In the first three minutes after the infant is delivered, if the umbilical cord is left intact, approximately one hundred milliliters of blood transfers from the placenta into the newborn.¹ That is roughly a third of the infant’s total blood volume. The transfer is not passive. The umbilical vessels contain their own smooth muscle. They close on their own schedule when the transfer is complete, usually within three to ten minutes. At that point the cord blanches, the pulsation stops, and the vessels seal.
In the United States, this process is interrupted, on average, within thirty to sixty seconds. The infant loses roughly thirty percent of the blood the physiology was constructed to deliver. The practice is defended on grounds that shift as the literature closes on it: it prevents jaundice (it does not, at any clinically meaningful rate), it reduces polycythemia (rarely, and asymptomatically), it is what the obstetrician was trained to do (this last is accurate). The iron the infant would have used for the next six months goes into a red plastic bag with the placenta.
This essay is about what happens in the first sixty minutes after birth in a standard American hospital, and about the biology of the first sixty minutes as it existed before the interventions displaced it. There are seven interventions in the standard sequence. Each one displaces a specific biological event. The essay traces the seven in the order they occur, and then examines the second casualty of the hour, which is the mother.
The argument is not that any single intervention is catastrophic in isolation. It is that the biology of the first hour was doing something, and hospital protocol displaces the entire sequence in favor of procedures whose cumulative effect has never been studied. What the interventions replace is a sequence humans arrived with. What replaced it was assembled between roughly 1930 and 1991, most of it introduced without controlled trial, and none of it evaluated as the sequence it now is.
The infant born in a Kansas farmhouse in 1890 received the first hour by default. The infant born in a Manhattan delivery room in 2026 receives the first hour only if the parents have prepared for months to protect it against interventions the hospital considers routine.
The Placental Transfer
The Cochrane review on the timing of umbilical cord clamping in term infants pools twenty-five trials involving more than three thousand mother-infant pairs. Delayed clamping (variously defined as one to three minutes, or until pulsation ceases) is associated with higher hemoglobin at birth, higher ferritin at three and six months, and lower rates of iron deficiency in infancy.² The World Health Organization recommends delaying cord clamping for at least one minute after birth.³ The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, in Committee Opinion Number 814 (January 2020), endorsed a delay of at least thirty to sixty seconds. Actual hospital practice in the United States has moved reluctantly, and inconsistently, toward the low end of that range.
Ola Andersson and colleagues at Uppsala University randomized four hundred term infants to early clamping (within ten seconds) or delayed clamping (at least three minutes) and followed them at four months and at four years. At four months, the delayed-clamping infants had ferritin levels forty-five percent higher than the early-clamping group.⁴ At four years, the delayed-clamping children scored higher on fine motor and social skills.⁵ The trial was published in the BMJ and in JAMA Pediatrics. It has not changed what happens in the room where the baby comes out.
The infant delivered at term arrives with approximately eighty milliliters of blood per kilogram in circulation. The placenta at the moment of birth contains roughly one third of the total fetal blood volume. That fraction is not surplus. The umbilical arteries and vein complete the redistribution while the infant’s lungs open and the ductus arteriosus and foramen ovale begin the transition from fetal to neonatal circulation. The iron load carried in the umbilical vessels at three minutes postpartum is approximately 70 milligrams. The daily iron requirement of the term infant during the first six months, met almost entirely from stores laid down before and during the third trimester, is approximately 0.27 milligrams. The math is not subtle. Three minutes of transfer delivers nine months of iron.
The American replacement is a plastic clamp on a still-pulsing cord, and a pair of scissors thirty seconds later. The consequences are measurable at four months (ferritin, hemoglobin), at six months (iron sufficiency), and at four years (fine motor and social scoring). The intervention has no informed consent process. The mother will rarely be told that the WHO and ACOG recommendations both call for a longer delay than the hospital in fact provides, and she will almost never be told what the delayed-clamping trials measured at four years.
The Approach to the Breast
The infant placed on the mother’s abdomen immediately after birth, undisturbed, dry but not washed, performs a sequence of movements that has been documented on video and named. Ann-Marie Widström and colleagues in Sweden videotaped twenty-eight undisturbed term newborns and identified nine sequential stages: birth cry, relaxation, awakening, activity, crawling, resting, familiarization, suckling, and sleeping.⁶ The sequence completes, on average, in the first sixty to ninety minutes after birth. The infant uses head-lifting movements, hand-mouth coordination with the mother’s nipple, and a slow crawl up the mother’s abdomen to the breast. The first latch, when the infant is left to accomplish it, typically occurs somewhere between sixty and ninety minutes after birth, with substantial variation between infants.
The Cochrane systematic review on early skin-to-skin contact between mother and healthy newborn pools forty-six trials with more than three thousand mother-infant pairs. Infants who received skin-to-skin contact in the first hour, without separation for measurement or procedure, breastfed earlier, breastfed longer, maintained more stable blood glucose, thermoregulated more efficiently, and cried less in the following twenty-four hours.⁷ Maternal outcomes included lower rates of breastfeeding cessation before six weeks and lower postpartum depression scores.
Standard American hospital practice moves the infant to a warmer within the first minute. There the infant is weighed, measured, footprinted, given an Apgar score, injected with the compound sold as vitamin K, and treated with erythromycin eye ointment. The infant is then wrapped in a receiving blanket and returned to the mother. The nine-stage sequence has been interrupted at stage three. The rest of the stages do not resume. The first latch, if it occurs in the first hour at all, occurs against the mother’s blanket-wrapped chest, with an infant whose hand-mouth coordination has been disrupted, whose skin has been rubbed with an absorbent towel, and whose eyes have been coated with antibiotic ointment.
What is displaced in the assessment ritual is the imprinting window. The infant returned to the mother wrapped, cleaned, and processed does not get the first hour. Neither does the mother.
The First Injection
The compound sold as vitamin K is administered to the American newborn by intramuscular injection, typically in the thigh, within the first fifteen minutes of life. The standard dose is one milligram. Endogenous plasma phylloquinone in the term newborn is approximately 0.05 nanograms per milliliter. The injection delivers a bolus at roughly twenty thousand times endogenous. The formulation includes polysorbate 80, benzyl alcohol, and propylene glycol.⁸ The active compound, phytonadione, is a synthetic form of phylloquinone.
The intervention has a real underlying observation. What mainstream pediatrics calls vitamin K-dependent bleeding, formerly labeled hemorrhagic disease of the newborn, occurs in a small fraction of untreated infants during the first week of life and, in a smaller fraction, between two weeks and six months. The late-onset form can produce intracranial hemorrhage and carries substantial mortality when it occurs. The bleeding phenomenon is not disputed. What is disputed is what to do about it.
The American Academy of Pediatrics adopted routine intramuscular prophylaxis in 1961.⁹ The route was chosen for the assurance of absorption, not because oral phytonadione does not work. Multiple oral regimens have been tested and are used in national protocols in the Netherlands, Denmark, Switzerland, and Germany. The Dutch protocol delivers 1 milligram at birth followed by 150 micrograms daily from day eight to week thirteen in breastfed infants. Rates of late-onset bleeding in the Dutch protocol are comparable to the American intramuscular protocol.¹⁰
Jean Golding and colleagues at Bristol published in the British Medical Journal in 1992 an analysis linking the intramuscular injection at birth to a doubling of childhood cancer, particularly leukemia, in the exposed cohort.¹¹ Subsequent studies were mixed. The mainstream position settled into “the balance of evidence does not support the association,” and the intramuscular protocol continued. The oral protocol, which delivers the same effect at physiologic dosing without the injection additives, was not adopted in the United States.
The additives merit examination on their own. Benzyl alcohol at neonatal doses has been associated with gasping syndrome in premature infants; the FDA issued a warning in 1982 restricting its use in that population.¹² The one-milligram vitamin K injection contains 9 milligrams of benzyl alcohol. Polysorbate 80 is a solubilizer with documented capacity to disrupt cellular membrane integrity and, in animal models, alter blood-brain barrier permeability. A prior essay developed the zeta-potential mechanism at length.¹³ The vitamin K injection is not the largest zeta-potential insult of the first hour. It is the first.
What the injection displaces is the intended pattern of vitamin K acquisition, which is neither zero nor bolus. The breastfed infant receives phylloquinone in milk at physiologic concentrations sustained across the first months. The intramuscular protocol delivers, in a single dose, an amount the physiology was constructed to receive across weeks.
For the reader wondering whether their own child received this injection: consent was almost certainly not obtained in any meaningful sense. A form signed on admission authorized the hospital’s standard newborn care. That form covered the injection.
The Ointment
Within the first thirty minutes, before the infant is returned to the mother, erythromycin ophthalmic ointment (0.5 percent) is applied to both eyes. The procedure is required by law in most states. The rationale, dating to Karl Credé’s 1881 protocol in Leipzig, was prevention of what mainstream medicine calls ophthalmia neonatorum, a neonatal eye inflammation the establishment attributes to gonococcal exposure during birth. Untreated, the condition was documented to progress to corneal ulceration and blindness in a subset of affected infants. Credé’s silver nitrate reduced the reported incidence in Leipzig from ten percent of newborns to less than one percent. The intervention reduced blindness. The intervention that replaced it, applied to a screened-negative population, does not.
