sought to determine whether wearing a mask during the cold season could help reduce the number of health care professionals who got sick.7 They recruited workers in a tertiary care hospital where it’s likely they had greater-than-passing interactions with patients and coworkers. Data were collected for 77 consecutive days during cold season. In the group who wore a mask at work, there were significantly more headaches and no evidence the masks had a benefit in protecting the participants against getting a cold. Another team also compared the effectiveness of cloth masks in protecting health care workers.8 They used 1,607 participants at 14 secondary- and tertiary-level hospitals in Hanoi, Vietnam. The outcome measurement was a clinical demonstration of respiratory illness, flu-like illness or laboratory-confirmed respiratory infection. The team found that those who wore cloth masks had a higher rate of flu-like illness and all measured infections as compared to those who used medical masks. They believed moisture retention in a cloth mask, along with reuse and poor filtration were potential reasons for higher rates of infection among mask wearers. CDC Is Promoting Cloth MasksAs I've written before, the size of the virus matters. SARS-CoV-2 is a beta coronavirus that has a diameter between 0.06 microns and 0.14 microns.9 This is about half the size of most other viruses that tend to measure between 0.02 microns to 0.3 microns,10 and much smaller than bacteria that average 0.5 microns to 2.0 microns, against which masks are effective.11 Lab testing has shown that 3M surgical masks can block up to 75% of particles that measure between 0.02 and 1 micron.12 Cloth masks block between 30% and 60% of respiratory droplets, depending upon the material used. However, the virus is not restricted to staying within respiratory droplets and can be aerosolized to particles far smaller, which cannot be caught by any mask. The CDC is currently promoting the use of masks by the public as “a simple barrier to help prevent respiratory droplets from traveling into the air and onto other people when the person wearing the mask coughs, sneezes, talks, or raises their voice.”13 The study on cloth masks the CDC included in their list of recent studies, notes that while cotton is the most commonly used material, it is the weave density that makes a difference in filtration efficiency, and gaps that occur around the face can reduce the effectiveness of filtration by more than 60%.14 In a press release from July 14, 2020, the CDC affirmed that cloth coverings are a “critical tool in the fight against COVID-19. There is increasing evidence that cloth face coverings help prevent people who have COVID-19 from spreading the virus to others.” Dr. Robert R. Redfield, Director of the CDC, was adamant about the power of cloth face masks, saying:15
Yet Masks Are Not Effective Against VirusesWith the push to wear cloth masks, the CDC found that after people in the U.S. were advised to wear “cloth face coverings when leaving home, the proportion of U.S. adults who chose to do so increased, with 3 in 4 reporting in a national internet survey they had adopted the recommendation.”16 And yet, a policy review paper published in the CDC’s own journal, Emerging Infectious Diseases, did not support Redfield’s statement. The paper measured the effectiveness of masks against influenza (0.08 microns to .12 microns), which measures very close to the size of COVID-19.17 In it, the researchers reviewed "the evidence base on the effectiveness of nonpharmaceutical personal protective measures … in non-health care settings," and found no evidence of benefit:18
Although masks are “not usually recommended in non-health care settings,” they are not making a recommendation for mask use by people who are asymptomatic in the community.19 Universal Masks Remind People To Be CompliantWithout strong scientific evidence to back up recommendations for using cloth masks or surgical masks during flu season or during the COVID-19 outbreak, governmental agencies around the world seem to be using the recommendations to prod the public into compliance with their mostly unsubstantiated and often conflicting demands.20 This may have a far deeper and long-term meaning, as Patrick Wood suggests in this video after years of investigation. But, in either case, the use of fear and the requirement for mask