Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Florida Governor Slams Proposal to Engineer Meat Allergies in Humans to ‘Save the Planet’

By Michael Nevradakis, Ph.D. | The Defender | October 20, 2025

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis last week publicly rejected the notion that humans could be engineered to develop a red meat allergy as a way to curb meat consumption and protect the environment — an idea he linked to the World Economic Forum (WEF) and the World Health Organization (WHO).

On X, DeSantis posted a 2016 video of Matthew Liao, a professor of bioethics at New York University and director of its Center for Bioethics. Liao tells his audience that ticks could be used to spread allergies that make humans unable to tolerate red meat — an idea that has been repeated by other bioethicists.

“People eat too much meat. And if they were to cut down on their consumption of meat, then it would actually really help the planet,” Liao said in the video. “There’s this thing called the lone star tick, where if it bites you, you will become allergic to meat. So, that’s something we can do through human engineering.”

DeSantis said Liao’s statements are “an example of why entities like the WEF and WHO are persona non grata” in Florida.

“Genetically engineering humans to become allergic to meat because some elites think people eat ‘too much’ of it is insane,” DeSantis wrote.

Tim Hinchliffe, editor of The Sociable, said that while Liao’s comments were not new — the video is from an almost 10-year-old talk at the World Science Festival — DeSantis’ remarks were significant.

“Although he’s slow to the game, at least he’s noticing,” Hinchliffe said.

Liao “has been talking about making people allergic to meat for over a decade, going back to his TED Talk 12 years ago, in 2013,” Hinchliffe said.

During that talk, Liao said, “Just as some people are naturally intolerant to milk or crayfish, like myself, we could artificially induce mild intolerance to meat by stimulating our immune system against common bovine proteins.”

Sayer Ji, chairman of the Global Wellness Forum and founder of GreenMedInfo, said DeSantis is “right to call out the WEF’s agenda targeting meat consumption.”

“This isn’t dietary advice — it’s social engineering,” Ji said. “Unelected global organizations have no business dictating what free people eat, especially when they’re demonizing traditional foods that have sustained human health for millennia.”

In a follow-up X post Friday, DeSantis questioned widespread claims that cattle and their carbon footprint harm the environment. “The notion that cattle are destroying the planet has always been ridiculous,” he wrote.

Kendall Mackintosh, a board-certified nutrition specialist, said such claims aren’t “just about climate,” but are also centered around “control and consolidation.”

“Real, regenerative farming supports independence and local economies. Centralizing food systems through synthetic or lab-grown products benefits corporations, not families,” Mackintosh said.

Ji agreed. He said such proposals are indicative of “the merger of biotechnology and behavioral control.” He added:

“The war on meat has never been about climate. It’s about control — consolidating food production under centralized, patented, technology-dependent systems.

“Meat represents everything the global technocracy fears: decentralized production, nutritional independence and cultural traditions that resist standardization. When people can raise their own food, they’re harder to control. The WEF understands this perfectly.”

Recent paper suggests spreading meat allergy to humans is a moral obligation

A paper published earlier this month in the journal Bioethics proposed using the lone star tick to spread alpha-gal syndrome (AGS), “a condition whose only effect is the creation of a severe but nonfatal red meat allergy.”

In the paper, Western Michigan University bioethics professors Parker Crutchfield, Ph.D., and Blake Hereth, Ph.D., argued that “if eating meat is morally impermissible, then efforts to prevent the spread of tickborne AGS are also morally impermissible.”

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), when it bites, the lone star tick transmits the alpha-gal sugar molecule into the human bloodstream, leading to a red meat allergy. Consuming red meat after being infected could result in life-threatening anaphylaxis.

The paper’s authors present what they called the “Convergence Argument.” If a specific action “prevents the world from becoming a significantly worse place, doesn’t violate anyone’s rights, and promotes virtuous action or character,” then it becomes a moral obligation to perform this action, they said.

According to the authors, the use of AGS to spread a red meat allergy to humans meets these criteria. However, they acknowledged ethical obstacles: few people would likely volunteer for the tick bite, and forcing it on people would raise questions of bodily autonomy and freedom.

The authors told The College Fix in an August email that their paper does not constitute an endorsement of spreading AGS to humans, but offers a hypothetical framework raising ethical and philosophical questions.

Mackintosh questioned this denial. “Calling it a ‘thought experiment’ doesn’t make it any less disturbing. The idea that inducing an allergy or harming human health could somehow serve a moral purpose shows just how far detached some parts of academia have become from basic human ethics,” she said.

“The fact that this was even published tells you how normalized these anti-human, anti-food narratives are becoming under the guise of ‘ethics,’” Mackintosh added.

Ji said the paper raises questions about bodily autonomy.

“This is about far more than food, it’s about whether human beings retain sovereignty over their own bodies, or whether that sovereignty can be overridden by those who believe they know better. The answer to that question will determine whether we remain free,” he said.

Mackintosh questioned the authors’ claim that lone star tick bites “only” lead to AGS.

AGS “can cause severe allergic reactions, including anaphylaxis, and can completely alter someone’s diet and quality of life,” Mackintosh said. “The suggestion of using ticks or any biological vector to intentionally spread an allergy is beyond unethical. It’s dangerous, unpredictable and medically reckless.”

A 2023 CDC report said AGS cases were on the rise in the U.S.

DeSantis previously outlawed sale of lab-grown meat in Florida

While DeSantis didn’t directly address the paper or AGS in his X posts, he has consistently spoken out against efforts to shift people away from red meat and toward alternatives such as lab-grown meat and insects.

Last year, DeSantis signed legislation prohibiting the sale of lab-grown meat in Florida. According to a press release, the law aims “to stop the World Economic Forum’s goal of forcing the world to eat lab-grown meat and insects,” which a 2021 WEF article characterized as an “overlooked” source of protein.”

“Florida is fighting back against the global elite’s plan to force the world to eat meat grown in a petri dish or bugs to achieve their authoritarian goals,” DeSantis said at the time.

DeSantis has previously questioned other WEF and WHO policies, saying they are unwelcome in Florida.

Joseph Sansone, Ph.D., a psychotherapist who sued DeSantis and Florida Attorney General Ashley Moody to prohibit mRNA vaccines in Florida, said that while he has been “litigating against DeSantis for over a year and a half to stop mRNA injections,” he agrees with DeSantis on this issue.

“DeSantis is calling out something that many Americans feel — they don’t want global organizations or unelected bodies deciding what they can or can’t eat,” Sansone said.

Mackintosh said lab-grown meat raises questions about potential health risks.

“There are questions about contamination risks, the use of antibiotics or growth media, nutrient content, and even the true environmental impact once scaled up. It’s also ultra-processed — far from the whole, nutrient-dense foods our bodies were designed to thrive on,” she said.

“Many lab-grown meat companies are using immortalized cell lines — cells that are capable of continuously dividing and growing in a manner disturbingly similar to cancer cells,” Ji said. There is a “complete absence of long-term safety studies” for such products.

Scientists have raised similar concerns about human consumption of insects. The exoskeletons of many insects contain chitin, a natural material that can trigger an allergic reaction in humans. Some studies suggest that humans cannot digest chitin, while other studies suggest humans “don’t digest it well.”

WEF suggests consuming alternative meats will ‘save the planet’

The WEF has repeatedly promoted reducing the consumption of red meat and animal products.

In a 2019 video, the WEF suggested that in the not-too-distant future, humans would be allowed to consume only “one beef burger, two portions of fish and one or two eggs per week” to “save the planet.”

That year, the WEF published a white paper calling for “a transformation in the global system for protein provision” to meet climate-related targets.

Also in 2019, the WEF published an article stating that humans will be “eating replacement meats within 20 years.” A 2020 WEF article said there were “promising” signs that humans will begin consuming lab-grown meats. A 2022 WEF article said lab-grown meat “almost entirely eliminates the need to farm animals for food.”

Mackintosh said corporate interests are behind the push for “alternative” meats.

“The biggest winners in the lab-grown meat push are large food conglomerates, biotech companies and venture capital investors who own the patents and production technology. Small farmers and ranchers — the backbone of our food system — lose. This is about creating dependence, not sustainability,” she said.

Ji agreed. “Follow the money. Biotech corporations and their investors stand to profit massively from patents and market control,” he said.

In 2019, Bill Gates invested in Beyond Meat, an alternative meat producer. In his 2021 book, “How to Avoid a Climate Disaster: The Solutions We Have and the Breakthroughs We Need,” Gates said stopping climate change requires a shift in human behavior, including a switch to synthetic meats. He later suggested that wealthy countries should switch to “100% synthetic beef.”

Beyond Meat’s stock price recently cratered, dropping from an all-time high of $240 to less than $1 amid low consumer demand in the U.S.

Liao suggested chemically inducing empathy, making kids smaller

DeSantis and others have suggested a link between Liao and the WEF, including a claim that Liao’s 2012 co-authored paper, “Human Engineering and Climate Change,” which argued that “human engineering deserves further consideration in the debate about climate change,” was the subject of a discussion at the WEF’s 2021 annual meeting.

At present, the only mention of Liao on the WEF’s website is in connection to a paper he co-published last month proposing “a structured approach” to the governance of artificial intelligence.

Hinchliffe noted that the WEF “does have a habit of scrubbing what it considers to be negative publicity from its website.” However, whether or not there is a direct connection between Liao and the WEF, Liao “is definitely aligned” with WEF policies, he said.

Liao previously suggested how humans could change their bodies to fight climate change. These include the “pharmacological induction of empathy,” which involves taking a pill to induce empathy; “cognitive enhancements” so that humans have fewer children; memory modification; and administering hormones to children so that they remain smaller in size because “being smaller is environmentally friendly.”

Ji said:

“Academic papers proposing disease vectors to manipulate behavior aren’t harmless philosophy — they’re rehearsals. They move the Overton window, normalize the abnormal and provide intellectual scaffolding for future atrocities. The field of bioethics has become less about protecting human dignity and more about rationalizing its violation.”

This article was originally published by The Defender — Children’s Health Defense’s News & Views Website under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Please consider subscribing to The Defender or donating to Children’s Health Defense.

October 21, 2025 Posted by | Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity | , , | Leave a comment

Rick Sanchez: War Propaganda & Suffocating Censorship Weaken the West

Glenn Diesen | October 19, 2025

Award-winning journalist Rick Sanchez has worked for CNN, MSNBC, Fox News and RT, which gives him a unique perspective on the Western and Russian media. Sanchez outlines how the war propaganda and rise of censorship across the West prevent us from pursuing rational policies.