Silver nitrate has since been replaced by erythromycin. The current protocol treats the infant of a screened mother not carrying the bacterium, in a population where gonorrhea prenatal screening is standard care.¹⁴ ACOG recommends screening at the first prenatal visit for all pregnant patients under twenty-five and for older patients with risk factors. A mother screened and treated presents what the establishment characterizes as no meaningful risk of transferring the bacterium. The ointment is applied anyway. The state mandate does not distinguish between screened-negative and unscreened mothers.
The ointment blurs the infant’s vision during the imprinting window. The newborn is optically calibrated to focus at eight to twelve inches, the distance from breast to mother’s face during nursing. Ointment-coated eyes cannot fix on that face. The ointment is also an antibiotic administered to the ocular surface at the moment the ocular microbiome is being established. No trial has ever measured what the ointment does to that colonization. The absence of the trial is the finding.
The eye ointment is one of the interventions parents can decline in most jurisdictions with a signed refusal form. It is rarely offered as an option. The nurse arriving with the tube does not typically pause to ask.
The Vaccination
At some point in the first twenty-four hours, and in some hospital protocols within the first hour or two, the newborn receives the first injection on the American vaccination schedule. The vaccine is the recombinant hepatitis B vaccine, marketed as Recombivax HB or Engerix-B, containing 5 to 10 micrograms of hepatitis B surface antigen and 250 micrograms of aluminum, as amorphous aluminum hydroxyphosphate sulfate (Recombivax) or aluminum hydroxide (Engerix-B).¹⁵
The rationale for administering this injection on the day of birth was established by the ACIP in 1991 as part of a strategy to eliminate what mainstream medicine calls hepatitis B transmission through universal infant vaccination.¹⁶ In the establishment framework, the condition is associated with blood-to-blood contact and sexual activity. The pediatric concern the ACIP named was vertical transfer from a mother carrying the surface antigen. Screening for that surface antigen has been standard prenatal care since 1988. The mother screened and confirmed negative delivers an infant whose risk of what the establishment calls hepatitis B in the first year of life, absent blood contact and sexual activity, approaches zero on the establishment’s own terms. The rationale for injecting that infant on the day of birth reduces to catching the infants of unscreened mothers, and to protecting against later transfer from a household member sharing razors. Both are surrogate arguments for injecting a screened-negative population.
The infant on day one receives 250 micrograms of aluminum in a single bolus. The FDA has identified 4 to 5 micrograms per kilogram per day as the exposure level at which parenteral aluminum accumulates to concentrations associated with central nervous system and bone toxicity in patients with impaired renal function.¹⁷ Applied to a 3.5-kilogram newborn, the FDA’s accumulation threshold works out to roughly 17 micrograms per day. The day-one injection delivers about fifteen times that amount, in a single bolus, into an infant whose kidneys are not yet fully working and whose blood-brain barrier will never again be this porous.
The aluminum-adjuvant literature, developed most extensively by Christopher Exley at Keele and Romain Gherardi at Créteil, documents that injected aluminum does not remain at the site. Macrophages carry it to lymph nodes, spleen, bone marrow, and, in Gherardi’s macrophagic myofasciitis series, to distant tissue including brain.¹⁸ ¹⁹ Clearance from tissue, once deposited, is measured in years. Zeta potential collapse in the neonatal blood following aluminum-adjuvant injection is the mechanism a separate essay in this series developed. The injection arrives when the infant is least prepared to receive it. The schedule is calibrated to that moment on purpose.
The 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act removed vaccine manufacturer liability for injuries arising from the recommended pediatric schedule.²⁰ A prior essay in this series traced the consequences of that legal structure. The injection administered to the newborn is the first of the schedule the Act protects. Consent is bundled into admission paperwork. The parent who declines is required to sign a separate refusal form. The counseling does not mention the aluminum load, the biodistribution literature, or the mother’s own negative screening.
The Vernix
The white coating on the newborn’s skin is not residue. It is a substance the infant made, for the infant, starting in the second trimester of gestation, composed of eighty percent water, ten percent protein, and ten percent lipid. The protein fraction contains at least forty-one distinct proteins identified in the Tollin proteomic analysis, of which roughly a third have direct antimicrobial activity.²¹ The active components include lysozyme, lactoferrin, cathelicidin LL-37, and a range of defensins active against gram-positive and gram-negative bacteria, fungi, and some enveloped particles. The lipid fraction, in composition and quantity, closely tracks the composition of the stratum corneum (the outermost skin layer) of the term infant. It is not a coincidence.
The vernix serves at least four documented functions. In utero it prevents maceration of the fetal skin by amniotic fluid across the third trimester. At delivery it eases passage through the birth canal. Post-delivery it retains warmth and moisture at the skin surface, providing thermoregulation and preventing transepidermal water loss. And it colonizes the infant’s skin with an antimicrobial coating whose peptides continue functioning during the hours in which the skin microbiome is being established.
The World Health Organization recommends delaying the first bath by at least twenty-four hours after birth.²² American hospital practice varies. Many hospitals wash the infant within the first several hours, sometimes with soap. The vernix is rubbed off with towels during drying and the residue is washed away in the bath.
What the vernix does that no substitute is offered for is the seeding of the infant’s skin surface with the mother’s microbiome combined with the fetal-secretion antimicrobial peptides. The infant delivered vaginally, placed on the mother’s chest unwashed, receives the mother’s flora onto skin coated with the vernix, which selects for the flora the peptides tolerate and against the flora the peptides suppress. The infant washed, wrapped in hospital linen, and handled by gloved hands receives hospital flora onto skin whose antimicrobial coating has been removed.
Maria Dominguez-Bello and colleagues have documented that the microbiome of the cesarean infant at one month differs measurably from the vaginally-delivered infant at one month, with the cesarean infant’s early flora more closely resembling adult skin flora than the mother’s vaginal flora.³⁰ Subsequent work has shown that at least some of the differences persist through infancy.
The vernix is not a candidate for pharmaceutical replacement. There is no product to sell in its place. It was produced by the infant, for the infant, and it functions in a window that closes within hours. What replaces the vernix in the hospital protocol is nothing. What is added is the antibiotic ointment, the alcohol wipe at the injection site, and the hospital-laundered blanket. The infant is now less colonized than it would be, and more colonized with what the hospital carries.
The First Meal
Some hospitals, at some times, supplement breastfed infants with formula in the nursery during the first hours after birth. The practice varies. It is more common when the mother is exhausted, when the infant is separated for observation, when the mother’s supply is judged inadequate, and when the hospital does not carry Baby-Friendly certification. The World Health Organization / UNICEF Baby-Friendly Hospital Initiative, launched in 1991, established ten steps designed to protect exclusive breastfeeding in the first days.²³ Step six is that no food or drink other than breast milk should be given to newborns unless medically indicated. Compliance is voluntary. A minority of American births occur in Baby-Friendly-designated hospitals.
The infant’s first meal is not decorative. Colostrum, produced by the mother’s breasts in the first hours to days after birth, is not milk in the mature sense. It is a thick, yellow-orange secretion containing at least twenty times the concentration of the protective proteins mainstream biochemistry classifies as secretory immunoglobulin A, compared to mature breast milk, plus lactoferrin, lysozyme, growth factors, and oligosaccharides that seed the infant’s gut microbiome selectively.²⁴ The newborn stomach at day one has a capacity of approximately five to seven milliliters. Colostrum production tracks this capacity. Formula, at the volume infants are commonly supplemented, does not.
The gut lining of the newborn is highly permeable in the first days. The tight junctions between epithelial cells have not yet closed. This permeability is a feature. It permits the passage of the intact protective proteins and growth factors in colostrum into the infant’s circulation. It also permits the passage of intact proteins from formula, including bovine milk proteins whose structure differs from human milk proteins and which the infant’s still-closing gut does not process the way it processes what it was constructed to receive.
The oligosaccharides in colostrum are indigestible to the infant. That is the point. They are metabolized by the Bifidobacterium species the mother’s flora deposited, feeding the microbes that will occupy the gut in the coming weeks. Formula lacks these oligosaccharides. Formula lacks the mother’s flora. The formula-supplemented infant, over the coming days and weeks, develops a gut microbiome that differs measurably from the exclusively-breastfed infant, and the difference persists.
The first meal is the culminating displacement of the first hour. It arrives to an infant who has been separated from the mother, injected, coated, and washed, and it delivers to that infant a substitute for the substance the biology laid down as the first food. The mother, watching this happen or unable to intervene because she has been medicated or exhausted, has already lost the imprinting window that was hers.
If you are a mother reading this, you were also in that room. Depending on what you were given for pain, you may remember very little. You were told the nurses knew what they were doing. You were not told that the sequence being performed on your infant was displacing a hormonal cascade that was also happening in you. Nobody said it aloud because the sequence has a name only in the physiology literature, and the physiology literature is not what the nurses were trained on.
The Mother’s Cascade
The mother’s biology in the first hour after birth is not incidental. It is a second event running in parallel to the infant’s, requiring the infant’s presence to sustain, and it is displaced by the same interventions.
Oxytocin production in the mother peaks in the minutes after delivery. The surge is triggered by uterine stretch during labor, by the ferguson reflex during crowning, and by direct skin-to-skin contact with the newborn in the minutes that follow.²⁵ The pulse at delivery is the highest circulating concentration of oxytocin a woman will produce in her lifetime. The hormone contracts the uterus, delivering the placenta and closing the vessels that fed it. It also acts centrally, producing a state that has been variously called maternal responsiveness, the imprinting state, or, in the phrasing of Michel Odent, the “cocktail of love hormones.”²⁶ Odent ran the maternity unit at the Pithiviers state hospital in France from 1962 to 1985 and documented what happened when the interventions were removed. Prolactin rises in the same window and initiates the transition from colostrum production to mature milk. The initiation depends on the infant’s suckling within the first hours. Delayed suckling delays the prolactin response and, in a subset of women, the milk-transition does not occur normally.