wearing are the first steps in pushing people into submitting to an agenda. Despite the lack of evidence, the World Health Organization continues to make a case for universal mask wearing. In a June 5, 2020, report, after listing the health-related reasons for wearing masks and discussing concerns about the practice, they include a list of “potential benefits/advantages” that have little to do with personal health, and more to do with learning submission, likely in preparation for future “recommendations.” These include:21 • "Reduced potential stigmatization of individuals wearing masks to prevent infecting others or of people caring for COVID-19 patients in nonclinical settings" — In other words, we should all wear masks to make people caring for COVID-19 patients feel more accepted, as if that's a significant problem. • "Making people feel they can play a role in contributing to stopping spread of the virus" — i.e., masks, while providing a false sense of security, make people feel like they're "doing something" to help. Put another way, it makes people feel virtuous and "good." • "Reminding people to be compliant with other measures" — In other words, people are expected to go along with what they’re told to do. • "Potential social and economic benefits" — This is perhaps the most ludicrously strained reason of all. According to the WHO:
Your Mask Is Useless Without These GuidelinesIf you do choose to wear a face mask, then it’s important to strictly follow these guidelines. As this short video demonstrates, just one slip of your hand and you are depositing bacteria on your face, making the mask ineffective against even the bacteria it can filter. This shouldn’t be scary since you’ve likely been walking around without a mask for years before this, including during cold and flu season. While the symptoms of these two viruses are not the same, they are respiratory viruses like SARS-CoV-2. They measure about the same size and are transmitted the same way. These are the strategies the WHO recommends for reducing the potential of infecting yourself:22
from http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2020/08/29/nejm-says-masks-dont-protect-you.aspx While U.S. media and self-appointed “fact checkers” claim the use of vitamin C against COVID-19 is nothing but fake news and dangerous nonsense, the Chinese have been hard at work looking at vitamin C against this pandemic illness. One source where you can find pertinent research material is the Orthomolecular Medicine News Service website,1 which has published more than a dozen reports on this topic. Earlier this year I interviewed Dr. Andrew Saul, editor-in-chief of the Orthomolecular Medicine News Service, about vitamin C against viral illnesses such as COVID-19, in which he reviewed some of its established benefits. Importantly, vitamin C is an essential component of immune cell function, it has potent anti-inflammatory effects and at high doses even works as an antiviral. Vitamin C is a foundational component of two distinct and highly effective treatment protocols developed by Dr. Paul Marik — one for sepsis and another, called MATH+, specifically for COVID-19. I’ve reviewed both protocols in previous articles. COVID-19 Patient Brought From Brink of Death by Vitamin CAn August 10, 2020, MedPage Today article2 highlights a recent case3 history in which high-dose IV vitamin C was successfully used to save the life of an elderly patient. A 74-year-old woman was admitted to a Flint, Michigan, hospital after suffering with low-grade fever, dry cough and shortness of breath for two days. She’d recently undergone a knee replacement procedure, and her knee is now red, swollen and painful, suggesting infection has set in. Over the next 24 hours, her condition continued to worsen, despite treatment with oxygen, antibiotics and other drugs. Her RT-PCR test also came back positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection. As reported by MedPage Today:4
By day 7, the woman’s family requested she be placed on high-dose IV vitamin C, and over the next 24 hours, she received 11 grams total. Two days later, her condition began to gradually improve, and on day 10, a second chest x-ray revealed considerable improvement of both the pneumonia and interstitial edema, at which point she was extubated. The patient’s breathing continued improving over the following five days.
Take-Home Message: Fight for the Treatment You WantRemarkably, while suffering from severe COVID-19 infection, septic shock and ARDS — and being on mechanical ventilation — this elderly woman made a full recovery. According to the doctors who reported the case, she was the first patient to successfully discontinue mechanical ventilation early at that hospital. The median duration of mechanical ventilation for COVID-19 patients is 10 days, whereas this patient was able to get off it in five. A key take-home message from this story is that the IV infusion of vitamin C was done at the insistence of her family. It’s an excellent example demonstrating that when things are going sideways, you need to step in and push for the care you want. You have that right. It’s also an example of why it’s so important to have an advocate to speak up for you when you’re admitted to the hospital. This woman was placed on mechanical ventilation, which means she was sedated and was in no position to make any of her own decisions. Fortunately, her family knew about the potential benefits of vitamin C and insisted it be tried. In doing so, they saved her life. As noted by MedPage Today:6
Yes, Doctors Are Using Vitamin C Against COVID-19While the U.S. media continues to censor claims that vitamin C can be useful against COVID-19, many practicing physicians and medical researchers are taking it seriously, primarily based on previous studies showing benefit against sepsis, viral illnesses and ARDS. For example, in one 2019 trial7 involving 167 ICU patients with sepsis and ARDS, IV vitamin C at a dose of 50 mg per kilo every six hours for 96 hours significantly reduced mortality and shortened ICU stays. At day 28, mortality was 46.3% in the placebo group compared to 29.8% in the vitamin C group, and the number of ICU-free days was 7.7 in the placebo group compared to 10.7 in the vitamin C group. The mean difference in ICU stay was 3.2 days. Back in March 2020, Northwell Health, the largest hospital system in New York, also reported that vitamin C was being “widely used” against COVID-19 within its 23 hospitals, in conjunction with hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin (an antibiotic). As reported by the New York Post, March 24, 2020:8
COVID-19 Studies UnderwayIn China, improvements among COVID-19 patients receiving vitamin C have been so consistently observed that they’re actually looking into it as a stand-alone treatment.9 The trial,10 which began in February 2020, is expected to have results by the end of September 2020. As detailed in the clinical trial description:
Research is also underway at the Cleveland Clinic in Florida.11 Here, they will investigate whether newly diagnosed COVID-19 patients are less likely to require hospitalization when given vitamin C and zinc. They’ll also assess whether the combo might reduce disease severity and duration. The goal is to enroll 520 patients and start them on the supplements within two days of diagnosis. Vitamin C Recommendations and GuidanceFor the actual treatment of sepsis and/or COVID-19, the dosages needed generally require IV administration. That said, Dr. Robert Rowen, whom I’ve interviewed about the use of vitamin C and ozone therapy for COVID-19, suggests taking upward of 6 grams (6,000 mg) per hour for acute illness, to simulate intravenous administration levels. While doses higher than 20 grams per day of oral non-liposomal vitamin C typically result in loose stools, you can take up to 100 grams (100,000 mg) of liposomal or IV vitamin C without encountering such problems. Prophylactically, it is not recommended to take such high doses, however. In fact, I discourage people from taking mega doses of vitamin C on a regular basis if they're not actually sick, because in high doses it is essentially a drug — or at least it works like one — and doing so could result in nutritional imbalances. For example, taking large doses of vitamin C on a regular basis lowers your level of copper, so if you are already deficient in copper and take high doses of vitamin C, you can actually compromise your immune system. So, instead of taking it all the time, simply start mega-dosing at the first sign of symptoms of illness, and continue until symptoms recede. Yet another alternative that I’m starting to think might be even better than vitamin C is nebulized hydrogen peroxide at 0.1% dilution. You can find more information about this in “Could Hydrogen Peroxide Treat Coronavirus?” I’ve recently come across examples of people with moderate to severe COVID-19 illness who rapidly recovered after this simple treatment. I’ll be discussing that in a future article. ContraindicationsThe only contraindication to high-dose vitamin C treatment is if you are glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G6PD) deficient, which is a genetic disorder.12 G6PD is required for your body to produce NADPH, which is necessary to transfer reductive potential to keep antioxidants, such as vitamin C, functional. Because your red blood cells do not contain any mitochondria, the only way it can provide reduced glutathione is through NADPH, and since G6PD eliminates this, it causes red blood cells to rupture due to inability to compensate for oxidative stress. Fortunately, G6PD deficiency is relatively uncommon, and can be tested for. People of Mediterranean and African decent are at greater risk of being G6PD deficient. Worldwide, G6PD deficiency is thought to affect 400 million individuals, and in the U.S., an estimated 1 in 10 African-American males has it.13 from http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2020/08/28/iv-vitamin-c-coronavirus.aspx In the U.S., the Food and Drug Administration is the foremost agency responsible for protecting public health. But an agency cannot look out for the public’s best interest if it is riddled with “systemic corruption and wrongdoing.” Those where the words used in a letter to the president of the United States, dated April 2, 2009, from the FDA’s Office of Device Evaluation.1 The letter’s signees have been redacted, but Sarah Kotler, the FDA’s director of the Division of Freedom of Information, who not only is privy to, but has custody of, official records from the FDA, said in a sworn affidavit that the letter is certified and authentic.2 It details that Dr. Frank M. Torti, who at the time was the FDA’s acting commissioner and first chief scientist, abruptly left the agency after the press revealed evidence of serious wrongdoing. However, “many other FDA managers who have failed to protect the American public” were not held accountable and remained in their positions, even after the following offenses:3
Top FDA Leaders Ignored Science and the LawIn one example of wrongdoing, the letter describes a federal district court judge’s decision to overturn the FDA’s restrictions on the Plan B emergency contraception pill in order to make it available over-the-counter.4 The judge said the FDA’s decision to restrict access to the pill was “arbitrary and capricious because they were not the result of reasoned and good faith agency decision-making.”5 Instead of making a decision based on science, the FDA’s motives were political in nature and once again failed to put public health first, the letter alleges. Even top officials at the agency were pressured to conform to the agency’s motives or risk retaliation in the form of job loss or demotion. The letter reads:
Honest FDA Employees Fear the Dishonest EmployeeFDA physicians and scientists also wrote a letter in 2008 to the House Energy and Commerce Committee to advise that FDA officials had distorted the scientific review process of medical devices and then retaliated against those who spoke out. It came out in January 2009 that the FDA had approved a medical device to detect breast cancer even though FDA experts had advised against its approval on three separate occasions. The New York Times again described the actions as politically motivated, and FDA physicians described a culture of dishonesty and fear of reprisal. In a letter from FDA scientists to John Podesta, former White House Chief of Staff, dated January 7, 2009, it’s stated:
After The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal published stories in 2009 detailing the FDA’s “improper political influence” and other wrongdoing, FDA attorneys and Torti sent an agency-wide email telling employees they “must comply with … obligations to keep certain information … confidential … [including] email to and from employees within FDA [that document the] deliberative process” and threatening that “violation … can result in disciplinary sanctions and/or individual criminal liability.” Further FDA documents show Torti and other top FDA officials attempted to cover up manipulations of the scientific review process for a knee implant medical device, in which a committee of outside experts were misled and manipulated. It was concealed, for instance, that one of the publications used to support the device was written, in part, by researchers with affiliations to the device manufacturer.7 Culture of Wrongdoing Is LongstandingThe patterns revealed in the letter reveal a longstanding pattern at the FDA, including the approval of medical devices against the opinions of scientific staff, even when the opinions were unanimous and in cases where the devices showed no clinical benefit and higher risks of death. The letter revealed:
Perhaps it’s not surprising, then, that a revolving door also exists between FDA officials and Big Pharma — and a much-used one at that. Research published in The British Medical Journal (BMJ) suggests conflicts of interest are rampant, as a concerning number of FDA employees leave the agency to work for the drug industry.9 The researchers analyzed data on FDA hematology-oncology drug approvals from 2006 to 2010 along with medical reviews conducted from 2001 to 2010. They then discovered the subsequent jobs of the former FDA medical reviewers that worked on those drug approvals. Out of 55 people, 15 left their job at the FDA to work or consult for the biopharmaceutical industry (another 29 continued working at the FDA in some capacity while the rest of the jobs could not be determined). Cozy Ties Between the FDA and Big PharmaEven past FDA Commissioners are likely to end up taking a position with the pharmaceutical industry. After leaving the top leadership position at the FDA, nine out of the last 10 commissioners in the past 33 years have gone on to work for pharmaceutical companies. This stretch began when Arthur Hayes went on to join E.M. Pharmaceuticals in 1986 after resigning as commissioner in 1983.10 The last to join this group is the most recent FDA commissioner, Scott Gottlieb, who joined Pfizer as a member of their board.11 During his term at the FDA, Gottlieb pushed several policies intended to speed up drug approvals and use the power of the FDA12 to encourage greater use of biosimilars, or generic copied versions of more costly biologic drugs used to treat autoimmune diseases and some cancers.13 One manufacturer of biosimilar drugs is Pfizer, which had complained about perceived roadblocks to making these drugs more available. With Gottlieb on the board of directors at Pfizer, this may help the company navigate the FDA rules and regulations more easily. Although the FDA has been in focus, other government agencies, including the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, raise similar concerns. In 2002 Dr. Julie Gerberding was the first woman to be appointed as a director for the CDC.14 While there she overhauled the structure of the organization causing many of the senior scientists and leaders to leave, as she replaced them with those who had ties to the vaccine industry. During her years at the CDC, the FDA approved the Gardasil vaccine for human papilloma virus vaccination manufactured by Merck. In 2009, Gerberding left the CDC and later became the president of Merck’s vaccine division.15 Similar to the FDA, a group of senior CDC scientists in 2016 sent a letter to the CDC raising concerns about the conflicts of interest and industry ties that appear to be so common among CDC leaders.16 The letter specifically addresses several areas of “particular concern,” including:
Meanwhile, while greenlighting drug approvals, the FDA has been targeting natural treatments like CBD oil and, rather than cracking down on the prescription opioids that are the root of the opioid epidemic, the FDA has gone after a natural plant called kratom. Making Smart Health DecisionsWhen it comes to making health decisions for yourself and your family, it’s crucial to do your research from legitimate independent sources to get the truth. Due to rampant conflicts of interest, you can’t always blindly trust the health organizations that state they’re looking out for public health. If you’re trying to address a health issue, make full use of all the resources available to you, including your own common sense, philosophical framework and reason. Ideally, you’ll also have a trusted holistic health care practitioner who can help to guide you and ensure you’re making positive choices to further your health at a foundational level. from http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2020/08/28/documents-reveal-governments-corruption-wrongdoing.aspx It seems that COVID-19 vaccine mandates are inevitable. According to Reuters,1 the U.S. government is planning to launch an "overwhelming" COVID-19 vaccine campaign come November, and many — especially Bill Gates — have suggested that vaccination of the entire global population2 will likely be necessary to get COVID-19 under control. Some have even suggested that the vaccine be mandatory.3 Billions of dollars have been invested in vaccine development, and one would be foolish to imagine these companies and investors are not going to do everything in their power to turn COVID-19 into a profit maker, and that may well include the use of force. It's still unclear exactly when a vaccine will be available, but it could be as early as October, or as late as January 2021. Prepare for Massive Brainwashing CampaignYale University is also conducting a trial4 to determine the type of message that will maximize acceptance and uptake of the COVID-19 vaccine. Messaging slants under investigation include:5
The study will also determine:
Many initially assumed most people would grow increasingly eager to get vaccinated considering the panic being whipped up, but recent polling6,7 reveals Americans are actually more leery than usual about the vaccine. Only half of Americans say they actually want the COVID-19 vaccine once it becomes available; 27% say they will "definitely" refuse it and another 12% say they will "probably" refuse it. With resistance that high, it's no wonder researchers are digging into human psychology in an effort to sway public opinion. Moderna's mRNA Vaccine Caused Systemic EffectsMeanwhile, preliminary findings from Phase 1 trials seem to support initial suspicions that the COVID-19 vaccine might turn out to be unusually reactive. For example, Moderna's mRNA vaccine (mRNA-1273) caused systemic side effects in most participants, with higher dose groups faring the worst.8 The 45 volunteers were divided into three dosage groups — 25 mcg, 100 mcg and 250 mcg — with 15 participants in each. Even in the low-dose group, one participant (6%) got so sick he required emergency medical care. In the 100 mcg-dose group, systemic side effects were found in 80% of participants after the first dose, and 100% after the second dose. This is important to note, seeing how the coronavirus vaccine will be a two-dose regimen and most likely recommended to be repeated annually, just like the flu vaccine. In the highest dosage group, which received 250 mcg, 100% of participants suffered side effects after both the first and second doses.9 Three of the 14 participants (21%) in the 250-mcg group suffered "one or more severe events." Despite these worrisome results, the trial is being heralded as a success. Dr. Paul Offit, director of the Vaccine Education Center at Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, has been quoted10 saying we now know "that it's safe in 45 people," and that "it doesn't have a very common side effect problem." If 80% to 100% is considered uncommon, then just what level of harm must be inflicted in order for a vaccine to be viewed as having a questionable safety profile? It would seem no matter how unsafe the COVID-19 vaccine might end up being, we're going to be assaulted with highly evocative advertising designed to play on our most basic emotions. NVIC: Powerful Resource for Navigating Upcoming CrisisFounded in 1982, the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) is the oldest and largest consumer-led nonprofit organization in the U.S. that provides accurate and objective information to help people make informed health choices and prevent vaccine-related injuries and deaths. As explained by the NVIC, the organization:11
Register for NVIC's Vaccine Conference Held Online in OctoberThe public education provided by the NVIC is now more important than ever. The rapid movement by governments and the pharmaceutical industry toward mandatory COVID-19 vaccinations and the proposed tracking and tracing of all individuals under the guise of public health is a culmination of everything we have been talking about for decades. In 2010, the National Vaccine Information Center created the NVIC Advocacy Portal, an online communications tool that monitors vaccine-related state legislation and alerts residents when proposed bills are moving in their state. They also provide fact-based talking points you can share when contacting your legislators. Now, the NVIC has created a new website for its international public conference on vaccination. Due to fluctuating social distancing rules and COVID-19-related travel bans, this three-day conference will be held entirely online, October 16 through 18, 2020. The theme of this conference will be "Protecting Health and Autonomy in the 21st Century." I invite you to attend by registering now. Since the conference is virtual, you now have the rare opportunity to attend no matter where you live. You also can offer your personal support for this historic event by becoming an NVIC conference sponsor with a one-time donation of $250 or more, which gives you two tickets and family or organization name recognition. It also grants you lifetime access to the conference online. The NVIC would not have been able to keep the general admission ticket price affordable had it not been for the generous support of conference sponsors. >>>>> Click Here <<<<< Protecting Health and Autonomy in the 21st CenturyThe virtual conference, which will be professionally recorded and produced, will feature more than 40 distinguished speakers — including scientists, doctors, nurses, holistic health professionals, informed consent advocates, civil and human rights activists, educators, journalists, attorneys, legislators and faith-based community representatives — from the U.S. and other countries, who will address issues such as:
A listing of the presentations being offered can be found on the home page.12 The conference is divided into four primary themes:
As noted on the conference website, the goal of this 2020 conference is to:13
Now more than ever, your civil liberties are being threatened. There is a global effort by the World Health Organization, major pharmaceutical corporations in business partnerships with governments, and nongovernmental organizations like the Gates Foundation to vaccinate every man, woman and child on the planet against SARS-CoV-2, or keep you locked up indefinitely. NVIC's conference, "Protecting Health and Autonomy in the 21st Century," may be the most important conference you can attend at this crucial time, so please sign up now. I am one of the keynote speakers at the event and was saddened, but not surprised, that the event could not be held in a hotel and would have to be virtual. So, I hope you can join me for what promises to be an incredible learning opportunity. Remember, any profits generated from the event go to support NVIC's work through public education to prevent vaccine injuries and deaths and to protect vaccine choices and civil liberties, including freedom of thought, speech and conscience. >>>>> Click Here <<<<< from http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2020/08/27/health-and-autonomy-in-the-21st-century.aspx |
Nia Pure NatureThe Provider of premium Quality Health Products To Live Better Lives Archives
March 2022
Categories |