October 20, 2025 Posted by | Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Russophobia, Video | , , | Leave a comment

Tylenol: From Painkiller to Empathy Killer

Why America’s most trusted drug may be quietly numbing our humanity

By Sayer Ji | September 24, 2025

Last week’s historic announcement from HHS and President Trump connecting Tylenol use with the autism epidemic reignited longstanding concerns over Tylenol’s toxicity. For decades, the focus has been on liver damage and accidental overdoses. But the deeper story—the one still hiding in plain sight—is more disturbing: even a single dose of acetaminophen (Tylenol’s active ingredient) measurably blunts human empathy, dulls positive emotions, and increases risk-taking behavior.

This isn’t just a matter of personal health. It’s a social and spiritual crisis. If one-quarter of U.S. adults are taking Tylenol weekly, we may be medicating away our collective capacity for compassion.

The Research That Changes Everything

In a landmark 2015 Psychological Science study, titled “Over-the-Counter Relief From Pains and Pleasures Alike,” researchers at Ohio State University gave healthy adults a single standard 1,000 mg dose of acetaminophen (Tylenol) and then exposed them to emotionally charged images—ranging from disturbing to uplifting.

The outcome was unambiguous:

  • Disturbing images were rated less negatively.
  • Uplifting images were rated less positively.
  • Across the board, participants reported feeling less emotional arousal, even when viewing the most extreme stimuli.

Brain research helps explain why: acetaminophen dampens activity in the anterior insula and anterior cingulate cortex—regions responsible for processing both physical pain and emotional resonance. These are the same circuits that allow us to feel empathy and to be moved by joy, awe, or sorrownihms703262.

The authors concluded:

“Acetaminophen attenuates individuals’ evaluations and emotional reactions to negative and positive stimuli alike… Rather than being labeled merely a pain reliever, acetaminophen might be better described as an all-purpose emotion reliever.”

2. Tylenol Reduces Empathy for Others’ Suffering

In 2016, researchers at Ohio State University published a Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience study titled “From Painkiller to Empathy Killer” (Mischkowski, Crocker, & Way, 2016). Participants who took a standard 1,000 mg dose of acetaminophen showed significantly reduced empathic concern when reading scenarios of people experiencing social or physical pain compared to those on placebo.

Neuroimaging explained why: acetaminophen dampened activity in the anterior insula and anterior cingulate cortex—the same brain regions that fire when we experience physical pain ourselves and when we empathize with the pain of others. In effect, Tylenol blunts the shared circuitry of compassion.

The story didn’t end there. In 2019, another study in Frontiers in Psychology confirmed the effect for positive empathy—our ability to share in others’ happiness (Randles, Harms, & Finn, 2019). After taking acetaminophen, participants reported less joy when hearing about others’ uplifting experiences. The researchers warned:

“Acetaminophen reduces affective reactivity to others’ positive experiences. Because positive empathy underlies prosocial behavior, this raises concern about the societal impact of excessive acetaminophen use.”

The Implication: Tylenol doesn’t just ease your headache—it quietly severs the neural bridges of human connection, dulling both our sensitivity to suffering and our capacity to celebrate joy with others.

3. Tylenol Increases Risk-Taking

In 2020, Baldwin Way and colleagues at Ohio State published a Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience paper showing that acetaminophen (Tylenol) not only blunts empathy but also alters how people perceive risk.

In a series of experiments:

  • 189 college students were randomly given either 1,000 mg of acetaminophen or placebo. They then rated the danger of activities like bungee jumping, walking alone at night in unsafe areas, or having unprotected sex.
  • Those who had taken acetaminophen consistently judged these behaviors as less risky.
  • In a second test, 545 students performed the “balloon analogue risk task,” where participants inflate a virtual balloon to earn money, knowing it might burst. The Tylenol group pumped the balloons significantly more times, resulting in more bursts and more losses—clear evidence of blunted fear of negative consequences

The mechanism seems to mirror acetaminophen’s emotional numbing effects: by dulling negative affect, the drug also dulls the anxiety signals that normally restrain risky behavior.

The scale of exposure is staggering. Around 52 million Americans take acetaminophen every week. Even slight shifts in how people evaluate risk, magnified across such widespread use, could ripple through society—affecting decisions from health and safety to finances, relationships, and beyond.

The Implication: Tylenol doesn’t just dull pain and empathy. It can tip the scales of judgment itself, making dangerous choices feel less threatening. Multiply this by millions of daily users, and the “safe, everyday painkiller” becomes a silent force reshaping collective behavior.

The Numbers Don’t Lie

  • ¼ of American adults use Tylenol weekly.
  • 600+ medications contain acetaminophen, from cold remedies to prescription opioids
  • 110,000 injuries and deaths per year are linked to acetaminophen
  • Empathy reduction is measurable after a single dose

This is not a fringe concern. It is a public health crisis with spiritual dimensions.

The Deeper Question

What happens to a society when its most common drug blunts compassion, dulls joy, and fuels reckless risk-taking?

We are not just facing an epidemic of liver toxicity. We are facing a subtle epidemic of soul toxicity. Tylenol, in numbing pain, may be numbing our humanity itself.

The time has come to ask: Is the cost of convenience worth the erosion of empathy?

