How the war will end…
By Gilbert Doctorow | June 3, 2022
It has been my rule not to join the vast majority of my fellow political commentators at the scrimmage line in sterile debates of the one subject of the day, week, month that has attracted their full attention. Their debates are sterile because they ignore all but a few parameters of reality in Russia, in Ukraine. For them, ignorance is bliss. They do not stir from their armchairs nor do they switch channels to get information from the other side of the barricades, meaning from Russia.
I will violate this overriding rule and just this once join the debate over how Russia’s ‘special military operation’ will end. Nearly all of my peers in Western media and academia give you read-outs based on their shared certainty over Russia’s military and political ambition from the start of the ‘operation,’ how Russia failed by underestimating Ukrainian resilience and professionalism, how Putin must now save face by capturing and holding some part of Ukraine. The subject of disagreement is whether at the end of the campaign the borders will revert to the status quo before 24 February in exchange for Ukrainian neutrality or whether the Russians will have to entirely give up claims on Donbas and possibly even on Crimea.
As for commentators in the European Union, there is exaggerated outrage over alleged Russian aggression, over any possible revision of European borders as enshrined in the Helsinki Act of 1975 and subsequent recommitments by all parties to territorial inviolability of the signatory States. There is the stench of hypocrisy from this crowd as they overlook what they wrought in the deconstruction of Yugoslavia and, in particular, the hiving off of Kosovo from the state of Serbia.
I mention all of the foregoing as background to what I see now going on in Russian political life, namely open and lively discussion of whether the country should annex the territories of Ukraine newly ‘liberated’ by forces of the Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics with decisive assistance of the Russian military. By admission of President Zelensky yesterday, these territories now amount to 20% of the Ukrainian state as it was configured in 2014.
In the past several weeks, when Russia concentrated its men and materiel on the Donbas and began to score decisive victories, most notably following the taking of Mariupol and capitulation of the nationalist fighters in the Azovstal complex, leading public officials in the DPR, the LPR and the Kherson oblast have called for quick accession of their lands to the Russian Federation with or without referendums. In Moscow, politicians, including Duma members, have called for the same, claiming that a fait accompli could be achieved already in July.
However, as I see and hear on political talk shows and even in simple political reportage on mainstream Russian radio like Business FM, a counter argument has raised its head. Those on this side ask whether the populations of the potential new constituent parts of the RF are likely to be loyal to Russia. They ask if there is truly a pro-Russian majority in the population should a referendum be organized.
This is all very interesting. It surely is a continuation of the internal debate in Moscow back in 2014 when the decision was taken to grant Crimea immediate entry into the RF while denying the requests for similar treatment from the political leaders of the Donbas oblasts.
However, there surely are other considerations weighing in on the Kremlin that I have not seen aired so far. They may be likened to the considerations of France following the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989, when the possible reunification of Germany was the talk of the day. Sharp witted observers said at the time that President Mitterand liked Germany so much that he wanted to continue to see two of them. Today Vladimir Putin may like Ukraine and its brethren Slavs so much that he wants to see three or four of them.
To be specific, from the very beginning the number one issue for Moscow as it entered upon its military adventure in Ukraine was geopolitical: to ensure that Ukraine will never again be used as a platform to threaten Russian state security, that Ukraine will never become a NATO member. We may safely assume that internationally guaranteed and supervised neutrality of Ukraine will be part of any peace settlement. It would be nicely supported by a new reality on the ground: namely by carving out several Russia-friendly and Russia-dependent mini-states on the former territory of East and South Ukraine. At the same time this solution removes from the international political agenda many of the accusations that have been made against Russia which support the vicious sanctions now being applied to the RF at great cost to Europe and to the world at large: there will be no territorial acquisitions.
If Kiev is compelled to acknowledge the independence of these two, three or more former oblasts as demanded by their populations, that is a situation fully compatible with the United Nations Charter. In a word, a decision by the Kremlin not to annex parts of Ukraine beyond the Crimea, which has long been quietly accepted by many in Europe, would prepare the way for a gradual return of civilized relations within Europe and even, eventually, with the United States
©Gilbert Doctorow, 2022
Kiev accused of mass kidnappings
Samizdat | June 3, 2022
Donetsk People’s Republic (DPR) officials have accused Ukrainian special forces of conducting mass kidnappings against relatives of the Donbass and pro-Russian activists and politicians since the start of Russia’s military operation in Ukraine.
The accusations were made by DPR Human Rights Commissioner Daria Morozova during a briefing on Friday, in which she stated that the daughter of a DPR people’s militia officer had been abducted by Ukrainian Special Operation Forces in Kharkov.
According to the ombudsman, on April 16, Aleksandr Demchenko, the officer, was contacted by an unknown group of people who offered him “cooperation in exchange for cooperation,” warning him that if he refused then “anything could happen to his daughter.”
Demchenko says that the people, who claimed they were members of the Ukrainian Special Operation Forces, demanded that he become a traitor and provide them with lists of captured soldiers, prisoner exchange plans, and other documents with which the officer says he has nothing to do with.
An investigation into the matter has reportedly revealed there was no official arrest of Demchenko’s daughter Ekaterina, and that she was abducted along with her husband by Ukrainian special forces and is currently being held at a secret prison.
Ekaterina has since sent her father a video saying she is being treated fairly. She asked him to cooperate with the abductors in “a calm fashion.”
The ombudsman said that the only way to save the lives of the woman and her husband was to bring this situation to public attention, since any country in the world defines such actions as kidnapping and the illegal detention of people, and is punishable by law.
Morozova noted that such actions by Kiev have become more widespread since Russia launched its military offensive against Ukraine and are being carried out under guidelines coming from the US and the UK. She claims there are currently dozens of confirmed cases of people, including children, being abducted by Ukrainian special forces and subsequently being held in secret prisons, tortured both physically and mentally, and stripped of their human dignity.
Vasily Prozorov, the head of the UkrLeaks research project and a former member of Ukraine’s Security Service, noted that such practices by Kiev’s special services, intelligence service, and the Ministry of Defense are part of the methodology the US and UK have been implanting in Kiev since the mid 2000s.
He added that Kiev’s secret services, with the tacit consent of the West, have been playing by the methodology used by terrorist organizations. “Kidnapping, torture, murder – for all this they are given carte blanche by their visiting curators. There are dozens of secret prisons all over Ukraine, where the people they kidnapped have been kept for years.”
The DPR Prosecutor General’s office has officially launched several criminal investigations into the kidnappings, promising all the perpetrators will be found, identified, and put before a tribunal after the military operation is completed.
Israel-IAEA collusion: Grossi lands in Tel Aviv ahead of UN nuclear agency meet
Press TV – June 3, 2022
The chief of the UN nuclear agency has traveled to Israel and met the regime’s extremist premier Naftali Bennett, ahead of the body’s Board of Governors meeting on Monday.
The high-profile visit by Rafael Grossi also comes in the wake of the latest report by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) on Iran’s nuclear program amid a stalemate in Vienna talks to salvage the 2015 nuclear deal, called the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).
Iran has on many previous occasions cautioned the UN nuclear agency against allowing the Israeli regime to influence its independent mandate and decision-making.
On Thursday, during a phone call with his Singaporean counterpart Vivian Balakrishnan, Iran’s Foreign Minister Hossein Amir-Abdollahian described any political interference in the technical affairs of the IAEA as “unconstructive”.
He said during Grossi’s recent visit to Iran, the two sides had reached a mutually satisfactory agreement through a positive process.
However, the IAEA’s latest report last week drew Iran’s criticism, rejecting it as “unfair and unbalanced” that had deviated from the technical path under Israel’s pressure.
Earlier this week, Bennett accused Iran of stealing classified documents from the IAEA and using them to deceive international inspectors nearly two decades ago. Iran rejected the allegations as outright lies.
Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesman Saeed Khatibzadeh on Wednesday called the Israeli regime “the world’s #1 JCPOA hater” which he said also “happens to be NPT-denier and the only nuke-possessor” of the region.
“We know this. The world knows this. Time for E3/US to stop pretending to be asleep. They can pursue diplomacy—or pursue the opposite. We’re ready for both,” the spokesman said.
Israel is the Middle East’s sole, though undeclared, nuclear-armed entity, but it has never allowed the IAEA to inspect its nuclear sites. It has also refused to sign the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).
On the other hand, Iran’s nuclear energy program has been subject to the most intensive inspections. The Islamic Republic is a signatory of the NPT, but it continues to reel under harsh sanctions for working to benefit from the peaceful use of nuclear energy, like other countries.
On Friday, Bennett told Grossi that Israel would prefer a diplomatic resolution but could take unilateral action against Iran’s nuclear energy program.
Bennett “stressed (to Grossi) the importance of the IAEA Board of Governors delivering a clear and unequivocal message to Iran in its upcoming decision”, a
statement from the Israeli premier’s office said.
Warning to IAEA
The IAEA board of governors is slated to hold a meeting on Monday for which Britain, France, Germany, and the US have reportedly prepared a draft resolution to mount pressure on Iran.
The United States on Thursday confirmed that it will join Europeans in backing the resolution against Iran.
Iran has pledged a “firm and appropriate” response to any “unconstructive” move. “We will respond firmly and appropriately to any unconstructive action at the board of governors,” Khatibzadeh said on Wednesday.
China also warned that any confrontational moves at the upcoming meeting will only undermine cooperation between Iran and the IAEA, and disrupt the process to revive the 2015 nuclear deal.
Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Zhao Lijian said exerting pressure on Iran and the UN nuclear agency will escalate tensions and complicate the situation.
He called on Washington to make a political decision as soon as possible on the revival of the nuclear agreement and actively respond to what Iran’s legitimate concerns.
Iran has repeatedly stated that it is waiting for a response from the US on its proposals to revive the deal, but Washington has been dragging its feet on it.
Backdoor Vaccine Mandates
No Vaccine, No Interview
The Naked Emperor’s Newsletter | June 3, 2022
Many countries around the world introduced vaccine mandates over the past year. Fortunately, in the UK, there was a big enough backlash to make politicians think twice. Personally, I think it was the global change in narrative, from Covid to Ukraine, that provided the final nail in the coffin but hopefully the mandate resistance got the ball rolling.
Unfortunately, for many in the care home sector, this backlash against vaccine mandates came too late, with many employees either losing their jobs, forced to leave or redeployed to the metaphorical basement.
Frontline health and social care workers (including anybody who would have contact with patients, such as receptionists) were the next target for mandates. This is when things really started to change and the government made a massive last minute U-turn. Since then, the news has barely mentioned Covid, with the focus being on Ukraine instead.
Great, so vaccine mandates in the UK have gone for good? Not so fast. Certain jobs on the government website clearly haven’t got the memo.
The paragraph above comes from a job posting for a ‘Relief Support Worker’ role posted a few days ago.
Don’t worry, they would love to hear from you even if you are part of the filthy, unvaccinated population. But they won’t even consider interviewing you unless you have had your first jab. Come on guys, this is perfectly reasonably, you are unclean, we might catch something from you in the interview.
So, you have decided not to be vaccinated for a year and a half now, managed not to die, even though Joe Biden said you probably would do over the Winter but now you have to get vaccinated even though you may not even get the job.
If you are lucky enough to get the job, then you need the second jab before you start.
Just before the vaccination paragraph is this one.
Sounds like a good company to work for. They are passionate and inclusive but only passionate and inclusive if you aren’t one of those smelly, unvaccinated types. Get your jab, you savage, and then we’ll be really passionate and include you.
Vaccine mandates via the backdoor.
1,287,595 Injuries Reported After COVID Shots, Vaccine Injury Compensation Programs ‘Overwhelmed’
By Megan Redshaw | The Defender | June 3, 2022
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) today released new data showing a total of 1,287,595 reports of adverse events following COVID-19 vaccines were submitted between Dec. 14, 2020, and May 27, 2022, to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). That’s an increase of 9,615 adverse events over the previous week.
VAERS is the primary government-funded system for reporting adverse vaccine reactions in the U.S.
The data included a total of 28,532 reports of deaths — an increase of 220 over the previous week — and 235,041 serious injuries, including deaths, during the same time period — up 2,347compared with the previous week.
Excluding “foreign reports” to VAERS, 825,454 adverse events, including 13,150 deaths and 83,454 serious injuries, were reported in the U.S. between Dec. 14, 2020, and May 27, 2022.
Foreign reports are reports foreign subsidiaries send to U.S. vaccine manufacturers. Under U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulations, if a manufacturer is notified of a foreign case report that describes an event that is both serious and does not appear on the product’s labeling, the manufacturer is required to submit the report to VAERS.
Of the 13,150 U.S. deaths reported as of May 27, 16% occurred within 24 hours of vaccination, 20% occurred within 48 hours of vaccination and 59% occurred in people who experienced an onset of symptoms within 48 hours of being vaccinated.
In the U.S., 586 million COVID-19 vaccine doses had been administered as of May 27, including 346 million doses of Pfizer, 221 million doses of Moderna and 19 million doses of Johnson & Johnson (J&J).
Every Friday, VAERS publishes vaccine injury reports received as of a specified date. Reports submitted to VAERS require further investigation before a causal relationship can be confirmed.
Historically, VAERS has been shown to report only 1% of actual vaccine adverse events.
U.S. VAERS data from Dec. 14, 2020, to May 27, 2022, for 5- to 11-year-olds show:
- 10,958 adverse events, including 291 rated as serious and 5 reported deaths.
- 22 reports of myocarditis and pericarditis (heart inflammation).The CDC uses a narrowed case definition of “myocarditis,” which excludes cases of cardiac arrest, ischemic strokes and deaths due to heart problems that occur before one has the chance to go to the emergency department.The Defender has noticed over previous weeks that reports of myocarditis and pericarditis have been removed by the CDC from the VAERS system in this age group. No explanation was provided.
- 43 reports of blood clotting disorders.
U.S. VAERS data from Dec. 14, 2020, to May 27, 2022, for 12- to 17-year-olds show:
- 31,858 adverse events, including 1,833 rated as serious and 44 reported deaths. VAERS reported 44 deaths in the 12- to 17-year-old age group last week.
- 62 reports of anaphylaxis among 12- to 17-year-olds where the reaction was life-threatening, required treatment or resulted in death — with 96% of cases attributed to Pfizer’s vaccine. VAERS reported 63 reports in the 12- to 17-year-old age group last week.
- 654 reports of myocarditis and pericarditis with 642 cases attributed to Pfizer’s vaccine.
- 167 reports of blood clotting disorders with all cases attributed to Pfizer. VAERS reported 168 cases of blood clotting disorders in the 12- to 17-year-old age group last week.
U.S. VAERS data from Dec. 14, 2020, to May 27, 2022, for all age groups combined, show:
- 20% of deaths were related to cardiac disorders.
- 54% of those who died were male, 41% were female and the remaining death reports did not include the gender of the deceased.
- The average age of death was 73.
- As of May 27, 5,559 pregnant women reported adverse events related to COVID-19 vaccines, including 1,740 reports of miscarriage or premature birth.
- Of the 3,617 cases of Bell’s Palsy reported, 51% were attributed to Pfizer vaccinations, 40% to Moderna and 8% to J&J.
- 883 reports of Guillain-Barré syndrome, with 42% of cases attributed to Pfizer, 30% to Moderna and 28% to J&J.
- 2,294 reports of anaphylaxis where the reaction was life-threatening, required treatment or resulted in death.
- 1,722 reports of myocardial infarction.
- 14,064 reports of blood-clotting disorders in the U.S. Of those, 6,294 reports were attributed to Pfizer, 5,032 reports to Moderna and 2,699 reports to J&J.
- 4,213 cases of myocarditis and pericarditis with 2,583 cases attributed to Pfizer’s, 1,431 cases to Moderna’s and 185 cases to J&J’s COVID-19 vaccines.
COVID-19 shots for kids under 5 could begin by June 21, White House says
COVID-19 vaccines could be available for children younger than 5 as early as June 21 if U.S. health regulators clear the shots, White House coronavirus response coordinator Ashish Jha said Thursday.
According to The Washington Post, states can start ordering vaccines today, with 10 million initially available. The FDA vaccine advisors are scheduled to meet June 14 and 15 to discuss pediatric vaccines. The CDC will meet shortly after to sign off on the decision.
Pfizer and BioNTech on Wednesday submitted their request for emergency authorization of a three-shot regimen for children 6 months to 4 years old. Moderna submitted its request in April for a two-shot regimen for children 6 months to under 6 years old.
There are about 19 million children under 5 in the U.S.
Young males have highest risk of heart damage from COVID vaccines
Young males are more likely to report heart damage following vaccination with an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine, and the damage is more likely to be reported after the second dose, according to researchers who reviewed the scientific literature and vaccine injury databases in the U.K., EU and U.S.
Research published May 25 in The BMJ showed 18,204 reports of myocarditis and pericarditis were submitted to U.K., U.S. and EU regulators during the study period, beginning when the mRNA vaccines first rolled out until mid-March 2022.
In the U.S., 2,986 events following Pfizer’s vaccine and 1,640 events following Moderna’s vaccine were reported to VAERS.
According to the CDC, 124.12 million people were fully vaccinated with Pfizer and 75.57 million people fully vaccinated with Moderna during the study period.
For Pfizer, the reporting rate was 14.70 cases of myocarditis and 9.36 cases of pericarditis per 1 million fully vaccinated individuals. The combined rate of myocarditis and pericarditis is 12.03 cases reported per 1 million fully vaccinated individuals.
For Moderna, there were 12.35 cases of myocarditis and 9.36 cases of pericarditis reported per 1 million fully vaccinated recipients. The combined reporting rate of both myocarditis and pericarditis is 10.86 per 1 million.
There were 13,573 events of myocarditis and/or pericarditis reported in observational studies included in the systematic review of the literature, but these cannot help to calculate the overall rate of these adverse events.
Vaccine injury compensation programs overwhelmed by thousands of reports
Federal programs compensating people who suffered injuries from vaccines or COVID-19 pandemic treatment are facing so many claims that thousands of people may not receive payment for their injuries for a long time, Politico reported.
The first program, the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP), has too little staff to handle the number of reported injuries resulting from pediatric vaccines such as polio and MMR, leaving thousands of patients waiting years for their cases to be heard.
The second program, the Countermeasure Injuries Compensation Program (CICP), designed to compensate people for injuries caused by COVID-19 vaccines and countermeasures, has seen unsustainable growth.
Between 2010 and 2020, the CICP received only 500 complaints. Since the start of the pandemic, it has received more than 8,000 complaints — 5,000 of which are related to COVID-19 vaccines.
To date, the CICP has paid zero claims, although it did approve one in December 2021.
Should COVID-19 vaccines become routine, any injuries would be handled by the already overwhelmed VICP. There are fears the public will mistake the situation for “too many injuries flooding the program,” which will lead to vaccine hesitancy.
Children’s Health Defense (CHD) asks anyone who has experienced an adverse reaction, to any vaccine, to file a report following these three steps.
© 2022 Children’s Health Defense, Inc. This work is reproduced and distributed with the permission of Children’s Health Defense, Inc. Want to learn more from Children’s Health Defense? Sign up for free news and updates from Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and the Children’s Health Defense. Your donation will help to support us in our efforts.
Fake Meat, Fake Breastmilk and Food Shortages
By Dr. Joseph Mercola | June 2, 2022
Fake food is being poised as a panacea to end world hunger and food shortages, but there’s nothing miraculous about synthetic, lab-made food. It can’t compare to food that comes from nature in terms of nutrition or environmental protection, and as we’re seeing with the mysterious infant formula shortages, when you’re dependent on fake food, your very survival is also dependent on the handful of companies that manufacture them.
With parents getting desperate in the search for infant formula, it’s eye-opening that campaigns haven’t been started to encourage new mothers to breastfeed — the best food for infants and one that also happens to be free and readily available in most cases. If you haven’t read my article on the best workaround for infant formula for those that are unable to breast feed, it is on Substack.
In the video above, you can watch a concerning timeline about why this may be, as Bill Gates appears to be behind the push to stop breastfeeding and encourage uptake of BIOMILQ, a cell-cultured “human milk” made in a lab,1 along with other varieties of fake food.
Bill Gates’ Formula for Disaster
In June 2020, Bill Gates announced startup company BIOMILQ, which is using biotechnology to create lab-made human milk for babies. Using mammary epithelial cells placed in flasks with cell culture media, the cells grow and are placed in a bioreactor that the company says “recreates conditions similar to in the breast.”2
This synthetic lab-made breast milk replacement raised $3.5 million in funding from Gates’ investment firm Breakthrough Energy Ventures.3 Gates has also contributed at least $319 million to the media,4 including The Guardian, allowing him to control and dictate what they print. The day after the Gates Foundation paid The Guardian its annual funding in May 2022, it released a hit piece on breastfeeding titled, “Turns out breastfeeding really does hurt — why does no one tell you?”5
U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) offers also seized 588 cases of infant formula from Europe in April 2021 because it lacked appropriate nutritional labeling. In February 2021, CBP officers said they inspected 17 separate shipments of infant formula from Germany and The Netherlands, leading to a warning against buying infant formula online from overseas.
At the time, Keith Fleming, CBP’s acting director of field operations in Baltimore, Maryland, said in a news release:6
“Consumers should be very careful when contemplating the purchase of items over the internet from an international source, because they may not get what they expect. People expect that the products they purchase comply with existing U.S. health and safety laws and regulations and they’ll be safe for them or their family. That’s not always the case.”
While warning Americans against purchasing infant formula from overseas, in February 2022 the U.S. Food and Drug Administration announced bacterial contamination at the Abbott Nutrition’s Sturgis, Michigan facility,7 which is behind the current infant formula shortages. While Gates is clearly behind the push to stop breastfeeding and encourage BIOMILQ in lieu of breastmilk or formula, the formula shortages highlight the risks of consolidated food production.
Abbott Enriched Shareholders While Formula Sickened Babies
Corporate consolidation is rampant in the U.S. baby formula market, of which 90% is controlled by four companies. Abbot is among them, responsible for 43% of baby formula production in the U.S.8 Yet, according to a whistleblower filing from October 2021, equipment at the company’s Sturgis facility was “failing and in need of repair.”
Pitting and pinholes reportedly existed in a number of pipes, allowing bacterial contamination. Leadership was aware of the failing equipment for up to seven years before the February 2022 outbreak, according to the whistleblower’s report.9
With equipment in need of repair, and a bacteria outbreak in their formula sickening babies, Abbott used its massive profits from 2019 to 2021 to announce a lucrative stock buyback program.10 According to The Guardian :11
“Abbott detected bacteria eight times as its net profits soared by 94% between 2019 and 2021. And just as its tainted formula allegedly began sickening a number of babies, with two deaths reported, the company increased dividends to shareholders by over 25% while announcing a stock buyback program worth $5bn.”
Speaking with The Guardian, Rakeen Mabud, chief economist for the Groundwork Collaborative, added, “Abbott chose to prioritize shareholders by issuing billions of dollars in stock buybacks instead of making productive investments.”12
Big Meat and Dairy Companies Dominate Fake Meat Industry
The increasing number of plant-based fake foods and lab-grown meat companies give the illusion that consumers are getting more choices and the food industry is becoming less consolidated. However, there are still relatively few firms that are controlling the global grab for “protein” markets.
In a research article published in Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems, Philip Howard, a faculty member in the department of community sustainability at Michigan State University, and colleagues explain how this “protein” industry convergence is further jeopardizing the resilience of the food system and reducing genetic diversity of livestock and crops:13
“Recent years have seen the convergence of industries that focus on higher protein foods, such as meat processing firms expanding into plant-based substitutes and/or cellular meat production, and fisheries firms expanding into aquaculture. A driving force behind these changes is dominant firms seeking to increase their power relative to close competitors, including by extending beyond boundaries that pose constraints to growth.
The broad banner of “protein” offers a promising space to achieve this goal, despite its nutritionally reductionist focus on a single macronutrient. Protein firm strategies to increase their dominance are likely to further diminish equity in food systems by exacerbating power asymmetries.”
Tyson and Cargill, two of the largest meat processors in the world, for instance, have invested in fake meat company Memphis Meats, which also has backing from Bill Gates and Richard Branson. Other billionaires invested in fake foods include Sergey Brin (Mosa Meat), Peter Thiel (Modern Meadow) and Marc Benioff (Eat Just).
“These companies wouldn’t be making these investments if they didn’t expect that the intellectual properties held by these start-ups will lead to monopoly profits,” Howard notes.14 In “The Politics of Protein,” a report from the International Panel of Experts on Sustainable Food Systems (IPES-Food), Howard explains:15
“Nearly every large meat and dairy processor/manufacturer has also acquired or developed plant-based meat and dairy substitutes, establishing footholds in a market that is growing approximately 20% per year.
More than a dozen of these firms have also invested in start-ups that are attempting to commercialize lab-grown meat and fish. Meanwhile, Vanguard and BlackRock — two of the world’s biggest asset management firms — have investments in almost all the largest meat, dairy, and animal feed companies.”
It is important to understand why all of these fake meat products are an absolute metabolic disaster relates to the fact that they are using vegetable fats to replace animal fats. Not only are they devoid of important vitamins like vitamin A and vitamin K2, but they are loaded with the dangerous omega-6 fat linoleic acid LA.
In some cases they contain up to 10 to 20 times the amount found in meats, which will radically contribute to diseases like diabetes, obesity, cancer and heart disease.
Lab-Grown Food Is an Environmental Catastrophe
The push for fake food is being made on the platform that it will somehow save the environment from the ravages of factory farming, which has devastated the environment with its concentrated animal feeding operations and monocultures. But this, too, is misleading.
In February 2021, the Good Food Institute (GFI), a nonprofit group behind the alternative protein industry, released a techno-economic analysis of cultivated meat, which was prepared by consulting firm CE Delft.16 In it, they developed a model to reduce the current costs of cultured meat production down to a point that would make it economically feasible in full-scale plants by 2030, a model they said is “feasible.”
In attempting to create cultured meat on the scale that would be necessary to feed the world, logistical problems are numerous and, possibly, insurmountable. There are waste products — catabolites — to deal with, as even cultured cells excrete waste that is toxic.
And, the oxygen and nutrients available must be adequately distributed to all the cells — something that’s difficult in a large reactor. Stirring the cells faster or adding more oxygen may help, but this can cause fatal stress to the cells.17
The environmental “benefits” are also on shaky ground when you factor in soy production as well as the use of conventional energy sources. When this is factored in, GFI’s life-cycle analysis found that cultured meat may be worse for the environment than conventionally produced chicken and pork.18,19
Farmer and historian John Lewis-Stempel also points out that the world’s farmers already produce enough food for the global population: “[A]ny discussion of global food policy needs to begin with one plain fact: there is … no actual food shortage. Already, the planet’s farmers produce enough food to cater for the projected 10 billion humans of 2050. The problem is waste and distribution.”20
Yet, the push for the creation of fake protein sources continues. In the foreword to Navdanya International’s report “False Solutions That Endanger Our Health and Damage the Planet,” Vandana Shiva also details how lab-grown foods are catastrophic for human health and the environment, as they are repeating the mistakes already made with industrial agriculture:21
“In response to the crises in our food system, we are witnessing the rise of technological solutions that aim to replace animal products and other food staples with lab-grown alternatives. Artificial food advocates are reiterating the old and failed rhetoric that industrial agriculture is essential to feed the world.
Real, nutrient-rich food is gradually disappearing, while the dominant industrial agricultural model is causing an increase in chronic diseases and exacerbating climate change. The notion that high-tech, “farm free” lab food is a viable solution to the food crisis is simply a continuation of the same mechanistic mindset which has brought us to where we are today — the idea that we are separate from and outside of nature.
Industrial food systems have reduced food to a commodity, to “stuff” that can then be constituted in the lab. In the process, both the planet’s health and our health have been nearly destroyed.”
Signs the Fake Meat Industry Is Stalling
For all of its fanfare, there are signs that the fake meat industry may be failing before it ever gets off the ground. Shares of Beyond Meat, for one example, lost $6 billion since March 2020 due to weak sales growth and has resorted to partnering with PepsiCo to release a plant-based jerky product.
“My analysis is the launch will do very little to increase the company’s fortunes,” writes business development consultant Victor Martino in Just Food.22 He argues that the “plant-based meat revolution” is just a PR stunt, a narrative that’s set to implode:23
“The fact is, despite increased product availability in terms of brand choices and added retail outlets, plant-based meat sales stalled in 2021, recording zero growth, according to recent research from SPINS, data commissioned and released by The Plant-Based Foods Association and The Good Food Institute.
According to the research, the total annual sales of plant-based meat in the US remained stable at $1.4 billion. That’s a continuation of the 1.4% share of total meat category sales.”
Shares of Beyond Meat and Oatly, a plant-based milk substitute, have lost more than half their value in 2022,24 but this isn’t to say that their executives are suffering. Beyond Meat’s former chief growth officer Chuck Muth sold shares valued at more than $62 million from 2019 to 2021, while Biz Stone, a current board member and Twitter co-founder, has made millions on Beyond Meat stock.25
The fact remains that when private companies control the food supply, they will also ultimately control countries and entire populations. Biotech will eventually push farmers and ranchers out of the equation and will threaten food security and human health. In other words, the work being done in the name of sustainability and saving the planet will give greater control to private corporations while weakening the population.
To save the planet and support your health, skip all the fake meat alternatives and opt for real food that’s being raised the right way instead. When you shop for food, know your farmer and look for regenerative, biodynamic and/or grass fed farming methods, which are bringing you truly sustainable food for a healthy population and planet.
Sources and References
- 1, 3 Rumble May 17, 2022
- 2 BIOMILQ, Our Science
- 4 MintPress News November 15, 2021
- 5 The Guardian May 9, 2022
- 6 U.S. Customs and Border Protection April 5, 2021
- 7 U.S. FDA May 17, 2022
- 8, 9, 10 Children’s Health Defense May 23, 2022
- 11, 12 The Guardian May 20, 2022
- 13 Front. Sustain. Food Syst., 16 August 2021
- 14 Civil Eats September 22, 2021
- 15 IPES-Food, The Politics of Protein, Executive Summary, Page 3
- 16 Techno-Economic Analysis for the production of cultivated meat February 2021
- 17, 19 The Counter September 22, 2021
- 18 LCA of cultivated meat – February 2021, Page 3
- 20 Unherd May 17, 2022
- 21 Children’s Health Defense April 5, 2022
- 22, 23 Just Food March 30, 2022
- 24 CNBC May 14, 2022
- 25 Michele Simon March 1, 2022
Global food crisis a result of policy mistakes by US and EU: Putin aide
Samizdat | June 3, 2022
The looming global food crisis that could result from skyrocketing food prices was enabled by a series of policy mistakes by Washington and Brussels, Maksim Oreshkin, economic adviser to Russian President Vladimir Putin, told RT.
The conflict in Ukraine alone could not have caused the crisis on such a massive scale, Oreshkin said.
The UN Food and Agriculture Organization’s international food price index shows that between April 2020 and April 2022, global food prices rose by more than 60%. The increase occurred for the most part before February 2022, when Russia launched its military operation in Ukraine.
In the four years from 2016 to 2020, the index grew by less than 7 points, but it increased by a whopping 27 points, from 98.1 to 125.7, in 2020-21. After the second year of the pandemic, the index stood at 141.1.
Since Russia’s military operation began, the index has risen by a further 17 points.
“Swings like that, with such huge increases in prices, are not happening due to one reason. It’s always a combination of a number of reasons which is leading to such a result,” Oreshkin, Russia’s economic development minister from 2016 to 2020, said.
He points to America’s overreaction to the Covid-19 pandemic as one of the first major factors that triggered the food price hikes. Since February 2020, the US “increased the money supply by almost 40%,” he said, adding that the $6 trillion the US printed to support its economy ended up flooding global markets, and led to the rise in food, commodity and energy prices.
Europe’s over-reliance on renewable energy, which drew resources away from food production, and on short-term gas contracts that led to gas price hikes in late 2021, are also significant factors, according to Oreshkin.
In early May, German Economic Cooperation and Development Minister Svenja Schulze said that the focus of some nations on green energy contributed to the food shortage. According to Schulze, up to 4% of biofuel in Germany is made from food and animal feed. “It needs to be reduced to zero, and not just in Germany but potentially internationally,” she told Bild at the time.
Oreshkin said these factors also led to a decrease in fertilizer production, which in turn hit harvests and drove up food prices. The waves of sanctions unleashed by the US and its allies on Moscow after the start of the military operation in Ukraine significantly exacerbated the crisis.
“It’s about a lot of sanctions imposed on the different fertilizer producers in Belarus, in Russia, it’s sanctions on ships, it’s sanctions on payments which halted trade,” he said, adding that Russia and Belarus both want “to export more food … more fertilizers,” but the “sanctions are blocking access to the global market and, of course, limit supply.”
According to Oreshkin, the 20 million tons of wheat supposedly blocked in Ukraine, which has become a hot topic among Western politicians and media, account for 2.5% of global wheat production. He also stated that Russia is prepared to partially substitute potential losses of Ukrainian wheat by exporting 13 million more tons this year than in 2021.
He also pointed to global food inequality as a root cause. “In reality, there is enough food on this planet,” but developed nations such as the US are simply consuming much more food than the others, he said, adding that people in the US consume on average “more than 50% calories per day more” than people around the world.
“They’re printing the money, they’re taking all the food, and of course they are taking the food from those who cannot afford it.”
He added: “if countries like the United States consume less, there will be enough food for everyone.”
Political West ‘shocked’ by polls indicating most of world population likes Russia
By Drago Bosnic | June 3, 2022
Russophobia is defined as a racist or supremacist attitude towards Russia, its people, culture, etc. It most certainly isn’t a new phenomenon and it has intermittently been spiking or subsiding at various historical stages. This is especially true for the political West and their client states, particularly those with predominantly (neo)liberal views. In the last several months, especially since the start of Russia’s special military operation, this hatred has reached levels which can only be described as borderline mass psychoneurosis. Oftentimes, it’s so extreme, that it should be treated by highly trained medical specialists such as psychiatrists and studied thoroughly by clinical psychologists.
There were some claims that anti-Russian sanctions and generally anti-Russian actions of various Western institutions, governments and supranational organizations were not aimed against the Russian people, Russian culture, language, etc. And yet, this is precisely what has been happening. Sanctions imposed on Russia were designed specifically to target and bring down the Russian economy. And it’s not even a conspiracy theory, as most Western leaders openly stated this was their primary goal.
This attempt didn’t only fail miserably, but it even backfired, sending Western markets into a frenzy of high inflation and economic stagnation (or even recession), otherwise known as stagflation, a dreadful and volatile mix for anyone’s economy. And yet, the political West didn’t only fail to address the mounting issues resulting from their own actions, but they also decided to capitalize on these exact problems to push for more Russophobia by blaming Russia for literally everything.
That’s precisely how we got the mythical “Putin’s price hike” in the US, which started over a full year before Russia’s special military operation. However, even in the atmosphere of raging, media-incited hatred, people affected by the so-called “Putin’s price hike” are well aware this has nothing to do with Russia’s president. And yet, the hatred not only needs to be kept alive, but also fanned up to new extremes.
The latest trend is to blame Russia for global food shortages, including the shortages of baby food in the US. Some Western officials went as far as to blame Russia for the widespread man-made famine which has been ravaging Yemen for the last 7 years. One problem with this, however, is the involvement of the political West and its regional allies and clients, which have been keeping Yemen in a state of perpetual siege, blocking food imports and bombing the country daily. The sheer amount of hypocrisy and mental gymnastics necessary for one to blame Russia for the war crimes committed by the political West requires a thorough analysis in itself. Some of it medical.
When it comes to global food shortages, they can only be explained as entirely man-made. Russia expects a record harvest this year, as do many other countries. So, how come there is a shortage announced months in advance? Well, we should ask those announcing it. The statements about coming food shortages also drive up the prices, but the actual reason behind it can only be explained by Western sanctions which are preventing normal trade between Russia and other countries which need Russian food. The political West is also using this to capitalize on Russophobia, by blaming the Russian counteroffensive in Ukraine as the reason behind food shortages. A portion of the accusations is heavily focused on the nonexistent Russian blockade of Ukrainian ports. But the crews of ships stranded in Odessa, Nikolayev and Kherson tell a very different story. It was the Kiev regime’s placement of thousands of sea mines that makes sea transit from Ukraine virtually impossible.
But, it’s all Russia’s fault in the minds of clinical Russophobes. And no matter how much evidence is presented to disprove this false narrative (just one of many), they will find ways to spin it to their advantage. Still, the vast majority of the world simply doesn’t believe any of it. And the fact that the world doesn’t fall for Russophobia and anti-Russian propaganda is what truly “shocks” the political West. The ever-belligerent, (neo)colonialist block cannot comprehend why the world doesn’t share their views. Well, maybe because much, if not most of that same world has suffered tremendously under the jackboot of global (neo)liberalism for decades, centuries even. The most recent polls confirm this. The Guardian published the “shocking” statistics on 30 May.
“The sharp polarisation between mainly Western liberal democracies and the rest of the world in perceptions of Russia has been laid bare in an annual global poll of attitudes towards democracy. The annual Democracy Perception Index covers 52 countries in Asia, Latin America, the US and Europe. Majorities in Greece, Kenya, Turkey, China, Israel, Egypt, Nigeria, Indonesia, South Africa, Vietnam, Algeria, the Philippines, Hungary, Mexico, Thailand, Morocco, Malaysia, Peru, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Colombia thought economic ties with Russia should not be cut. Also, positive views of Russia have been retained in China, India, Indonesia, Egypt, Vietnam, Algeria, Morocco, Malaysia, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. By contrast, among the 31 countries that favoured cutting ties, 20 were in Europe. The countries with a widely held most negative view of Russia included Poland (87%), Ukraine (80%), Portugal (79%), Italy (65%), UK (65%), Sweden (77%), US (62%) and Germany (62%). Thus, negative views of Russia are largely confined to Europe and other liberal democracies,” the report says.
Statistics such as this should always be taken with a grain of salt, as they could easily be rigged to further an agenda, if not through data manipulation, then through ambiguous questions which result in (intentionally) confusing or unclear answers. And yet, the results must be highly disappointing, with the massive trillion-dollar propaganda machine exposed as largely impotent outside of the political West. Long gone are the days when entire nations, such as Serbs, Iraqis or Syrians, among many others, could be demonized and then killed en masse with impunity.
Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst.
Anti-war demonstrations held in Italy on Republic Day
By Max Civili | Press TV | June 3, 2022
Rome – Anti-war demonstrations were held in Italy with protesters calling on the government to stop sending weapons to Ukraine and leave NATO.
It came as the Italian authorities were celebrating the 76th anniversary of the Republic.
June 2 is the day Italy celebrates becoming a Republic. On this day, in a referendum held in 1946, Italians opted to abolish the country’s short-lived monarchy and adopt a Republican form of government.
Every year, the celebrations feature large military and official parades along with the ancient Roman Forum in the presence of the highest offices of the State.
Never before have controversies over the military parade been this contentious with anti-war demonstrations held in a number of Italian cities including Bologna, Padua, and Bari.
One of the anti-war protests was held in central Rome, 500 meters away from the Republic day celebrations. The initiative had been called by the base union USB and political party Power to the People.
Since the start of the Ukraine conflict, opinion polls have steadily shown over half of the Italians oppose sending weapons to Kiev and believe sanctions against Russia are useless.
The protesters are angered not only over Mario Draghi government’s military spending on Ukraine, which they say would be better spent on raising workers’ wages. They are also opposing officials’ decision to raise military expenditure from 1.4 to 2% of the country’s GDP.
According to studies carried out by a number of Italy-based think tanks, Italians have never been eager to increase defense expenditures.
Based on data from the 1950s to date, on average, less than 20% of respondents believe that military spending is too low or should be increased.