Sarah Buckley, in Hormonal Physiology of Childbearing, catalogs the full cascade.²⁷ Endorphins, elevated during labor, remain elevated postpartum and cross into breast milk. Catecholamines drop in the presence of the infant and rise again if the infant is separated. Vasopressin mediates maternal attention. The literature is not fringe. Klaus and Kennell developed it in the 1970s. Odent and Uvnäs-Moberg extended it. Buckley formally reviewed it for the National Partnership for Women and Families in 2015. The birth hormones are a system whose components require each other to complete. Interrupt any of them and the system does not deliver what it was constructed to deliver.
What displaces the mother’s cascade in the hospital delivery is the familiar sequence. The infant is taken to a warmer within the first minute. The mother loses skin-to-skin contact at the moment the oxytocin sustaining stimulus was constructed to arrive. She may receive synthetic oxytocin by intravenous drip for uterine contraction, which acts on peripheral receptors but does not cross the blood-brain barrier and does not reproduce the central effects of the endogenous surge. The synthetic drip contracts the uterus. It does not produce the maternal-responsiveness state. Meanwhile, her epidural has not fully worn off. She has received four to six liters of intravenous fluids. She is exhausted. She is being handed paperwork. When the infant is returned to her, wrapped and processed, the window has closed.
The consequences are measurable. Breastfeeding initiation rates track skin-to-skin contact in the first hour.²⁸ Postpartum depression rates track breastfeeding duration and, independently, track the interventions during labor and the first hour.²⁹ The mother who did not receive the first hour her physiology laid down is more likely to experience difficulty with breastfeeding at two weeks, with mood at six weeks, and with maternal attachment at six months.
None of this appears in standard prenatal care. The literature exists. It is not read. The mother arriving at the hospital in labor believes she is arriving to receive expert care for a medical event. She is not told that the event proceeds along a hormonal pathway hospital protocol is not calibrated to protect.
The second casualty of the first hour is the mother. She experiences the same interventions from a different position. Each act of separation displaces her cascade at the same moment it displaces the infant’s. The two biologies were constructed to complete together.
What the First Hour Was, Before
Humans lived and reproduced for the entire pre-industrial history of the species without the seven interventions this essay has cataloged. Cord clamping, in the form the American delivery room now practices it, is not a traditional intervention. The vitamin K injection was introduced in 1961. The universal newborn hepatitis B injection was recommended in 1991. Erythromycin eye ointment for gonococcal prophylaxis dates to the 1980s in its current formulation, replacing the silver nitrate protocol that began in 1881. Formula supplementation as routine hospital practice dates to the mid-twentieth century. Immediate bathing dates to the era when hospital birth replaced home birth, roughly the 1940s.
The first hour, before all of this, was not chaotic. It was structured, and the structure was biological. The infant arrived, was placed against the mother’s body, received the placental blood transfer over three to ten minutes, initiated the pulmonary transition with adequate volume, warmed against the mother’s skin, was colonized by the mother’s flora onto vernix-coated skin, self-attached to the breast within the first hour, and received colostrum. The mother, during those minutes, delivered the placenta by uterine contraction driven by the endogenous oxytocin surge, produced the imprinting state that oriented her to the infant, transitioned into prolactin-mediated lactation initiation, and completed the physiologic postpartum sequence.
This is what the first hour was. It is what the modern delivery room has displaced.
What the First Hour Is, When Nothing Interrupts
The infant emerges. Passage through the birth canal has compressed the thoracic cavity and cleared amniotic fluid from the lungs. The cord remains attached. The infant is placed directly on the mother’s abdomen, chest, or breast, skin to skin. The infant is not dried aggressively. The vernix remains on the skin. A warm blanket may be placed over both mother and infant. The room is quiet.
The infant emits the birth cry, which opens the lungs. The cry subsides. The infant enters a period of quiet alertness, eyes open, and fixes on the mother’s face at the eight-to-twelve-inch distance. This state persists for roughly sixty to ninety minutes and does not recur with the same intensity for weeks. The mother, in the same window, has completed uterine contraction and delivered the placenta, and the endogenous oxytocin surge has produced a state of focused attention on the infant that she will remember, if she experiences it, for the rest of her life.
The cord transfers blood from placenta to infant. The pulmonary circulation opens. Between three and ten minutes, the cord pulsation slows and stops. The umbilical vessels close. The cord blanches. Only now is the cord cut, and it can be cut without a clamp if it has fully closed.
The infant, in the following thirty to sixty minutes, moves through the nine stages Widström documented. The head lifts. The hand-mouth coordination emerges. The infant crawls, sometimes visibly, up the mother’s abdomen. Somewhere between sixty and ninety minutes, the infant self-attaches to the breast. The latch is deep. Colostrum flows. The infant receives the first meal.
The mother’s flora colonizes the vernix. The mother’s oxytocin surge sustains. Body temperature stabilizes. Blood glucose stabilizes. The infant enters the first sleep. The mother enters her own recovery.
This is the first hour when it is not interrupted. Every event described is in the literature. Nothing here is romantic. This is what the biology does when it is left alone.
What to Refuse, and What Requires More
The mother planning a hospital birth in the United States who wants the first hour her physiology can deliver has options. Not all seven interventions can be refused in every hospital, but most can be refused in most.
Delayed cord clamping is available for the asking in most American hospitals in 2026. The written birth plan should specify “delay cord clamping until pulsation ceases, or a minimum of three minutes.” Some hospitals will interpret this as thirty seconds. The plan should specify the minimum. The obstetrician’s agreement should be secured in advance at a prenatal appointment, and documented in the chart. Skin-to-skin contact within the first minute, uninterrupted for the first hour, is available in Baby-Friendly-designated hospitals and increasingly in non-designated hospitals for the asking. The birth plan should specify that weighing, measuring, Apgar assessment, and all non-emergency procedures be deferred to after the first hour. Apgar assessment can be done visually while the infant is on the mother’s chest.
The vitamin K injection, the erythromycin eye ointment, and the day-one hepatitis B vaccine can each be declined in every American state with a signed refusal form. In some states an oral vitamin K protocol is available on request. Delayed bathing, by at least twenty-four hours and preferably until the mother is home, is increasingly available for the asking. Exclusive breastfeeding, with no formula supplementation in the nursery, requires the parents to state the preference explicitly on the birth plan and repeatedly in person, and to keep the infant in the mother’s room rather than the nursery.
The mother who wants the fuller first hour, without the intrusions the American hospital continues to make available on request, has options beyond the hospital. Birthing centers, in states that license them, deliver a substantially undisturbed first hour as their default. Midwife-attended home birth, for the low-risk mother, delivers the first hour without the interventions being present as options at all. The refusal is not required. The interventions are not there to refuse.
The mother who cannot deliver at home, and whose hospital does not offer a birthing-center option, can still preserve most of what the physiology needs. The birth plan matters. The advocate at the birth matters. The prenatal conversation with the obstetrician matters. The seven interventions, one by one, can be reduced or declined. What cannot be done, in the standard American hospital, is arrive without a plan and receive the first hour intact. What the hospital delivers by default is what this essay described.
No cumulative safety study of the seven interventions as a sequence has ever been conducted. None was required, because each intervention was introduced separately, defended separately, and evaluated (when it was evaluated at all) against no comparator except the intervention it replaced. The regulatory capture the reader can name in other domains (pharmaceutical, agricultural, financial) operates here at the level of the individual body, and at the level of the sixty minutes that were once the least medicalized in the human life course.
The infant born in a Kansas farmhouse in 1890 received the first hour by default. The infant born in a Manhattan delivery room in 2026 receives the first hour only if the parents have prepared for months to protect it against interventions the hospital considers routine. The first hour was displaced within roughly a century. It has not disappeared. It is still there, in the physiology, waiting.
How to Explain This to a Six-Year-Old
Imagine a brand new baby, just coming out.
For all the time before hospitals, this is what happened next.
The little tube that connected the baby to the mommy on the inside kept working for a while, like a garden hose finishing a watering. It sent all the rest of the baby’s blood back into the baby’s body. When it was done, the tube stopped on its own. The baby stayed on the mommy’s chest, warm and quiet. In about an hour, the baby crawled up to the mommy’s breast all by itself and started to drink.
That was the first hour. That is what it was.
Now, in most American hospitals, this is what happens instead.
As soon as the baby comes out, a doctor cuts the little tube right away. That means the baby loses about a third of the blood that was supposed to be inside the baby’s body. The blood goes in the trash with the tube.
Then a nurse takes the baby to a table with a bright lamp. She weighs the baby. She measures the baby. She puts a needle in the baby’s leg and gives the baby a shot. She puts sticky medicine in the baby’s eyes so the baby can’t see the mommy’s face clearly. Later, another shot goes in, and that one has a metal called aluminum inside it. After a while, a nurse gives the baby a bath. That washes off a special white coating the baby was born with. The coating was made to keep the baby safe from germs. The bath takes it away.
While all of that is going on, the mommy is on the table by herself. Her body is trying to make a special feeling that helps her fall deeply in love with the baby. But the baby is way over on the warm table, being weighed and measured and stuck with needles. When the baby finally comes back, the baby is wrapped up in a blanket and can’t feel the mommy’s skin very well.
Nobody in the delivery room is trying to be mean. The nurses are doing what they were taught. The doctor is doing what the doctor was taught. But what they were taught to do is not what a baby is made for.
A baby is made for a quiet room, the mommy’s skin, and time. The little tube finishes on its own. The baby finds the mommy’s breast on its own. Everything a baby needs in the first hour is already there. No shots. No goo. No bright lamp. Just the mommy.
It took about a hundred years for hospitals to forget this.
It only takes one baby being born to remember.
In Print
Seven of my books are now available as paperbacks, printed to order through Lulu and shipped worldwide. The Unvaccinated lays out the completely unvaccinated as a comparison group across twenty chapters and five appendices — as far as I know, the only book of its kind. Medicalized Motherhood follows a woman through 123 documented interventions from teenage pill to postpartum discharge. Drilling for Profit argues that cavities, gum disease, and crooked teeth are a dietary problem the dental profession treats surgically. What Your Vet Can’t Tell You applies the same critique to pets — food, vaccines, and a profession trained by the industries whose products cause the harm. Escape from Psychiatry documents the fabrication of the DSM, the collapse of the serotonin hypothesis, and the specific damage done by every major psychiatric drug class.
Two more take up what the first five leave out — the remedies the first five explain why you need. The DMSO Book covers 100,000 studies, zero deaths, and one approval — the suppressed science of medicine’s most versatile compound. Chlorine Dioxide: The Forbidden Remedy collects the interviews, protocols, and evidence from the doctors and researchers they tried to silence.
A physical book reaches the person a Substack post never will — the sceptical relative, the friend who won’t click a link but might open a book, the visitor whose eye lands on a coffee table. Buy one to keep, and one to give away.
References
Yao, A.C., Moinian, M., and Lind, J. “Distribution of blood between infant and placenta after birth.” Lancet 2, no. 7626 (1969): 871–873. The three-minute placental transfusion volume in term infants was established in this landmark measurement study and has been replicated in subsequent literature.
McDonald, S.J., Middleton, P., Dowswell, T., and Morris, P.S. “Effect of timing of umbilical cord clamping of term infants on maternal and neonatal outcomes.” Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 7 (2013): CD004074.
World Health Organization. Guideline: Delayed umbilical cord clamping for improved maternal and infant health and nutrition outcomes. Geneva: WHO, 2014.
Andersson, O., Hellström-Westas, L., Andersson, D., and Domellöf, M. “Effect of delayed versus early umbilical cord clamping on neonatal outcomes and iron status at 4 months: a randomised controlled trial.” BMJ 343 (2011): d7157.
Andersson, O., Lindquist, B., Lindgren, M., Stjernqvist, K., Domellöf, M., and Hellström-Westas, L. “Effect of Delayed Cord Clamping on Neurodevelopment at 4 Years of Age: A Randomized Clinical Trial.” JAMA Pediatrics 169, no. 7 (2015): 631–638.
Widström, A.M., Lilja, G., Aaltomaa-Michalias, P., Dahllöf, A., Lintula, M., and Nissen, E. “Newborn behaviour to locate the breast when skin-to-skin: a possible method for enabling early self-regulation.” Acta Paediatrica 100, no. 1 (2011): 79–85. The nine-stage sequence was documented from videotape observation of twenty-eight full-term infants and elaborated further in Widström, A.M., Brimdyr, K., Svensson, K., Cadwell, K., and Nissen, E. “Skin-to-skin contact the first hour after birth, underlying implications and clinical practice.” Acta Paediatrica 108, no. 7 (2019): 1192–1204.
Moore, E.R., Bergman, N., Anderson, G.C., and Medley, N. “Early skin-to-skin contact for mothers and their healthy newborn infants.” Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 11 (2016): CD003519.
Konakion (phytonadione) injectable, product monograph. Hoffmann-La Roche. Formulation includes polysorbate 80, benzyl alcohol (9 mg per 1 mg dose), and propylene glycol. Alternative formulations by Hospira and Amphastar carry comparable excipients.
American Academy of Pediatrics, Committee on Nutrition. “Vitamin K compounds and the water-soluble analogues.” Pediatrics 28 (1961): 501–507. The AAP policy adopting routine intramuscular vitamin K prophylaxis at birth dates to this statement.
Cornelissen, M., von Kries, R., Loughnan, P., and Schubiger, G. “Prevention of vitamin K deficiency bleeding: efficacy of different multiple oral dose schedules of vitamin K.” European Journal of Pediatrics 156, no. 2 (1997): 126–130. The Dutch, Danish, and Swiss oral protocols are compared in this systematic analysis.
Golding, J., Paterson, M., and Kinlen, L.J. “Factors associated with childhood cancer in a national cohort study.” British Journal of Cancer 62, no. 2 (1990): 304–308. Golding, J., Greenwood, R., Birmingham, K., and Mott, M. “Childhood cancer, intramuscular vitamin K, and pethidine given during labour.” British Medical Journal 305, no. 6849 (1992): 341–346. The original findings.
FDA. “Benzyl alcohol may be toxic to newborns.” FDA Drug Bulletin 12, no. 2 (1982): 10–11. The gasping-syndrome warning restricting benzyl alcohol use in neonates dates to this bulletin.
Unbekoming. “What Is Zeta Potential?” Lies are Unbekoming Substack. The mechanism by which surface-active additives collapse blood-cell surface charge is developed at length in this prior essay.
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. “Practice Bulletin No. 189: Nausea and Vomiting of Pregnancy,” and associated guidance on prenatal STI screening. ACOG recommends universal prenatal screening for gonorrhea in all pregnant patients under 25 and for older patients with risk factors, at the first prenatal visit and again in the third trimester when indicated.
Recombivax HB (Merck) and Engerix-B (GlaxoSmithKline), pediatric formulation package inserts. Aluminum content per 0.5 mL pediatric dose: 250 micrograms as amorphous aluminum hydroxyphosphate sulfate (Recombivax) or aluminum hydroxide (Engerix-B).
Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices. “Hepatitis B virus: a comprehensive strategy for eliminating transmission in the United States through universal childhood vaccination.” MMWR Recommendations and Reports 40, no. RR-13 (November 22, 1991): 1–25.
FDA. “Aluminum in Large and Small Volume Parenterals Used in Total Parenteral Nutrition.” 21 CFR 201.323. The FDA-required labeling states that aluminum accumulates at levels associated with central nervous system and bone toxicity in patients with impaired renal function receiving parenteral aluminum greater than 4 to 5 micrograms per kilogram per day. No corresponding regulatory limit exists for aluminum delivered by injectable vaccines in infants.
Exley, C. “The toxicity of aluminium in humans.” Morphologie 100, no. 329 (2016): 51–55. Exley, C., Siesjö, P., and Eriksson, H. “The immunobiology of aluminium adjuvants: how do they really work?” Trends in Immunology 31, no. 3 (2010): 103–109.
Gherardi, R.K., Eidi, H., Crépeaux, G., Authier, F.J., and Cadusseau, J. “Biopersistence and brain translocation of aluminum adjuvants of vaccines.” Frontiers in Neurology 6 (2015): 4. Gherardi’s macrophagic myofasciitis series traces aluminum from injection site to distant tissue including brain.
National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Public Law 99-660. Unbekoming. “The Diagnosis That Ends the Investigation” (on the 1986 NCVIA and the Audrey Edmunds case). Lies are Unbekoming Substack.
Tollin, M., Bergsson, G., Kai-Larsen, Y., Lengqvist, J., Sjövall, J., Griffiths, W., Skúladóttir, G.V., Haraldsson, A., Jörnvall, H., Gudmundsson, G.H., and Agerberth, B. “Vernix caseosa as a multi-component defence system based on polypeptides, lipids and their interactions.” Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences 62, no. 19-20 (2005): 2390–2399.
World Health Organization. “WHO Recommendations on Newborn Health.” Geneva: WHO, 2018. Delay of the first bath by at least 24 hours after birth is recommended.
World Health Organization / UNICEF. “The Ten Steps to Successful Breastfeeding.” Baby-Friendly Hospital Initiative, revised 2018. Step 6: “Give infants no food or drink other than breast-milk, unless medically indicated.”
Ballard, O., and Morrow, A.L. “Human milk composition: nutrients and bioactive factors.” Pediatric Clinics of North America 60, no. 1 (2013): 49–74. Colostrum composition, secretory IgA concentration, and oligosaccharide profile are cataloged in this review.
Uvnäs-Moberg, K. The Oxytocin Factor: Tapping the Hormone of Calm, Love, and Healing. Cambridge, MA: Da Capo Press, 2003.
Odent, M. The Scientification of Love. London: Free Association Books, 1999.
Buckley, S.J. Hormonal Physiology of Childbearing: Evidence and Implications for Women, Babies, and Maternity Care. Washington, DC: National Partnership for Women and Families, 2015.
Bramson, L., Lee, J.W., Moore, E., Montgomery, S., Neish, C., Bahjri, K., and Melcher, C.L. “Effect of early skin-to-skin mother-infant contact during the first 3 hours following birth on exclusive breastfeeding during the maternity hospital stay.” Journal of Human Lactation 26, no. 2 (2010): 130–137.
Bell, A.F., Erickson, E.N., and Carter, C.S. “Beyond labor: the role of natural and synthetic oxytocin in the transition to motherhood.” Journal of Midwifery & Women’s Health 59, no. 1 (2014): 35–42.
Dominguez-Bello, M.G., Costello, E.K., Contreras, M., Magris, M., Hidalgo, G., Fierer, N., and Knight, R. “Delivery mode shapes the acquisition and structure of the initial microbiota across multiple body habitats in newborns.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 107, no. 26 (2010): 11971–11975.
A former key adviser to Dr. Anthony Fauci pled guilty to concealing public records related to the origins of COVID-19 in a plea deal reached with federal prosecutors — a development some political figures and analysts suggest could implicate Fauci.
Dr. David Morens pled guilty Tuesday to one count of conspiracy to defraud the U.S. According to The Washington Post, Morens, 78, told a federal judge he attempted to bypass federal recordkeeping laws by using his private email account to discuss research — and a terminated federal grant — related to COVID-19’s origins.
Morens, initially indicted in April on five federal charges, told the judge he intentionally redirected communications to his personal email account to protect Fauci and because the emails might be misinterpreted in the future, if and when they were publicly released.
Court filings show some of the emails were back-channeled to a senior official at the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID). According to CBS News, the official is likely Fauci, who directed NIAID until December 2022. Morens served as senior adviser in Fauci’s NIAID office between 2006 and 2022.
Morens diverted messages to his personal email while speculation swirled around whether COVID-19 emerged in nature, as Fauci and other Biden administration officials and key virologists publicly asserted at the time, or was developed at China’s Wuhan Institute of Virology and leaked from there.
Morens faces up to five years in prison and a maximum fine of $250,000 under the terms of the plea deal, though his sentence may be shorter. According to the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), “actual sentences for federal crimes are typically less than the maximum penalties.” Sentencing is scheduled for Nov. 12, Politico reported.
“By pleading guilty today, Dr. Morens has taken responsibility for what he did and will continue to do so,” Tim Belevetz, Morens’ attorney, said in a statement cited by the Post.
James Billot, editor of UnHerd, told Australia’s News24 Digital that Morens’ guilty plea represents the “first big scalp” in the COVID-19 origins investigation. “We are going to see a lot more of this thing coming out soon.”
According to Politico, Fauci was not “charged with or accused of wrongdoing in the case against Morens and is not referred to by name in court filings.”
But in a post on X, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), who is leading the congressional COVID-19 origins investigation, suggested Fauci may be implicated: “Long-time Fauci ally pleads guilty. Could his plea involve implicating Anthony Fauci?” Paul wrote.
Morens boasted about being able to ‘make emails disappear’
During testimony before the U.S. House of Representatives in 2024, Fauci denied he had a close working relationship with Morens, suggesting that Morens did not advise him on “institute policy or other substantive issues.”
However, Morens’ plea deal includes a statement that he often consulted with an outside researcher, Peter Daszak, Ph.D., then-president of the EcoHealth Alliance, to prepare briefings for Fauci that would suggest COVID-19 had natural origins.
In a 2021 email released by the House and cited by The Hill, Morens told Daszak, “I can either send stuff to Tony [Fauci] on his private gmail, or hand it to him at work or at his house. He is too smart to let colleagues send him stuff that could cause trouble.”
In another 2021 email, Morens said he knew how to “make emails disappear after I am FOIA’d” — referring to Freedom of Information Act requests for federal records.
John Leake, vice president of the McCullough Foundation and author of “Mind Viruses: America’s Irrational Obsessions,” wrote on Substack that Morens’ guilty plea to a single conspiracy charge is “akin to Al Capone being convicted for income tax evasion.” Leake suggested the plea will have minimal impact on the COVID-19 origins probe.
“Though Morens will likely serve time behind bars, his guilty plea and his punishment for this particular act of fraud strike me as a distraction from the elephant in the room,” Leake wrote — referring to “the illegal creation and subsequent illegal concealment of a bio-weapon in a Chinese biosecurity lab.”
But for other analysts and commentators, attention is swirling back to Fauci in the aftermath of Morens’ guilty plea.
Jeffrey Tucker, president and founder of the Brownstone Institute, suggested Morens has likely agreed to testify against other figures in exchange for his plea deal and possibly a more lenient sentence.
“He is now ready to talk in exchange for a lighter sentence. He surely will talk and it will be fascinating to know everything he knows,” Tucker said.
Rutgers University molecular biologist Richard Ebright, Ph.D., agreed. Ebright has been a vocal critic of gain-of-function research, which lab-leak theory proponents have suggested likely resulted in the laboratory creation of SARS-CoV-2 and its subsequent leak from the Wuhan lab.
He said Morens “likely” acted “under orders from his boss — Fauci.”
Ebright said:
“Morens’ guilty plea is an important first step in holding accountable the malfeasant U.S. officials who funded the reckless gain-of-function research in Wuhan that caused COVID-19.
“It seems possible, even likely, that Morens has been ‘flipped’ by prosecutors, and that Morens’ guilty plea is the product of a plea bargain in which Morens has agreed to testify against Fauci, Daszak … and others.”
Morens’ plea deal included a sealed file, which Ebright suggested indicates Morens has agreed to testify against others — a view supported by research scientist and author James Lyons-Weiler, Ph.D., who wrote on Substack:
“Finally, because the plea agreement incorporates a sealed supplement and a separate factual stipulation, the currently public record is incomplete. That gap matters especially to speculation that Morens is cooperating against others. Such cooperation is possible in the abstract but cannot responsibly be asserted from the sealed filing’s existence alone. …
“ … We predicted that [Morens] would be offered a plea deal and specific charges dropped in exchange for testimony against Fauci and others.”
Morens received gifts for ‘behind-the-scenes shenanigans’
The indictment against Morens extensively referenced two co-conspirators, referred to as “Co-Conspirator 1” and “Co-Conspirator 2.”
According to the Post, documents released as part of the congressional investigation indicate the two people in question are Daszak and Dr. Gerald Keusch, former director of the NIH Fogarty International Center, which funded foreign scientists.
Morens, Daszak and Keusch “repeatedly discussed limiting their conversations to private email,” the Postreported.
Under Daszak’s leadership, the EcoHealth Alliance received a grant from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) — NIAID’s parent agency — for a study titled “Understanding the Risk of Bat Coronavirus Emergence.” The Wuhan lab later received a subaward from EcoHealth Alliance funded by the grant.
As part of his plea deal, Morens acknowledged that he received “illegal gratuities” from Daszak — including meals at Michelin-starred restaurants and bottles of wine — to thank him for his “advice, support, and behind-the-scenes shenanigans” in helping Daszak “restore the termination of the bat coronavirus grant and counter the narrative that COVID-19 leaked from a lab.”
According to the DOJ, “Morens then allegedly identified an official act that he could perform to ‘deserve’ the gift, which was to author a scientific commentary in a prominent medical journal advocating that COVID-19 had natural origins.”
Tucker said Morens was “once a promising intellectual” who “turned to the dark side” by acting on “Fauci’s orders” — including publishing journal articles supporting the establishment COVID-19 narrative.
Tucker cited a September 2020 article Morens co-authored with Fauci and published in the journal Cell, calling for “rebuilding the infrastructures of human existence.”
“It was dystopian to the extreme and he knew it,” Tucker said. “It reflected his mood — absurdity in the service of power.”
Will other Fauci aides vie to ‘rat each other out’ in exchange for plea deals?
Morens’ guilty plea is the latest development in the ongoing congressional investigation into COVID-19’s origins. In 2024, when he testified before Congress as part of the investigation, Morens denied trying to bypass federal law by routing communications through his personal email account.
Earlier this month, Paul referred Fauci for prosecution on contempt of Congress charges for refusing to answer questions during last month’s hearing. According to the Post, the DOJ is reviewing the request. It’s the third time Paul has referred Fauci to the DOJ for possible criminal charges.
In the waning moments of his administration last year, then-President Joe Biden preemptively pardoned Fauci for all of his official acts dating back to 2014 — the year that the NIH approved a grant for Daszak’s bat coronavirus research.
Legal experts previously told The Defender that while the pardon shields Fauci from federal prosecution for his official acts, it does not prevent states from filing charges against Fauci. And it does not shield him from contempt of Congress charges or perjury in subsequent testimony.
In 2024, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services suspended all funding for EcoHealth Alliance after finding the organization had failed to properly monitor coronavirus experiments.
In April, the NIH reportedly pulled all grants issued to virologist Ralph Baric, Ph.D., who worked with Fauci and researchers at the Wuhan lab before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Documents released last month suggest that in 2021, the FBI pressured U.S. Customs and Border Protection agents not to question Daszak on his return to the U.S. from China, where he had traveled as part of a World Health Organization investigation into COVID-19’s origins.
Last year, Daszak became president of Nature.Health.Global — a nonprofit that performs research on public health and pandemic prevention. Morens works for the nonprofit.
Ebright suggested that the “rat race now is on” for Fauci’s former close aides and allies to “rat each other out.”
“Morens, Daszak, Keusch and the others likely already are vying to be first to flip and thereby to snag the best plea deals.”
The US national debt is on track to surpass $40 trillion this week, months earlier than previously projected, as the US-Israeli war on Iran, renewed inflation fears and rising government borrowing push long-term bond yields higher across major economies.
The Treasury reported on Monday that US government debt stood at $39.9 trillion, putting it within reach of the milestone. Six months ago, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office had projected that federal borrowing would reach $39.4 trillion during the current fiscal year.
The faster accumulation of debt comes at a perilous moment for US finances. Investors are demanding higher returns to hold long-term government bonds amid concerns over inflation, geopolitical tensions, government debt levels and spending on artificial intelligence.
The yield on 30-year US Treasury bonds climbed to 5.33% on Tuesday, its highest level since June 2007. Long-term borrowing costs also rose in Britain, where yields reached 5.85%, as well as in Germany and Japan.
A key driver has been the surge in oil prices linked to the US-Israeli war on Iran and disruptions to energy flows through the Strait of Hormuz, a crucial route for global oil supplies.
Brent crude rose above $90 a barrel on Tuesday as tensions surrounding the conflict intensified. Prolonged high oil prices could reignite inflation by increasing transportation and production costs, potentially forcing central banks to keep interest rates higher for longer or raise them again.
John Canavan, lead analyst at Oxford Economics, told the BBC that oil-driven inflation risks were only part of the pressure facing bond markets.
High government debt, uncertainty over the vast amounts being invested in AI and questions about when those investments will generate returns are also contributing to higher borrowing costs, he said.
The US debt outlook is worsening as federal revenue falls and spending rises. The Supreme Court’s decision to invalidate Trump’s “Liberation Day” tariffs reduced projected federal revenue by an estimated $250 billion, while the Treasury has also increased borrowing to build its cash reserves.
The federal deficit was already expected to approach $2 trillion this year. Annual interest payments on the debt are projected to exceed $1 trillion, roughly equivalent to the Pentagon’s budget.
Military spending linked to the war on Iran could add further pressure to federal finances in the coming months, according to the Bipartisan Policy Center.
The growing debt burden could also bring the next US debt-ceiling confrontation forward. Congress set the borrowing limit at $41.1 trillion last year, but preliminary projections by the Bipartisan Policy Center suggest Washington could reach that threshold between late winter and midsummer 2027.
The broader pressure is not confined to the United States. Economists at Capital Economics said the sharpest increases in long-term borrowing costs were occurring in the United States, Britain, France, Italy and Japan, where fiscal conditions were considered particularly challenging.
They said the moves did not amount to a bond-market crisis, but investors had rational reasons to demand higher returns given greater geopolitical and inflation uncertainty, questions over US monetary policy and concerns about the sustainability of government finances.
For consumers, higher government bond yields can eventually translate into more expensive mortgages, car loans and other forms of credit, while companies may face higher financing costs and pass those increases on to customers.
Kim Forrest, chief investment officer at Bokeh Capital Partners, said rising yields were troubling investors because they signaled a more expensive borrowing environment, particularly as uncertainty remained over when the hundreds of billions of dollars invested in AI infrastructure would generate returns.
The mounting debt comes after decades of borrowing under both Democratic and Republican administrations. Trump pledged during his first presidential campaign to eliminate the debt within eight years, but it has instead doubled since he first took office.
Washington has repeatedly raised or suspended the debt limit when it has been reached, often after contentious political battles. Such confrontations have rattled financial markets and contributed to downgrades of U.S. government debt by major credit-rating agencies.
The Ukrainian parliament has unanimously approved Yevhen Khmara as Ukraine’s new defense minister, giving their go-ahead to a man who earlier pledged that “Russia will burn” after orchestrating the deadly August 12 attack on the Russian city of Novorossiysk.
A career SBU officer, Khmara is notoriously known for being behind some of the bloodiest operations carried out by the Ukrainian special services against Russian civilians.
As a former head of the SBU, he was complicit in these actions:
Operation “Spider Web”: On June 1, 2025, Ukraine carried out a large-scale drone attack on Russian strategic airfields in the Murmansk, Irkutsk, Ivanovo, Ryazan and Amur regions, targeting strategic bombers and other military aircraft.
Crocus City Hall attack: On March 22, 2024, gunmen attacked the Crocus City Hall concert venue near Moscow, killing 139 people and injuring hundreds more.
Assassination of Darya Dugina: In August 2022, Russian journalist Darya Dugina was killed when a bomb planted in her car exploded near Moscow.
Crimean Bridge explosions: The Crimean Bridge has been targeted in several major attacks, including the October 2022 truck bombing and a subsequent strike in July 2023.
Hundreds of deadly drone and missile strikes on the Russian cities of Belgorod, Kursk and Donetsk, including attacks on markets, maternity hospitals and bus stops.
Senior Iranian lawmaker Ebrahim Azizi has condemned France’s “constant betrayals” against the Islamic Republic, warning that Paris’s continued anti-Iranian measures will only further complicate its ties with Tehran.
“The Iranian people will never forget France’s constant betrayals over issues such as contaminated blood, INSTEX and snapback,” Azizi, chairman of the Iranian Parliament’s National Security and Foreign Policy Committee, wrote on X on Wednesday.
“Continuing this course and anti-Iranian actions will only make conditions more difficult for it,” he added.
Azizi’s reference to the INSTEX (Instrument in Support of Trade Exchanges) and snapback comes against the backdrop of longstanding disagreements between Iran and the E3 — France, Germany and the UK- over Tehran’s peaceful nuclear program.
The three countries shut down the INSTEX mechanism in 2023. Established in 2019, the INSTEX was designed to facilitate trade between European companies and Iran, bypassing the US sanctions.
The E3 also moved to trigger the UN Security Council’s “snapback” mechanism under the 2015 Iran nuclear deal last year, despite Tehran’s commitment to diplomacy and transparency regarding its nuclear program.
Azizi’s remarks came after Iran’s Foreign Ministry declared two French diplomats working at the French Embassy in Tehran persona non grata over activities that violated international law and the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations.
In a statement on Tuesday, the ministry said the two French officials had engaged in activities contrary to international law, particularly provisions of the Vienna Convention.
The ministry said that, despite several weeks having passed since the misconduct was uncovered, France had taken no steps to address the diplomats’ actions or provide assurances against similar incidents, prompting Tehran to bar the two from entering the country.
The move follows a diplomatic dispute between Tehran and Paris that escalated in July, when the diplomats were briefly detained in Tehran after Iranian forces discovered them at a secret meeting site while carrying out a judicial order to arrest two suspects in a major case involving foreign infiltration and interference.
Iran’s Ministry of Intelligence said the two diplomats had “extensive records of violations and conduct contrary to domestic laws and diplomatic obligations.”
Azizi also referred to the issue of HIV-contaminated blood products supplied by France in the 1980s, another longstanding grievance in Tehran’s relations with Paris.
In 1985, French pharmaceutical company Institut Mérieux supplied blood-clotting products contaminated with HIV to several countries, including Iran. The products were administered to hemophilia and thalassemia patients, many of whom contracted the virus and later died.
Iran recorded its first HIV infections among patients who had received the contaminated French blood products.
NATO war planners rarely discuss their “nightmare scenarios” in public and appear even less prepared for real-life confrontations on that scale. This is particularly true when it comes to simultaneous or near-simultaneous wars in which the most aggressive racketeering cartel in recorded history has to fight in Eastern Europe, the Middle East and East Asia. As the pillar of NATO, the United States would be forced to manage wars against Russia, Iran and China at once. One of the most infamous mainstream propaganda machine outlets, The Atlantic, explored this possibility, calling it “NATO’s nightmare”. The analysis largely focuses on “a coordinated assault by Beijing and Moscow” and how difficult it would be to “muster a viable defense” (obviously implying that NATO wouldn’t attack first, which is beyond laughable given its history).
The author, Simon Shuster, warns that “about a year ago, General Alexus Grynkewich, NATO’s top commander in Europe, publicly warned of the risk of a two-front war involving Russia and China and urged European allies to help the US prepare”. He quotes Florence Gaub, director of research at the NATO Defense College, who described it as “the scenario we’re currently not ready for”. She warns that “NATO strategists know the gap exists, but have not closed it” and that “despite growing military cooperation between Russia and China, Western governments have conducted only a handful of low-profile exercises examining what a joint attack might look like”. Although there weren’t any publicly acknowledged drills with this specific scenario in mind, Western-led military exercises in different areas of the world certainly focused on such a possibility.
However, The Atlantic admits that even when such scenarios were conducted as part of war games, the results were “less than optimistic”. The report quotes Mark Montgomery, a retired US Navy rear admiral who participated in major war games and stated that he last studied such a scenario roughly 15 years ago. Montgomery recalled that “it didn’t go well” because “even then, the US lacked the weapons stockpiles and industrial capacity to sustain a prolonged multifront war”. Even when numerous US allies, vassals and satellite states are added to the mix, “it made no difference at all”. What’s more, Montgomery warns that “those metrics have worsened, even as some NATO countries have increased defense spending”. To prove this is truly the case, one simply needs to look at the US aggression against Iran, which demonstrated remarkable resilience.
Worse yet (for America), Tehran also uncovered the Pentagon’s woeful incompetence in fighting a remotely capable opponent. A single country that the US promised to “defeat in three days to two weeks tops” has not only withstood all attacks in the last six months, but has also successfully retaliated against US occupation forces across the Middle East. It should be noted that Iran has been under Western sanctions for nearly half a century at this point. Now imagine how a direct confrontation with Russia or China would unfold, even separately, much less simultaneously. The Atlantic fears that “Moscow and Beijing have actually improved their positions”. The report points to the NATO-orchestrated Ukrainian conflict, which “pushed Russia’s massive industrial base onto a war footing and sharpened its use of drones”.
It also warns that “while China has not fought a major war in decades, it now surpasses the US in warships and long-range missiles”. Obviously, the Asian giant hasn’t fought a major war in nearly half a century because it has refused to do so. Nothing prevents Beijing from fully restoring its sovereignty over Taiwan by force. However, it seeks to resolve the dispute through peaceful means, just like it did when restoring sovereignty over Hong Kong and Macao back in 1997 and 1999, respectively. This is precisely what the US fears the most, as a non-violent transition would only strengthen China and effectively break US dominance in the Asia-Pacific without firing a single shot. Washington DC would much rather see Taiwan destroyed than give up its influence there peacefully. This is why the US maintains tight control over local military forces.
However, directing “controlled chaos” is not enough for the Pentagon to “feel safe”. Namely, growing Sino-Russian ties are what really makes the political West “shiver” (or should we say, suffer panic attacks). The Atlantic is particularly concerned by the “no-limits partnership” Presidents Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping announced back in February 2022. NATO simply has no mechanisms to prevent Moscow and Beijing from building their alliance. On the contrary, its truly unprovoked aggression against the entire world has only strengthened their strategic partnership. The Atlantic thinks that “from Russia’s and China’s perspective, the timing may look favorable”, primarily because “the US is stretched by conflict in the Middle East, has shifted ships and aircraft away from Europe and Asia, and has depleted much of its advanced air-defense missile stockpile”.
Well, nobody forced Washington DC to wage yet another war of aggression. Neither Moscow nor Beijing forced the Trump administration to foolishly attack Iran. However, even the Middle East pales in comparison to how Western forces would fare in a fight against adversaries such as Russia and China, particularly now that the NATO-orchestrated Ukrainian conflict has turned the Russian military into the deadliest fighting force on the planet. The Atlantic concludes that “in a two-front war, the side most likely to prevail may be the one that acts with common purpose and stays united”. It would seem NATO didn’t learn from the strategic mistakes of its Axis predecessors, because that’s precisely what’s going to happen if it continues with its aggression against the entire world, which will have no other choice but to unite.
Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst.
David Miller is a British sociologist whose research and publications focus on Islamophobia and propaganda. Miller was Professor of Political Sociology at the University of Bristol, where he was dismissed by the university because it was deemed he had not met the standards of behavior expected from staff. The dismissal related to allegations from students that Miller engaged in antisemitism during one of his lectures.
Miller was ultimately cleared of any unlawful behavior. In 2026, the Employment Appeal Tribunal upheld the 2024 Employment Tribunal finding that Miller’s anti-Zionist beliefs constituted a protected philosophical belief under section 10 of the Equality Act 2010.
In this interview Miller discusses his victory over Zionism, Pax Judaica, and Jewish Supremacy. Miller describes how the United States and its powerful armed forces have become a proxy for the Jewish state’s imperial interests.
US President Donald Trump’s so-called Board of Peace is “weighing” a “new” Hamas disarmament proposal after Tel Aviv rejected Washington’s latest one, sources told theTimes of Israel on 18 August.
“The Board of Peace is considering abandoning its phased framework for Hamas’s disarmament” due to the “Israeli pushback,” an informed source told the Israeli outlet.
“Instead of having Hamas hand over its weapons in phases, with Israel conducting corresponding withdrawals … another option being weighed by the Board of Peace would see Hamas hand over all weapons throughout Gaza, and only then would Israel have to pull back its troops to the Gaza border,” the report went on to say.
The new proposal being reported on is, essentially, what Israel has been demanding – a full surrender by the resistance prior to any discussion on withdrawal of occupation forces.
“The shift could be enough to get Israel on board, it risks losing the support of Hamas,” the Times of Israel wrote.
An Israeli official claimed to the outlet that there remains a dispute between Tel Aviv and Washington over the initial disarmament plan.
The source says the US has not yet dropped the original plan but is considering a “wholesale approach” to appease Israel.
“In this different approach, the entire area currently under Hamas’s control would be decommissioned of weapons all at once, rather than sector by sector.”
The report follows a Monday meeting between Trump’s son-in-law and top aide Jared Kushner and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Board of Peace director Nickolay Mladenov was also present.
Another Hebrew report released by Israel’s Channel 12 said Kushner reportedly opposes Netanyahu on his plans to continue strikes and assassinations in Gaza.
“There was no agreement between Netanyahu and Kushner on the continuation of the assassination operations,” a source told Channel 12. “Netanyahu made clear that he will continue the assassinations, while Kushner expressed his opposition to them.”
Kushner had also met with Hamas officials in Egypt prior to his meeting with Netanyahu on Monday. The new reports coincide with continued Israeli attacks across Gaza.
Hamas said when Washington announced the new “disarmament deal” that it would hand over its weapons to the US-endorsed Palestinian committee of technocrats tasked with governing Gaza – but “only” if Israel adheres to its commitments. Israel continues to bar this committee from entering the strip.
Tel Aviv has openly refused the new deal – which Trump referred to as “historic” – claiming both Hamas and Israel were on board.
Hamas insists that any full disarmament depends on the establishment of an independent Palestinian state. According to several reports, intensive talks on the wording of the new disarmament deal took place between Hamas officials and mediators.
The reports say the weapons will be “stored” but not handed over to Israel or destroyed.
Israel has not stopped attacks, violations, and genocide since the 2025 US plan was launched. It has also illegally occupied 70 percent of the strip.
Since the start of Trump’s so-called peace plan, over 1,200 Palestinians have been killed and more than 4,000 wounded by Israel in Gaza.
Thousands of buildings have been demolished via detonation.
More incitement to violence from Israeli Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir exposes how colonial violence is aimed at the entire colonised population. Speaking on a podcast with former Israeli hostage Rom Braslavski, Ben Gvir said that Israeli forced should kill 30-40 Palestinians each night in Gaza.
Braslavski requested to act as executioner should Ben Gvir’s plan come to pass, to which the security minister replied, “I will turn the world upside down to make that happen. I promise you that I will do everything I can and turn the world upside down until it happens.”
As shocking as the comments are, both are the product of an enterprise that knows it can only sustain itself through ethnic cleansing.
In 2025, a poll by the Hebrew University Centre showed that 87 per cent of the Israeli government’s supporters perceived “no innocents’ in Gaza, while 64 per cent of Israelis held the same view.
Israel’s Channel 14 branded all Palestinians killed during the genocide as terrorists. Among settlers that normalise the killings of Palestinians, and which even glorifies those murdering them, Ben Gvir’s comments are unlikely to elicit any lingering shock. On the contrary, Ben Gvir’s wish for extrajudicial killings may well find willing participants. And while Gaza remains within reach of the Israeli military in terms of extrajudicial assassinations, the occupied West Bank faces both Israeli institutions and settlers.
Ben Gvir’s comments were aimed at Gaza, but Israel’s colonisation plans do not only include Gaza. The occupied West Bank, which faces daily violence from settlers, is much at risk from extrajudicial killings. In Ras al-Ain, south of Nablus, Israeli settlers besieged Palestinian families and cut off their electricity, water and food supplies. While attracting international attention, the UN as usual preferred to rely on its usual condemnations while Erika Guevara Ross, Amnesty International Senior Director for Research, Advocacy, Policy and Campaigns, described the siege as “an accelerating and well-documented pattern of coordinated and strategic settler terror, enabled, backed and funded by the State of Israel.” True, but what is being done with the information that is already mainstream knowledge to the rest of the world?
Likewise, Ben Gvir’s comments have not prompted a reckoning with world leaders or international institutions. Israel has already internalised such thinking – it thrives upon creating victims to sustain itself. The international community, supposedly a reference for human rights under the UN, does not seem to consider Ben Gvir’s threats dangerous enough. Even though Israel has a proven history of torturing and killing Palestinians.
Killing 30-40 Palestinians per night is not merely a fantasy. It has already been carried out by the Israeli military during the genocide; also exceeding that quota. Ben Gvir has also found someone willing to carry out the assassinations, even on a much larger scale. For Israel, as Ben Gvir again elucidated, Palestinians “are not worthy of life. They shouldn’t live. They’re not even people.”
If, according to Ben Gvir, killing Palestinians is killing non-people, then Israel is already completely absolved of culpability. This is the type of impunity the UN is harvesting for Israel.
Israel launched a new wave of strikes on Syria on 18 August, despite no threat being posed to it by the extremist-led authorities in Damascus, which fought against Tel Aviv’s adversaries for years.
The new Israeli strikes hit the Abu al-Duhur Military Base in the countryside of the northern city of Idlib on Tuesday.
Syria’s Foreign Ministry released a statement condemning the attack.
It described Israel’s strikes as “an unjustified act of aggression and a dangerous escalation threatening regional security and stability.”
“Continued Israeli attacks since 8 December 2024, while Syria exercises restraint and works to consolidate stability and avoid escalation, reveal attempts by the Israeli occupation to undermine those efforts and push the region toward further tension and instability,” the ministry added, according to Syrian state media.
Washington also expressed “concern,” with US envoy to Syria and former Epstein associate Tom Barrack condemning “the unnecessary escalation that does not advance regional stability.”
Barrack also praised Damascus and its forces for posing no threat to Israel, as Damascus itself has repeatedly confirmed.
He posted on X that the government of self-appointed Syrian President Ahmad al-Sharaa “has neither adopted a predatory posture nor maintained proxy forces. It has, in fact, repeatedly indicated a preference for de-escalation with Israel.”
According to Syrian media, eight Israeli airstrikes hit the base.
“Israeli occupation aircraft early this morning targeted the runway of the Abu Duhur military airport … with eight strikes,” sources told state television.
The attack comes not long after Damascus’s forces were said to have been given access to Washington’s “final” base in Syria, after a several-month process of US withdrawal from the country following years of occupation.
It remains unclear to what extent Washington has withdrawn. Iran recently announced operations targeting what it said were US forces and assets in Syria.
The US for years trained extremist forces at its Al-Tanf Base in Syria. It also armed and financed several other factions in Syria throughout the war, including the Noureddine al-Zinki movement, responsible for the beheading of a 12-year-old boy as well as other war crimes.
Many of these Al-Qaeda- and ISIS-linked groups, including the Noureddine al-Zinki movement, are now brigades in the new Syrian army established after the fall of former president Bashar al-Assad’s government.
This army has killed thousands of Alawites, Druze, and Kurdish civilians since the formation of the new Syrian state – but have not targeted Israeli troops which illegally occupied the country after Assad’s departure.
Damascus has openly declared that it holds no hostility toward Israel and is not looking for confrontation with it. Despite this, Israel continues to attack the country and expand its occupation of Syrian territory.
Since Assad left Syria, Israeli occupation forces have practically encircled Damascus.
Major Syrian military capabilities belonging to the former army were destroyed by Israeli attacks in the first days after Sharaa’s government took power.
Sharaa, the new president, was formerly an Al-Qaeda chief who served as deputy to late ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi.
The Syrian president is directly responsible for brutal suicide bombings against civilians and holy sites in Syria, Lebanon, and Iraq.
The Iraqi Kata’ib Hezbollah resistance group has set conditions for any understanding with the Baghdad government to place all its weapons under state control, including a full withdrawal of US military forces from the country.
The group’s security chief, Abu Mujahid al-Assaf, announced in a statement on Monday that the first condition to integrate into the state’s armed forces is for US forces to completely withdraw from Iraqi soil and airspace, offer cast-iron guarantees that they would not come back, and ensure that Iraqi political and economic apparatuses will make decisions free from American sway.
The second condition, he added, is the withdrawal of Turkish forces from areas in the semi-autonomous Kurdistan Region in northern Iraq, while the third one is the dissolution of the Peshmerga, which serves as the official armed forces of the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG).
Assaf went on to criticize Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi, saying that Iraqi anti-terror resistance groups had waited “more than a hundred days” for him to address the internal, regional, and international pressures over the issue of restricting weapons to the state, as a September 30 deadline approaches.
He asserted that Zaidi is disregarding advice from allied political factions, and is instead taking heed of demands being made by certain parties and the US Ambassador to Turkey and Special Presidential Envoy for Syria and Iraq, Tom Barrack.
The remarks came on the same day that Iraq’s four top state authorities renewed calls for the implementation of the Iraqi government’s plan to disarm the armed groups and bring weapons under state control.
In a statement following a Monday meeting in Baghdad between President Nizar Amedi, the prime minister, Parliament Speaker Haibat al-Halbousi and President of the Supreme Judicial Council Faiq Zaidan, the officials stressed the importance of strengthening and developing the capabilities of Iraq’s armed forces “across all spectra” and protecting the country and its citizens.
Successive administrations in Iraq have vowed to bolster state power and to bring all weaponry under the jurisdiction of recognized institutions.
On June 3, Sabah al-Numan, the spokesperson for the commander-in-chief of the armed forces, declared the establishment of a committee aimed at restricting weapons to state control, affirming that the committee had commenced its operations.
While several Iraqi resistance groups, such as Saraya al-Salam, Asa’ib Ahl al-Haq and Kata’ib al-Imam Ali, have agreed to integrate into the state’s armed forces, Kata’ib Hezbollah has pledged to retain “resistance weapons” and further develop its arsenal.
While the US Trump administration insists that the very much closed Strait of Hormuz is in fact open and grapples with domestic pushback against his war losses, Iran has been busy pursuing a military strategy that is placing a chokehold on their opposition.
Although the ongoing regional war has been experiencing a lull in direct confrontations between the Islamic Republic of Iran and the US-Israeli alliance, a series of other fronts have become the focus of Tehran’s recent efforts.
Contrary to what you would be led to believe by the corporate media, Iran’s ballistic missile and drone fire has not ceased. Instead, officials belonging to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) have made it clear that there is no ceasefire in effect and that their operations are therefore being carried out in a coordinated fashion.
One of the fronts Iran has chosen to keep open is northern Iraq, where it has consistently launched short-range ballistic missiles and drone waves, targeting headquarters, hideouts, bases and weapons depots belonging to Kurdish-Iranian opposition factions backed by the United States. Powerful blasts are being reported on a near-daily basis in Suleimaniyeh and Erbil, with footage often confirming direct impacts on strategic targets.
US President Donald Trump has been vocal since the first weeks of the war on Iran, which began on February 28 of this year, that he was expecting action from his Kurdish allies that he armed during the riots in Iran a month prior. Leaked reports in the American press suggested that a plan was being drawn up that would see the use of these Kurdish militant groups to invade the Iranian mainland, triggering a process that would – in their minds – lead to the disintegration of the Islamic Republic.
A Kurdish breakaway State project was one major card that the US and Israel – which was revealed to have established bases in Iraqi Kurdistan – were hoping to play against Tehran. The IRGC and Iranian Regular Army have not let that go, choosing to launch persistent strikes and even deploy special forces units to carry out operations on the ground against these groups.
Meanwhile, Iran’s Yemeni allies have mobilized their forces and are committing major offensive operations against their Saudi-backed opposition. They have also imposed an unprecedented equation on Saudi Arabia, where they are now implementing a counter-blockade that places a further chokehold on global oil supplies, while striking Saudi oil facilities in retaliation to violations of Yemeni airspace alone.
The threats of Iraqi factions to intervene in Syria, if the leadership in Damascus follows Trump’s orders to attack Lebanon, combined with reports that Iran will launch strikes on targets belonging to the Syrian regime, also appear to be an effort to prevent this step from taking place.
In the Strait of Hormuz, the IRGC Navy continues to take out tankers with drones and missiles if they choose to attempt to break the blockade with US coordination. When this occurs, US Central Command refrains from even making regular comments, a far cry from its previous threats to bomb Iranian civilian infrastructure in retaliation for every tanker struck.
As this has all been happening, the US is scrambling to replace its USS Abraham Lincoln Aircraft Carrier, after reports emerge that chaos is erupting on board. The vessel has been deployed for over 9 months and is now facing a food shortage that has impacted around 5,000 sailors. The situation is so bad that some reports even indicated that the first fights broke out on the ship, deaths have occurred, and that some service members either attempted or were considering suicide.
Recent reports also indicate that Iran has destroyed at least 45 US MQ-9 Reaper Drones, costing roughly $1.3 billion in total; this is on top of the US military expending most of its long-range precision missiles and depleting 80% of its THAAD interceptor stockpile.
The Israelis are currently refusing to budge when it comes to Lebanon, Gaza and Syria, while escalating their attacks on Palestinians in the occupied West Bank, fronts that could all escalate very quickly and drain more resources.
Iran has demonstrated that it is far from depleting its weapons stockpiles and even Israeli intelligence estimates assess that it has rapidly recovered from the 40-day war period. What has become clear is that the US President has to make a choice sooner or later: either he signs what will effectively be a surrender agreement and pushes back against the Israel Lobby, or he decides to try an all-out war one last time.
In 1924, Arm & Hammer distributed a twenty-eight-page booklet to physicians describing sodium bicarbonate as clinical medicine — for influenza, kidney disease, gastric distress, uric acid disturbances, respiratory illness, and the general support of the body’s cleansing processes. Arm & Hammer, as the manufacturer, could not distribute that booklet today. The substance is unchanged. What changed is the regulatory environment, which now restricts what manufacturers of unpatentable compounds can say about them.
Two of those compounds are the subject of the two books out today. Both were in every kitchen. Both were routine medicine for generations. Both were quietly written out of the professional conversation as the drug model took over. Neither has stopped working. Neither is expensive. Neither is new. What they are is recovered.
This site is provided as a research and reference tool. Although we make every reasonable effort to ensure that the information and data provided at this site are useful, accurate, and current, we cannot guarantee that the information and data provided here will be error-free. By using this site, you assume all responsibility for and risk arising from your use of and reliance upon the contents of this site.
This site and the information available through it do not, and are not intended to constitute legal advice. Should you require legal advice, you should consult your own attorney.
Nothing within this site or linked to by this site constitutes investment advice or medical advice.
Materials accessible from or added to this site by third parties, such as comments posted, are strictly the responsibility of the third party who added such materials or made them accessible and we neither endorse nor undertake to control, monitor, edit or assume responsibility for any such third-party material.
The posting of stories, commentaries, reports, documents and links (embedded or otherwise) on this site does not in any way, shape or form, implied or otherwise, necessarily express or suggest endorsement or support of any of such posted material or parts therein.
The word “alleged” is deemed to occur before the word “fraud.” Since the rule of law still applies. To peasants, at least.
Fair Use
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more info go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
DMCA Contact
This is information for anyone that wishes to challenge our “fair use” of copyrighted material.
If you are a legal copyright holder or a designated agent for such and you believe that content residing on or accessible through our website infringes a copyright and falls outside the boundaries of “Fair Use”, please send a notice of infringement by contacting atheonews@gmail.com.
We will respond and take necessary action immediately.
If notice is given of an alleged copyright violation we will act expeditiously to remove or disable access to the material(s) in question.
All 3rd party material posted on this website is copyright the respective owners / authors. Aletho News makes no claim of copyright on such material.