Learn more about Tylenol’s long established risks in our series below :

Broken Trust: The Tylenol Cover-Up That May Have Damaged Millions of Children

Part I: Breaking: Government Finally Admits Tylenol-Autism Link After Years of Corporate Cover-Up

Part II Tylenol and Autism, Part II: The Swedish Study That Got It Wrong

Part III: Broken Trust: The Tylenol Cover-Up That May Have Damaged Millions of Children

October 20, 2025 Posted by | Timeless or most popular | , | Leave a comment

US envoy says Syria ‘back to our side’ after joint raid with extremist-led govt forces

The Cradle | October 20, 2025

US envoy to Syria Tom Barrack declared on 19 October that Syria and the US are once again allies.

In a post on X, Barrack said, “Syria is back to our side,” following reports of a joint US-Syrian security operation near Damascus, allegedly to detain an ISIS member.

Barrack commented on a post by Qatar-funded analyst Charles Lister claiming that US special forces launched a helicopter-borne raid into the town of Dumayr in the desert northwest of Damascus on 18 October. The operation was carried out in cooperation with Syrian counter-terror units to capture an ISIS operative.

However, the raid raises questions about its authenticity, as the ISIS operative detained during the operation, Ahmed Abdullah al-Badri, was openly living in Dumayr and enjoyed close ties with officials in the current Syrian government, led by self-declared president and former ISIS commander Ahmad al-Sharaa.

Kurdish-Syrian journalist Scharo Maroof reported that Badri had invited the governor of Damascus, Mohammed Amer, to his guest house in September. Maroof pointed to a photo showing Badri walking alongside the governor and his delegation during their visit to Badri’s home.

The Syrian government has carried out several fake raids against ISIS cells since coming to power in December, including after allegedly foiling an ISIS attack on the Sayyida Zaynab Shrine in southern Damascus in January, and following a suicide bombing at the Mar Elias Church in Damascus in June.

It was later revealed that members of Sharaa’s General Security Service (GSS) carried out the suicide attack that killed 25 worshipers and injured 52 more at the church in the Duweila district of Damascus.

The logic behind targeting Christians and blaming the attack on ISIS was explained by a former founder of Al-Qaeda in Syria (Nusra Front), Saleh al‑Hamwi.

While promoting the narrative that ISIS was responsible for the Mar Elias attack, he stated on the social media site X that, as a result, “The international community will rally around [the Syrian government], it will receive significant support, and it will join the international coalition against ISIS.”

He added that the government was releasing ISIS leaders from prisons in Idlib and exploiting “the ISIS file internationally in exchange for lifting sanctions.”

The US and Israel have a long history of supporting Al-Qaeda linked groups such as the Nusra Front and ISIS in Syria as part of the CIA-led operation known as Timber Sycamore.

Starting in 2011, the US, Israel, and allied countries sparked anti-government protests in Syria while flooding the country with Al-Qaeda operatives from Iraq and Lebanon, to topple the government of Bashar al-Assad for his anti-Israel foreign policies.

In 2012, Jake Sullivan, advisor to then-secretary of state Hillary Clinton, wrote in a leaked email that “AQ [Al-Qaeda] is on our side in Syria.”

Israeli officials later acknowledged supporting Al-Qaeda groups by paying their salaries, shipping them weapons, and allowing them to cross into Israel for treatment at Israeli hospitals.

The operation was finally successful on 8 December of last year as Assad was toppled and replaced by Sharaa, the head of the Nusra Front (rebranded as Hayat Tahir al-Sham, HTS).

The same day, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu quickly took credit for Sharaa’s rise, stating that the events in Syria were the “direct result of the blows we have inflicted on Iran and Hezbollah, the main supporters of the Assad regime,” since 7 October 2023.

October 20, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | , , , , , | Leave a comment

US envoy renews threats against Lebanon as Israeli warplanes strike south

The Cradle | October 20, 2025

US envoy Tom Barrack renewed threats against Lebanon on 20 October in an opinion piece published on his social media account, warning that Beirut must “act” or face an “inevitable” Israeli assault.

The US “must assist Lebanon in decisively distancing itself from Hezbollah before the country is overtaken by a growing global shift toward zero tolerance for terrorist organizations.”

“If Beirut fails to act, Hezbollah’s military wing will inevitably face a major confrontation with Israel, at a moment when Israel is at peak strength and Iranian support for Hezbollah is at its weakest,” the US envoy added.

Barrack went on to say that disarming Hezbollah “is not only a security necessity for Israel, but also Lebanon’s opportunity for renewal, the restoration of sovereignty, and a chance for economic recovery.”

This was not the US envoy’s first threat to Lebanon.

In late September, Barrack confirmed Washington’s intention of placing the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) in a direct confrontation with the resistance.

“Who are they going to fight? We’re gonna arm them so they can fight Israel? I don’t think so. So, you’re arming them so they can fight their own people. Hezbollah,” he said. He also warned Lebanon to commit to disarming Hezbollah or face a new Israeli war, while confirming that Israeli forces will not withdraw from south Lebanon until the resistance gives up its arms.

Barrack’s newest comments on 20 October came the same day Israeli warplanes carried out violent strikes on the Al-Mahmoudiya–Jarmaq area in south Lebanon. Israeli drones also buzzed over the capital at low altitude.

A few days earlier, Israel launched its heaviest strikes on Lebanon since the ceasefire, destroying millions of dollars’ worth of reconstruction equipment.

Over 300 people, including scores of civilians, have been killed by Israeli attacks on the country since the ceasefire was reached in November last year. Israel has also expanded the occupation it established during the ceasefire in violation of the deal, and Tel Aviv has said that it will not consider withdrawal until Hezbollah is disarmed first. Washington has publicly backed Israel’s position more than once.

The Lebanese government adopted a decision to disarm Hezbollah in August under heavy pressure from the US.

Hezbollah has rejected the decision. It says it is open to discussing a national defense strategy, which would see its weapons incorporated into the Lebanese army and be available for use in defending the country if needed.

Yet the resistance group has emphasized that these talks cannot take place while Israel continues to attack Lebanon and occupy its territory in the south.

In early September, Lebanese army chief Rudolphe Haikal presented his disarmament plan to the government after being tasked to draft a strategy following the 5 August cabinet decision to disarm the resistance, which Hezbollah continues to reject. Deliberations have been kept confidential, and the army has been ordered to present monthly updates about the implementation.

Given the confidentiality, the timelines of the plan remain unclear. Some Lebanese media reports have said that the government “backtracked” from its decision.

Last month, Barrack said, “the Lebanese … all they do is talk.”

October 20, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | , , , , | Leave a comment

Sweden calls on citizens for ‘war mode’

Swedish Defense Minister Pal Jonson, Warsaw, Poland, April 3, 2025. © Foto Olimpik / NurPhoto via Getty Images
RT | October 20, 2025

People living in European NATO member states must brace themselves for a possible war with Russia, Swedish Defense Minister Pal Jonson told RedaktionsNetzwerk Deutschland (RND) in an interview published on Sunday.

Jonson’s remarks come as the EU accelerates a broad militarization drive. Brussels has cast Russia as an imminent threat, a narrative Moscow has dismissed as a political distraction from Europe’s domestic crises.

“To preserve peace, we must prepare ourselves both mentally and militarily for the possibility of war,” the official said. “A change in mentality is necessary: We must switch to war mode to resolutely deter, defend, and preserve the peace.”

The push for greater defense spending aligns with calls from US President Donald Trump, who has demanded that European members buy more American weapons – including for Ukrainian use. Jonson justified such purchases, saying that Europe “simply doesn’t have or cannot yet produce” the necessary systems. “Ukraine needs these assets fast,” he said. “If Europe lacks them, it’s logical to procure them from the US.”

The European Commission last week unveiled a roadmap outlining its plans to expand joint arms procurement to at least 40% by 2027. The document emphasized the need to “invest more, invest together, and invest European,” citing global strategic shifts to other regions among “traditional allies.”

Moscow views the Ukraine conflict as a NATO proxy war aimed at undermining Russia’s security following decades of expansion. Sweden is the bloc’s newest member, while Ukraine was promised accession sometime in the future.

October 20, 2025 Posted by | Militarism, Russophobia | , | Leave a comment

Does conventional climate science threaten civilization?

By Vijay Jayaraj | American Thinker | October 14, 2025

Practitioners of rigorous scientific methodology — from the 17th century’s Galileo to 1965’s winner of the Nobel Prize in Physics, Richard Feynman — would consider today’s climate research an embarrassment, shaped by uncritical orthodoxy and zealotry rather than genuine testing of hypotheses.

Classical science welcomes skepticism. It thrives in an environment where debate and revision are encouraged. Today’s climate conformists declare the debate “settled” and label those with questions as deniers, effectively outlawing the skepticism that drives scientific progress.

Plenty of 21st-century scientists have objected to this travesty. Dr. Matthew Wielicki, formerly of the University of Alabama, put it bluntly: “Science should be self-correcting. Climate science isn’t. It’s self-preserving.”

Dr. Richard Lindzen of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology notes that climate dogma has little to do with evidence: “The narrative is a quasi-religious movement predicated on an absurd scientific narrative.”

In essence, modern climate science has been transformed into a political apparatus dominated by campaign-style advocacy, subverting the foundational principles of evidence-based inquiry.

Climate cultists treat every warming or cooling event as anthropogenic by default, ignoring millennia of natural variation. “While substantial concern has been expressed that emissions may cause significant climate change, measured or reconstructed temperature records indicate that 20th- and 21st-century climate changes are neither exceptional nor persistent, and the historical and geological records show many periods warmer than today,” say scientists writing to the American Physics Society.

Gregory Wrightstone, geologist and best-selling author of A Very Convenient Warming, says that the longer geological record reveals numerous epochs with much higher temperatures and levels of atmospheric CO₂, all predating the influence of modern human activity.

Wrightstone rejects descriptions of current conditions as dangerous, saying that “Earth is growing greener, and temperature-related deaths are declining.” The evidence indicates the planet is not imperiled but flourishing.

Deaths from natural disasters are at historic lows, life expectancy continues to climb, and global crop yields in both advanced and developing economies are at record highs. Rising atmospheric CO2 is associated with improved plant growth, not planetary degradation.

The much-hyped “disappearing islands” of the Pacific continue to exist. Many atolls have grown in size due to coral and sediment accumulation. Arctic sea ice, too, has refused to vanish; the 2025 minimum extent is nearly half a million square kilometers larger than 2007.

Yet none of these realities make it into school textbooks or U.N. briefings. The crisis narrative is perpetuated to sustain a trillion-dollar “green” industry dependent on fear, political support and publicly financed subsidies.

Error-riddled computer models that back doomsday predictions violate core tenets of scientific methodology. When tested against known outcomes, they routinely fail.

In 2014, Dr. Roy Spencer compared real-world satellite data with over 90 climate models. Nearly all the models exaggerated warming. Spencer summarized the absurdity: “If 95% of your models disagree with observations, the models are wrong — not reality.”

Dr. William Happer, a physicist at Princeton University and former scientific advisor to the U.S. government, notes: “Observations anchor our understanding and weed out the theories that do not work. This has been the scientific method for more than 300 years… computer models are not meant to replace theory and observation and to serve as an authority of their own.”

Yet these models drive the global policy agenda. The insistence on short time frames and cherry-picked data appear to support catastrophic scenarios; long-term geological records contradict them. Steve Milloy, author of JunkScience.com, described the phenomenon perfectly: “Climate science has become a political enterprise. The conclusion comes first; the data are adjusted later.”

Science belongs to critical thinkers, not to committees. The climate establishment will collapse as its funding dries up or the public stops believing its prophets. Reality will win — as it always does — but the longer the struggle, the higher the human cost of irrational policies.

Reason, empirical investigation and intellectual freedom have been undermined by a politically charged climate movement, which is a threat to science and civilization itself.

Vijay Jayaraj is a Science and Research Associate at the CO2 Coalition, Fairfax, Virginia. He holds an M.S. in environmental sciences from the University of East Anglia and a postgraduate degree in energy management from Robert Gordon University, both in the U.K., and a bachelor’s in engineering from Anna University, India.

October 20, 2025 Posted by | Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity, Science and Pseudo-Science | Leave a comment

US knew Israeli bulldozer, not Hamas, caused deadly Rafah blast: Reports

Press TV – October 20, 2025

Reports have revealed that the US was aware that the deadly Rafah explosion, which killed two Israeli soldiers, was caused by an Israeli bulldozer hitting unexploded ordnance (UXO), not by a Hamas operation.

Journalist Ryan Grim reported on Monday that, according to a source familiar with the matter, both the White House and the Pentagon knew the Rafah incident was the result of an Israeli settler bulldozer running over a UXO, contradicting Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s claim that Hamas had attacked an Israeli tank.

Sources cited by Grim said that after the US administration confronted Israel with its findings, Netanyahu abruptly reversed his position and announced that crossings would reopen within hours. The Pentagon reportedly reached the same conclusion as the White House.

Journalist Curt Mills of The American Conservative also quoted a senior US administration official confirming that “Hamas did nothing. An Israeli tank hit an unexploded improvised explosive device (IED) that had probably been there for months.”

Following Sunday’s explosion, in yet another blatant breach of the ceasefire, Israeli forces launched a new wave of airstrikes across the Gaza Strip, killing at least 15 civilians, including a journalist, in what observers described as an effort to justify renewed aggression.

Refugees sheltering south of the nearby European Hospital said the latest attacks were accompanied by artillery shelling, with explosions shaking parts of Rafah.

They also reported at least 12 airstrikes in eastern Khan Yunis, part of what residents described as a “fire belt.”

The assaults sent thick plumes of smoke rising over the city and caused widespread panic among displaced families.

The revelation further exposes the Israeli regime’s attempts to mislead the public and inflame tensions in Gaza, where its ongoing violations of the ceasefire have deepened an already dire humanitarian crisis.

Analysts say Israel appears determined to provoke further conflict despite the ceasefire signed in Sharm el-Sheikh earlier this month.

Recent strikes on civilian areas have raised fears that Israel intends to derail the agreement and sustain military pressure on Gaza.

Since the ceasefire took effect, Israel’s military has repeatedly breached it, killing at least 97 people and wounding another 230, according to Gaza’s Government Media Office.

The first phase of the US-brokered ceasefire, which began on October 10, was aimed at bringing an end to Israel’s assault, a partial withdrawal of its troops to a so-called yellow line along Gaza’s borders, and a modest increase in humanitarian aid.

Last Monday, Hamas released all living captives, as well as the remains of 12 of the 28 dead Israeli captives.

In return, Israel freed 2,000 Palestinian detainees and returned 15 Palestinian bodies for every one dead Israeli captive returned.

Israel’s war on the Gaza Strip, launched on October 7, 2023, has killed at least 68,000 Palestinians and wounded 170,000, most of them women and children

Experts warn that the true death toll could reach hundreds of thousands once the missing and those buried beneath the ruins are fully counted.

October 20, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | , , , | Leave a comment

Charlie Kirk Google Searches Prove They PLANNED Assassination!

The Jimmy Dore Show | October 16, 2025

Journalist James Li and others including Baron Coleman have recently been highlighting claims regarding unusual Google search data connected to the assassination of Charlie Kirk. Google searches allegedly made from IP addresses in Washington D.C. and Israel before and after the shooting were ostensibly targeting the hospital, medical examiner, and surgeons associated with the case.

October 19, 2025 Posted by | Deception, Video, War Crimes | , | Leave a comment

Journal Faces Lawsuit Over Discredited Study Used by GSK to Market Dangerous Antidepressant to Teens

By Brenda Baletti, Ph.D. | The Defender | October 14, 2025

The publisher of a decades-old peer-reviewed article claiming that the antidepressant paroxetine, marketed as Paxil, is safe and effective for teens, said it is reviewing the article.

Meanwhile, a lawsuit filed last month against the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry (AACAP) and Elsevier, which publishes the organization’s journal, JAACAP, demands that the journal retract the article.

Attorney George W. Murgatroyd III, acting on behalf of the public, filed the suit in the Superior Court of the District of Columbia Civil Division.

Published in 2001, the article ignited decades of controversy. Critics say it overstated Paxil’s benefits and downplayed its risks, including increased suicide risk among teens.

Known as the “Keller article,” after lead author Dr. Martin Keller, then chair of psychiatry at Brown University, the paper reported partial results from Study 329, an investigation into whether paroxetine was safe and effective for treating depression in adolescents.

GlaxoSmithKline, now GSK, which manufactures Paxil, funded the study.

The article reported that “paroxetine is generally well tolerated and effective for major depression in adolescents” — a claim now widely known to have been based on distorted results.

The study actually found the drug was neither safe nor effective. Internal documents later showed that GSK hired a PR firm to ghostwrite the article, cherry-picking data and recruiting 20 co-authors to lend credibility. The company then used the paper to market Paxil to doctors.

Peer reviewers raised concerns about the study’s data. As soon as the article went live, practitioners wrote multiple letters to the editor asking why statistically significant indications that the drug caused serious adverse events, including “suicidal gestures,” were dismissed in the clinical trials and not addressed in the paper.

According to the complaint, the Keller article became one of the most cited articles supporting the use of antidepressants in child and adolescent depression — even though evidence from two other GSK trials confirmed the drug was ineffective and risky.

Even though the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), which never approved the drug for use in children and adolescents, raised concerns about the study.

Calls for JAACAP to retract the article began in 2010, bolstered by:

  • A 2015 BMJ reanalysis confirming the drug’s dangers and data manipulation.
  • Evidence from GSK’s internal files and depositions in other Paxil lawsuits.
  • A 2012 U.S. Department of Justice case in which GSK paid $3 billion to settle criminal fraud charges related to Paxil and two other drugs.

Still, the JAACAP and Elsevier have so far refused to retract the article.

Murgatroyd has represented a dozen families whose children died by suicide or were severely injured in a suicide attempt, allegedly as a result of taking Paxil. His litigation team has deposed all the article’s authors and has combed through GSK’s internal documents.

Both JAACAP and Elsevier continue to profit from the article, according to court documents. It costs $41.50 to download from the JAACAP website, and $33.39 to download from Elsevier’s ScienceDirect website.

The complaint asks the court to “redress the knowing publication, distribution, and continued sale of a false and deceptive medical article that has misled physicians, consumers and institutions for over two decades and continues to endanger adolescent mental health and safety as well as public trust in scientific integrity.”

JAACAP last week published an “expression of concern” indicating that the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) will manage recommendations and guidance.

COPE is an international, nonprofit organization that provides guidance to journal editors on publication integrity. COPE does not investigate whether there is research or publication misconduct — it only examines whether the journals involved followed its code of conduct.

AACAP did not respond to The Defender’s request for comment. Elsevier responded only that it would need more time to respond to such a request.

Study 329 revealed serious safety risks, including suicidal behavior

Before publishing the Keller article, GSK funded three studies to test the safety and efficacy of paroxetine to treat depression in children and adolescents. The drug failed to demonstrate efficacy in all three trials.

The first study — Study 329, completed in 1998 — also revealed serious safety risks, including suicidal behavior. Later studies confirmed those risks. According to court documents, GSK knew the “disappointing” results of Study 329 would be a commercial disaster for the drug.

However, the study had some minimal positive results, which could indicate the possibility of efficacy. It met 15% of the outcomes the researchers had been hoping for to show that Paxil worked. GSK officials privately conceded these results were not sufficient to show efficacy.

Yet GSK planned to publish selective data from the study in a prestigious medical journal to claim the drug worked.

GSK hires PR firm to write first draft of JAACAP article

The drugmaker hired a private public relations company, Scientific Therapeutics Information Inc. (STI), to write the article. An employee drafted it and sent it to Keller, who was selected to be the lead author and finish the publication process. STI’s role was not listed in the final draft submitted to JAACAP.

Later in 1998, GSK’s second study, number 377, also failed to show efficacy. The study also showed four times the number of serious adverse events related to suicidality as the placebo study, according to court documents.

That same year, although GSK by then knew of two studies showing the drug was ineffective, the drugmaker decided not to publish any data from Study 377 and instead paid “directly or indirectly” three prominent psychiatrists — Karen Wagner, M.D., Ph.D., Dr. Neal Ryan, and Keller, who had worked on Study 329 — to promote Paxil as a safe and effective treatment for adolescent depression at conventions, forums and at a meeting of the American Psychiatric Association.

The third study, 701, concluded in 2001, also failed to demonstrate efficacy six months before the Keller article was published — yet GSK and JAACAP went ahead with publication.

Twenty authors who were psychiatrists were added as authors of the Keller article. Two GSK employees, James P. McCafferty and Rosemary Oakes — the only authors without medical or doctoral degrees — were also added, although their affiliation with GSK wasn’t disclosed.

Testimonies from depositions in other trials indicated that 10 of the authors didn’t even comment on the paper, and none of them had access to raw clinical trial data — although they all said they did.

None of them disclosed conflicts of interest, and all of them signed off on the article as their work.

GSK used Keller paper to sell $1 billion worth of Paxil to teens

Once JAACAP published the article, GSK’s sales team began promoting Paxil as “safe and effective” for teens.

GSK sent the article to all of its 2,000 Paxil sales reps. In the three years that followed the article’s publication, it is estimated that the company made over $1 billion from sales of the drug to adolescents, the court documents state.

In the following few years, regulators in the U.K. and the European Union issued alerts about the dangers of paroxetine based on its link to suicide ideation in teens.

In 2003, the FDA issued a similar warning, saying there was “no evidence” the drug was effective.

In the following years, some of the authors began to discuss their concerns about suicidality internally, although they made no changes to the article, according to court documents.

Have JAACAP and Elsevier refused retraction to protect authors?

The complaint filed last month alleges that JAACAP editors and Elsevier refused to retract the Keller article “in an apparent attempt to shield at least five of the Keller article authors who are prominent members of the AACAP from possible ramifications of retraction.”

Conflicts of interest among the article’s authors are glaring. Keller, Wagner and Ryan all received money to promote Paxil as safe and effective in the years before publication, according to the complaint.

Two authors, McCafferty and Oakes worked for GSK, the complaint said, and did not disclose that in the article.

Several authors of the Keller article went on to hold influential positions within the AACAP. Wagner was president from 2017-2019.

Dr. Gabrielle A. Carlson also served as president of the organization from 2019-2021. Before that, she was chair of AACAP’s Program Committee from 2011-2014, and won AACAP’s Virginia Q. Anthony Outstanding Woman Leader Award.

Dr. Graham Emslie has served on the JAACAP Editorial Board. Dr. Boris Birmaher has chaired committees in the AACAP and published numerous articles, editorials and organizational practice parameters.

The current editor-in-chief of the journal, Dr. Douglas Novins, who was not an author on the article but holds final decision-making power over retraction, has worked closely with some of the authors — co-authoring editorials with both past presidents.

Dr. David Healy, co-author of the BMJ article that reanalyzed the data from Study 329, told The Defender that for years, he and others who had been investigating this issue assumed the journal had been duped by GSK, but later realized the journal “was not duped — it was complicit.”

Keller and then-editor Dr. Mina Dulcan were close friends, Healy said — a relationship revealed in transcripts of interviews Dulcan did for a set of BBC programs.

This article was originally published by The Defender — Children’s Health Defense’s News & Views Website under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Please consider subscribing to The Defender or donating to Children’s Health Defense.

October 19, 2025 Posted by | Corruption, Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science | | Leave a comment

WHO and European Commission Launch AI System to Monitor Social Media and Online “Misinformation” in Real Time

By Cindy Harper | Reclaim The Net | October 19, 2025

The World Health Organization has introduced a major overhaul of its global monitoring network, unveiling an AI-powered platform that tracks online conversations and media activity in real time.

Known as Epidemic Intelligence from Open Sources 2.0 (EIOS), the system is being presented as a new step in “pandemic preparedness,” but its reach extends well beyond disease surveillance.

The upgrade is part of a growing merger between health monitoring, digital tracking, and centralized information control.

Developed with the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre (JRC), the new version of EIOS is designed to scan the internet for signals of emerging health threats.

According to the WHO, it now automatically analyzes social media posts, websites, and other public sources to detect possible outbreaks.

While this is described as a tool for early warning, it effectively allows a global health authority to observe the world’s digital conversations under the banner of safety.

The WHO’s EIOS Collaboration page indicates that partners are also exploring projects such as “News Article Credibility Detection” and “Misinformation Classification Systems.”

These initiatives suggest a growing interest in shaping how information is categorized and filtered.

The latter effort appears linked to the JRC’s “Misinfo Classifier,” released in 2020, which the JRC described as an AI program that detects “fake news” by analyzing the tone and intensity of language in articles.

The organization claimed the tool achieved an 80% success rate and stated that “this is comparable to the state of the art right now.”

At the time, the JRC said the classifier was already in use by the European Commission and European Parliament, and that it would soon be shared with professional fact-checking organizations.

The existence of that project highlights how data analysis and information control are being integrated into public health infrastructure.

The WHO reports that EIOS now operates in more than 110 countries and collaborates with over 30 organizations, including national governments and the European Commission. The platform is being offered “free of charge” to eligible users, along with training materials and support.

This approach ties national monitoring systems directly into a WHO-managed network that continuously gathers and processes global data.

The WHO’s concept of “social listening” sheds more light on this strategy. It defines social listening as “the process of listening to and analyzing conversations and narratives” to understand people’s “attitudes, knowledge, beliefs, and intentions.”

In practical terms, this means that the organization is not only collecting data about disease but also analyzing how citizens think and communicate online.

In its October 13 announcement, the WHO described EIOS 2.0 as “more open, more agile and more inclusive.”

However, under that language lies an expanding surveillance framework that uses artificial intelligence to interpret global social behavior.

A system supposedly for improving health security could easily function as a tool for monitoring public opinion and online expression.

This initiative combines artificial intelligence, government cooperation, and social media tracking under the label of global health security. It represents a change from traditional disease control toward the ongoing analysis of public communication, where algorithms determine which discussions appear “relevant” or “misleading.”

This is something that the WHO has been looking at implementing for some time.

For countries choosing to adopt EIOS, dependence on WHO data and analysis may come at the cost of digital independence.

Under the justification of protecting public health, the WHO is establishing an always-on digital network that watches, classifies, and evaluates global discourse, quietly redefining what it means to manage health and information in the same breath.

October 19, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »