Florida residents must feel like they have been taking a beating from major hurricanes in recent years, but what do the data show?
The problem with human perception of such things is that the time scale of hurricane activity fluctuations is often longer than human experience. For example, a person born in the 1950s would have no memory of the beating Florida took in the 1940s from major hurricanes (a total of 5). But they would have many memories of the hurricane lull period of the 1970s and 1980s, each decade having only one major hurricane strike in Florida. Then, when an upswing in hurricane strikes occurs, it seems very unusual to them, and they assume that “hurricanes are getting worse”.
Another problem is that any statistics for an area as small as Florida, even over 100+ years, will be pretty noisy. Landfalling hurricanes for the eastern U.S. would be a better metric. And statistics for the entire Atlantic basin would be even better, except that satellite coverage didn’t start until the 1970s and hurricane intensity in remote areas before then would be poorly measured (or not measured at all).
Finally, tropical cyclone statistics for the entire tropics would be the best (if one was trying to determine if climate change is impacting cyclone intensity or frequency). But satellite data for the global tropics is, again, limited to the period since the 1970s. Global tropical cyclone data before the 1970s is sketchy, at best.
So, keeping in mind that any trends we see for Florida are going to be strongly influenced by the “luck of the draw” and the quasi-random nature of hurricane tracks (hurricanes are steered by the large-scale flow of air in the mid-troposphere, say around 20,000 ft altitude or so), what are the statistics of Florida major hurricane intensity and frequency since 1900?
Florida Major Hurricane Intensity & Number
The following plot shows the intensity of major hurricanes (100 knots or greater maximum sustained wind speed) striking Florida since 1900, updated through recent (2024) Hurricane Helene:
As can be seen from the linear trend line, there has been no significant trend in the intensity of major hurricanes striking Florida since 1900.
But what about the number of hurricanes? The next plot shows there has been a weak upward trend in the decadal totals of major hurricanes striking Florida since 1900:
Note that the 2020s number might well increase, since the end of the current (2024) hurricane season will be only half-way through the 2020s. While Hurricane Milton has just been classified as a major hurricane, in 2 days time it is expected to be under increasing wind shear, so it is not obvious it will strike Florida as a major hurricane, and so I did not include it in the above charts.
Another feature of the second chart above shows that a native Floridian born in the 1960s or 1970s would indeed have experienced an increase in major hurricanes striking Florida during their lifetime. But their first couple of decades of personal experience would have occurred during a historic lull in hurricane activity.
Why Start In 1900?
There is reason to believe that the number and/or intensity of major hurricanes striking Florida in the early 1900s has been underestimated, which would bias the trends in the above plots in the upward direction, spuriously suggesting a long-term increase in activity. First of all, there were virtually no people living in Florida in 1900. The population of Miami in 1896 was 444 persons. The intensity of a hurricane is based upon its maximum sustained 1 minute windspeed, which usually covers a very small area. Even with people now inhabiting much of the Florida coastline, it is rare for a coastal anemometer to measure the intensity that the National Hurricane Center gives to a hurricane, because those winds cover such a small area. So, how could it ever be known how intense some hurricanes were in the early 1900s?
Evidence for Long-Term Hurricane Fluctuations Unrelated to Water Temperature
Modern concern centers on the possibility that warm sea surface temperatures from global warming caused by anthropogenic CO2 emissions is making hurricanes stronger or more frequent. But studies of coastal lagoon sediments along the Gulf coast and Caribbean deposited by catastrophic hurricane landfalls show large fluctuations in activity on centennial to millennial time scales, even in the absence of the unusually warm sea surface temperatures measured today. (Example here.)
It should also be remembered that not long ago the U.S. experienced an “unprecedented” 11-year drought in major hurricane strikes. That significantly impacts our perception of what is “normal”. When the lull had reached 9 years, a NASA study found such an event was a 1-in-177-years occurrence. As I recall, that was increased to 1-in-250 years when the lull reached 11 years.
The point is that there is a huge amount of natural decadal- to centennial-time scale variability in hurricane activity in Florida (or any other hurricane-prone state). But with increasing numbers of people thinking that the government is somehow influencing hurricane activity (I’m seeing a lot of this on Twitter), I doubt that actual data will have much influence on those people, and as I approach 70 years on this Earth I have noticed a long-term decline in critical thinking regarding weather, climate, and causation. I doubt that trend will change any time soon.
In a David and Goliath battle, two doctors have won a libel case against a British tabloid and journalist Barney Calman, in what the judge described as “the most significant piece of defamation litigation” he had seen in a very long time.
The UK’s High Court found that Calman and his publishers, Associated Newspapers Ltd, had falsely accused Malcolm Kendrick MD and Zoë Harcombe PhD of deliberately making false statements about statin drugs and putting many people at risk of heart attacks and strokes, with far graver consequences than the MMR scandal.
Further, Calman’s article inappropriately branded the two doctors as dishonest brokers, who were focused on the business of selling books that downplay the role of cholesterol in heart disease.
Barney Calman, journalist at Associated Newspapers Ltd
Calman and his publishers refused to apologise, remove or alter the offending articles which were published in March 2019, so Kendrick and Harcombe sued for libel arguing the articles “caused serious harm” to their reputations.
Calman and his publishers claimed the articles were “honest opinion” published in the public interest, and therefore protected under the Defamation Act 2013. But Justice Matthew Nicklin denied them a public interest defence in June 2024. (See previous coverage)
Since then, the publishers decided not to appeal the decision.
Today, the Mail Online issued an apology to Kendrick and Harcombe, conceding that the allegations it printed were “untrue and ought not to have been published.”
It added, “We are happy to set the record straight, and apologise to Dr Harcombe and Dr Kendrick for the distress caused. We will not repeat the allegations and have agreed to pay substantial damages and costs.”
In response to the announcement, Dr Zoë Harcombe said, “I’m delighted to say it’s finally over. Malcolm and I are so grateful to those who made this possible – especially our legal team Claire & Dominic at Carter-Ruck and Adrienne & Godwin at 5RB.”
The offending articles have been removed from the website. The case serves as a stark warning to journalists who use their platform to try and discredit those who challenge orthodoxy.
HART recently posted an article titled “The Witch Hunt continues”, which discussed self-censorship of doctors, General Medical Council (GMC) overreach, and how medical professionals are being erased from the medical register, despite no wrongdoing. Yet this is not a new phenomenon. If we delve into the history of how our existing ‘medical monopoly’ was established, with its roots firmly in America, it is an all too familiar disturbing playbook of censorship, corruption and subversion of ethics that spans over 130 years in the making. The existing medical monopoly was contrived by the Rockefeller family and their many contacts, which has been so successful in its takeover of medicine in America. Herein, I discuss an excellent book by Eustace Mullins titled “Murder by Injection: The Story of the Medical Conspiracy Against America”. Despite the book’s off putting title, Eustace’s careful research spanning over 30 years provides a detailed and shocking account of how billionaire tycoons have waged tyranny, economic depressions, wars and revolutions as part of a wider plan to usher in a medical care system to enslave the public through an entirely controlled medical monopoly. The whole book is free to download here.
Until the late 19th century, doctors were freelance practitioners who assumed all the risks associated with their medical decision-making. In 1832, the British Medical Association was chartered and provided the impetus for a similar organisation to be established in the United States (US), namely the American Medical Association (AMA), which was founded in 1847 with its headquarters in Chicago. From its inception, the AMA had one objective: to create a total medical monopoly of the practice of medicine, and ensure allopathy was the basis of its practice. Allopathic medicine required practitioners to receive training in a recognised academic school of medicine, which relied heavily on surgical procedures as well as medicines. Allopathy was to rival homoeopathy, which promoted non-toxic doses of natural remedies; in the mid-1800s, homoeopaths outnumbered allopaths two to one in the US – a statistic that had to be overturned when the AMA was created.
The reason this book is so pertinent in our troublesome times is that it catalogues the long, but very calculated and carefully planned demise of healthcare in America. It chronicles how the introduction of a monopoly through any means possible – including, racketeering, abuse, censorship and murder – enabled the takeover of health by federal agencies and governments, which were inextricably linked to industry and big pharma. How was such a monopoly to be achieved? It had to be orchestrated by the richest man in the world at that time, the monopolist John D. Rockefeller, who had triumphed in organising his oil monopoly. Backed by Rothschild and Wall Street colleagues, it was hoped the medical monopoly would provide even greater profits than oil, which has more than proved to be the case. Rockefeller appointed Frederick T. Gates (related to Mr Microsoft Bill Gates) as his ‘philanthropic’ agent, whose task was to dominate the entire medical education system.
In 1907, the AMA requested the Carnegie Foundation to conduct a survey of all medical schools in the US; the Foundation appointed Abraham Flexner to lead the study of medical schools. Coincidentally, Abraham Flexner’s brother, Simon, was head of the Rockefeller Institute of Medical Research, so this was an intentional cosy and conflicted setup from the outset. Flexner, a graduate of Johns Hopkins University, which was founded by Daniel Colt Gilman, completed his report in 1910. The report and AMA decided there were too many doctors and the solution was to create a medical educational system so elitist that most students would be prohibited from considering such a career. The undergraduate training was constructed so that allopathic medicine was central to its teaching, and by 1920 the number of medical schools had declined from 650 to 50 in number.
The book goes on to describe how ‘quackery’ was established, with three key players, Morris Fishbein, George Simmons and Albert Lasker, who all began their careers as journalists. Not one of them had any credentials of practising medicine, but their collective journalist and organisational talents propelled them to the heights of power, as full-time ‘quacks’. They utilised their connections with the corrupt AMA to stifle dissent and opposition. For instance, the AMA would grant pharmaceutical companies a ‘Seal of Approval’ for their products but only if they advertised in AMA-affiliated journals. Those that opposed this, such as Wallace Abbott, founder of Abbott Laboratories, soon found out the hard way that no products would be approved, and his reputation would suffer unless he ‘cooperated’. Simmons’ practices were particularly egregious, with one critic positing: “almost every branch of the Federal Government active in the field of medicine was completely dominated by the AMA”.
Ultimately, the monopolists forced government agencies to act against anyone who posed a threat to their monopoly, including arrests and prison sentences. Simmons and Fishbein collectively controlled the AMA for over half a century, through raising money and using political clout. Fishbein had total control over all publications of the AMA and selection of personnel in various committees. Moreover the AMA was instrumental in concealing beneficial (but non-lucrative) therapies, with products of high value being rejected or their acceptance enduring unwarranted delays. The extent of the corruption detailed in this history of American medicine is remarkable. Federal agents were solicited by charitable foundations to instigate police actions to hundreds of unsuspecting health practitioners throughout the US, in a ruthless operation to arrest and imprison people distributing leaflets about natural or herbal formulas, despite no evidence anyone had been injured or killed by these remedies. Terror raids against competitors were carried out, with heavily armed federal agents breaking doors and seizing any herbal stocks from people’s homes. The book describes terrorisation of anyone active in the alternative healthcare field. Thus, the AMA became an autocracy. Physicians were trained under the Rockefeller-based medical system, which had full control over the medical examination boards. So successful was this endeavour that Americans are now treated with expensive, overpriced, ineffective and potentially dangerous drugs, a corruption that has been routinely covered up by federal agencies.
In 1940, a bill for health insurance was introduced; although it initially suffered setbacks, the seed was sown to create an industry whereby the AMA would fight ‘socialised medicine’, which was the forerunner for Medicare and Medicaid. In the 1960s, the next target for annihilation was the chiropractic sector. No level of intimidation of censorship was spared and many high-profile speakers were forced to cancel lectures and lobby groups were set up to sanction and apply pressure on the Council on Chiropractic Education to the extent that the AMA Joint Committee on Accreditation of Hospitals barred chiropractors and refused accreditation of hospitals that had such practitioners. The AMA also forced the Veterans Administration to refuse payments to veterans for chiropractic services.
With their eyes set on further control, the medical monopolists realised that cancer was a lucrative endeavour and so established the next phase of the monopoly. In 1913, the same year President Woodrow Wilson signed the Federal Reserve Act, a group of doctors met at the Harvard Club in New York to establish a national cancer organisation, the American Society for the Control of Cancer (later renamed the American Cancer Society, ACS). The Rockefellers (with Rothschild and J. P. Morgan backing) funded the ACS. Similarly, funding for the Memorial Hospital (later to become the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center) was also linked with the National Radium Institute, which stipulated that further funds be permitted, only assuming all cancers were treated with radium. By 1922, more than 100 radiologists had died from X-ray induced cancer. Alfred Sloan, the President of General Motors and Charles Kettering, an inventive genius of electrical systems and auto ignition were deployed. Mullins chronicles in detail how huge industry directors and partners were all interlinked with each other, such as Squibb, Bristol Myers, Johnson & Johnson, Bell Telephone Laboratories, Lehman Brothers, Chase Manhattan Bank and National Geographic. Collaborations with ‘elected’ presidents, industry players, defence industries, CIA, chemical and drug firms go hand-in-hand.
Two key names in patent medicine and journalism were Albert Lasker and Elmer Bobst. One of Lasker’s greatest achievements was his national campaign to persuade women to smoke in public. Lasker became ill with cancer and died in 1952, but before his death, he set up the Albert and Mary Lasker Foundation, which made Mary (Albert’s daughter) the most powerful woman in American Medicine. It is also no coincidence that 18 members of the ACS Board of Directors were executive officers of banks. Pat McGrady, who served as editor of the ACS for 25 years stated “Medicine has become venal, second only to the law”. Since “the fight against cancer” is totally controlled by the Rockefeller medical monopoly, much of cancer research is bogus and filled with falsified results, albeit by well intentioned and unsuspecting researchers. Since Elmer Bobst played a crucial role in making it possible for Nixon to become President, it was not difficult to persuade him to authorise a new and expensive “war on cancer” in 1971.
The book explains how the ACS, AMA and FDA collaboratively staged a war of censorship and intimidation, preventing discussion of effective compounds, such as laetrile, for treating cancer. The ACS, for example, opposed the regulation of potential carcinogens, such as TRIS (trisaminomethane) and DES (diethylstilbestrol). Chemotherapy was promoted as a cancer treatment in the 1960s, despite evidence that it had many serious side effects and was shown to be highly toxic and carcinogenic in animal models, as well as immunosuppressive. Cancer is as much a disease of poor nutrition and one in which the multiplication of ‘simpler’ cells are unable to differentiate because the energy balance of the body is disrupted causing the disease. One of the Director’s of the National Cancer Institute is Mary Lasker, who has close ties with the Pharmaceutical Manufacturers Association, which is not a coincidence.
Mullins goes on to describe several instances of researchers who had discovered cancer cures either by detoxification or a diet low in salt, protein and fats, but the work was buried or destroyed to ensure the chemotherapy, radiation and surgical approaches to cancer were unchallenged. The Laskers built much of their fortune on the promotion of cigarette smoking. Although cigarette smoking is harmful and causes cancer, studies (cited in the book) have shown that there was no link between traditional air-dried tobacco and lung cancer. The tobacco industries, dominated by the Rothschilds, add chemicals and sugar to tobacco, which creates a carcinogenic substance in the nicotine tar. Air-dried tobacco lacks this carcinogen, as noted by the many primitive tribes who have smoked tobacco for thousands of years without any ill effects. Mullins explains that the ACS has vested interests in established forms of cancer treatment, for example owning 50% of the patent rights for the chemotherapy drug 5-fluorouracil. Dr Hardin James addressed the ACS in 1969, noting that “for a typical type of cancer, people who refuse treatment live an average of 12.5 years. Those who accepted surgery and other kinds of treatment, lived an average of 3 years. I attribute this to the traumatic effect of surgery on the body’s natural defence mechanisms.”
In the ‘holy church’ of allopathic medicine, there are what might be termed the four ‘holy waters’, which include immunisation, fluorination of water, use of fertilisers and contamination of the food chain. The practice of immunisation is the most pernicious in terms of its long-term effects. This practice goes directly against the discovery of modern holistic medical experts that the body has a natural immune defence against illness. The greatest heresy any clinician can commit is to publicly voice any doubt about any one of the four ‘holy waters’. The most deeply entrenched in the fabric of modern medical practice, as is glaringly apparent, is the vaccination programmes, as well as being one of the most profitable aspects of the medical monopoly. One physician, Dr Henry R. Bybee of Norfolk, Virginia, stated “My honest opinion is that vaccines are the cause of more disease and suffering than anything I could name.” Additionally, Dr Herbert Snow, a senior surgeon at a cancer hospital in London voiced similar concerns “In recent years, many men and women in the prime of life have dropped dead suddenly. I am convinced that some 80% of these deaths are caused by the inoculation or vaccination they have undergone.” The chilling accounts continue with another practitioner Dr W. B. Clarke of Indiana remarking “cancer was practically unknown until compulsory vaccination when the cowpox vaccine began to be introduced. I have had to deal with at least 200 cases of cancer, and I never saw a case of cancer in an unvaccinated person”. Is this not at least an observation worth exploring? It is unlikely modern medicine advocates will examine this alarming connection. Eventually, the outraged public will bring pressure to abandon the modern ritual of vaccinating children.
Another well-known practitioner from San Francisco, Dr J. M. Pebbles, revealed “The vaccination practice…has not only become the chief menace and the greatest danger to the health of the rising generation, but an outrage upon the personal liberties of the American citizen.” The book tells of how Wyeth laboratories was charged with $15 million in damages to an 8-year-old girl who suffered permanent brain damage after receiving a diphtheria-pertussis-tetanus vaccine. In the US, vaccines are actively and incessantly promoted as the solution for all infectious diseases. It is not a coincidence that agencies, such as the AMA, WHO, FDA, are in favour of the vaccine programmes given the revolving door that exists between Big Pharma and these agencies. It is well known that Edward Jenner ‘discovered’ the cowpox vaccine to purportedly prevent smallpox. However, smallpox was already declining before the introduction of the vaccine and many believe it would have disappeared by the end of the 19th century. After the cowpox vaccine became widespread in England, a smallpox epidemic ensued killing over 22,000 people. By 1872, 44,480 were killed, and the vaccine was finally banned in 1948. This trend is mirrored elsewhere: Japan introduced compulsory vaccination in 1872 and by 1892 there were 165,774 cases of smallpox resulting in nearly 30,000 deaths. Other European countries that submitted to compulsory vaccination saw similar high numbers of cases and deaths, whereas countries (such as Norway) who did not vaccinate had a fraction of the cases. Historians are reluctantly concluding that the 1918 ‘great flu epidemic’ was attributable to the widespread use of vaccines, as survivors were those who had refused the vaccines.
The book chronicles how dissenters and researchers who spoke out lost their jobs, had their laboratory notes seized and burned, and laboratory animals destroyed. In the 1970s, the swine flu vaccination campaign was ushered in, but insurance companies refused to cover against lawsuits as there were inadequate studies. This prompted a propaganda campaign by the monopolists to trick Americans into saving themselves by taking the vaccines, which resulted in billions in damage claims. The next iteration by Dr Jonas Salk in the 1950s was the polio vaccine, which Simon Flexner helped to recommend. It is disturbing that a national conference in Washington in 1988 declared that “all the cases of polio in America come from the vaccine. The naturally occurring (or wild type) polio virus has not been shown to cause a single case of polio in the US since 1979”. Even back in 1955, the Surgeon General of the US highlighted in the AMA conference that “no batch of vaccine can be proven safe before it is given to children”. Moreover, James R. Shannon of the NIH declared “the only safe vaccine is a vaccine that is never used.”
Importantly, the death by injection playbook is not new; rather, a well-orchestrated agenda has been implemented with calculated precision in multiple cycles to gradually harm and decimate populations across the globe. This book further discusses how fluorination of water has been another Rockefeller-deployed monopoly to poison millions of Americans by adding the poisonous chemical sodium fluoride to drinking water. Large quantities of fluorides are waste contaminants and byproducts from large agricultural firms, pesticides and chemical firms, such as Hooker Chemical. Predictably, Hooker Chemical became part of the Rockefeller unit when one of the Hooker family married into the Rockefeller family. Fluorides can cause serious chromosomal damage and animal model studies have shown it promotes cancer development, even at the one part per million threshold in drinking water that has detrimental consequences especially when consumed cumulatively over time. Soviet studies have further shown that fluorides were useful in inducing docile obedience in the general population. Combined with aluminium that was included in many foods, cooking pots and packaging, this has aided in slowly poisoning the mass population and of course produced Alzhiemer’s disease, in what constitutes a build up of toxic levels of aluminium, leading to cognitive and nervous system decline.
Not content with disrupting the medical and water supplies, the Rockefeller-based medical monopoly had its eye on the ‘green revolution’ and agricultural control through the contamination of crops using a ‘co-opted’ carefully constructed money laundering system. This time they developed ‘super crops’ or grains that would serve as an excellent cash cow for the US to sell to ‘developing’ nations. To achieve this goal required the soil to be pumped with huge quantities of fertiliser (the product of nitrates and petroleum), commodities controlled by the Rockefellers that helped to build an entire chemical empire. At the end of the second World War, a concerted effort was made by the monopolists to dump surplus nitrates into the American food chain. Farmers were instructed to increase their use of fertilisers, herbicides and pesticides and create a capital intensive payback scheme for the monopolists. The final sections of the book discuss how fertilisers have been used to reduce nutrients in the soil and how the food chain has been slowly contaminated. Chapter 9 lists and discusses the 18 largest drug firms and their close associations with major banking cartels and federal agencies, such as the CIA.
Collectively, these insidious links with Big Pharma and the medical monopoly, are not only a massive cash cow, but have maimed and decimated the population and continue to do so. Since the rest of the world is intimately tethered to the well-oiled Rockefeller US medical monopoly machine, it is not hard to see how the censorship, corruption and silencing of dissenters has become all too commonplace today.
Alberta Health Services & the Colleges have murdered 10,000s of vulnerable Albertans and not one person has been held accountable by your govt.
AHS murdered over 2500 Cancer patients in Edmonton at Cross Cancer Institute and continues to do so daily, like 41 year old Steven Wong who was murdered by AHS on July 19, 2024 and was denied Cancer Care (and so many others whom I can name to the Police).
AHS murdered over 5818 COVID-19 patients, almost all of which were preventable deaths, AHS is still using Remdesivir (which was recalled in the US) and lethal hospital protocols & continues to kill vulnerable Albertans in the hospitals. Doctors who killed COVID patients like Edmonton ICU doctor Dr.Darren Markland, continue to do so with impunity and with no accountability.
No one in the AHS COVID-19 Scientific Advisory Group, led by AHS bureaucrats Lynora Saxinger, Braden Manns and your Public Health Chief Mark Joffe, which blocked all early treatments including Ivermectin, Hydroxychloroquine, Vitamin D, etc, that lead to 5818 COVID-19 deaths, was held accountable. Not one person was arrested or even criminally investigated. Not one person was fired. Dr.Saxinger continues to push mRNA jabs.
NDP MLA Dr.Luanne Metz murdered over 1600 COVID-19 patients by blocking Alberta’s largest Hydroxychloroquine Trial (on the basis of the Lancetgate fraudulent HCQ paper) and not only was she not held accountable, she laughs about it at the Alberta Legislature while calling for doctors who raise concerns about mRNA jabs to be CENSORED.
AHS & the Colleges have murdered over 10,000 Albertans who died as “excess deaths”, most of them being COVID-19 Vaccine Deaths. There are 4000-6000 unexplained deaths each year.
AHS continues to illegally block proper autopsies from being done (with staining for COVID-19 vaccine spike protein). Proper autopsies would have solved the mystery of the #1 cause of death in Alberta (COVID-19 Vaccines) which is killing 4000-6000 Albertans each year since 2021. You have taken no steps to address either the deaths or AHS’ cover up of these deaths.
AHS continues to push DNA contaminated COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines on children and pregnant women, despite the fact that you were informed 100s of children died from the mRNA injections and the jabs were never approved for use in pregnancy (we don’t know how many pregnant Alberta women have died after taking mRNA jabs, but AHS certainly does).
You had a chance to protect Alberta’s children from harms of contaminated mRNA injections after the “An Injection of Truth” Event on June 17, 2024 and chose to stay silent instead and not protect children.
In fact, the Alberta Minister of Health AdrianaLaGrange publicly lied about the event and came out in defense of pedophiles and child sex abusers (AHS Executives & College Presidents like Dr.Albert De Villiers & Dr.Fred Janke) who had been arrested by RCMP for sexually assaulting and trafficking children as young as 5 years old but were given their medical licenses back by the College during the pandemic. You didn’t fire Adriana LaGrange for this and she didn’t fire anyone on her staff for supporting sex crimes against children.
You haven’t restored a single doctor who was persecuted by the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Alberta during the pandemic. Doctors like Dr.Roger Hodgkinson, Dr.Daniel Nagase, Dr.Gary Davidson and myself continue to be illegally persecuted by College leaders Dr.Scott McLeod and Dr.Michael Caffaro whom Adriana Lagrange does photo-ops with.
You haven’t restored a single nurse who was persecuted by AHS and the College of Nurses, 100s of whom reached out to me with horror stories of persecution that should land AHS CEOs Verna Yiu, Mauro Chies and Athana Mentzelopoulos in prison for life.
You haven’t restored a single healthcare worker, 1000s of whom had to leave the medical profession after being bullied & abused by their AHS Managers.
You haven’t restored INFORMED CONSENT which was illegally destroyed by the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Alberta who threatened 11,000 Alberta doctors into not informing Albertans about the risks of COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines. You also didn’t hold College leaders Scott McLeod & Michael Caffaro responsible for this act of destruction of all medical ethics in Alberta. They continue to threaten doctors with impunity.
You haven’t dissolved the thoroughly corrupt and private Corporation that is the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Alberta, even though you had run on the promise to do so. In fact, now you say at Town Halls we need to have a corrupt College to continue persecuting good doctors, because who else will police them? This is unforgivable.
You haven’t dissolved the top 2-3 layers of corrupt Alberta Health Services Leadership that is run by NDP millionaire bureaucrats including Dr.Jennifer Bestard, Dr.Sid Viner, Sean Chilton, Dr.Peter Jamieson, Karen Horon, Michael Lam, Ronda White, Andrea Beckwith-Ferraton, Kerry Bales, all of whom are AHS Executives hired by Rachel Notley’s Government during 2015-2019 and who became millionaires pushing paper and mismanaging $26 billion AHS yearly budget.
You installed a corrupt NDP/Notley AHS Executive – Dr.Mark Joffe – as the Public Health Chief of Alberta. This is the AHS Executive who said “don’t walk, run to get your booster shot” in Dec.2021, when AHS & Deena Hinshaw were aware that 1000s of Albertas were dying or had damaged immune systems after their first 2 COVID-19 Vaccines and Deena Hinshaw deleted crucial government data showing mRNA Vaccine injury.
You allowed AHS to bury 1000s of reports of COVID-19 Vaccine injuries that were reported by Alberta doctors but rejected & covered up by AHS bureaucrats. You have not pushed for those reports to be made public or for any transparency in vaccine injury reporting at AHS.
You installed former Alberta Liberal Party leader Raj Sherman as Chair of the Health Quality Council of Alberta, who had fully expressed support for COVID-19 Vaccines and AHS’ corrupt leadership.
You allowed Tyler Shandro to be installed on the Board of Covenant Health, even though he was Health Minister who stayed silent when AHS CEO Verna Yiu implemented an illegal COVID-19 Vaccine mandate on Alberta’s 105,000 healthcare workers
You didn’t investigate AHS CEO Verna Yiu DrYiu_Verna who signed a deal with the World Economic Forum in 2020 and implemented an illegal vaccine mandate on Alberta’s 105,000 healthcare workers in Aug-Oct.2021 while violating medical privacy of AHS employees as AHS spied on their medical records to see if they were vaccinated. She was paid $700,000 at AHS, is now Vice President at UAlberta and was never investigated for her crimes.
There are now criminal charges pending against AHS CEO Athana Mentzelopoulous, AHS Board Chair Lyle Oberg, AHS CEO Mauro Chies and AHS CEO Verna Yiu for threats & extortion being inflicted on my family.
Criminal charges are also pending against College leaders Scott McLeod, Michael Caffaro and their lawyer Craig Boyer who have been repeatedly threatening me and my family at our home.
There are many more reasons than the above why you should not be proud of your last 2 years as Alberta Premier and I will continue to expose this and much more to millions of Albertans, Canadians and those around the world who are watching very closely.
The 10,000s of Alberta victims will not be silenced and everyone has to be held accountable for the crimes committed against Alberta’s most vulnerable citizens.
You have much work to do, Premier Smith, and time is running out.
I can only look at your last 2 years as an abysmal failure to do the right things, on the level of failures of former Alberta Premier Jason Kenney.
Medical and pharmaceutical history is replete with examples of dangerous interventions that have poisoned, injured, or killed. However, events since 2020 have attracted attention as never before to medicine’s potential to be both lethal and malevolent. In The Medical-Pharmaceutical Killing Machine, Children’s Health Defense situates current perils in their broader context with the aim of helping readers understand how to protect themselves and their loved ones.
In the Greek Trojan War saga, the god Apollo ensured that Cassandra’s prophecies would never be believed, with disastrous consequences. As recounted in the book, modern medicine, too, has produced its fair share of “medical Cassandras”—doctors and writers who have tried to warn the public about medicine’s life-threatening underbelly, generally to little avail. A chapter dedicated to nine of these medical skeptics, beginning with Ivan Illich and his coining of the term “iatrogenesis” to describe adverse outcomes caused by doctors, weaves a powerful portrait of harms regularly denied and ignored, with those making the claims typically marginalized and “canceled.”
The book shows that there is no shortage of tools in the killing machine arsenal. One chapter highlights the mRNA vaccine technology inaugurated with COVID, illustrating how this new mechanism for iatrogenesis is inflicting novel forms of toxicity, not all of which are yet understood. Another chapter about assisted suicide and euthanasia describes the chilling global proliferation of policies and propaganda promoting those practices for vulnerable populations that include babies, children, people diagnosed with autism, and the mentally ill. The book also describes factors that make it possible for the killing machine to continue operating with impunity, including the ascendance of an “evidence-based medicine” juggernaut, medical gaslighting, and a ballooning global enforcement infrastructure. Nor does it shy away from confronting what some now characterize as “iatrogenocide”; a chapter asking “Why Do They Do It?” considers money, prestige, and control as three possible answers.
Ultimately, it is only by acknowledging the long-standing reality of an all-too-effective medical-pharmaceutical killing machine that people can learn to dodge the threats and work toward building a different model that prioritizes life and genuine health.
Children’s Health Defense embarked on a nine-month journey across America, gathering powerful testimonies from the people. Our interviews ranged from mothers and fathers to teenagers, families, medical professionals, whistleblowers, lawyers, and people from all walks of life.
The Misinformation Bill is not just wholly unnecessary, it’s an abject travesty. How did such a preposterous overbearing, undemocratic, anti-science and dangerous piece of legislation get past the first focus group? It wouldn’t survive a high-school debate, and yet, here it is?
Misinformation is easy to correct when you own a billion dollar news agency, most academics, institutions, expert committees and 25% of the economy. The really hard thing, even with all that power and money is to defend an absurd lie and stop people pointing it out, which is surely the main purpose of the Misinformation Bill amendments. The government can already correct any misinformation that really matters, so these amendments curtail our freedom of speech for no benefit at all.
Guilty until proven innocent?
The amendments turn free speech on its head — instead of having the implicit right to criticize the government, everyone now needs to prove to some judge that their views are “reasonably” satire, or reasonable dissemination for an “academic, scientific or religious” purpose, and that their “motive” is honest and their behaviour is “authentic”.
When it comes to reasonableness in a democracy the highest court should be the court of public opinion, but how can the people decide if they are not allowed to hear it?
How is it even a democracy still if the government is allowed to take our money to force feed us the government’s view on the ABC and in every captured university (dependent on government funds), but the people cannot even reply through sheer unfunded creative wit?
This legislation puts a very unfree cloud over all groups, forums, blogs, and social media.
The fines (and all legal fees today) are so obscenely, disproportionately harmful to Australians that few will risk going to court, instead the platforms will be preemptively second guessing what a judge might say is reasonable, and people with serious social media accounts will be second guessing the second-guesses of their platform controllers in fear that they might be thrown off, and lose years of work if they guess wrongly.
Worse, the big platforms, supposedly so “independent” will become unaccountable but de facto arms of the government. The platforms will know if they don’t perform as expected and favorably to the incumbent masters, that the rules will get more onerous, the fines bigger. And thus and verily the unholy alliance of Big-Tech and Big-Government will become Big-Brother in your conversations, and Big Bankrupter in your nightmares.
The government claim they are not censoring anyone, but it’s just done at arms length with “implausible” deniability. Obviously the laws will censor all of us who are not already controlled by ACMA or the government through a public salary, a grant, or a Code of Practice written into the the Australian Broadcasting Corporation Act.
Who silences the government misinformation, then?
We were there when the government experts told us margarine with hydrogenated fake vegetable fat would be great for our hearts. We heard them when they told us an ice age was coming, and antibiotics were useless against stomach ulcers. We noticed they told us to hold off on the peanut butter for babies to prevent allergies, only to find out that all these things were misinformation.
What happens when the experts are wrong, but the people who are unconvinced can’t speak up because they might “harm… the efficacy of a preventative health measure”? These health measures may take a … lifetime… to even measure the efficacy. Does the government get a free pass for 40 years?
It was estimated dietary trans fats (found in margarine) were killing 82,000 people a year in the US. (Danaei et al 2009). Should we have fined all the people who talked about this, and perhaps delayed things, and killed a half a million more? Someone speaking against hydrogenated margarine could have been deemed to be spreading “misinformation causing harm to public health in Australia”. So 20 years later, they turn out to be right — will the government compensate the families of the dead who might have chosen a different sandwich spread had they heard another opinion and been able to make up their own mind?
Will Facebook and Twitter need to block the accounts of experts who were wrong? Or, are there two kinds of citizens in Australia — one sort that work for the government, who can give their opinions and get things wrong without losing their right to speak, and the Untermenschen, who cannot speak, even if they are right?
Confidence has to be earned, not ordered
Apparently the citizens of Australia are not allowed to say anything that might harm the confidence in the banking system or the financial markets. But if our banking system is so fragile, or our currency so fake, that it needs a law to force people to “feel confident” then we are in a trouble already.
Nothing damages confidence like making a law to silence critics.
As adults, we filter misinformation our whole lives, it’s our job
We are all adults in this room, and we have lived our whole lives filtering out advertising spin, ignoring political lies, and reading books telling us we can stop storms if we just ride a bike. Since the stone-age we’ve spent our lives climbing from one misinformation-swamp to another, but as adults, it’s our job to figure it out. Free will and all. How dare you treat us like children.
And even the children about to enter the room have to learn how to deal with misinformation. How exactly can we teach them, if the government serves up one permitted line to protect us from accidentally hearing something “wrong”?
It’s not just that this misinformation bill is egregiously wrong, it’s that we shouldn’t have one at all in the first place.
REFERENCES
Danaei et al (2009) The preventable causes of death in the United States: comparative risk assessment of dietary, lifestyle, and metabolic risk factors, PLoS Med, . 2009 Apr 28;6(4):e1000058. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000058. Epub 2009 Apr 28.
Adding fluoride to drinking water provides very limited dental benefits, especially compared with 50 years ago, according to an updated Cochrane Review published today.
The review follows less than two weeks after a California federal judge ruled water fluoridation poses an “unreasonable risk” of reduced IQ in children and must be regulated by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
It also comes as some U.S. cities and towns have moved to pause or stop fluoridating their water in response to the verdict, signaling that fluoridating water, a long-term and largely unquestioned practice in the U.S., is facing heightened scrutiny.
To determine if water fluoridation leads to reduced rates of tooth decay, researchers from the University of Manchester and other U.K. universities reviewed 157 studies comparing communities that fluoridated their water to those that don’t.
They concluded that contemporary evidence shows community water fluoridation may lead to a very small reduction in cavities in children’s baby teeth over time. Fluoride in water reduced tooth decay only by about one-quarter of one tooth, they found, and even that conclusion was made with “low certainty.”
“Adding fluoride to water may slightly increase the number of children who have no tooth decay in either their baby teeth or permanent teeth,” the study authors wrote. “However, these results also included the possibility of little or no difference in tooth decay.”
They said studies conducted in 1975 or before showed a larger benefit of water fluoridation on tooth decay, CNN reported — a reduction of about one less cavity in baby teeth. However, those findings no longer apply to populations today who have better baseline dental health and exposure to other sources of fluoride, like toothpaste, they said.
The findings also confirm recent observational studies, including the LOTUS Study, which found only a 2% reduction in cavities among people living in fluoridated areas in England.
The conclusions — taken together with recent scientific research and the federal court decision — raise serious questions about the practice of community water fluoridation.
“When interpreting the evidence, it is important to think about the wider context and how society and health have changed over time,” said co-author Anne-Marie Glenny, professor of Health Sciences Research at the University of Manchester.
“Given that the benefit has reduced over time, before introducing a new fluoridation scheme, careful thought needs to be given to costs, acceptability, feasibility and ongoing monitoring,” said co-author Lucy O’Malley, Ph.D., senior lecturer in Health Services Research at the University of Manchester.
They maintain water fluoridation is a safe and effective strategy for oral health.
“I find it incredibly irresponsible that agencies like the CDC [Centers for Disease Control and Prevention], American Dental Association and the American Academy of Pediatrics have lauded and promoted this harmful practice of fluoridation for far too long,” integrative dentist Dr. Griffin Cole told The Defender.
Cole said that given the known neurotoxic effects of fluoride, there was never any justification for fluoridating water. He said:
“It is accurate to say we are all exposed to so many other sources of fluoride that continuing to add it to our water supply is now not necessary, but it’s disingenuous and unconscionable to say the statistically insignificant effect on tooth decay was worth poisoning millions of Americans and children’s brains for nearly 80 years.”
In last week’s 80-page federal court decision, U.S. District Judge Edward Chen evaluated and summarized the extensive scientific data presented at trial demonstrating that fluoride has neurotoxic effects on the developing brains of fetuses and children.
According to Chen, the “optimal level” of water fluoridation currently used in the U.S., which is 0.7 milligrams per liter, is too close to the known level at which fluoride poses a neurotoxic risk and may itself be neurotoxic.
Research published in JAMA Network Open in May shows that children born to women exposed during pregnancy to fluoridated drinking water at optimal levels were more likely to have neurobehavioural problems.
The authors of the Cochrane study also found insufficient evidence to show that water fluoridation reduces oral health inequalities, which is one of the key claims supporters like the ADA used to justify the practice.
Last week, the ADA and the AAP confirmed they remain staunch supporters of water fluoridation.
ADA President Linda J. Edgar said in a statement that scientific evidence shows community water fluoridation reduced cavities by 25% — a significantly higher claim than found in the Cochrane review. Dr. Charlotte W. Lewis, a member of the AAP Section on Oral Health, said water fluoridation is “a public health policy based on a solid foundation of evidence.”
Neither organization immediately responded to The Defender’s request for comment.
The CDC, which has long advocated for water fluoridation as a “cornerstone strategy” for limiting tooth decay, and the EPA, which has refused to regulate it, also did not respond to The Defender’s request for comment on the study.
Over 200 million Americans are currently exposed to fluoridated water on a daily basis.
New York City officials are planning a tabletop simulation later this month to prepare for a hypothetical bird flu outbreak, a city health official revealed at the International Bird Flu Summit, taking place this week in Fairfax, Virginia.
The summit is sponsored by Gingko Biosecurity, which says it is “building and deploying the next-generation infrastructure and technologies that global leaders need to predict, detect, and respond to a wide variety of biological threats.”
According to U.S. News & World Report, the Missouri cases “could be the first cases of bird flu spreading between humans in the United States.”
Italy and Hungary recently announced they detected bird flu outbreaks at farms, Reuters reported. According to CBS News, bird flu killed 47 tigers, three lions and a panther at zoos in Vietnam.
Epidemiologist Nicholas Hulscher told The Defender that the Missouri and other global outbreaks are not concerning.
“The current outbreaks of H5N1 among animal populations have not resulted in mass mortality with the exception of government-mandated culling,” Hulscher said. “Genotype B3.13, the currently circulating strain in U.S. cattle, is currently a very mild illness for humans. There has never been a reported human H5N1 death in the U.S.”
Dr. Clayton J. Baker, an internal medicine physician, told The Defender the latest news reports strike him “as classic ‘fear porn.’” He noted that before the U.S. News & World Report story, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) released a report stating that only one H5N1 case in humans had been detected in Missouri.
Journalist and author John Leake is attending the Bird Flu Summit. He told The Defender that while mainstream media reports are hyping purported bird flu outbreaks, the atmosphere at the summit is subdued, albeit aligned with the prevailing narrative.
“They’re following, I’d say, the narrative that we’ve been treated to all year, that this new H5N1 is jumping from birds into mammals — for example, dairy cattle, marine mammals, which are genetically, genomically far closer to humans,” Leake said.
“So, the prevailing orthodoxy is that this pathogenic avian influenza is getting closer to making the evolutionary jump from animals into humans. And if that happens, it’s going to place a big burden on human health and the public healthcare system,” Leake added.
As for the Missouri outbreak, Leake said it’s been a topic of discussion at the summit — but no evidence has been presented to confirm that human-to-human bird flu transmission has occurred.
In addition to the news about New York City’s planned bird flu simulation, the topic of gain-of-function research involving the H5N1 virus came up, with some attendees speculating that the current predominant H5N1 strain may be a product of such research.
Simulation of bird flu outbreak ‘cause for tremendous concern’
According to Leake, Syra Madad, senior director of the System-wide Special Pathogens Program at NYC Health + Hospitals, told summitt attendees that her agency is planning a “full pandemic tabletop exercise” on Oct. 21.
Noting the similarities with similar simulations that took place shortly before the COVID-19 and monkeypox outbreaks in 2019 and 2022, respectively, Leake said, “In my experience, once these guys start doing this kind of thing, they’re signaling that they think it’s for real.”
Baker said news of the tabletop simulation “is cause for tremendous concern.” He called the timing of the COVID-19 tabletop exercise, Event 201, which took place in October 2019, “in retrospect, ‘suspicious in the extreme.’”
The Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security, the World Economic Forum and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation organized the 2019 simulation of a coronavirus outbreak.
In March 2021, the Nuclear Threat Initiative, in conjunction with the Munich Security Conference, organized a “tabletop exercise on reducing high-consequence biological threats,” based on a hypothetical global monkeypox outbreak in May 2022.
“Any full-scale exercises for a pathogen should raise concerns about possible pre-planned release,” Hulscher said. “Event 201 should remind us that ‘drills’ are usually held before the real event.”
Hulscher suggested a bird flu outbreak could be weaponized to disrupt this year’s U.S. presidential election or the next administration.
“Peter Hotez, Bill Gates and Robert Redfield have warned of future pandemics worse than SARS-CoV-2 with high confidence that it will be avian influenza,” Hulscher said. “Many groups would benefit from disrupting the 2024 election and/or society in general. Thus, I think there’s a high probability of another intentional laboratory leak.”
‘Abundant evidence’ current bird flu strain a product of gain-of-function research
Leake said Kawaoka and Fouchier “have published papers in which they have proclaimed that they have successfully created an H5N1 variant that is transmissible by aerosolized droplets amongst ferrets,” noting that “the pulmonary tract or the respiratory tract of Ferrets is considered very almost eerily close to that of humans.”
According to Hulscher, “There is abundant evidence that the current circulating strain of H5N1 in the United States — Genotype B3.13 Clade 2.3.4.4b — is a consequence of serial passage gain-of-function research being conducted at SEPRL.”
“The accelerated evolution of H5N1 via serial passage in mallard ducks may be the reason behind the adaptations to new species,” Hulscher said, referring to a preprint study he co-authored with Leake and cardiologist Peter McCullough, which Hulscher said “provides the entire rationale for a possible laboratory leak.”
The preprint has been accepted by a journal and is awaiting publication, Hulscher said.
According to Baker, “It’s a documented fact that gain-of-function manipulation of bird flu has been going on for many years. There is no legitimate reason to perform this type of research, other than to weaponize these viruses.”
In a recent post on Substack, Leake said that the “Pandemic Flu Industry will likely need lab assistance to amplify human-to-human transmission and virulence.”
Baker said, “All a malicious group of people would have to do is have their meeting, ‘get their ducks in a row,’ so to speak, then release those gain-of-function-infected ducks into the environment. Or use whatever vector of spread they choose.”
Leake told The Defender that during the Bird Flu Summit, he asked Karen Murphy, senior director of biosecurity for Gingko Biosecurity, if the company is “doing any kind of surveillance of this pathogen being manipulated and released from a lab.”
In her response, Murphy confirmed that her company has developed a product that can detect whether a pathogen developed organically or is man-made — but that this product is only being made available to government and intelligence agencies.
She said:
“When we think about biosecurity surveillance at large, we’re thinking about things that develop organically.
“We actually do have a product on the market today. It’s called NR, and NR will help — It is mostly for government organizations and the intelligence community, but the concept behind NR is to help understand if something has been man-made or female-made or if it’s organic.”
Remarking on Murphy’s response, Leake said “We’re once again left with these national security state assurances.”
“How are we the citizens going to know if it’s another example of what we saw coming out of the Wuhan Institute of Virology,” Leake asked, referring to the likelihood that the SARS-CoV-2 virus leaked out of that facility.
Leake said companies like Gingko Biosecurity are “well within the biopharmaceutical complex,” adding that they represent “commercial interests that seem pretty revved up about pandemics, when the money flows.”
“Until we outlaw gain-of-function research entirely and enforce the Biological Weapons Convention, which is being flouted by gain-of-function researchers, we’ll have this sword of Damocles hanging over our heads forever,” Baker said.
Several key scientists and researchers, including Redfield, former director of the CDC, have called for a moratorium on gain-of-function research or for the total cessation of such research.
Last month, the U.S. Senate’s Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee passed S.4667, the Risky Research Review Act, out of committee, sending the bill to the full Senate. If passed, the bill will subject research involving risky pathogens, including gain-of-function research, to strict oversight.
NYC plan includes isolating bird flu patients, administering Tamiflu
Leake said there has been only limited discussion of bird flu vaccines so far during the summit.
“We were excited to attend a vaccine talk that was in the published program … but when we got our updated program electronically at the conference, that vaccine presentation had apparently been removed,” Leake said.
In contrast, Leake said that there was plenty of discussion around pandemic preparedness and response during this week’s Bird Flu Summit.
According to Leake, Madad, an infectious disease epidemiologist, said New York City hospitals are preparing a bird flu outbreak preparedness plan focused on isolating people suspected of infection and administering antiviral medications.
“She really didn’t offer a satisfactory answer at all,” Leake said. “She said, ‘We have got an idea or a concept for isolation [and] we’ve got antivirals like Tamiflu.’”
“Antivirals administered in the hospital setting to an acutely ill patient? It’s too late by then,” Leake said. “Based on her testimony, they don’t have a hospital treatment plan. Instead, vague talk of isolating the patient, which of course is cold comfort if you’re severely ill, if you can’t breathe in a hospital.”
On June 8, 2024, a call regarding ‘Mask Exemption Certificates and House Searches’ was initiated by Dr Walter Weber, head of the doctors’ association Ärzte für Aufklärung. On this call, we received some shocking information: in Germany, there is a ‘blacklist’ of about 200 doctors who issued mask exemptions and as a result are apparently monitored by state security. Around 100 doctors who had issued similar certificates then came forward. Approximately 95% of these doctors experienced unannounced house searches, with one doctor being searched eight times.
These house searches typically took place from 6am and often lasted during office hours for 1-3 hours. In many cases, doors were broken down, and there were reports of inappropriate treatment of those affected. One example is Rolf Kron, who had to endure sitting in his nightgown with an open door for hours in the winter. Physical violence was also a concerning issue: Dr. Woitzel had to undergo a leg amputation due to police violence.
Psychological and physical consequences
These reports of physical assaults are alarming. An eye doctor from Münster suffered hearing loss after a violent incident. Moreover, several female colleagues became seriously ill, and one doctor, Dr. Ströer, was sentenced to two years in prison without parole and died six months later “for no reason”. Dr. Bianca Witzschel has been in pre-trial detention for 1.5 years due to a negative expert report, while a counter-report was rejected by the judge.
The financial implications are also severe.
Many doctors had to ‘buy their freedom’, paying sums of up to 6,000 euros. One colleague reported costs of around 30,000 euros because the waiting room chairs did not meet the required distance. Most doctors affected agree to the anonymized publication of their experiences, underscoring the gravity of the situation.
Smeared, ostracised, silenced
Local press often reported on these doctors, leading to defamation and slander. Families were bullied, including children. The medical profession in Germany, consisting of about 150,000 practicing doctors, has been silenced by this systematic persecution. The 200 or so doctors willing to issue mask exemptions constitutes less than 0.00013% of the total number.
There is no justification for such treatment – but there is plenty of justification for these doctors having issued mask exemptions.
We recently reported on the leaked protocols from Germany’s Robert Koch Institute (RKI), which revealed the extent to which the German people were deceived by their own government during the so-called pandemic. One revelation was that the RKI – the equivalent of the US’ CDC – knew there was no evidence that masks stopped the spread of Coronavirus. Those doctors who issued mask exemptions were both acting in their patients’ best interests and in line with the evidence, as acknowledged by the RKI. The problem is, they weren’t in line with their government and the consequences of this should shock the world.
This is what totalitarian, centralized medicine looks like.
The systematic persecution of doctors who issued mask exemptions highlights a concerning development in German society. The fear of house searches and the resulting consequences have deterred many doctors from helping patients in need. This not only silences the medical profession but also isolates them from society. It is time to question these practices and protect the rights of doctors as well as the needs of patients. Especially taking into account the actual science supporting their decision to be cautious about the inefficacy and even harm created by using masks as a mandatory tool for the management of Covid 19 (Brownstone, 2024).
The World Council for Health is grateful for these 200 brave doctors and all those supporting informed consent and the Hippocratic oath primum non nocere, first do no harm. The WCH calls on the people of Germany to speak up for these doctors and demand that all charges against them are dropped, that they are compensated for the crimes their own government has committed against them, and that they are duly honoured for maintaining their moral and scientific integrity despite devastating consequences.
This evening I received an e-mail from Dr. Marik, who explained that Amazon’s ban of his book “Cancer Care” has been retracted. The e-book is again available for purchase. This great news comes almost exactly a week after I wrote about the ban in my post Amazon Excommunicates Dr. Paul Marik. I’d like to think that my protest, which was very widely shared, may have contributed to the retail Leviathan’s decision to retract the ban.
I hope that our oligarchic overlords will come to understand that—as much power and money as they possess—they won’t get away with banning books by great scholars while also pretending to be benevolent. Everyone who still has his brain will see this for what it is—namely, a brutal act of tyranny that ONLY the bad guys in history have done.
Congratulations, Dr. Marik, for your victory for free speech and for providing helpful and possibly life saving information to cancer patients. Put one in the win column for the good guys!
This week, Robert F. Kennedy Jr sat down for his first interview with Tucker Carlson since announcing he was suspending his presidential campaign and throwing his support behind former President Donald Trump.
In that interview, Kennedy echoed the thoughts of Calley and Casey Means, a brother and sister team, who’ve been raising concerns about children’s exposure to the toxic food environment.
In particular, Kennedy mentioned endocrine disruptors, which are chemicals in our food and water that can interfere with the body’s hormone biosynthesis and metabolism.
Kennedy spoke about how the poorly regulated use of these synthetic chemicals in the environment could affect fertility, sperm counts and reproductive development.
He talked about how the onset of puberty is occurring far earlier in children than it was decades ago, and that these changes may have lasting repercussions on a child’s mental and physical development.
It is true.
In 2020, an analysis of global data found the average age of puberty onset for girls aged 8 to 13 years in the US has been dropping by about three months every decade over 40 years.
It means that a growing number of children are developing breasts, acne, pubic hair or a deepening of the voice before they reach teenage years.
Exposure to these chemicals begins in utero, and can have a significant impact on the developing foetus.
Several years ago, when I was working as a filmmaker for ABC TV in Australia, I produced a documentary about the ‘chemical soup’ of modern life and its potential health consequences.
I examined the regulation and testing around industrial chemicals in the environment, and spoke to experts around the world who shared the same concerns as Kennedy.
Linda Birnbaum, a toxicologist and former director of the US National Toxicology Program, was very critical of the regulation of industrial chemicals in America.
“In the US, we basically consider chemicals safe until proven otherwise,” she said.
Birnbaum was particularly concerned about foetal exposure to chemicals. Endocrine disruptors such as Bisphenol A (or BPA) can cross the placenta and reach a developing foetus.
She said it’s like “throwing a monkey wrench into the system and it can never recover …so you’ll have permanent change.”
Researchers were first alerted to the impact of endocrine disruptors in wildlife after observing the widespread feminisation of male fish in English rivers that were polluted with effluent, containing biologically active oestrogen.
Feminised male fish in SE London rivers Image Source: mihtiander/123RF
Similarly, a chemical spill in Florida’s Lake Apopka led to alligators exhibiting significantly smaller penises (24% decrease) and lower testosterone levels (70% lower) when compared to alligators of similar size in Lake Woodruff.
Alligator Gathering at Lake Apopka, Credit: RC Scott Photography
In humans, making ‘causal’ links to reproductive changes is more difficult, but Australian experts say a 50% increase in testicular cancer, for example, is “too fast to be entirely genetic, and therefore is likely to be environmental.”
John Aitken is a world leader in reproductive biology with a focus on male reproductive health and biology of mammalian reproductive cells. He says the development of testes in the womb is a very “sensitive barometer” of environmental toxicants.
“When environmental chemicals hit the testes, there are some cells sitting in the testes that are of a very primitive kind, and they respond very abnormally to that signal and give you that testicular cancer (later in life),” said Aitken.
Andrea Gore, a toxicologist at the University of Texas, spearheaded a report by the Endocrine Society after doctors began noticing an increase in reproductive problems and disorders of puberty and wondered if endocrine disruptors were to blame.
The dose is crucially important for any toxicological consideration. Often industry studies examine the safety of a single chemical for short durations, but in the real world, we are repeatedly exposed to a cocktail of chemicals, which render many of the studies irrelevant.
Ian Shaw, professor of toxicology at the University of Canterbury, said that hormones work at “infinitesimally tiny doses” and the doses of oestrogenic chemicals in food and water that children are exposed to are “well within the range of doses to have a biological effect.”
Bruce Lanphear, a health sciences professor at Simon Fraser University, said that even low levels of chemicals like lead and flame retardants, can have an impact on brain development.
These chemicals act as “dopaminergic toxicants” which disrupt the pre-frontal cortex – the part of the brain that makes us human. US data show that exposure to endocrine disruptors like lead is associated with a 5-point decrement in IQ.
“When we see this on a population level, the impact is phenomenal,” said Lanphear.
In the US, for example, if you shift the mean IQ by 5-points, it leads to an increase in children who are considered ‘challenged’ (from 6 to 9.4 million). And there’s a corresponding decrease in ‘gifted’ children (from 6 to 2.4 million).
“The pattern is pretty clear,” said Lanphear who has advocated for more stringent regulation of industrial chemicals. “We should expect that some of these chemicals [turn out ] to be toxic, and we should no longer be using our children as guinea pigs to find out when they are toxic.”
Until recently, Lanphear was co-chair of the Health Canada’s scientific advisory committee on pesticide management, but resigned in June 2023 over the agencies lack of transparency and scientific oversight.
In his three-page resignation letter, Lanphear said he felt the committee, and his role as co-chair, “provides a false sense of security” that Health Canada is protecting Canadians from toxic pesticides.
Some chemicals are stored in our body for years, whereas others can be metabolised and excreted quickly.
BPA, for example, is a short-lived chemical used to make plastic water bottles. It does not require the same safety testing as if it was added to food, but it still leaches out of the plastic and into the water that will be consumed.
Industry has responded to these concerns by developing plastics that are “BPA-free,” but BPA is often substituted for Bisphenol S (or BPS), another unregulated chemical that can also leach out of plastic into food and drink.
BPA free plastic containers are widely available
In fact, a recent literature review suggested that BPS could be more toxic to the reproductive system than BPA and was shown to hormonally promote certain breast cancers at the same rate as BPA.
There is general agreement among scientists in the field that regulators are not doing their job by simply waiting for “more evidence” of harm before they act.
They say it’s unacceptable that we are all subjected to this uncontrolled, human experiment.
Will political leaders like RFK Jr be the catalyst for change?
By Jonas E. Alexis | Veterans Today | July 23, 2017
Israeli Rabbi Shmuel Eliyahu seems to have picked up where the late Rabbi Ovadiah Yosef left off. The Israeli army, Eliyahu said, must slaughter the Palestinians “and leave no one alive.” The Palestinians, the good rabbi continued, must be “destroyed and crushed in order to end violence.” Here is Eliyahu’s algorithm:
“If they don’t stop after we kill 100, then we must kill 1,000. And if they do not stop after 1,000, then we must kill 10,000. If they still don’t stop we must kill 100,000, even a million.”
There is more to this “logic” than meets the eye and ear. Eliyahu even postulated that the Israeli army ought not to get involved in arresting Palestinians because “If you leave him alive, there is a fear that he will be released and kill other people. We must eradicate this evil from within our midst.”
You may say that this is just an isolated case. No Israeli official believes that, right? … continue
This site is provided as a research and reference tool. Although we make every reasonable effort to ensure that the information and data provided at this site are useful, accurate, and current, we cannot guarantee that the information and data provided here will be error-free. By using this site, you assume all responsibility for and risk arising from your use of and reliance upon the contents of this site.
This site and the information available through it do not, and are not intended to constitute legal advice. Should you require legal advice, you should consult your own attorney.
Nothing within this site or linked to by this site constitutes investment advice or medical advice.
Materials accessible from or added to this site by third parties, such as comments posted, are strictly the responsibility of the third party who added such materials or made them accessible and we neither endorse nor undertake to control, monitor, edit or assume responsibility for any such third-party material.
The posting of stories, commentaries, reports, documents and links (embedded or otherwise) on this site does not in any way, shape or form, implied or otherwise, necessarily express or suggest endorsement or support of any of such posted material or parts therein.
The word “alleged” is deemed to occur before the word “fraud.” Since the rule of law still applies. To peasants, at least.
Fair Use
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more info go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
DMCA Contact
This is information for anyone that wishes to challenge our “fair use” of copyrighted material.
If you are a legal copyright holder or a designated agent for such and you believe that content residing on or accessible through our website infringes a copyright and falls outside the boundaries of “Fair Use”, please send a notice of infringement by contacting atheonews@gmail.com.
We will respond and take necessary action immediately.
If notice is given of an alleged copyright violation we will act expeditiously to remove or disable access to the material(s) in question.
All 3rd party material posted on this website is copyright the respective owners / authors. Aletho News makes no claim of copyright on such material.