Earlier this year, I reported that carcinogenic N-nitrosodimethylamine (NDMA) had been found in certain blood pressure, heartburn and diabetes medications. As of February 2020, drugs recalled due to contamination with this poison included:1
In the case of valsartan, the three companies whose drugs were recalled in 2018 had all purchased the active ingredient from a Chinese company called Zhejiang Huahai Pharmaceutical Co. It’s one of China’s largest manufacturers of generics.3 Since 2018, the recall has been expanded dozens of times to also include losartan and irbesartan, made by more than 10 different companies with distribution in some 30 countries.4 As reported5 by Bloomberg in December 2019, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration checks less than 1% of imported drugs for impurities (or potency for that matter). Clearly, the regulatory system, which is meant to safeguard patients, is broken, and trust in drug manufacturers is often misplaced. Disturbingly, Bloomberg’s report6 suggests the NDMA contamination at Huahai may have been intentional, at least in the sense that profitability was prioritized over thorough quality testing and perfecting of novel manufacturing methods. What Is NDMA?NDMA is a water-soluble chemical known to cause cancer in animals. In humans, it’s classified7 as a probable carcinogen and causes serious liver damage and liver failure.8 According to the Environmental Protection Agency’s technical fact sheet,9 NDMA, which can form in both industrial and natural chemical processes, is a member of N-ni-trosamines, a family of potent carcinogens. “Potential industrial sources include byproducts from tanneries, pesticide manufacturing plants, rubber and tire manufacturers, alkylamine manufacture and use sites, fish processing facilities, foundries and dye manufacturers,” the EPA notes. However, we now know the chemical can also be produced during the manufacturing of drugs. Historically, there are several cases10 in which NDMA was used as a poison. In 1978, a German teacher's wife died after he put NDMA in her jam and a Nebraska man was sentenced to death that same year for spiking lemonade with it, killing two people. In 2013, a Chinese medical student died as a result of an April Fool's prank when NDMA was put into the water cooler, and in 2018, a Canadian graduate student poisoned a post-doctoral fellow by injecting it into an apple pie. Meanwhile, hundreds of millions of patients around the world have been taking drugs contaminated with this poison, oftentimes daily, for years on end. Can FDA Ensure Drug Safety?Bloomberg’s report11 reviews the history of how carcinogens like NDMA have crept into the generic drug supply, and raises serious questions about the FDA’s ability to ensure drug safety. The article features the story of Karen Brackman, who after taking generic valsartan for two years suddenly found herself with a diagnosis of a rare and aggressive liver cancer, despite having no family history of cancer, and no specific risk factors for it. As reported by Bloomberg,12 some of the contaminated valsartan pills contained as much as 17 micrograms of NDMA per pill, an amount estimated by European health regulators to give 1 in 3,390 people cancer. Brackman suspects she’s one of the unlucky ones. While generics are a boon to patients in that they’re far less expensive while still providing the same benefits, there’s more room for error as they also receive far less scrutiny by regulators, and manufacturers are trusted to regulate themselves. Most Active Ingredients Are Manufactured in China and IndiaAn estimated 80% of all active drug ingredients are manufactured in China and India, and overseas plants are rarely inspected by U.S. authorities. At present, the U.S. has just one FDA inspector’s office in China. In the case of valsartan, even when a plant is inspected and found wanting, it can take years before problems are addressed — if ever.
As David Gortler, a drug safety consultant and former FDA medical officer, told Bloomberg, “Valsartan is just the one we caught. Who knows how many more [tainted drugs] are out there?” Well, we now know the NDMA contamination affects many other drugs as well, including metformin, used by more than 78.6 million Americans as of 2017.14 Huahai’s MistakeBloomberg goes on to recount some of the historical details of Huahei, from its inception in 1989 to its current status as one of the largest generic’s companies in China, and the first Chinese company to gain FDA approval to export finished drugs to the U.S. — a generic HIV medication. When Novartis’ patent on Diovan (the brand name for its valsartan drug) expired in 2011, Huahai became one of the companies to manufacture valsartan for generic drug companies. Valsartan, being a simple compound to make and used daily by millions, looked like it could be just what Huahai needed to grow and improve its bottom line. Now, as explained by Bloomberg, if a company like Huahai wants to create its own version of a generic drug and then export it to the U.S., they must first get FDA approval. However, if they’re just manufacturing and supplying the active ingredient to a U.S. company that then produces the finished product, then FDA approval is not required. All they have to do is inform the FDA if there are any changes to the manufacturing process. In the case of Huahai’s valsartan, the company did make a change to its manufacturing process, but downplayed its significance. In November 2011, Huahai stopped using the solvent used by Novartis in the manufacturing of the brand name drug, and started using another called dimethylformamide (DMF). This turns out to have been a massive mistake, as side reactions ended up producing NDMA, which could not be removed from the drug. “The chemists at Huahai either didn’t realize that or didn’t consider it a potential hazard,” Bloomberg writes, adding that, in 2018, after the recall began, vice chairman of Huahai, Jun Du, told an FDA inspector that “The purpose of the change was to save money,” thus increasing their profits. The cost-savings were so substantial, it allowed Huahai to dominate the global market share for valsartan. Making matters worse, since Huahai’s patent was public, other generic companies copied the new, toxic, process. According to Bloomberg,15 this is “one reason so much of the world’s valsartan supply is now contaminated.” Incompetence or Intentional Poisoning?It’s hard to justify a defense of ignorance, though, seeing how the 2017 FDA inspector’s report noted multiple problems at the plant, including suspicious contaminants showing up in quality tests. Du claimed the tests showed “ghost peaks … from time to time for undetermined reasons.” In another instance, he referred to the residual spike showing in testing as “noise.” Huahai never investigated to determine what the contaminants might be, or how they got there. Instead, they simply omitted the incriminating tests from official reports. The FDA inspector recommended the agency issue a warning letter, which would have meant Huahai would have to pass another inspection before continuing its manufacturing. But the FDA didn’t send a warning letter. Instead, they urged Huahai to resolve the issues on their own — which they didn’t. Disturbingly, a lax FDA approach to inspections that reveal faked quality testing is not unusual. Bloomberg spoke to Michael de la Torre, who runs a database of FDA inspections. According to Torre, in the five years up to 2019, the FDA issued warning letters in response to faked data just 25% of the time. Bloomberg also recounts a number of quality problems discovered at Indian drug manufacturing plants. Clearly, FDA is failing in its mission to regulate the generics industry overseas. The industry is expected to regulate itself, and profit wins over quality concerns most of the time when no one is around to hold the companies accountable. A company is only as ethical and conscientious as the people running it. Quality problems are really not uncommon. The New Haven, Connecticut-based online pharmacy Valisure LLC tests every drug it orders, and reports rejecting more than 10% of all batches it receives — in some cases due to inaccurate amounts of active ingredient, in others due to contaminants or other inconsistencies in quality.16 Kevin Schug, analytical chemistry professor at the University of Texas, told Bloomberg17 Huahai “certainly should have caught” the NMDA contamination, and “should have modified the procedure to correct it.” Former FDA medical officer Gortler agreed, saying, “Any well-trained analytical chemist would know to check. If it’s not intentional, it’s incompetence. At some point, those are the same.” Valisure CEO David Light told Bloomberg that while people in the industry are well aware of the problems, the overwhelming consensus is that it’s not “their” problem. “There’s no liability at any one point,” he said. “The only element who cares in this whole global supply chain is patients.” The FDA didn’t send a warning letter18 to Huahai until November 2018, stating the obvious: The company should have anticipated the possibility that changing the process to use DMF solvent might cause problems, and when testing revealed anomalies, they should have identified the impurity. Brackman filed a lawsuit against Huahai in April 2019. About 140 others have also sued Huahai and other drugmakers involved in the valsartan recall, and lawyers are reviewing several hundred additional cases, Bloomberg reports. Bottom LineThis devastating and pervasive toxic exposure results largely from people’s reliance on using drugs as symptomatic bandages that in no way, shape or form treat the cause of the disease. They trust their physicians to help them but sadly they have been captured by the drug industry and are nearly universally clueless on how to identify and address the underlying cause of most diseases. That is why it is crucial to understand that YOU are responsible for your own health and need to use physicians as your consultants, and not implicitly trust them. If you provide your body with what it needs, it typically tends to self-correct and get better so you can avoid these dangerous medications which, rarely, if ever, resolve the foundational cause. Fortunately, this COVID-19 crisis has shown us the two most important physical strategies to optimize your health: vitamin D and metabolic flexibility. The ability to eliminate insulin resistance is a strategy that addresses the majority of illnesses that you will ever encounter in your lifetime. This is why time-restricted eating, eliminating industrially processed seed oils like soy, corn and canola oils, eating a cyclical ketogenic diet, exercising and sleeping well can improve, if not eliminate, most conditions that you would need to take medications for. As you can see, drugs can harm you just because they were made with shortcuts to increase company profits. When you follow these health principles you will decrease, if not eliminate, your need for these dangerous medications. You will also enjoy a high degree of health and freedom from the pain, disability and suffering associated with these conditions. from http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2020/09/30/ndma-in-generic-pills.aspx
0 Comments
Children’s Health Defense (CHD), founded by Robert F. Kennedy Jr., created “The Jab” video above, which highlights the gold rush that occurred for pharmaceutical companies when the World Health Organization declared swine flu a pandemic in 2009. While Big Pharma got richer, an experimental vaccine was hastily rushed to market, and thousands suffered adverse effects as a result. Now, in the midst of another controversial pandemic, we’re facing an eerily similar playbook — with pharmaceutical companies eager to cash in on the first COVID-19 vaccine, begging the question, “Are we are being played — again?”1 Pandemic Playbook: First, ‘The Trap’Pandemics have been coming and going around the globe for centuries, but in recent history they’ve been used as points of manipulation that have profited corporations, particularly pharmaceutical companies. In 2005, you may remember, the bird flu epidemic was predicted to kill from 2 million to 150 million people,2 but turned out to be a whole lot of hot air, and prompted me to write the book “The Great Bird Flu Hoax.” At the time, Nature Immunology published an editorial stating that the fear of bird flu had prompted government officials to prioritize developing plans to deal with pandemic influenza, and the WHO had named bird flu as the No. 1 health concern. “This heightened concern exists despite any evidence suggesting sustained human-to-human transmission of the potentially pandemic H5N1 strain of avian influenza virus,” according to the article.3 In the years that followed, WHO executed agreements — so called “sleeping contracts” — with European and African nations in the name of protecting people from a future global pandemic. The contracts stated that countries would buy vaccines in the event of a pandemic, but this would only be necessary if WHO declared a Phase 6 influenza pandemic.4 Both GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) and Baxter were named in contracts with the U.K. parliament, for instance, which stated the pharmaceutical companies would supply a pandemic influenza vaccine to the U.K. and were valued at £155.4 million (more than $206 million) over four years.5 “Unfortunately,” CHD noted, “the government officials who signed the contracts never suspected that GSK makes multimillion-dollar donations to the WHO in return for control over decisions that result in GSK windfalls.”6 WHO Changes Definition of PandemicIt was June 11, 2009, when WHO declared H1N1 swine flu to be a Phase 6 global influenza pandemic, even though it had only caused 144 deaths worldwide. That declaration put the sleeping contracts into an active state, to the tune of $18 billion directed to the production of H1N1 vaccines, including GSK’s Pandemrix. Prior to the pandemic’s declaration, WHO had defined a pandemic at the top of their Pandemic Preparedness website as follows:7
The 144-person death toll certainly didn’t seem to fit the description of an “enormous” number of deaths, but, conveniently, it didn’t matter because WHO changed their definition of a pandemic. According to CHD in “The Jab”:8
Pandemic Expert Panel Fraught With Conflicts of InterestLest anyone suggest that WHO, which received funding from GSK, wasn’t entirely unbiased in their decision to declare swine flu a pandemic, it should be noted that the opinion of an Emergency Committee from WHO’s International Health Regulations Review Committee was sought. The guidance of many of these leading experts benefited the pharmaceutical industry, but their identities were kept secret in order to “protect them from outside influences.”9 In 2010, however, a joint investigation by the BMJ and the Bureau of Investigative Journalism revealed troubling conflicts of interest between key panel members and the pharmaceutical industry. According to the BMJ:10
H1N1 Swine Flu Vaccine Caused NarcolepsyAs is the case with all vaccines, unexpected injuries can occur, but in the case of the ASO3-adjuvanted swine flu vaccine Pandemrix, GSK continued to promote the vaccine even as cases of adverse events rose. Pandemrix was released in Europe during the swine flu pandemic of 2009 to 2010. Its approval process was accelerated, with most safety and efficacy tests bypassed. At the time, the WHO tried to assure the public that this was safe, but at the same time they admitted, “Further testing of safety and effectiveness will need to take place after administration of the vaccine has begun.”11 Years later, Pandemrix (used in Europe but not in the U.S. during 2009-2010) was causally linked to childhood narcolepsy,12 a chronic neurologic condition in which your brain loses its ability to regulate sleep-wake cycles normally. As a result, this causes you to suddenly fall into a deep sleep at any point during the day, which is debilitating and seriously affects quality of life. Many cases of narcolepsy also involve cataplexy, which is the sudden loss of voluntary muscle control triggered by strong emotions or laughter. According to “The Jab”:13
Later, in 2019, researchers described a “novel association between Pandemrix-associated narcolepsy and the non-coding RNA gene GDNF-AS1”14 — a gene thought to regulate the production of glial cell line-derived neurotrophic factor or GDNF, a protein that plays an important role in neuronal survival. According to the researchers, “Changes in regulation of GDNF have been associated with neurodegenerative diseases. This finding may increase the understanding of disease mechanisms underlying narcolepsy.”15 Antiviral Drugs Also Fraudulently Stockpiled for PandemicsPandemrix is only one example of a pandemic medication gone wrong. Antiviral drugs like Tamiflu are another, yet are still recommended by government agencies like the U.S. CDC,16 despite long-standing studies questioning their effectiveness and safety. At one point, WHO even classified Tamiflu as an "essential" medicine and recommended that it be used “as soon as possible” after a flu diagnosis.17 WHO’s definition of “essential” is reserved for drugs "selected with due regard to public health relevance, evidence on efficacy and safety, and comparative cost-effectiveness."18 That status was downgraded in 2017, when the WHO moved Tamiflu from a “core” essential medicine to a “complementary” drug, which is used for those that are less cost effective.19 In a BMJ editorial, Mark Ebell, professor of epidemiology at the University of Georgia, called the move “far too late” and described a multisystem failure that allowed Tamiflu to become a blockbuster medication,20 once again in the name of potential pandemics:21
In 2019, a whistleblower lawsuit was filed against Tamiflu’s maker, Roche, alleging Roche duped the U.S. government into stockpiling Tamiflu while mispresenting its effectiveness. According to the suit, Roche knew Tamiflu was ineffective at fighting influenza pandemics but went ahead and “masterfully marketed this drug to fill Roche’s coffers at taxpayer expense.”22 COVID-19 Deja-VuThe unsettling question now, amid the COVID-19 pandemic, is whether another experimental vaccine will make it to market, padding the drug companies’ pockets further while putting lives at risk. Asking, “Will they get away with it this time?” “The Jab” notes:23
The earliest results from COVID-19 vaccine studies are starting to roll in, and they’re far from reassuring. Initially, public health officials had stated that a vaccine could be ready in an unprecedented 12 to 18 months. Now, there’s talk of accelerating vaccine delivery even further, with a target date of fall 2020.24 However, as noted by Barbara Loe Fisher, co-founder of the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC), based on the historical failures of past coronavirus vaccines, a fast-tracked COVID-19 vaccine could become one of the biggest public health disasters in history. And, no one involved is accountable or will face any repercussions, just as GSK was not held accountable for the narcolepsy cases caused by Pandemrix. Instead, they will all continue to profit. from http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2020/09/30/inside-scoop-on-covid-pandemic.aspx In a September 2020 interview with Axios on HBO, Melinda Gates said "It may be time for a reckoning" with social media's role in spreading disinformation. According to Axios:1
It's ironic, to say the least, considering the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation funds and influences mainstream media companies, which in turn write whatever the Gates desire, be it truthful or not, without disclosing their conflict of interest. Through its grants to the Leo Burnett Company, an ad agency owned by Publicis, the Gates Foundation is also financially linked to NewsGuard and HealthGuard, as both of these "fact-checking" sites are funded by Publicis. As such, Gates already has the power to pull strings and censor content they don't like. Gates Foundation Funds Scientific DisinformationThe Gates Foundation also has a history of funding disreputable and flawed to the point of being fraudulent science. What they call "disinformation" and "conspiracy theories" are to a large extent merely information exposing the Gates Foundation's own disinformation campaigns. Case in point: The Gates Foundation funds the MRC Centre for Global Infectious Disease Analysis to the tune of millions of dollars per year. The MRC Centre is the leading body advising world governments and the World Health Organization about infectious disease outbreaks. Neil Ferguson, a professor of mathematical biology at Imperial College London and co-founder of the MRC Centre, has produced a string of pandemic predictions that have turned out to be spectacularly incorrect:2,3 • In 2001, Ferguson's team produced a model for the spread of foot and mouth disease in British livestock, concluding that even in cases where there was no evidence of infection, animals had to be culled to curtail the outbreak. The projection led to the slaughter of more than 6 million cattle, sheep and pigs in the U.K. that year, costing the national economy an estimated £10 billion. As reported by Spectator:4
• In 2002, Ferguson predicted that by 2080, beef tainted with mad cow disease could kill up to 50,000 people, with a worst-case scenario killing 150,000.5 As of 2015, there had only been 177 human deaths attributable to Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease in the U.K., the human version of mad cow disease.6 • In 2005, Ferguson forecasted that 200 million people would die from bird flu. Meanwhile, in the real world, just 282 people died from bird flu, worldwide, between 2003 and 2009.7 • In 2009, Ferguson predicted the swine flu would have a case fatality rate of 0.3% to 1.5%, with the most likely fatality rate being right around 0.4%. Based on this model, the U.K.'s projected death toll was 65,000. Once the pandemic ended, it turned out to have a death rate of just 0.026%, killing just 457 Britons.8 • In 2020, Ferguson's Imperial College model for COVID-19, relied on by governments around the world, led to the most draconian pandemic response measures in modern history. It predicted9 the U.K. would be looking at a death toll of more than 500,000, and the U.S. some 2.2 million, if no action was taken. Based on the experiences of certain countries that chose not to lock down or mandate draconian disease prevention measures, such as Sweden, we can now see that authoritarian pandemic responses have had little if any beneficial impact. According to Ferguson, his woefully incorrect prediction was based on "undocumented, 13-year-old computer code that was intended to be used for a feared influenza pandemic," the National Review reported.10 Analyses11,12 of the problematic bugs in the code have been published by a software engineer on LockdownSceptics.org. According to the author, the Imperial College has made a number of false statements and claims about this code. In May 2020, Ferguson — nicknamed "Professor Lockdown" — resigned as government adviser to the U.K. after being caught breaking the very lockdown and social distancing rules he so strongly advocated for, to meet up with his married lover.13 Science for HireFerguson's predictions have been so far off the mark, fellow academics have started referring to him as "The Master of Disaster."14 Jan Schnitzer, a vascular biology expert and former scientific director of the Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center in San Diego is quoted15 saying Ferguson "dances on the edge of being a publicity-seeking charlatan." You'd think that with this kind of abysmal track record, funding would have dried up long before COVID-19 hit. But no. This is precisely the kind of convenient disinformation and gross overestimation of risk that Gates needs and relies on to drive his own vaccine and tech agendas forward. Gates also has close links to Dr. Anthony Fauci, a key member of the White House Coronavirus Task Force, so it's hard to imagine Fauci has not been given a few talking points here and there to help shepherd the masses. Fauci was a member of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation's Global Grand Challenges scientific board16 (described as a "family of initiatives fostering innovation to solve key global health and development problems"17) from 2003 until 2010, at which time he joined the Leadership Council of the Gates Foundation's Decade of Vaccines Collaboration.18 In 2012, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, of which Fauci has been the director since 1984, also began forging close ties with GAVI, The Vaccine Alliance.19 The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation founded GAVI in 1999 and has permanent seats on its board of directors.20 Gates' War on LifeIn a September 2020 article,21 environmental activist Vandana Shiva reviews Gates' global agenda and "war on life," highlighting the March 2015 TED Talk22 he gave in which he showed an image of a coronavirus. This, he said, was what "the greatest catastrophe of our time would look like," Shiva writes, adding:
Cryptocurrency System Based on Human Body ActivityShiva goes on to review a patent granted to Microsoft the last week of March 2020, for a cryptocurrency system based on human body activity. Everything from brain activity and body fluid flows to organ activity and various muscle movements is to be used to mine for cryptocurrency in this system. Coincidentally, the number on this patent is 060606. Remove the zeros and you end up with the ill-fated number "666," which also happens to show up in the monstrously unconstitutional U.S. surveillance bill H.R. 6666.
Ultimately, Gates vision, Shiva says, includes the colonization of our children's minds and bodies "before they even have the opportunity to understand what freedom and sovereignty look and feel like." To this end, Gates is working on reinventing education.
Indeed, the COVID-19 lockdowns and social distancing rules have repeatedly been referred to as "the new normal." If the technocrats get their way, there will essentially be three kinds of people in the world: The uber-rich top echelon to whom rules don't apply, digital slaves, and disposables — people who have no value in this new digital empire. If this doesn't sound like the life we want to live, we must, as Shiva proposes, resist. And we must start now.
Are We in a Deadly Dilemma?We now face what, for some, is a choice between two evils: Living with SARS-CoV-2, or continue hiding from it. I say "for some," because others have accepted the data showing that COVID-19, in terms of lethality, is no worse than influenza, poses an exceptionally low risk for people under the age of 40 and virtually no risk at all to young adults and children. The WHO has published data showing the overall infection mortality rate COVID-19 is about 0.6%,26 and according to CDC data27 released August 26, 2020, only 6% of the total COVID-19-related deaths in the U.S. had COVID-19 listed as the sole cause of death on the death certificate. A September 2, 2020 study28 found the overall noninstitutionalized infection fatality ratio was a mere 0.26%. Among those under the age of 40, the infection fatality ratio is 0.01%, while those over 60 have an infection fatality ratio of 1.71%. The estimated infection fatality rate for seasonal influenza is 0.8%,29 so this shows the only people for whom SARS-CoV-2 infection is more dangerous than influenza is those over the age of 60. Everyone else has a lower risk of dying from COVID-19 than they have of dying from the flu. White House coronavirus task force coordinator Dr. Deborah Birx also confirmed a lower than typically reported mortality rate when she, in mid-August 2020, stated that it "becomes more and more difficult" to get people to comply with mask rules "when people start to realize that 99% of us are going to be fine."30 In her August 16, 2020, Doctor for Disaster Preparedness31 lecture, Dr. Lee Merritt points out that based on deaths per capita, the death rate for COVID-19, worldwide, is a minuscule 0.009% (709,000 people have died from or with COVID-19 around the world, and the global population is 7.8 billion). So, the average person's chance of surviving this disease is 99.991%. Live Life or Hide Until You DieUnder normal circumstances, these data would convince just about everyone that COVID-19 is not a significant threat. Certainly, not sufficient to meekly relinquish our most basic human rights. Unfortunately, months of hardcore fear-mongering and censorship, largely spearheaded by Gates and the WHO, which Gates is the largest funder of, has led to a situation where people fear COVID-19 more than just about everything else. It is with that mindset that some people find themselves having to make a choice to either live with the threat of COVID-19, or continue hiding from it, which means ceasing to live indefinitely. As noted in an "open letter to world leaders" published on Secret-Retreats.com, the path of hiding:32
Meanwhile, the other path, the path of accepting the risks associated with life, COVID-19 included:
Bill and Melinda Gates' fight against "disinformation" is really a fight against facts showing that the technocratic takeover is not an inevitable outcome of a global pandemic, but rather the result of a long-term well-planned effort. If you haven't taken steps to extricate yourself from their digital grasp as of yet, now's the time to do it. For tips and guidance, see "Harvard Professor Exposes Surveillance Capitalism." from http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2020/09/29/gates-disinformation-in-social-media.aspx EcoHealth Alliance, a corporate-funded nonprofit organization that seeks to uncover novel viruses in the environment, has been working in China for decades, trapping bats and looking for previously unknown coronaviruses that could lead to a global pandemic.1 This may come as a surprise to many, but even more surprising is the fact that the research was carried out via a grant awarded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH).2 While the grant was initially supposed to continue through 2024, it was cut off in April 2020 as the COVID-19 pandemic gained steam, and U.S. intelligence agencies started to look into whether the coronavirus that started it all escaped from a biological laboratory in Wuhan, China.3 EcoHealth Alliance collaborated with the Wuhan Institute of Virology for years, collecting coronavirus samples from bats and investigating whether they could jump to humans,4 and the NIH told the nonprofit that the project “no longer fit with NIH goals and priorities.”5 In August 2020, however, the NIH pivoted, granting a new $7.5 million grant to EcoHealth Alliance — part of an $82 million award being split among 11 research teams looking into the origins of viruses and how they infect people. The controversial move means that EcoHealth Alliance’s work will continue, this time targeting Southeast Asia instead of China.6 EcoHealth Alliance’s Controversial Gain-of-Function ResearchGain-of-function (GOF) research refers to studies that have the potential to enhance the ability of pathogens to cause disease, including enhancing either their pathogenicity or transmissibility.7 Such research is by its very nature controversial, since there are clear risks should the information be misused or the pathogens escape (or are maliciously released). Further, Jonathan Latham, Ph.D., a molecular biologist and virologist and Allison Wilson, Ph.D., a geneticist, believe gain-of-function research performed at the Wuhan Institute of Virology played "an essential causative role in the pandemic."8 Peter Daszak, EcoHealth Alliance president, however, said that the funding cut to their China bat research project would pose a threat to the U.S. public health. "Once this pandemic is over, we know of hundreds of other coronaviruses that we've found evidence of in China that are waiting to emerge," Daszak said in an interview with NPR. "We are now going to be unable to know about the risk of that, which puts us completely at risk of the next pandemic."9 Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), which is part of the NIH, has also long backed dangerous GOF coronavirus research, including that conducted by EcoHealth Alliance. According to Newsweek:10
Daszak to Lead COVID-19 Task ForceOutrageously, Daszak has also been appointed to lead a task force examining whether COVID-19 may have leaked from a lab, as part of the Lancet Covid-19 Commission, which is looking into a variety of issues surrounding the pandemic and offering practical solutions.11 Part of the commission’s goal is to investigate the origins of COVID-19 and avert future zoonotic pandemics. While Daszak said he would head the investigation with an open mind, critics such as Filippa Lentzos, an expert on biological threats at King’s College London, wrote on Twitter, “Goodness. I can't imagine a lead investigator with more vested interests!”12,13 Not only has Daszak been widely criticized for spreading misinformation surrounding the origins of COVID-19 previously, but his longtime collaboration with the Wuhan Institute of Virology, which has been identified as the most probable source of a laboratory leak, is a glaring conflict of interest. If it’s found that COVID-19 did, in fact, leak from a lab, the work of Daszak’s EcoHealth Alliance could come under fire, and future funding could be put in jeopardy. As reported in GM Watch, “… if more scientists fail to speak out against his appointment as the Lancet Commission’s lead investigator, it will reflect the success of a censorship strategy that has not just allowed Daszak to evade serious scrutiny but to be put in charge of investigating himself and his associates.”14 Hundreds of Scientists Called for End of GOF Research in 2014In 2014, a series of accidents at laboratories led to more than 300 scientists to launch a petition calling for an end to gain-of-function research.15 The U.S. issued a temporary pause as a result16 but, according to Ronnie Cummins, co-founder of the Organic Consumers Association (OCA) and Alexis Baden-Mayer, OCA’s political director:
In the NPR interview, Daszak said he really doesn’t understand the rationale behind the funding cut from NIH,17 as they were only researching how coronaviruses may spread from bats to people. But as Cummins and Baden-Mayer explained in my interview with them (linked above):
Bat Virus Made Capable of Infecting Human Airway CellsIn 2015, the University of North Carolina collaborated with the Wuhan Institute of Virology, performing gain-of-function research in which bat viruses were manipulated to create a chimeric virus capable of binding to human upper airway cells. That particular virus was called SHC014-MA15.20 EcoHealth Alliance had funded the research with a U.S. grant,21 but this wasn’t mentioned by Nature, which quoted Daszak as saying the findings “move this virus from a candidate emerging pathogen to a clear and present danger.”22 Cummins and Baden-Mayer pointed out the irony of this statement:
In my previously linked article, they added:
NIH Conditions for Restoring Prior Grant Go UnmetEcoHealth Alliance’s new grant is distinct from the previous grant that funded the Chinese bat research. The new grant is intended to fund the creation of the Centers for Research in Emerging Infectious Diseases, or CREID, a network of centers focusing on different geographical regions. EcoHealth Alliance will be conducting research on coronaviruses and other pathogens that may emerge from bats, rodents and primates in Singapore, Thailand and Malaysia.24 As for their earlier grant, the NIH notified EcoHealth Alliance that they may restore its funding for the Chinese research if they meet certain conditions, including the following:25
According to NPR, “The scientist has been the focus of internet conspiracy theories suggesting she was in fact ‘patient zero’ for the coronavirus. The Wuhan Institute of Virology has previously said that the scientist in question was a graduate student who had finished her master's degree and moved on to other work.”26 EcoHealth Alliance has not met the conditions for the funding to be restored, with Daszak calling them “preposterous” and telling NPR, "I'm not trained as a private detective. It's not really my job to do that."27 The conditions do seem unusual, particularly for a U.S. government agency to be requesting of a nonprofit organization — unless, perhaps, they believe the organization knows something they don’t. NIH Investigation Reveals Rampant Undisclosed Ties to ChinaThe U.S. NIH is investigating 189 scientists from 87 institutions for undisclosed ties to foreign institutions, with 54 being fired or forced to resign as a result.28 Among them, 93% received undisclosed support from China, and many had active NIH grants while accepting foreign grants that were not disclosed. About 75% of those being investigated had received active NIH grants, and close to half had at least two of them. In all, 285 active grants totaling $164 million were counted among those being investigated. Such ties are rampant, and 133, or 70%, of the researchers being investigated did not disclose to the NIH that they had received foreign grants. More than half (54%) also did not disclose their participation in a foreign talent program, while 9% hid ties to a foreign company and 4% did not disclose a foreign patent.29,30 The investigation is part of larger efforts to limit threats to the U.S. economy and national security, as cutting-edge technologies and other information at the forefront of new industries that is being supported by federally funded research could be flowing into the wrong hands. A broader investigation is also ongoing, with NIH highlighting 399 scientists “of possible concern,” 121 of which the Federal Bureau of Investigation is also investigating. According to Dr. Michael Lauer, NIH’s deputy director for extramural research, after the NIH looked into the scientists “of possible concern,” 63% of the investigations came back positive, revealing the true scope of the underhanded dealings.31 Meanwhile, Fauci, who also supported GOF research on bird flu viruses 10 years ago,32 continues to support EcoHealth Alliance and their research into novel diseases, noting in a statement about the latest grants, “The CREID network will enable early warnings of emerging diseases wherever they occur, which will be critical to rapid responses.”33 In reality, should further GOF research be allowed to continue, it’s possible that it could “seed” another pandemic.34 Admittedly, it’s quite a coincidence that the very viruses undergoing gain-of-function research turned out to be the ones causing pandemics. from http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2020/09/29/bioweapon-labs-nih-funding-for-deadly-research.aspx Evidence showing vitamin D lowers your risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection, hospitalization, severe complications and death continues to mount. Most recently, a September 17, 2020, paper1 in PLOS ONE found people with lower vitamin D levels in their blood had a significantly higher risk of testing positive for SARS-CoV-2. Higher Vitamin D Lowers Risk of Positive SARS-CoV-2 TestThe lead researcher in this study was Dr. Michael Hollick, who is widely recognized as one of the leading vitamin D experts in the world. I have interviewed him twice in the past. He and his team used retrospective observational analysis of SARS-CoV-2 tests to determine whether vitamin D blood levels impacted positivity rates. Based on vitamin D results from the preceding 12 months and SARS-CoV-2 test data from mid-March through mid-June 2020 from 191,779 patients from 50 U.S. states, people with a vitamin D level of at least 55 ng/mL (138 nmol/L) had a 47% lower SARS-CoV-2 positivity rate compared to those with a level below 20 ng/mL (50 nmol/L).2 As noted by the authors:
The graph below, obtained from GrassrootsHealth,6 shows how the rate of positive SARS-CoV-2 results declines as vitamin D levels go up. Again, as you increase your vitamin D level from 20 ng/mL to 55 ng/mL, your risk of having a positive SARS-CoV-2 test result decreases by 47%. Even after adjustment for gender, age, ethnicity and latitude, the risk of having a positive test result was 43% lower among those with a vitamin D level of 55 ng/mL compared to those with a level of 20 ng/mL. I understand that the COVID-19 test may be worthless and counterproductive with its false positives, but it is the only metric we currently have to assess interventions. Vitamin D Lowers Infection and Hospitalization RatesThat higher vitamin D levels lower the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection (i.e., getting a positive test result) was also confirmed in an Israeli population-based study7,8 published in July 2020. This paper examined data from 7,807people tested for SARS-CoV-2 infection between February 1 and April 30 of 2020 who also had vitamin D test data available. Here, those with a vitamin D level above 30 ng/mL (75 nmol/L) had a 59% lower risk of testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 compared to those with a vitamin D level between 20 ng/mL and 29 ng/mL (50 to 74 nmol/L), and a 58% lower risk compared to those with a vitamin D level below 20 ng/mL (50 nmol/L). The graph below, from a GrassrootsHealth report,9 illustrates the findings. Vitamin D Lowers Hospital and ICU AdmissionsSeeing how higher vitamin D levels lowers your risk of testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 in the first place, it’s no surprise then that other data show higher vitamin D also lowers hospital and intensive care admissions. The Israeli analysis10 above, for example, found that among individuals who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection, those who had a vitamin D level below 30 ng/mL also had a 1.95 times (crude odds ratio) to 2.09 times (odds ratio after adjustment for demographics and psychiatric and somatic disorders) higher risk of being hospitalized for COVID-19. In other words, having a vitamin D level below 30 ng/mL about doubled the risk of being hospitalized with COVID-19. Vitamin D, when administered to hospitalized patients, can also lower their risk of needing intensive care. This was demonstrated by Spanish researchers in a small randomized clinical study11,12,13,14 published online August 29, 2020. They found hospitalized COVID-19 patients who were given supplemental calcifediol (a vitamin D3 analog also known as 25-hydroxycholecalciferol or 25-hydroxyvitamin D) in addition to standard of care — which included the use of hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin — had significantly lower intensive care unit admissions. Patients in the vitamin D arm received 532 micrograms of calcifediol on the day of admission (equivalent to 106,400 IUs of vitamin D15) followed by 266 mcg on Days 3 and 7 (equivalent to 53,200 IUs16). After that, they received 266 mcg once a week until discharge, ICU admission or death. Of those receiving calcifediol, only 2% required ICU admission, compared to 50% of those who did not get calcifediol. None of those given vitamin D supplementation died, whereas 7.6% in the standard care group perished. Vitamin D Lowers COVID-19 MortalityOther studies have also confirmed that higher vitamin D levels lowers your risk of complications and death from COVID-19. Among them is an August 2020 study17,18 published in the journal Nutrients, which found patients who had a vitamin D level below 12 ng/mL (30 nmol/L) had a 6.12 times higher risk of severe disease requiring invasive mechanical ventilation, and a 14.7 times higher risk of death compared to those with a vitamin D level above 12 ng/mL. An Iranian study19,20 published online in mid-July 2020 also found that patients with vitamin D levels above 30 ng/mL (75 nmol/L) had better clinical outcomes and a far lower risk of death. Among COVID-19 patients over the age of 40 who had vitamin D levels below 30 ng/mL, 20% died, compared to 9.7% of those with levels at or above 30 ng/mL. Among those with a vitamin D level of at least 40 ng/mL, only 6.3% died. Low Vitamin D Is a Risk Factor for Respiratory FailureYet another study, published in the Journal of Endocrinological Investigation in August 2020, found vitamin D deficiency was a common factor among hospitalized patients in Italy who had been diagnosed with COVID-19 related respiratory failure. As reported by GrassrootsHealth:21
According to the study authors:
How and Why Vitamin D Lowers COVID-19 RisksIn “Bradykinin Hypothesis Explains COVID-19 Complexities,” I reviewed how vitamin D lowers your risk of COVID-19 complications and death by inhibiting both cytokine22 and bradykinin storms.23 Vitamin D also:
All of these factors make it an important component of COVID-19 prevention and treatment. As temperatures and humidity levels drop — two factors that influence the viability of SARS-CoV-2 in air and on surfaces — it’s quite likely we’ll see a reemergence as we move into fall and winter. My #StopCOVIDCold campaign seeks to raise awareness about the importance of vitamin D optimization to prevent a resurgence of COVID-19 hospitalizations and deaths. The two reports, which you can download free of charge on the #StopCOVIDCold website, provide in-depth information about the biological mechanics behind vitamin D’s protective effects. Now, as the northern hemisphere heads into autumn, is the ideal time to check your vitamin D level and start taking action to raise it if you’re below 40 ng/mL (100 nmol/L). Experts recommend a vitamin D level between 40 and 60 ng/ml (100 to 150 nmol/L). An easy and cost-effective way of measuring your vitamin D level is to order GrassrootsHealth’s vitamin D testing kit. Once you know your current vitamin D level, use the GrassrootsHealth vitamin D calculator31 to determine how much vitamin D you might need to reach your target level. To optimize vitamin D absorption and utilization, be sure to take your vitamin D with vitamin K2 and magnesium. As explained in “Magnesium and K2 Optimize Your Vitamin D Supplementation,” taking magnesium and vitamin K2 can lower your oral vitamin D requirement by as much as 244%. Lastly, remember to retest in three to four months to make sure you’ve reached your target level. If you have, then you know you’re taking the correct dosage. If you’re still low (or have reached a level above 80 ng/mL), you’ll need to adjust your dosage accordingly and retest again in another three to four months. from http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2020/09/28/coronavirus-infection-rate-vitamin-d.aspx 1 Which of the following companies halted their Phase 3 COVID-19 vaccine trials in August 2020 due to a serious and unexpected adverse reaction in one of the participants, pending medical review?
2 According to polls, what percentage of Americans and Europeans say they do not plan to get a COVID-19 vaccine once it's licensed?
3 To minimize your risk of respiratory infections such as influenza and COVID-19, I recommend having a vitamin D level:
4 Which country recently decided to ban the sale of junk food to minors to combat comorbidities that worsen outcomes and increase the risk of death from COVID-19?
5 Which of the following are particularly prone to the negative impact of electromagnetic field (EMF) radiation?
6 Which of the following legislations shields vaccine manufacturers from liability and requires individuals who are injured by vaccines to sue the U.S. government for compensation instead?
7 Which of the following hypotheses speaks to SARS-CoV-2's manmade origin?
from http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2020/09/28/week-149-health-quiz.aspx Oregano (Origanum vulgare) is usually associated with Italian cooking, but it's believed to have originated in Greece. It’s closely related to marjoram (Origanum majorana) and the two have often been confused.1 A variety of oregano from Mexico (Lippia graveolens) was used for decades before being brought to America. It didn’t make an appearance in American cookbooks until after World War II. The herb that originates from the Mediterranean and from Mexico are slightly different. The Mexican herb has a stronger flavor, while the Mediterranean leaf is smaller, lighter in color and has a milder flavor. When choosing which to include in your cooking, the Mexico variety works well with spicy flavors and the Mediterranean complements Italian and Greek dishes. Origanum vulgare is a perennial plant that grows up to 3 feet high and 2 feet wide.2 It blooms between July and October with pinkish purple or white flowers. Oregano enjoys full sun and is a low-maintenance plant that attracts butterflies. It’s also resistant to drought and erosion. The herb is rich in phenols, which are natural phytochemicals that have beneficial antioxidant effects. The two most abundant are thymol and carvacrol.3 Oregano has been used in traditional remedies as a relaxant, pain reliever and antibacterial agent. It also offers immune system support.4 Oregano Oil Effective Against NorovirusAround the world, norovirus triggers nearly 20% of all cases of gastroenteritis leading to diarrhea and vomiting.5 In the U.S. it's the leading cause in people of all ages.6 Outbreaks usually happen from November to April; in years when there is a new strain, it can boost the numbers by 50%. Symptoms of norovirus infection include nausea, vomiting, stomach pain and diarrhea. Some people may also experience fever, body aches and headache.7 Symptoms develop from 12 to 48 hours after being exposed and most people are well from one to three days after the symptoms appear. Each year there are 900 people who die from norovirus, with 109,000 hospitalizations and up to 21 million cases. Many of the outbreaks occur in crowded locations such as nursing homes and schools.8 Despite the impact on health and the economy, no drugs are currently available for its prevention or treatment. In addition to this, many aspects of the virus are not known since it is difficult to culture human norovirus and there is no small animal model. Noroviruses have been identified in mice, cattle and pigs and of these the murine norovirus found in mice replicates in cell culture and small animals. For this reason, it is the strain of norovirus studied in the lab. Researchers have found that carvacrol, one of the primary components of oregano oil, is effective against murine norovirus. In one study, scientists used cell cultures and a side-by-side experiment with a cell binding assay and transmission electron microscopy. Viral infectivity dropped within 15 minutes of exposure to both oregano oil and carvacol, but using carvacrol alone was far more effective. The researchers concluded carvacrol could:9
Oregano oil and carvacrol are active against other bacterial agents found in the kitchen which can lead to food poisoning. In another study, researchers found that oregano essential oil could remove young and mature Staphylococcus aureus biofilms on stainless steel.10 Oregano Oil Active Against Intestinal Bacterial OvergrowthSmall intestine bacterial overgrowth (SIBO) is the term used to describe an abnormal rise in overall bacterial population of the small intestine.11 It can happen when surgery, disease or medications slow the intestinal tract, which creates a breeding ground for bacteria. This can negatively impact immune health since your gut microbiome regulates your immune homeostasis.12 Some of the health issues that can cause motility problems in the gastrointestinal tract include scleroderma, lupus and diabetes.13 The use of antispasm medications, the long-term use of proton pump inhibitors and the frequent use of antibiotics and narcotic medications all have been linked to SIBO. Excess bacteria can cause weight loss, malnutrition and diarrhea. The primary treatment options used by Johns Hopkins Medicine are the antibiotic rifaximin (Xifaxan), and in some cases a combination of rifaximin and neomycin. The condition has been studied in those who have disease affecting the intestines, such as irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). In one review of the literature, researchers identified 50 studies and found that more than 38% of people with IBS were positive for SIBO.14 The prevalence varied according to the type of test used for diagnosis and the risk rose for women, people of older age and those who had diarrhea with IBS. In another study researchers gathered data from 104 people who tested positive for SIBO. Participants completed a study intervention and subsequent testing.15 They were offered a daily regimen of rifaximin or herbal therapy for 4 weeks. The researchers used a combination of herbs to provide broad coverage. Oil of oregano was one of those chosen because it’s well-documented that it “directly kills or strongly inhibits the growth of intestinal microbes. Oil of oregano has other beneficial properties such as inducing apoptosis in human colon cancer caco2 cells.”16 At the end of the study, each person underwent a lactulose breath test (LBT) to check for the presence of SIBO. Of the patients who received herbal therapy, 46% had a negative follow-up compared to 34% of those using the rifaximin. There were 31.8% who did not respond to rifaximin and were offered herbal rescue therapy. Of those, 57.1% had a negative LBT after completing the treatment. The researchers concluded:17
Oil May Help Reduce Antibacterial ResistanceAntibiotic resistance is a threat to human health. Infections caused by antibiotic resistant pathogens are sometimes impossible to treat. Health experts have been warning for decades that the overuse of antibiotics in humans and agriculture would usher in a potential explosion of death from pathogens that were once easily treated. The Review on Antimicrobial Resistance was requested by the U.K. prime minister in 2014. The data suggested that drug resistant infections cause the loss of 50,000 lives each year in Europe and the U.S.18 Globally, that number is at least 700,000. However, another estimate suggests the number in the U.S. is far higher, at about 162,000 each year.19 In addition, experts predict the global number may rise to 10 million people each year by 2050.20 This is 2 million more than are expected to die from cancer that year. Essential oils, such as oregano oil, may help reduce antibiotic resistance. In one study, researchers evaluated the effectiveness of frankincense, lavender, lemon, thyme, oregano and myrtle essential oils against common pathogenic bacteria,21 including Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Escherichia coli, Enterococcus faecalis, Klebsiella pneumoniae and Staphylococcus aureus. These bacteria are responsible for several types of infections including gastrointestinal and dermal ailments. The researchers used aqueous and micellar extracts to determine the minimal inhibitory concentration (MIC) and minimal bactericidal concentrations (MBC). The oils with the most activity against the bacteria were oregano oil, lemon, lavender and thyme. Oregano oil had 64 times lower MICs and MBCs than ethylic alcohol. The bacteria that were most susceptible to it included methicillin resistant S. aureus (MRSA). Oregano and lavender aqueous extracts were active against K. Pneumoniae. The researchers concluded:22
Take Care When Choosing Your Oregano OilWhen purchasing oregano oil, take care to purchase from a trusted manufacturer because some sell adulterated oils. As I’ve written before, some oil may be made from products which do not provide the same health benefits. Oregano oil should be diluted in water or used with a carrier oil. My top choices are olive oil, coconut oil or jojoba. Test it on a small area of your skin when using it topically to be sure you don't have a reaction. The pure oil can be a moderate skin irritant and it irritates your mucous membranes as well, which is why it must be diluted before use. Don’t use it on sores or cuts. Clinical herbalist Michelle Lynde writes that the ideal ratio when diluting it for topical use is one part oregano oil to three parts carrier oil. A few drops of essential oil can also be added to a vaporizer or diffuser to help relieve the symptoms of allergies, sinusitis, chronic bronchitis and coughs.23 However, diluted oil should be avoided in women who are pregnant or nursing, and it should not be given to babies or children. People who have high blood pressure or a heart condition should also avoid using oregano oil. When taken internally, the taste can be strong. The diluted oil can be mixed with juice or honey or added to pizza sauce. from http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2020/09/28/oregano-oil-benefits.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. Dr. Peter Breggin, a psychiatrist, has written more than a dozen bestselling books on psychiatry and the drug industry. He's frequently referred to as “the conscience of psychiatry” because he's been able to successfully reform the psychiatric profession, abolishing one of the most harmful practices, namely lobotomies and other experimental psychosurgeries. He was the first to take a public stand against lobotomies as a young man, and was able to change the field as a result. He’s featured in Aaron and Melissa Dykes’ excellent documentary, “The Minds of Men.”1 Now 83 years old, Breggin has seen a lot, and in this interview, he shares his own evolution and experiences as a psychiatrist. His interest in psychiatry began at the age of 18, when he became a volunteer at a local state mental hospital.
Toxic PsychiatryBreggin eventually became the leader of that volunteer program. He and 200 other students painted the walls and took patients for walks. He asked the superintendent to assign one patient per volunteer aid, to build real relationships. The superintendent balked at the idea, but eventually gave in. Breggin tells this story in his book, “Toxic Psychiatry.”2
All of this is what motivated Breggin to go into psychiatry, in order to help reform the profession from the inside. Interestingly, as early as 1963, Jerry Klerman, who later became the highest-ranking psychiatrist in the federal government and a professor at Harvard, told Breggin there was no future in helping people strengthen their mental resilience. The future, Klerman told him, was in drugs, and using computers to decide which drugs to use. After his first year at Harvard medical school, Breggin left and went back to the Upstate Medical Center (University) in New York, where he had already done internship.
Breggin Spearheaded Drug-Free PsychiatryBreggin focused on helping people without medication. “I learned very quickly that the most disturbed people would calm down and relate when somebody cared about them, wasn't afraid of them, was interested in them and made no pretense of being superior to them,” he says. Drugs, he explains, were simply stifling the patients. While they might ease some of the suffering, that relief came at the expense of brain damage. Breggin goes on to tell the story of how he prevented the return of lobotomies and psychosurgeries — strategies in which the brain is purposely damaged through electric shocks, radium chip implants or puncturing the prefrontal area of the brain with an ice pick inserted next to the eyeball, for example. Breggin refers to lobotomies as a rape of the soul, the permanent mutilation of an individual’s selfhood, as damage to one area of the brain will harm the integration of the whole brain. As noted by Breggin, you cannot “plop out aggression” like a pit out of an olive. The brain doesn’t work like that. It’s an integrated organ and mental processes arise from integrated processes involving many different areas of the brain. He decided somebody had to stop the madness. And, while he received no support from any other well-known psychiatrist or professor, and came under vehement attack by the establishment, including threats of physical violence against himself and his family that at times necessitated the use of bodyguards. Breggin eventually succeeded. It’s a fascinating story, so I highly recommend listening to the whole interview. When asked why he took on this formidable fight, he says:
The Lawsuit That Ended LobotomiesThe end of lobotomies was brought about by a lawsuit filed by a young lawyer named Gabe Kaimowitz on behalf of a chronically hospitalized patient who had been promised release from the mental hospital if he underwent experimental psychosurgery. Breggin tells the story:
It’s important to realize just how important this was, to put a stop to the return of lobotomies and experimental psychosurgeries. It was widely accepted as a practical solution for all sorts of problems, including race riots and behavioral problems among young children. The beginning of the end of psychosurgery was the early 1970s. At that time, Breggin, who for most of his career struggled to get support, got the support of the Congressional Black Caucus, who could see the social consequences of psychosurgery being used on black children, as well as certain conservative Senators who thought it was immoral.
The Dangers of Speaking Out Against ProzacBreggin also had a hand in getting the word out about the dangers of Prozac. In his 1991 book, “Toxic Psychiatry,” he briefly mentioned Prozac is likely to do a lot of harm, and that there were already reports of the drug causing violent aggression. He was later asked to be the sole scientific expert to put together the science for several dozen lawsuits against Eli Lilly, in which patients or their families claimed the drug had caused violent episodes, suicide, homicide, mania or psychosis. The drama and intrigue surrounding this trial rivals any good spy novel, so for more details, listen to the interview. As just one example, at the time of his deposition against Eli Lilly, he, his wife and daughter all developed severe illness. By chance, a plumber they’d called in to fix a problem in the basement discovered the stovepipe for the gas heater had been disconnected and was laying out of sight, as if purposely hidden, pumping gas into the house. Before that, the family had received death threats, and Breggin had called the FBI. Agents claiming to be FBI had visited his family, but something obviously wasn’t right.
In broad strokes, the Eli Lilly trial turned out to be fixed in Eli Lilly’s favor and Breggin was set up to fail in his investigation. The plaintiffs lost the case and Eli Lilly was cleared of charges. Eventually, however, evidence emerged showing Eli Lilly lawyers had bribed some of the plaintiffs and arranged for a secret settlement provided they lost the case. A Supreme Court judge in Kentucky declared the trial a fraud and changed the verdict to “a secret settlement with prejudice.” When the judge decided to disclose the amount of the secret settlement, he was removed and replaced with another judge who decided the settlement amount was not to be disclosed as it might hurt Eli Lilly. The full details of this remarkable case can be found in Breggin’s book, “Medication Madness.”3 Electroshock Treatment — A Real-World ConspiracyOne psychiatric treatment Breggin has not been able to eliminate is electroshock treatment (ECT), which is actually starting to be used more and more. Breggin says:
On Neuralink and Transcranial Direct Current StimulationBreggin also discusses the hazards of transcranial direct current stimulation and Neuralink, a transcranial implant designed by the Elon Musk Company. Elon is probably doing this because he’s concerned about the integration of artificial intelligence, which is coming. He fears the human race could become subservient to artificial intelligence. He thinks one of the preservation strategies is to allow us to sort of keep pace with these advances. Breggin comments:
from http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2020/09/27/peter-breggin-toxic-psychiatry.aspx July 31, 2020, I wrote about a Hong Kong whistleblower scientist who claims1 the Chinese government and World Health Organization representatives in Hong Kong covered up the Wuhan outbreak, allowing it to spread unchecked around the world. In a Fox News interview in July 2020, the whistleblower, Dr. Li-Meng Yan — who worked at the University of Hong Kong School of Public Health, a top coronavirus research lab — said her investigation into the SARS-like outbreak in Wuhan could have helped prevent a global pandemic from developing, had her supervisors shared her findings. Yan was interviewed by Fox News again September 15, 2020 (above), this time about the report she just published, and Twitter promptly began censoring the interview from its platform.2 Yan claims her supervisor, WHO consultant Leo Poon, asked her to, secretly, investigate reports of a SARS-like illness spreading in Wuhan, China, in late December 2019. The Chinese government had refused overseas experts from getting involved, and Poon wanted her to figure out what was really going on. Yan turned to a professional colleague who works in the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention and had first-hand information about the outbreak. Yan was told there was likely human-to-human transmission occurring, as they had found family clusters of cases. The WHO, however, did not confirm the human-to-human spread potential for several weeks. On the contrary, an official WHO statement said the virus “does not transmit readily between people.” January 16, 2020, Yan was again asked to reach out to her contacts in China to see if she could learn more. Her CDC contacts were fearful, but it became clear that patients and front-line doctors were not being properly protected, and that Chinese authorities were trying to keep a lid on the flow of information. When she updated Poon, he told her to stay silent and not cross the Chinese government, or else they’d both be “disappeared.” The co-director of the University of Hong Kong School of Public Health laboratory, professor Malik Peiris, also stayed quiet. Yan told Fox News she believes WHO colluded with the China Communist Party (CCP) government to prevent information about the virus from coming out. The Yan Report Is Instantly CensoredBack in July 2020, Yan claimed she had proof that SARS-CoV-2 was manmade, and that once she released it, she would make it accessible to all. September 11, 2020, The Sun quoted statements made by Yan during a British TV interview that same morning, in which she said:3
Three days later, September 14, 2020, Yan and her Ph.D. colleagues, Shu Kang, Jie Guan and Shanchang Hu, published the report,4 “Unusual Features of the SARS-CoV-2 Genome Suggesting Sophisticated Laboratory Modification Rather Than Natural Evolution and Delineation of Its Probable Synthetic Route” on the preprint server Zenodo. On the morning of September 14, Yan posted a link to the paper on her Twitter account.5 Shortly thereafter, she posted another tweet saying Zenodo was “immediately hacked” once the report was posted. The following day, September 15, Twitter suspended her account.6 According to Yan’s report:7
Before I get into the content of Yan’s report, it’s worth noting that questions have arisen as to whether she might be “controlled opposition.” Her report also appears very similar to the work8 of Yuri Deigin. In a September 16 Twitter post, Deigin says:9
Interestingly, a formerly anonymous scientist has now stepped forward as one of the three co-authors of Yan’s paper. The anonymous scientist has detailed scientific evidence showing SARS-CoV-2 is a manmade virus, and that there appears to be a concerted effort to promote the idea that SARS-CoV-2 is a natural occurrence, in a blog called Nerd Has Power.10 I reviewed some of the key take-home points of this work in “Why Was Wuhan Lab Locked Down When Outbreak Began” and “Undetectable Engineering Methods Used to Create SARS-CoV-2.” Steven Mosher, president of the Population Research Institute (a nonprofit research group that exposes human rights abuses and the myth of overpopulation11) has previously noted that because Nerd Has Power “published his raw data, I and others have been able to check and verify his work.”12 In a September 14, 2020, Twitter post,13 Nerd Has Power identifies himself as Shu Kang, one of the four authors of the Yan report. “Like my co-authors, I stand by this report 100%,” Kang says. Yan Report Claims SARS-CoV-2 Was Genetically EngineeredAs of this writing, the Zenodo website is back up and Yan’s paper is again available for viewing. Below are a few chosen excerpts.14 (If you like, you can compare it to Yurin’s Medium article.15)
>>>>> Click Here <<<<<
Why Natural Origin Theory FailsYan’s paper goes on to explain why the natural evolution origin theory fails to hold water. She points out that were it the result of wholly natural evolution, its RBM would have to have been acquired either through a) an ancient recombination event followed by convergent evolution, or b) a natural and fairly recent recombination event. Yan dismisses the ancient recombination/convergent evolution option, stating, in part:16
She also dismisses the second, recent recombination event, option stating:17
Pangolin and Other Animals Are Unlikely Intermediary HostsThere is a third possibility for natural evolution, Yan notes, that of an intermediary host, but this theory also has a significant flaw. “The ZC45/ZXC21-like virus and a coronavirus containing a SARS-like RBM could have recombined in an intermediate host where the ACE2 protein is homologous to hACE2,” the paper states. It also added that several laboratories have reported that Sunda pangolins carrying coronaviruses with a near-identical receptor-binding domain to that of SARS-CoV-2 have been smuggled into China from Malaysia. Some have argued that these pangolins were likely intermediary hosts. There are several problems with this theory, however, including the following: • Even though Sunda pangolins have been sampled between 2009 and 2019, no coronaviruses have ever been found in those samples • Recent research shows the receptor-binding domain shared by SARS-CoV-2 and the reported pangolin coronaviruses binds 10 times stronger to the human ACE2 receptor than it does to the pangolin ACE2 receptor • Other research has demonstrated that none of the animal ACE2 proteins examined have more favorable binding potential to the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein than the human ACE2 receptor. According to Yan:18
Restriction Enzyme Digestion — The Smoking Gun?Yan goes on to review what she believes is the smoking gun proving SARS-CoV-2 is a laboratory creation. In a nutshell, she and her colleagues believe SARS-CoV-2 was created by swapping out the receptor-binding motif or RBM, not the entire spike protein. The feasibility of such a swap has already been proven by none other than Dr. Zhengli Shi, one of the researchers arguing for a natural origin of SARS-CoV-2 (as reviewed in this September 10, 2020, article19 on Minerva). According to Yan:
Yan’s paper also details evidence suggesting the Chinese scientists tried to cover their tracks to hide the genetic manipulation, and reviews how the furin-cleavage site in SARS-CoV-2 is further indication that genetic engineering was used. SummaryIn summary, Yan and colleagues propose SARS-CoV-2 was made using the ZC45/ZXC21 bat coronavirus as the backbone. The RBM in the spike protein was then manipulated to give the virus the ability to strongly bind to the human ACE2 receptor.
The diagram below illustrates the steps required to create SARS-CoV-2: Why the Cover-Up?As reported by Aksel Fridstrom in a September 10, 2020, article20 posted on Minerva, as well as a September 9, 2020, article21 written by Rowan Jacobsen in Boston Magazine, Alina Chan, a molecular biologist at the Broad Institute of Harvard and MIT, is yet another scientist who questions the zoonotic nature of SARS-CoV-2. Importantly, Chan discovered that SARS-CoV-2 has not evolved in the manner you’d expect had it jumped from an animal to a human. It sprang into action fully evolved for human transmission. Like Yan and several other scientists, Chan has come to the conclusion that the missing intermediate phase of evolution from animal to human transmissibility must have taken place in a lab. Chan published her paper,22 “SARS-CoV-2 Is Well Adapted for Humans. What Does This Mean for Re-Emergence?” on the preprint server bioRxiv May 2, 2020. As in most cases, the pushback she and her co-authors received was enormous. In his article,23 Jacobsen points out that one of the obvious reasons for this response is that “if the public and politicians really knew about the dangerous pathogen research being conducted in many laboratories, they’d be outraged.” Hence, “Denying the possibility of a catastrophic incident like this … could be seen as a form of career preservation.” Interestingly, The Lancet COVID-19 Commission, which has vowed to “leave no stone unturned” in its investigation into the origins of SARS-CoV-2 and the possibility of a lab escape, is being led by none other than Dr. Peter Daszak,24 a scientist who has already concluded the virus is natural. As the president of the EcoHealth Alliance, Daszak is also steeped in conflicts of interest, seeing how EcoHealth Alliance received grants from the NIH for coronavirus research that was then subcontracted to the Wuhan Institute of Virology. What’s more, the NIH is demanding EcoHealth Alliance produce records detailing its work with the Wuhan lab before further funding will be released.25 It seems the purpose for this “fix” is best summarized by a quote from Boston Magazine:26
Indeed, safeguarding the continuation of dangerous gain-of-function research would be a powerful motivator to preserve the zoonotic origin narrative. According to Chan, there are solutions, however. One would be to conduct this kind of research using “neutered viruses that have had their replicating machinery removed in advance, so that even if they escaped confinement, they would be incapable of making copies of themselves,” Jacobsen writes.27 Another would be to locate high biosafety level laboratories in sparsely populated areas rather than right smack in the middle of large cities. New Engineered Coronaviruses Are Under DevelopmentGetting to the bottom of where SARS-CoV-2 actually came from is important, because if it came from a high-security bioweapons lab, then it’s proof positive that something must be done to prevent a repeat. This is even more important now that biosafety labs around the world are looking at modifying live SARS-CoV-2 even further.28 As just one example, researchers at the University of Pittsburgh are looking to insert the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, which is what allows the virus to gain entry into human cells, into Bacillus anthracis, the causative agent of anthrax,29 an already devastatingly dangerous pathogen. Researchers are also arguing for infectious SARS-CoV-2 research to be permitted in biosafety level 2 laboratories, which have nowhere near the same level of biosafety procedures in place as BSL 3 and BSL 4 labs do. If the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic is in fact the result of a lab escape, then the responsible way forward is to halt all gain-of-function research until safety protocols are massively upgraded. If we really want to avert another catastrophe, this kind of research should probably be abolished altogether. Be PreparedAs it stands right now, the weaponization of pathogens continues unabated, and is likely to continue unless or until the public becomes sufficiently aroused to demand real change. In the meantime, it is important to make sure you’re prepared at home. I strongly recommend reviewing my interview with Dr. David Brownstein, in which he explains the benefits of nebulized hydrogen peroxide. It’s important to have something in your own arsenal to protect yourself against whatever they come up with next. I also added a new video to the page that describes how to do the nebulization therapy. This needs to be a central player in your emergency medical kit as I fully believe it could be the difference for many, especially the elderly, those who are vitamin D deficient and/or metabolically unfit and insulin resistant. I believe nebulized peroxide is one of the best options available for any respiratory virus, including even more dangerous ones than SARS-CoV-2 that are likely to be introduced in the future. from http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2020/09/27/chinese-whistleblower-coronavirus.aspx In this interview, Dr. Andrew Wakefield discusses the documentary1 "1986: The Act," which he produced. He also co-wrote and directed Del Bigtree's film "Vaxxed," which discloses the conspiracy within the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to withhold information about vaccine harms. Wakefield is now doing a tour promoting "1986: The Act," which is the best documentary I've ever seen on this topic. It's also one of two full-feature films included in the ticket price for the National Vaccine Information Center's international public conference on vaccination,2 which will be held online October 16 through 18, 2020. >>>>> Click Here <<<<< If you haven't signed up for that event yet, I encourage you to do that now. If you want to watch the film now, it's available online at 1986theact.com. A trailer is provided at the end of this article. The Wakefield ControversyWakefield, as many of you know, has been a controversial character within the vaccine field. He's been vilified like few others, to the point of losing his medical license — all because he, together with 12 other doctors, published a case paper suggesting there may be a possible association between measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine and development of autism in some children. In the interview, Wakefield gives his side of the story:
The Power of FilmAnother film made by Wakefield is "Who Killed Alex Spourdalakis?" It's the tragic story of a child destroyed by the medical system. After being prescribed 28 psychotropic medications and being chained to his bed, the boy was ultimately killed by his mother when she took his life to spare him further pain. The film turned out to be so powerful, after the state prosecutor in Illinois saw the film, he decided to release her from prison.
1986: The Act"1986: The Act," is a historical description of how the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 came into being, and how it radically changed the vaccine landscape forever. It's meticulously documented and, like a detective story, takes the viewer through the many twists and turns that brought us to where we are today. As explained by Wakefield, it's a complex story of legislation, litigation and medical science.
The film follows a husband and wife as they're expecting their first baby, late in life, and takes the viewer on the journey they go through as they begin their investigation of vaccines.
1976 Swine Flu Pandemic Paved Way for Liability ProtectionIn the interview, Wakefield reviews how the 1976 swine flu pandemic helped pave the way for the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 and the implementation of the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (NVICP).3 In many respects, the 1976 swine flu pandemic is the pandemic most closely resembling that of COVID-19, in that it stirred up tremendous fear, which led to the rushed creation of a vaccine. Americans were strongly encouraged (but not forced) to get the vaccine. Many died or were seriously injured by that vaccine, resulting in injury awards totaling about $3 billion. The 1976 flu vaccine fiasco was crucial in that it permanently altered the perception of vaccine risks for politicians and drug companies alike. As explained by Wakefield:
Children's Lives Sacrificed for Penny Profits"1986: The Act" discloses — through discovery documents from Mike Hugo, a plaintiff's lawyer in vaccine court — that the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act, and the liability shield it provides to vaccine manufacturers, is based on a grand lie. The pertussis vaccine had not been made as safe as it could. In fact, the vaccine manufacturer had a patent for a safer vaccine all the way back in 1937, but it was going to cost them a fraction of a dime more to manufacture that vaccine. So, they kept distributing the more dangerous whole-cell pertussis vaccine. Quite literally, children's lives were sacrificed for what amounts to pennies.
The Act Provides Little Protection or BenefitAs explained by Wakefield, in the years since its enactment in 1986, the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act has been so perverted and corrupted that, today, it provides little to no protection or benefit for those injured by liability-free vaccines. First of all, the very existence of the compensation program has been suppressed. Few people even know it exists, so when they or a family member is injured, they don't realize they have the right to seek compensation. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is supposed to inform the public about the program, yet they refuse to fulfill the mandate of Congress and notify people of the existence of this program. "They keep it quiet because they know if they tell people that vaccines can actually do harm, then people would resist vaccination," Wakefield says. Adverse Event Reporting System Misses 99% of Adverse EventsSecondly, vaccine safety informing, recording, reporting and research provisions were secured in the Act by parents of vaccine injured children but, after the Act was passed, most of those provisions were either substantially weakened by Congress through amendments to the law or HHS used rule making authority to get the safety provisions. A centralized Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) was created in Act that mandated doctors and other vaccine provides report vaccine-related hospitalizations, injuries and deaths to the federal government. Sadly, because Congress did not put any sanctions for doctors and other vaccine providers if they failed to report vaccine reactions to VAERS, a shocking less than 1% of all vaccine reactions that happen are ever reported to the government. As noted by Wakefield:
When the CDC learned of those results, rather than take action to do the necessary research to find out how many children were being harmed so vaccine reactions could be prevented, they basically ignored the Harvard Pilgrim report and didn't openly disclose the initial results. HHS Removed Common Vaccine Injuries From Injury TableThirdly, the HHS has also gutted the vaccine injury table, which lists the types of injuries recognized as being "common" vaccine injuries. If an injury is listed on the table, the individual will automatically receive compensation without having to go through the full legal process.
Autism Acknowledged, Then RevokedAs noted by Wakefield, the vaccine court made a serious "mistake" when they compensated Hannah Poling for a novel injury. By doing so, they created a precedent, and they had no idea just how common her condition was. When it dawned on them, something had to be done to downplay the real ramifications of the case.
What Awaits Us With the COVID-19 Vaccine?In closing, we discuss the potential ramifications of a mass vaccination program for COVID-19. There are already disconcerting signs that these novel, fast-tracked mRNA vaccines are a tragedy in the making, a 'la the 1976 swine flu vaccination campaign. AstraZeneca recently halted their global vaccine trials after one of its British participants developed transverse myelitis. Importantly, transverse myelitis is a recognized compensable table injury for a vaccine, so there's really no way to deny a potential vaccine link — but they did, by dismissing it with a report that the reaction was "either considered unlikely to be associated with the vaccine or there was insufficient evidence to say for certain that the illnesses were or were not related to the vaccine."4 Note that the commentary mentions "illnesses" in the plural — as it turns out there was a similar neurological event with one of the company's clinical trial participants in July. That event was attributed to a pre-existing, but "previously undiagnosed" case of multiple sclerosis. This — in a clinical trial participant that supposedly was carefully screened and judged healthy before being accepted into the trials. As to the case of transverse myelitis, Wakefield noted:
Where to Watch '1986: The Act'Again, "1986: The Act" is complementary if you sign up for the NVIC's international public conference on vaccination.5 For just $80, you get access to two films and nearly 40 expert speakers. Due to COVID-19 concerns and travel bans, the event will be held entirely online, October 16 through 18, 2020. If you don't want to wait, you can also access the film on 1986theact.com. >>>>> Click Here <<<<< from http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2020/09/26/act-of-1986.aspx |
Nia Pure NatureThe Provider of premium Quality Health Products To Live Better Lives Archives
March 2022
Categories |