Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

NEW STUDY CONFIRMS FLUORIDE’S TOXIC EFFECTS

The HighWire with Del Bigtree | January 16, 2025

The tide may have finally turned with mainstream news on fluoride safety after a recently published study on the significant association between fluoride exposure and lower IQs in children reaffirms previous findings.

January 18, 2025 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science, Video | | Leave a comment

Immunocascade

Why Infectious Diseases are on the Rise

Biopolitiks by Dr. Alejandro Diaz | January 16, 2025

Over the last few years, I’ve had the privilege and honor of speaking in some of the most important global health forums. The topics discussed in these forums are information of the highest level. This information provides a broad epidemiological outlook on global health, but what about the feeling on the ground? I believe treating patients is vital to my understanding of the current state of health.

What I’ve seen in consults recently is alarming—immunosuppression like never before. The rate of infectious diseases, particularly upper respiratory infections, is through the roof this season. The long duration of symptoms is what has caught my attention the most.

I attribute this to widespread immunosuppression, stemming from the toxic injectable materials so-called “COVID vaccines”, and the rest of the pandemic-era “public health” policies. Beginning with the insane restrictive measures that were implemented worldwide and continuing with the rollout of the jab. The result has been an unprecedented immunocascade. It is estimated that approximately 5.5 billion people around the globe took at least one dose of the COVID Vaccine. Imagine the level of widespread harm.

The immune system is composed of a complex and unique set of molecules. It can be described as the summation of all those physiological processes that endow the host with the capacity to recognize “materials” as foreign and neutralize, eliminate, or metabolize them with or without injury to its tissue. This ability to differentiate “self” from “nonself” constitutes the basic hallmark of the immune response. Recently there has been a lot of talk about “new” viruses like avian influenza (H5N1) which has been around since the 1960s. There is also mention of RSV and Human metapneumovirus (HMPV) known since the early 2000s with recent outbreaks in China. All these “outbreaks” are different versions of the same agenda of fear and critical mass formation psychosis.

After the COVID op, everything is sold out as an outbreak. However, few people have realized that all these infections have existed for many years. Due to the different measures taken during the COVID operation, including and especially the jabs, weakened immune systems aren’t able to respond accordingly. This is why we are seeing a rise in respiratory illnesses, and other health problems like turbo cancer.

At scale, people have not yet begun to understand the true consequences of these COVID-era policies. Policies that “experts” implemented to supposedly mitigate the spread of an infectious disease (COVID), forced the entire globe to isolate for nearly an entire year. What resulted has been an entire generation of immunosuppressed individuals, particularly children who were in their age of prime immune system development. The consequences are just barely being shown. This is only the tip of the iceberg.

It’s not as though new pathogens are springing up out of nowhere. Instead, people now have suppressed immune systems incapable of fighting off simple infectious diseases that have been around forever.

What is true, is that infections are up. The UK, for example, reported a ‘tidal wave’ of flu cases in hospitals this season.

QUICK PARENTHESIS

Isn’t it interesting that during the COVID Op, all respiratory infections were labeled as COVID until proven otherwise? In the same time period, the flu seemed to disappear. Interestingly, after a 3-year hiatus, the flu is back. Doesn’t that seem suspicious?

Obviously, this is being used as an excuse to promote further vaccination.

The so-called “novel” viruses, while they may have been around for some time, are being artificially pushed onto the public.

The McCullough Foundation recently published a research paper in the Poultry Fisheries & Wildlife Sciences Journal. This study looks into two laboratories that have been conducting gain-of-function research on H5N1, leading to the possible conclusion that these recent outbreaks may be the result of laboratory leaks.

A “manmade problem”, as Dr. Peter McCullough describes it, just as the COVID Operation was. There seems to be coordination here. They are purposefully pushing these diseases to spread fear and incite information warfare, taking advantage of the fact that there are now more immunocompromised people.

They’re pulling out the same playbook as they did for the COVID Op. They are trying to create a perfect storm in a renewed effort to exert further control of people.

Fortunately, the collective consciousness is elevated, and I’m certain that people won’t fall for it the same way that they did before.

Compromised immune systems are at the heart of the problem here. Strengthening them will be key to fighting off these coordinated bioattacks by utilizing early treatments such as nasal sprays, nutraceuticals, and natural remedies to prevent and treat these diseases effectively.

Trust has been greatly eroded in conventional medicine, as I have mentioned repeatedly in my articles. In the middle of all the chaos that surrounds the constant barrage of fear and health crises, patients must have options. Trusted messengers that they can look to and trust when it comes to their well-being. There is an increased awareness worldwide. People are starting to look for better health options.

There is no doubt that a new shift in attitude is required. An alternative/parallel healthcare system must be built. It should revolve around specialists who understand these basic principles of care, not those who have been captured by rhetoric and indoctrination of the medical religion.

Dr. Alejandro Diaz is a Pediatric Allergist / Immunologist and Global Health Expert with extensive international experience. He has delivered conferences in over 27 countries around the globe on topics of medicine, migration, biosecurity, and related topics. This includes prestigious venues such as the White House, the US Capitol, the Romanian Parliament, the European Parliament in Brussels, the Mexican Senate of the Republic, the United Nations in Geneva, Japanese Parliament, among others.

His career encompasses diverse roles in healthcare including private practice, health systems, and advisory positions for medical service companies, governments, and government entities worldwide.

January 18, 2025 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | , | Leave a comment

YouTube Removes Barrister’s Legal Submission at Official UK Covid Inquiry Amid Censorship of Vaccine Injury Discussions

By Cindy Harper | Reclaim The Net | January 15, 2025

YouTube’s decision to remove a barrister’s legal submission from the UK Covid Inquiry has intensified concerns over widespread censorship of vaccine-related discussions on major social media platforms.

Anna Morris KC, who represents families claiming injury from Covid-19 vaccines, disclosed that YouTube deleted a video of her preliminary remarks to the inquiry in September 2023, citing violations of its medical “misinformation” policy. Although the platform later reinstated the video, it failed to provide a clear explanation, admitting only that “it sometimes makes mistakes.”

This act of censorship has been condemned as part of a larger pattern of silencing voices critical of vaccine safety and government health policies. As reported by The Telegraph, during the inquiry’s Module 4 session — focused on vaccines and pharmaceutical measures — Morris directly addressed this issue, stating, “The inquiry must understand the stigma and censorship for the vaccine injured and bereaved.”

She revealed that a poll of affected families found that 74% had been censored when discussing vaccine injuries on social media platforms.

Morris further criticized the suppression of information, noting that doctors were instructed to withhold concerns from both the public and their own patients. Her removed statement emphasized that “the treatment of the vaccine injured in this country has historically been a source of shame.”

Morris argued that those harmed by vaccines have been systematically “dismissed, ignored, censored,” and subjected to hostility when seeking acknowledgment and support.

She condemned the ongoing silencing of vaccine-injured individuals as a severe barrier to accountability and transparency, adding, “Unfortunately, this censorship has continued years after the pandemic and into our engagement with this inquiry.”

Despite repeated requests for a review, YouTube justified the video’s removal by citing its medical “misinformation” policies, a rationale that critics argue is increasingly being used to suppress legitimate concerns and experiences.  This censorship has fueled calls for a reevaluation of how social media platforms regulate content related to public health, especially when it involves dissenting voices.

An emotional impact video shown during the inquiry highlighted the tragic story of pharmacist John Cross, who took his own life after suffering paralyzing complications from a Covid vaccine and being denied compensation. His story underscores the devastating consequences of dismissing those seeking recognition and support.

January 18, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Science and Pseudo-Science | , , , | Leave a comment

ICAN’s INVESTIGATION INTO GEOENGINEERING, MILITARY SPRAYING & SELF-SPREADING VACCINES

The HighWire with Del Bigtree | January 16, 2025

Siri & Glimstad Attorney, Catherine Ybarra, Esq., presents ICAN’s assessment of the science behind geoengineering and transmissible vaccines. Discover the lengths the research team went to, to uncover the government agencies involved in current and future weather modification, and a few surprising discoveries they made along the way.

January 17, 2025 Posted by | Environmentalism, Science and Pseudo-Science, Video | , | Leave a comment

MAINSTREAM STOKES FEAR OVER BIRD FLU

The HighWire with Del Bigtree | January 10, 2025

Legacy media and world health agencies continue to ratchet up the bird flu fear factor, despite the fact not a single human death has been caused from the virus. With mere days left for the Biden Administration in office and stockpiles of outdated H1N1 vaccines at the ready, skeptics are concerned it’s not just coincidence.

January 14, 2025 Posted by | Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Science and Pseudo-Science, Video | | Leave a comment

No Proof MMR Vaccine Is ‘Safer’ than Measles, Mumps or Rubella Infection, Physician Group Says

By Suzanne Burdick, Ph.D. | The Defender | January 14, 2025

The risk of permanent disability or death from the MMR vaccine may be greater than the risk posed by measles, mumps or rubella infection because large enough vaccine safety studies haven’t been done, according to a collection of new documents released by Physicians for Informed Consent (PIC).

The collection includes disease information statements for measles, mumps and rubella, and a vaccine risk statement for the MMR vaccine.

According to the Mayo Clinic, measles is a viral infection typically accompanied by a skin rash, fever, cough, runny nose, sore throat, inflamed eyes and tiny white spots on the inner cheek.

Mumps and rubella also are viral infections. According to PIC, all three viral infections typically resolve on their own with proper rest and hydration in almost all cases.

Dr. Shira Miller, PIC’s founder and president, told The Defender, “The main takeaway is that the MMR vaccine has not been proven safer than measles, mumps and rubella.”

PIC is a nonprofit that delivers data to doctors and the public so they can “evaluate the data on infectious diseases and vaccines objectively, and voluntarily engage in informed decision-making about vaccination.”

Miller explained that the MMR vaccine clinical trials didn’t include enough subjects to be able to prove that the risk of permanent disability or death from the vaccine is less than the risk of permanent disability or death from measles, mumps or rubella.

The number of measles, mumps or rubella infections that result in permanent disability or death is so low that researchers would need to have at least 50,000 subjects in a clinical trial to be able to show that the vaccine is safer than the disease.

The MMR vaccine’s clinical trials fall very short of that benchmark, according to PIC’s statement on MMR vaccine risk.

Prelicensure clinical trials for vaccines, including the MMR shot, are “relatively small and usually last no longer than a few years,” according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) 2024 “Manual for the Surveillance of Vaccine-Preventable Diseases.”

The 2024 edition of the CDC manual doesn’t specify exactly how many subjects are in these “relatively small” trials. However, the 2011 edition stated that “relatively small” meant that such trials are “usually limited to a few thousand subjects.”

The rate of disability or death among healthy children from any of those three diseases is incredibly rare. PIC wrote:

“For children under age 10 at normal risk (i.e., with normal levels of vitamin A and infected after birth), the pre-vaccine annual risk of death or permanent disability from measles, mumps, and rubella respectively was 1 in 1 million, 1 in 1.6 million, and 1 in 2.1 million. …

“Therefore, the cumulative annual risk of a fatal or permanently disabling case of any of those diseases was about 1 in 500,000, and the risk over a 10-year span was 1 in 50,000.”

In other words, clinical trials would need at least 50,000 subjects to detect one case of death or disability from a measles, mumps or rubella infection.

Meanwhile, no safety studies on the MMR vaccine have been done that looked for possible genetic mutations, impaired fertility or cancer, according to the product’s package insert.

Also, seizures from the MMR vaccine occur five times more often than measles-related seizures.

Dr. Liz Mumper, a pediatrician, praised PIC for releasing the collection of data on measles, mumps and rubella, and on the MMR vaccine.

“Most parents have not had access to the information contained in the thoughtful analysis done by Physicians for Informed Consent. Parents should recognize that the risk of bad outcomes from a measles infection — if their child lives in a developed country with clean water and is not immune-deficient — is extraordinarily rare, as PIC reports.”

Unfortunately, she added, recent U.S. media reports “sensationalized” the risks of measles.

What’s typically missing from measles media reports

PIC’s statement on measles cited numerous facts commonly overlooked in many media reports on measles outbreaks, including:

  • The U.S. measles mortality rate dropped dramatically before a measles vaccine was introduced in 1963.
  • Immunity from the MMR vaccine wanes so that by age 15, roughly 60% of vaccinated children are susceptible to subclinical measles virus infections.
  • Studies have suggested a link between a naturally acquired measles infection and a reduced risk of Hodgkin’s and non-Hodgkin’s lymphomas.
  • Studies also suggested a link between a naturally acquired measles infection and a lower risk of asthma, eczema and hay fever.
  • Malnutrition — particularly vitamin A deficiency — is a primary cause of over 100,000 measles deaths in underdeveloped countries.

Mumper said that the risk of bad outcomes from a measles infection drastically declined with improved public health and better nutrition long before MMR vaccines were available.

“The risk of bad outcomes has always been more for children in developing countries who are more likely to have nutritional deficiencies including vitamin A and lack access to clean water,” Mumper added.

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.

January 14, 2025 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science | , , , | Leave a comment

Paper Showing Earth’s Atmosphere Has Become ‘Saturated’ With Carbon Dioxide and More Carbon Emissions Won’t Make Any Difference Is Retracted Following Positive Coverage

By Chris Morrison | The Daily Sceptic | January 13, 2025

Another important paper taking issue with the ‘settled’ climate narrative has been cancelled following a report in the Daily Sceptic and subsequent reposts that went viral across social media. The paper discussed the atmospheric ‘saturation’ of greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide and argued that higher levels will not cause temperatures to rise. The work was led by the widely-published Polish scientist Dr. Jan Kubicki and appeared on Elsevier’s ScienceDirect website in December 2023. The paper has been widely discussed on social media since April 2024 when the Daily Sceptic reported on the findings. Interest is growing in the saturation hypothesis not least because it provides a coherent explanation for why life and the biosphere grew and often thrived for 600 million years despite much higher atmospheric levels of greenhouse gases. Alas for control freaks, it also destroys the science backing for the Net Zero fantasy.

Many scientists contend that above certain levels the ability of CO2 to warm within narrow bands of the infrared spectrum falls off a logarithmic cliff. Recently, eight Taiwanese scientists led by Professor Peng-Sheng Wei found that the sensitivity of the climate to a rise in CO2 atmospheric levels from 100 to 400 parts per million (ppm) was “negligibly small” at 0.3°C. Current levels of CO2 are around 420 ppm. Seven Austrian scientists recently concluded that a future doubling of CO2 showed “no increase in the IR [infrared] absorption for the 15 u-central peak”. At most, it was stated, this could lead to warming of 0.5°C. Yet in spite of this, Elsevier decided to retract Kubicki’s paper with only a few words of explanation, a decision that is likely to send shock waves through any group of scientists seeking to examine the role of saturation of gases in the atmosphere.

The retraction reads: “Subsequent to acceptance of this paper, the rigour and quality of the peer-review process for this paper was investigated and confirmed to fall beneath the high standards expected by Applications in Engineering Science. After review by additional expert referees, the Editor-in-Chief has lost confidence in the validity of the paper and has decided to retract.”

Retraction in a scientific journal is a serious matter, relatively rare and potentially damaging to the reputation of authors. According to Elsevier’s withdrawal policies, articles may be retracted “to correct errors that impact the findings reported by an article where they are too extensive in the view of the editors to publish a correction, or due to infringements of Elsevier’s journal policies, such as multiple submission, bogus claims of authorship, plagiarism, fraudulent use of data or the like”. None of these reasons for withdrawing the Kubicki paper have been given. Instead there is the pompous reference to a ”fall beneath the high standards expected”, supposedly confirmed by additional unnamed “experts”. Further details about the retraction may emerge given the important issues raised by Elsevier’s action.

Whatever the real reasons behind this retraction, it will not be the first science paper that has met this fate following publicity in the Daily Sceptic and subsequent widespread interest on social media.

In January 2022, a group of physics scientists led by Profession Gianluca Alimonti of Milan University published a paper in a Springer Nature journal that considered past weather trends. They concluded that the idea we’re in the throes of a ‘climate emergency’ was not supported by the facts. The paper attracted little attention outside academic circles until September 14th when the Daily Sceptic reported on it – and our promotion of the story on X resulted in 9,000 retweets. The story was covered by the Australian and Sky News Australia, after which attacks were launched by activist scientists and journalists such as Michael ‘Hockey Stick’ Mann and Graham Readfearn of the Guardian. After a year of lobbying, Springer Nature retracted the paper claiming it no longer had confidence in the results and conclusions. This surprised many, not least because much of the data came from the International Panel on Climate Change. Science writer Dr. Roger Pielke published a number of leaked emails surrounding the affair and concluded: “Shenanigans continue in climate science, with influential scientists teaming up with journalists to corrupt peer review.”

In September 2023, a departing academic, Dr. Patrick Brown, came clean about a paper he’d written in Nature saying that climate change was increasing the risk of wildfires in California. “I knew not to try to quantify key aspects other than climate change in my research because it would dilute the story that prestigious journals like Nature and its rival Science, want to tell,” he explained. These key aspects, of course, include considering the role of arsonists and forest management. For its part, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change can find little or no evidence of human-caused climate change affecting ‘fire weather’ to date and going forward to 2100. In Brown’s view, climate science has become less about understanding the complexities of the world “and more about serving as a kind of Cassandra, urgently warning the public about the dangers of climate change”.

The Editor-in-Chief of Nature Magdalena Skipper reacted furiously to Brown’s comments, accusing him of “poor research practices” that are “highly irresponsible”, according to the Daily Mail. Despite all the controversy, Brown’s paper has not been retracted.

Dr. Matthew Wielicki had a senior position in the Geological Sciences department of the University of Alabama. His parents were academics and he grew up on a Californian university campus surrounded by freely-exchanged competing ideas. He only ever wanted to be an academic but he gave it up during Covid, seemingly disgusted at the turn against free speech in American universities and the effect it has had on climate science. If you speak out against the accepted narrative “you are a pariah in this community”, he said. Climate change is a “taboo” subject in academia and there is a “disconnect between what the science says and what the narrative in mainstream media is”. It isn’t about finding the truth in open discussion – It’s about silencing those who disagree with you, he observed.

January 14, 2025 Posted by | Full Spectrum Dominance, Science and Pseudo-Science | Leave a comment

Scientists Sound Alarm About Using Mosquitoes to Vaccinate Humans

By Brenda Baletti, Ph.D. | The Defender | January 10, 2025

Human clinical trials are underway to use mosquitoes to vaccinate people against malaria, cardiologist Dr. Peter McCullough reported on his Substack.

McCullough cited a paper published in the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) in November reporting results from a double-blind, controlled clinical trial at two university medical centers in the Netherlands.

The trial evaluated the safety, side effects and efficacy of immunizing people via mosquito bites, using mosquitoes infected with a genetically engineered version of the parasite that causes malaria.

“It seems as if the world of vaccinology has ramped up to a feverish pitch with amplified research, massive funding, and no limit to the extent in which vaccines could be injected into humans,” McCullough wrote.

Researchers have been trying to develop a malaria vaccine since the 1960s, but they have been largely unsuccessful. It wasn’t until October 2021 that the World Health Organization (WHO) recommended the first malaria vaccine, made by GSK, for children living in sub-Saharan Africa and other high-transmission regions.

Two years later, the WHO recommended a second malaria vaccine, developed by Oxford University and manufactured by the Serum Institute of India.

The vaccines, given to small children in four doses, offer only modest and short-lived protection — 50-80% efficacy for less than a year — and are even less effective in infants in high endemic areas.

Malaria is caused by plasmodium parasites, which spread to humans through bites from infected mosquitoes.

Given the limited efficacy of existing vaccines, researchers continue researching alternative vaccination strategies, including using genetically modified versions of the malaria parasites to elicit an immune response.

“In a simplified view, the innovation may seem like a good idea,” Karl Jablonowski, Ph.D., senior research scientist at Children’s Health Defense, told The Defender. “Malaria commonly afflicts those in poorer countries with limited access to healthcare. If we could make a change to the environment that improves the lives of all and diminishes the lives of none, in theory that would be progress.”

“The problem,” he said, “is that every detail of it looks like a bad idea.”

Researchers call results ‘promising,’ critics say research should be banned

The researchers, from two Dutch universities, previously engineered the “GA1” version of the parasite to stop developing 24 hours after being introduced into the human body.

Theoretically, these parasites wouldn’t cause malaria but would prime the immune system to recognize non-genetically modified pathogenic malarial parasites and trigger an immune response.

However, GA1 showed poor efficacy.

The NEJM study tested their next version of the genetically modified parasite, GA2, which halts development later — six days post-infection — when the parasite is replicating inside of human liver cells.

Jablonowski said this is not necessarily safe. The genetic modifications are intended to stop development in the liver stage before the parasite can proceed to the blood stage and become infective, he said. However, “The protozoa can still replicate, both sexually and asexually. This means the genetically modified protozoa can reproduce with wild-type to produce an infective genetically modified organism not bound by the original design.”

The study tested GA2 against GA1 and placebo in a small number of healthy adults 18 to 35 years old. The genetically modified parasites were injected into the human subjects via mosquito bites rather than through a shot like most vaccines currently available.

“The mosquitoes act like a vaccine syringe and then inject that modified parasite in the case of malaria into the human body,” McCullough explained in an interview on Substack.

In the first phase of the study, participants received either 15 or 50 bites from mosquitoes infected with GA2 to identify the highest dose without harmful side effects.

Next, researchers randomly assigned healthy adults who had not previously been infected with malaria to one of three groups. One was exposed to 50 bites from GA2, another to 50 bites from GA1, and the third to 50 bites from uninfected mosquitoes, the placebo group. There were nine participants in the GA2 group, eight in the GA1 group and three in the placebo group.

The researchers completed three sessions of 50 bites per session — to simulate a three-dose vaccine regimen. Three weeks later, all test subjects were exposed to five bites from mosquitoes carrying non-genetically engineered malarial parasites.

Before being exposed to the non-genetically engineered parasites, the researchers reported that the subjects in both GA1 and GA2 groups had some anti-malarial antibodies. They found that GA2 provided greater efficacy (89%) against malaria and induced a higher immune response than either GA1 or placebo. They also said the vaccine was “safe” with no significant difference in adverse events within the groups.

Adverse events included skin redness and itchiness from the bites, which most participants experienced and treated with antihistamines or topical corticosteroids. Some also reported muscle aches and pains and headaches.

Two participants had elevated troponin T levels, which indicates heart damage, or even a heart attack. However, investigators assessed these incidents as unrelated to the vaccination. One participant also showed elevated liver-function tests that researchers said were related to the antihistamines.

“The authors took a lot of liberties in identifying adverse events they considered related and unrelated to the experiment,” Jablonowski said. “When 40% of your trial group have abdominal pains, 45% have a headache, 50% have malaise and fatigue, and 60% have nausea and vomiting — these are not small relative numbers.”

The researchers concluded that the results were promising, but noted that more and larger studies would be necessary to understand the safety profile, the durability of protection and the efficacy against a greater variety of Plasmodium falciparum strains — the deadliest and most prevalent form of malaria — found in regions where malaria is endemic.

Last week, the same researchers published additional results in Nature Medicine from a second trial with the same GA2 genetically engineered parasite. In this trial, they exposed 10 research subjects to a single, “one-dose regimen” of the parasite.

That means the trial participants were exposed to one 50-bite session by mosquitoes infected with GA2. They reported that after six weeks, nine of the 10 subjects showed no breakthrough infections. They called the results “promising” and again called for further studies.

McCullough said he believes “there should be a moratorium, a ban, on all mosquito vector research right now for human conditions.”

He added, “No Institutional Review Board would agree to, you know, mass populating, mass vaccinating a population without their consent with mosquitoes.”

There would also be serious problems with tracking the effects of the vaccines themselves. “There would be no control on the dose or the inoculum, as an example. There would be no control over recognizing side effects,” McCullough said.

Jablonowski noted that 14 of the 75 originally assessed participants were excluded for medical reasons. If such a vaccine were released, “not only would a person not have foreknowledge of vaccination, they wouldn’t have after-knowledge of it either. If a medical condition arose, they would have no idea if they were infected with the genetically modified protozoan.”

He noted that in this study alone, 11 of the 75 persons initially assessed for participation declined to participate. “If this strategy is implemented, they won’t be asked if they wish to participate. Informed consent is the only power we have over our own medical autonomy,” he said. “Neither the mosquitoes nor the governments who use them are going to ask for consent.”

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.

January 12, 2025 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | | Leave a comment

Zuckerberg’s mea culpa – more strategy than sincerity

Maryanne Demasi, reports | January 12, 2025

Mark Zuckerberg’s Meta has spent years manipulating algorithms to suppress dissent and inconvenient truths. Now, Zuckerberg wants us to believe he’s turned over a new leaf. “Community notes” is his supposed act of contrition—replacing Meta’s infamous “fact-checkers” with what he’s touting as a democratic approach to truth.

The changes will affect Facebook, Instagram and Threads – social media platforms with more than 3 billion users globally. Zuckerberg says the purpose is to outsource fact-checking to the people and let the collective wisdom determine what’s true.

Users can add context or clarification to posts, which won’t vanish into algorithmic oblivion but will instead bear appended “notes” offering a more balanced view.

So, has Zuckerberg suddenly grown a conscience? Hardly. This is less about soul-searching and more about political expediency. We’re meant to believe this is some heartfelt mea culpa, a humbling moment for a company that “got it wrong.”

But to me, this feels insincere. Pure public relations – a cynical scramble to navigate shifting political winds. Meta isn’t repenting; it’s repositioning. After all, this is the same platform that orchestrated an era of unparalleled online censorship, silencing inconvenient truths under the guise of “misinformation control.”

Remember the Biden laptop story? An exposé conveniently buried before the 2020 election because it didn’t fit the desired narrative. Zuckerberg himself admitted to suppressing the story after pressure from the FBI. But that wasn’t an isolated incident.

Over the last four years, Facebook has been the digital embodiment of Orwell’s Ministry of Truth. Articles questioning the efficacy of masks, the lab leak theory, or COVID-19 vaccine safety were flagged, shadow-banned, or outright erased. Entire communities of vaccine-injured individuals—desperate for support and answers—were wiped off the platform. Real lives were affected; people were isolated. Conversations that could have saved lives were silenced. It’s no exaggeration to say Facebook has blood on its hands.

One example of Meta’s overreach involved The BMJ. Paul Thacker’s piece on Pfizer whistleblower Brook Jackson which highlighted data integrity issues at a few of Pfizer’s vaccine trial sites, was slapped with a label by Facebook, effectively discrediting it. This wasn’t just heavy-handed; it was a brazen suppression of credible journalism. An open letter from The BMJ’s editors to Meta rightly lambasted the organisation for trying to discredit the vetted information. The damage wasn’t limited to stifling discourse; it eroded public trust in both science and media.

As recently as August 2024, Zuckerberg admitted to the House Judiciary Committee that Meta had been coerced by the government to censor Americans. His letter detailed relentless pressure to silence dissenting views on COVID-19, elections, and more. And yet, despite this supposed epiphany about governmental overreach, Facebook continued censoring content right up until its recent pivot to community notes.

Zuckerberg’s newfound candour isn’t transparency; it’s pre-emptive blame-shifting. The Murthy v. Missouri (formerly Missouri v Biden) case has exposed the collusion between tech giants and government officials to suppress online speech. Allegations that the Biden administration pressured platforms to bury certain viewpoints—even when factually accurate—paint a chilling picture. Facebook’s narrative of victimhood feels like a calculated attempt to deflect legal and public scrutiny.

Meanwhile, there are ‘journalists’ in legacy media who are mourning the loss of fact-checkers as though democracy itself is under siege. What kind of journalist defends a system that stifles free speech and debate? Science thrives on questioning and open dialogue, not the orthodoxy imposed by fact-checkers operating with opaque agendas. Their hand-wringing isn’t about truth—it’s about losing control of the narrative.

And now, as the political tide shifts and the Biden administration’s influence wanes, Meta suddenly finds the courage to air its grievances about government meddling. Convenient, isn’t it? Zuckerberg’s newfound spine is less about principle and more about positioning Meta for survival in a new political landscape.

Let’s be real. Community notes is not altruism – it’s damage control. Meta isn’t addressing the harm it caused—it’s deflecting. The platform’s censorship caused real-world consequences: vaccine-injured people left voiceless, critical public health debates silenced, and public trust shattered. If Meta was truly contrite, it would compensate for the damage, support those it deplatformed, and restore erased communities – even compensate those with vaccine injuries who were silenced.

Don’t get me wrong – I think dumping fact-checkers was the right move and its a win for free speech – it just should have happened sooner, and Zuckerberg shouldn’t be let off the hook. Meta’s track record suggests this is just another calculated move.

For years, Facebook wielded its influence with recklessness, deciding who could speak and what could be said. Now, as the tide turns, it wants to rebrand as a champion of open dialogue and transparency. But the damage is done. The trust is broken. And no amount of community notes can erase the scars left by Meta’s years of suppressing truth.

Mark Zuckerberg might try to rewrite history, but history won’t forget.

January 12, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Science and Pseudo-Science | , , , | Leave a comment

THE POLIO PARADOX WITH DR. SUZANNE HUMPHRIES

The HighWire with Del Bigtree | January 9, 2025

Nephrologist and co-author of ‘Dissolving Illusions’, Suzanne Humphries, MD, joins Del to discuss her significant role in the first installment of ‘Jefferey Jaxen Investigates’ on the polio virus. Hear how the dangers of vaccines came to light for her and why the future of humanity depends on people understanding the true history behind the polio vaccine.

January 11, 2025 Posted by | Book Review, Corruption, Deception, Film Review, Science and Pseudo-Science, Video | | Leave a comment

Public Opinion on Water Fluoridation Is Changing, Expert Says

By Michael Nevradakis, Ph.D. | The Defender | January 10, 2025

Kathy Thiessen, Ph.D., a leading fluoride expert, joined “The Defender In-Depth” this week to discuss a meta-analysis published last week by the National Toxicology Program (NTP) concluding that that “fluoride is a neurotoxicant in humans.”

Thiessen, president and senior scientist at the Oak Ridge Center for Risk Analysis, testified last year in a lawsuit against the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). A September 2024 federal court ruling in the case found that water fluoridation at current U.S. levels poses an “unreasonable risk” of reduced IQ in children.

The ruling requires the EPA to take regulatory action to address the risks of water fluoridation. The agency, which has until Jan. 20 to appeal, has not yet taken action.

Thiessen co-authored a 2006 National Research Council report that addressed the toxic effects of fluoride and called for more research into its effects.

Thiessen said the new meta-analysis and a previous NTP report show that “fluoride is a neurotoxicant in humans and as fluoride exposure is increased, the likelihood of reduced IQ and some other cognitive deficits … increases.”

According to Thiessen, exposure to fluoride during pregnancy harms the fetus. “Fluoride crosses the placenta, so whatever the mother’s fluoride exposure is, the baby’s going to be exposed to that.”

And those risks continue after birth. “If the [infant] formula is made up with fluoridated tap water, those babies get the largest dose per body weight of anybody in the population at an age when they’re still developing,” Thiessen said.

‘Consistent body of literature’ shows ‘fluoride is neurotoxic during development’

The NTP’s latest meta-analysis reviewed 74 epidemiological studies examining the link between children’s IQ and fluoride exposure. Thiessen said the number and quality of such studies has increased substantially in recent years.

“When we wrote the [2006 report], there were just a few studies of fluoride exposure and cognitive deficits,” Thiessen said. “Many of the … most recent ones have been funded by our National Institutes of Health. They are high-quality studies.”

Thiessen said the studies together form “a very consistent body of literature showing that the fluoride is neurotoxic during development.” In the case of the NTP report and meta-analysis, however, there were repeated efforts to block or delay their publication.

Thiessen said the lawsuit against the EPA, filed by the Fluoride Action Network, Moms Against Fluoridation and Food & Water Watch, along with individual parents and children in 2017 was instrumental in the public release of the NTP report and meta-analysis.

“My best guess is that, if possible, they would’ve suppressed them totally,” Thiessen said. “But … because they were important to the court case, the judge required them to be made public. And we have that to be thankful for there.”

Efforts to block or delay publication of the NTP’s reports are part of “a very long history of suppression” and “of adverse information about fluoridation,” Thiessen said.

Scientists raised concerns about water fluoridation as early as the 1940s when it first started, Thiessen said. “From the 1940s on, there have been vested interests of several sorts that have pushed for water fluoridation.”

The EPA has ignored evidence of fluoride’s risks, Thiessen said. “I have said on record in the fluoride trial that if EPA had done its job responsibly, even back in the 1980s, we would not be having that case,” Thiessen added.

‘There should simply be a national end to water fluoridation’

Thiessen responded to claims that fluoridation protects oral health and that it was one of the 10 great public health achievements of the 20th century. She said, “The real evidence shows that it’s probably one of the 10 leading contributors to poor health in this country.”

Thiessen referred to a 2024 Cochrane report finding that water fluoridation confers minimal benefits to public health. She suggested that diet and other lifestyle factors are more significant determinants of oral health than fluoridation or lack of it.

“There are studies showing that children in areas where it’s a subsistence existence … These kids have great teeth. You have poor kids in this country whose diet is mostly sugar and no, they’re not going to have good teeth … It’s much more a matter of access to care, and access to good nutrition,” Thiessen said.

Thiessen suggested children in poorer and rural populations “are most likely to be adversely affected” by fluoridation, as their parents are more likely to bottle-feed babies with baby formula mixed with tap water.

Thiessen said public attitudes toward water fluoridation are changing. “The tide has been turning slowly for 20-something years, but we’re seeing a lot more of that now.”

She said many communities will be using the court ruling to justify stopping fluoridation.

“Hopefully, this will happen at the state level in those states that mandate it. I’d like to see it at the national level that we just don’t do this anymore,” Thiessen said. “There should simply be a national end to water fluoridation.”

Watch ‘The Defender In-Depth’ here.

Listen to the podcast on Spotify.

‘The Defender In-Depth’ airs on CHD.TV Wednesdays at 10 a.m. ET/7 a.m. PT.

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.

January 11, 2025 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science, Video | | Leave a comment

The Trump Administration Must Bring Moderna to Heel

Brownstone Institute | January 7, 2025

Last week, independent journalist Alex Berenson reported that a preschool-aged child died of “cardio-respiratory arrest” after taking a dose of Moderna’s Covid mRNA vaccine during its clinical trials. Despite federal requirements to report all trial information, the company withheld the truth for years as it raked in billions from its Covid shots.

The extent of the cover-up remains unknown, but Moderna, headed by CEO Stéphane Bancel, disregarded federal law requiring companies to report “summary results information, including adverse event information, for specified clinical trials of drug products” to clinicaltrials.gov. The company, not the government, is responsible for posting all results, and failure to report the death of a child constitutes a clear breach of US law, which threatens civil action against any party that “falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick, scheme, or device a material fact.”

To this point, pharmaceutical companies have remained largely immune for their role in perpetrating globally-scaled deception resulting in thousands of vaccine injuries and billions in profits. They have enjoyed a liability shield courtesy of the PREP Act, which offers protections for injuries resulting from vaccines; that indemnity, however, does not extend to non-compliance with federal regulations, material misstatements or omissions of fact, or other offenses.

The death of the child only became known because of an obscure European report released last year, which revealed that Moderna has known about the death for over two years while it continues to advertise Covid shots to children as young as six months old.

Moderna’s European filing also revealed that the company withheld trial results demonstrating that children under 12 who received the vaccine were ten times more likely than those who received the placebo to suffer “serious side effects.” Without any evidence, Moderna claimed that the side effects, including the death of a child, were unrelated to the shots.

The incoming Trump administration offers a rare opportunity to hold pharmaceutical companies accountable and to investigate the depth of the cover-up.

The FDA is responsible for enforcing the reporting of vaccine trial results, but recent heads of the agency such as Scott Gottlieb and Robert Califf have been fanatical supporters of Big Pharma. Trump’s choice for FDA, Dr. Marty Makary, presents a stark contrast to his predecessors. Makary has criticized the US Government’s reluctance to acknowledge the role of natural immunity in preventing Covid infection, and he opposed the widespread vaccination of children. He testified to Congress, “In the U.S. we gave thousands of healthy kids myocarditis for no good reason, they were already immune. This was avoidable.”

President-elect Trump has tapped Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., perhaps the most well-known critic of the Covid vaccines, to lead the Department of Health and Human Services, which oversees the FDA. He has named Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, an author of the Great Barrington Declaration, as his choice to head the National Institutes of Health. Further, Senator Ron Johnson (R-WI) told Berenson that he plans to subpoena the FDA once Republicans become the majority party in the Senate this month.

President Trump’s first term was ultimately defined by his failure to fulfill his pledge to “drain the swamp.” A corrupt bureaucracy, personified in many ways by Dr. Anthony Fauci, aided and abetted by advisors like his son-in-law, Jared Kushner, hijacked the president’s agenda. Now, the Trump administration has an unlikely yet monumental opportunity for health reform, which can start on January 20 with an investigation into Moderna’s cover-up.

The Covid response doomed Trump 1.0. Whether one regards this as a monumental error, the betrayal of a president by his advisors, an event beyond the president’s control, or a deeper and more complex plot involving everything and everyone associated with the government, both in the US and around the world, there is no question of the scale of the calamity for the public. The shots are part of that, the capstone failure of a long line of foreshadowing with lockdowns and all that was associated with pre-pharmaceutical interventions. The antidote came not as a cure but, for many, the disease itself.

There must be truth if not justice.

January 11, 2025 Posted by | Corruption, Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science | , , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »