Some UK military personnel and their families have been turning to food banks because of the increasing pressures from the cost of living crisis, a British news network has reported.
The raging cost of living crisis that has had the UK in its stifling grasp is going to cause thousands of extra deaths this year, according to new research, as life expectancy across the UK will plummet by 6.5 percent this year.
The research suggests that untimely mortalities in the United Kingdom are expected to rise from 463 to 493 per 100,000 inhabitants.
The findings have shone a light on critical concern for the populace at large. The unrelenting cost-of-living crisis, combined with a prolonged period of soaring prices, is anticipated to result in a significant 6.5 percent drop in life expectancy throughout the nation this year.
Furthermore, the report highlights a stark disparity: the most economically disadvantaged households are projected to face a four times higher death toll than their wealthier neighbours. This discrepancy arises from the fact that the less affluent must allocate a more significant portion of their income to pay for energy, the cost of which has rocketed.
Recent statistics from the previous month indicate that the UK’s inflation rate stood at 6.7 percent. Despite this reduction from its peak of 11.1 percent, Britain continues to have the worst inflation of all G7 member states.
“The mortality effects of inflation and real-terms income reduction are likely to be large and negative, with marked inequalities in how these are experienced. Implemented public policy responses are not sufficient to protect health and prevent widening inequalities,” researchers noted.
These findings come on the heels of a recent alert from the UK-based consumer association ‘Which’ last month, when it pointed out that rising food prices had left low-income households in the country in dire straits and having to make painful decisions about whether to pay the utility bills or put food on the table.
After a long period studying CO2 effects, as a chemical engineer and technical problem solver – I leveraged the most credible experts and put together a simplified summary! And I stick ONLY to the FACTS!
During the 1950s, the inactivated polio vaccine created by Jonas Salk was made using rhesus monkeys that were infected with SV40, a monkey virus that was later linked to cancer in humans.
From 1955 to 1963, hundreds of millions of people worldwide — in North and South America, Canada, Europe, Asia and Africa — received the vaccines, which at the time were heralded as a medical breakthrough.
In the archived 1956 video below, you can see a propaganda piece from that era, showing just how the ill-fated vaccine was made.
“Few back then grasped that these vaccines might also be a huge, inadvertent, uncontrolled experiment in interspecies viral transmission,” a 2004 article in The Lancet noted.
1950s propaganda reveals how polio vaccine was made
While Salk’s polio vaccine was considered a medical triumph of its time, its manufacturing process leaves much to be desired.
“Welcome to modern vaccinology. A hilariously unscientific process predicated on insane barbarism, rife with fraud and immense hubris,” Inversionism wrote on X, formerly Twitter.
The investigative journalist detailed the polio vaccine’s manufacturing process outlined in the video as follows:
Put all the glassware inside a hot steam bath or sterilize it.
Import Macaca mulatta monkeys from India for the experiments.
Prepare a mixture called “medium 199” — containing 2% calf serum, 200 units/ml penicillin, 200 g/ml dihydrostreptomycin and 50 units/ml Mycostatin (nystatin Squibb); the pH of the medium was brought to 7.0 by the addition of a NaHCO3 solution.
Euthanize the monkeys, remove their kidneys, and then place the kidney into a tube and hand-mince it with scissors into small bits.
After the kidney tissue was weighed and decapsulated, they put the tissue in a centrifuge tube where they washed it in phosphate-buffered saline and placed it in a trypsinization flask. Trypsin enzymes break down the proteins, which were then centrifuged at 800-1000 RPM for 10 minutes to separate the tissue and cells.
The kidney cells are then mixed with the medium 199 and incubated (fermented, rotted essentially) at 37C for 6-8 days. By the end of the 6-8 day period, the bottles and tubes were covered with a “confluent sheet of cell growth.”
Once the medium 199 is exhausted, half is siphoned off to be replaced by fresh medium 199.
They then add the “polio virus” for the first time. 3 different strains supposedly, with no other details on the source, isolation process, or genome determination.
The bottles continue to rock for 4 days in the solution culturing, fermenting and decaying, and then it’s ready for harvesting.
Scientists then visually look at the vials under a microscope to do a “titration test” to discern how much live virus is in the solution, hand counting particles that could be ANYTHING. (very scientific …)
Next is filtration, the most egregious part. They filter the solution first through porcelain filters (heavy metal risk), and then through MULTIPLE SHEETS OF ASBESTOS to drain out any kidney tissue or stray bacteria.
(This part of the process is not disclosed in the video but is detailed in the original paper on the polio vaccine process. They made multiple trivalent vaccine pools, with some having additional additives like sodium bisulfite, along with parabens, a known carcinogen and endocrine disruptor).
Now rabbits, monkeys, guinea pigs, and chickens are injected with the “live virus” vaccine solutions … to ensure it’s free of other pathogens.
Now the “climax” of the process as they call it, inactivation. This is where they mix the vaccine solution with formaldehyde, and then let it sit together for 66-68 hours. The narrator then hilariously says “then what remains can only do good, can provide humans with protection of paralytic polio.” “The enemy of man can now become his servant.”
Then the process of mass distribution. They get these massive tanks and mix in all the solutions, adjuvants, chemicals, and ingredients for mass production and “preservation.”
Before mass administration, they do a couple of experiments on mice and monkeys to ensure the vaccine is creating enough “polio-fighting antibodies” in humans.
The remainder of the process details the various “tests” they do as the vaccine lots are distributed, before really turning up the propaganda and showing President Eisenhower’s son receiving the polio vaccine.”
Paralyzed children, deaths reported following vaccination
By 1954, a large-scale study of Salk’s polio vaccine, which included 1 million children, took place. On April 12, 1955, Salk declared the shots to be safe and effective. In addition to being given widely throughout the U.S., by 1959, 90 countries were using it.
But there were signs of problems from the start.
After mass vaccination began, some subjects became paralyzed in the limb where the vaccine was given. Recalls of 250 cases of the shots from two laboratories ensued following the reports of parasitic illness.
“There were also reports of paralysis and death in several children,” Singapore Medical Journal reported. “Investigations showed that improperly inactivated vaccine had released live virus into more than 100,000 doses of the vaccine.”
“When Salk developed his vaccine, instead of using human tissues, as did the scientists who won a Nobel Prize for first growing poliovirus in tissue culture, he used minced-up rhesus macaque monkey kidneys, which were remarkably efficient poliovirus factories.
“Those who sought to supplant Salk’s formaldehyde-inactivated vaccine with live, attenuated oral vaccine also used monkey kidney cultures. Despite a manufacturing problem that, at best, left six children who received the vaccine paralyzed in the arm, and despite concerns about wild simian viruses, Salk’s shots were declared safe and effective after 1954 field trials.
“The next year, after grudging approval by skeptical government regulators, free Salk shots were made available throughout the USA. By 1960, scientists and vaccine manufacturers knew that monkey kidneys were sewers of simian viruses.”
Americans kept in the dark about monkey virus in polio shots
It was 1959 when the late Bernice Eddy, a researcher at the National Institutes of Health, conducted a study, injecting hamsters with the rhesus monkey kidney substrate used to make the polio vaccines. The majority of them developed tumors.
“Eddy’s superiors tried to keep the discovery quiet, but Eddy presented her data at a cancer conference in New York. She was eventually demoted, and lost her laboratory,” The Atlantic reported, but soon after researchers with Merck pharmaceutical company identified the cancer-causing virus in rhesus monkey kidney cells, naming it SV40 because it was the 40th monkey virus discovered.
According to Barbara Loe Fisher, co-founder and president of the National Vaccine Information Center, in a presentation before the U.S. House of Representatives in 2003:
“Sadly, the American people were not told the truth about this in 1960. The SV40 contaminated stocks of Salk polio vaccine were never withdrawn from the market but continued to be given to American children until early 1963 with full knowledge of federal health agencies.
“Between 1955 and early 1963, nearly 100 million American children had been given polio vaccine contaminated with the monkey virus, SV40.”
Did SV40 in vaccines cause cancer?
While there wasn’t an “epidemic” of cancers that followed the widespread administration of polio vaccines contaminated with SV40, which suggests the virus alone may not be causing the cancers, researchers noted, “it seems possible that SV40 may act as a cofactor in the pathogenesis of some tumors.”
As further reported in Oncogene, at least three independent scientific panels agreed that “there is compelling evidence that SV40 is present in some human cancers and that SV40 could contribute to the pathogenesis of some of them.”
For instance, research published in the New England Journal of Medicine in 1992 revealed that half the choroid plexus tumors and most of the ependymomas studied contained a segment of the T-antigen gene related to SV40.
“These results suggest that SV40 or a closely related virus may have an etiologic role in the development of these neoplasms during childhood,” the researchers wrote.
In 2002, meanwhile, The Lancet published evidence showing SV40 is significantly associated with some types of non-Hodgkin lymphoma after detecting it in 42% of non-Hodgkin lymphomas tested.
And in a 2004 review of the then-available evidence, it’s noted:
“Persuasive evidence now indicates that SV40 is causing infections in humans today and represents an emerging pathogen.
“A meta-analysis of molecular, pathological, and clinical data from 1,793 cancer patients indicates that there is a significant excess risk of SV40 associated with human primary brain cancers, primary bone cancers, malignant mesothelioma, and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma.”
What else is lurking in vaccines?
While the SV40 polio vaccine contamination occurred decades ago, the controversy continues, as does the potential for present-day vaccines to be contaminated.
Research by cellular and molecular biologist Judy Mikovits, Ph.D., showed that many of our vaccines are contaminated with gammaretroviruses.
How did this happen?
In short, vaccine viruses were replicated and grown in animal cell cultures that were already contaminated with retroviruses. In other words, the root of the problem stems from the use of contaminated cell culture lines, similar to the problems with the original polio vaccine.
Meanwhile, microbiologist Kevin McKernan — a former researcher and team leader for the MIT Human Genome project — assessed the nucleic acid composition of four expired vials of the Moderna and Pfizer mRNA COVID-19 shots.
“DNA contamination that exceeds the European Medicines Agency (EMA) 330ng/mg requirement and the FDA’s 10ng/dose requirements” was found.
In addition to the spike protein and mRNA in COVID-19 shots, McKernan’s team discovered SV40 promotors.
McKernan explains that in many cases, when tumors are sequenced they’re found to contain sequences from SV40 and other viruses, which can integrate into your genome, causing disruptions and instability that can trigger the cell line to grow out of control.
In the case of COVID-19 shots, he says:
“The concern is if this DNA integrates the genome, one portion of the SV40 sequence is an SV40 promoter, a very strong promoter, which means it drives transcription wherever it lands in the genome.
“If this happens to drop itself in front of a proto-oncogene [a gene that has the potential to cause cancer] and drives a lot of expression off of a gene that’s known, if you hyper-express it and turn the cell cancerous, then we have a concern that DNA is in fact doing that.”
McKernan and colleagues have tried to spread the word about SV40 promotors and components in COVID-19 shots, but the media continue to try to discredit their findings,
much like what occurred with SV40 in the original polio vaccines.
Further, as for why the SV40 promoter and enhancer are in COVID-19 shots in the first place, it’s again related to the plasmid growth medium, which in this case is E. coli.
Since many types of cells continue to be used as growth mediums during vaccine production, including animal cell strains from chickens, dogs, monkeys, hamsters and insects, as well as cells from bacteria or yeast, and vaccines continue to be fast-tracked to market, it’s more important than ever for scientists and manufacturers to ensure that the treatment or preventative isn’t causing more harm than good.
Firstly, Binder writes, “The effective dose of the expressed foreign protein is unknown and varies greatly between individuals, mRNA ‘vaccines’ should never have been approved.”
Secondly, “The cells that express the protein foreign to the body and then present it on their surface are falsely recognized by the immune system as being foreign or infected by an alien, thus are destroyed in an autoimmune attack similar to transplant rejection.”
He continues: “If it was only expressed by skeletal muscle cells capable of regeneration, this would not be problematic. But the LNPs [lipid nanoparticles] are chosen in such a way that they introduce the mRNA into any body cell, including those of the heart, brain, embryo and fetus. Worse: As physiological doses did not induce a relevant immune response, a horrendous dose of mRNA was chosen, which can lead to the destruction not only of a few, but of so many cells that this can cause serious illness and death. Worse: The chosen antigen and LNPs are themselves toxic.”
He notes: “Kevin McKernan found contamination with up to a third of functional bacterial plasmid DNA from the manufacturing process, which explains the spike expression over years detected by pathologists.” Finally, it has not been ruled out yet that the DNA can be integrated into the genome and even be inherited by offspring.”
Male mice fed doses of aspartame far lower than the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recommends got slower and dumber working through a maze — a literal and metaphorical test of human intelligence since ancient times, before Homer wrote of Theseus chasing the Minotaur through the mythic labyrinth in the “Iliad.”
According to a study published Aug. 31 in Scientific Reports, the mice passed on the learning and memory deficits to their first-generation offspring — but not second-generation offspring.
The researchers studied males and not females because they were looking for problems caused only by genes and not by direct exposure. Fetuses developing inside an exposed female would experience both.
Aspartame, an artificial sweetener found in more than 6,000 foods and medicines, has been linked to heart disease, obesity, mood disorders and other serious health issues. In the U.S., it’s sold under the brand names Equal and Nutrasweet.
Researchers led by Pradeep Bhide, Ph.D., at the Florida State University College of Medicine, provided adult 8-week-old male mice with free access to drinking water containing either 0.015% or 0.03% (by weight) of aspartame.
A third group of control mice drank plain water.
“A key public health implication of our findings,” the authors wrote, “is that the population at risk of aspartame’s adverse effects on learning and memory may be larger than current estimates, which consider the directly exposed individuals only. Our findings underscore the need for considering heritable effects as part of the safety evaluation of artificial sweeteners by regulatory agencies.”
Mice in the 0.015% and 0.03% aspartame groups consumed, on average, 43.2 milligrams and 86.4 milligrams of aspartame per kilogram of body weight per day.
“Milligrams per kilogram” (mg/kg), is a way to express dosages relative to a subject’s weight, to account for a larger subject requiring a larger dose to obtain a specific effect.
The FDA-recommended maximum daily intake value of aspartame for humans is 50 mg/kg but most consumers take in much less — 4.1 mg/kg.
Mice in the lower-concentration aspartame group received approximately this dose, while those in the 0.030% group got about twice the average daily intake. So low and high dosages were just 8.2% and 16.4% of the maximum “safe” agency-recommended intake, respectively.
Bihde’s study design was typical for mouse experiments except for his focus on male mice and their male or female offspring. Most studies examining the heritability of characteristics use female study animals.
He selected this mouse strain because a previous study showed the animals neither preferred nor avoided aspartame in drinking water, nor did they experience changes in weight or metabolism after exposure.
Aspartame recently was in the news as a possible cancer-causing agent. Based on what it termed “limited evidence” the World Health Organization considers the sweetener, at a maximum daily exposure limit of 40 mg/kg, as “possibly carcinogenic [cancer-causing] to humans.” WHO does not recommend using artificial sweeteners for weight control.
U.S. regulators disagree with the WHO’s position and even recommend a higher daily maximum intake.
As The Defender reported last week, industry representatives are paying dietary influencers on social media to promote artificially and naturally sweetened products to children.
Testing: How did the mice perform?
Mice in all three dosage groups underwent regular cognitive testing during the study. Researchers found deficits in spatial working memory in treated mice relative to controls at 4 weeks, an effect that persisted at weeks 8 and 12.
No differences between high- and low-dose groups were evident.
The spatial learning and memory test used a maze to determine how long it took mice to find a way out and the number of mistakes they made before escaping. This test began at 14 weeks after initial dosing and continued for 10 consecutive days.
Mice typically improved over time on this test, which was true for all three groups.
But mice ingesting aspartame found their way out of the maze much more slowly than control animals. Again, no difference was noticed between treatment groups.
“Learned helplessness,” a term from human psychology, describes a feeling of being stuck in a situation or circumstance and being “paralyzed” from acting.
Psychologists use learned helplessness tests to characterize depressive episodes. Animals undergoing learned helplessness testing are observed for how hard they try to avoid an apparently inescapable bad situation, for example, an electric shock.
To assess learned helplessness Bhide and co-authors used a tail suspension test, which involves hanging mice upside down by their tails to quantify the effort they expend in pulling up and righting themselves. They found no difference here between aspartame and control groups.
Cognitive dysfunction: the next generations
Treated and control mice were bred with stock females to produce second-generation test animals. Litters were of normal size, with pups meeting normal developmental milestones. However, several deficits noted in the original test mice were also seen in these unexposed animals.
The effects on spatial working memory for treated vs. control fathers were particularly pronounced. Offspring of both dosage groups also showed significant learning deficits compared to the control lineage.
But no differences were apparent between offspring of low- and high-dose aspartame fathers, or for reversal learning — a measure of how an animal unlearns old, ineffective behavior and develops new problem-solving strategies.
Deficits among first-generation mice in learned helplessness were also not evident.
To eliminate the question of whether these effects are a permanent part of the animals’ DNA, vs. a temporary effect on sperm cells, researchers bred first-generation males to produce second-generation litters.
To simplify their analysis they compared learning test responses of second-generation control group offspring only to the second-generation higher aspartame dosage group but found no second-generation effects.
Why just male mice?
Bhide’s focus on paternal lineage is unusual for inter-generational toxin exposure studies. Historically, most investigations consider only maternal exposures, particularly on events occurring during pregnancy or nursing.
Since a father’s biological involvement ends at conception, intergenerational effects must occur through effects on exposed males’ sperm cells. If these effects had been permanent, second-generation mice as well as first-generation offspring would show learning deficits, but this was not observed.
Until relatively recently, biologists believed that acquired characteristics were not heritable. While this remains true for most traits, scientists now recognize the potential for certain drug, food or toxic exposures to turn genes on or off temporarily.
Epigenetics is the emerging science describing how certain life events, including toxic exposures, may act as temporary genetic switches.
Epigenetics also explains how a drug or pesticide might cause harm to individuals with no history of exposure, and how this effect eventually disappears.
The alternative — permanent genetic damage — would continue to affect offspring for generations. The effects of aspartame lasted only one generation, which is consistent with transient, reversible epigenetic alterations to sperm cells.
Considering epigenetic effects, and not just direct contact with toxins, amplifies the potential harms of certain exposures and expands the scope of potential consequences to exposure that regulators should consider before licensing or approving certain products.
Angelo DePalma, Ph.D., is a science reporter/editor for The Defender.
The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), quick to approve an experimental and untested Covid-19 ‘vaccine’, is now stalling over approval of a new device that could save the lives of people who go into anaphylactic shock.
One of the first lines of treatment for anaphylaxis is an EpiPen which can be carried by those who know they have allergies. It is a device containing the drug noradrenaline (called norepinephrine in the US) that counteracts the shock induced by anaphylaxis. However, an EpiPen requires the injection of noradrenaline intramuscularly. This is invasive and if the person is unable to administer the drug others can be reluctant, either not knowing how to use the device or being afraid to. Also, the drug has to get from the musculature to the bloodstream to be effective. This can take five to ten minutes during which time the person may die.
How much better if noradrenaline could be administered more directly into the bloodstream. Manufacturing a device to do this intravenously, far less expecting anyone other than a medic, nurse or paramedic to have the expertise to do this in an emergency, is a tall order. But drugs can be administered rapidly into the bloodstream nasally and a company, ARS Pharmaceuticals, has developed an injection-free device for administering noradrenaline nasally in the form of an epinephrine nasal spray.
What’s not to like, you may think. Well, the FDA don’t like it and have withheld approval pending further testing. The FDA objections are based on the need for further clinical data in people with anaphylaxis due to the fear that it may fail to work.
It is, surely, heartening that the FDA has the best interests of potential anaphylaxis sufferers at heart. If only they had had the same concern on 2021 when they approved the Pfizer Covid-19 vaccines. It has been exposed in these pages from the start of the Covid-19 vaccine rollout that these were ‘experimental’ medications and had not been tested adequately before approval. Well, they have been tested now and the outcome is clear: they were completely unnecessary; they do not work; and they are extremely dangerous leading to injury and death. They undoubtedly have played a large part in the level of excess deaths observed in recent years.
According to UK government figures, the overall fatality rate from Covid-19 (always a disputed figure due to the difficulty in distinguishing ‘with Covid’ from ‘from Covid’) is 0.1 per cent. The estimated fatality rate from anaphylaxis – made uncertain by the fact that many suspected cases are dead before being found – is between 0.7 and 2 per cent. Recent England hospital Covid-19 admissions are approximately 3,000 per month at the latest available figures. The annual rate of hospitalisation in England for anaphylaxis in 2022-23 was 26,000; at approximately 2,000 monthly, the same order of magnitude as the Covid-19 admissions.
Bearing in mind that it is not easy to distinguish Covid-19 from other respiratory infections but that anaphylaxis is unmistakable and more fatal and, assuming a similar situation in the US, the recent FDA decision regarding nasally administered noradrenaline for anaphylaxis in the light of their unseemly haste over Covid-19 vaccinations is hard to understand. Could political and financial pressured be involved? Surely not!
On August 31, 2023, roughly two weeks before the latest COVID booster recommendation by FDA/CDC/ACIP, independent researchers published an online, open-access analysis announcing “… it is possible to distinguish, by tryptic digestion, followed by mass spectrometry analysis, synthetic Spike proteins originated from the translation of the mRNA vaccines from natural Spike circulating in biological fluids.”
In other words, the researchers devised a method to determine how long the synthetic spike protein created by mRNA vaccines was present in the human body of vaccinated individuals.
This was a big deal. Their approach represents the first proteomic detection of recombinant Spike in vaccinated subjects. How long did they find it lasted?
They write, “The specific PP-Spike fragment was found in 50% of the biological samples analyzed, and its presence was independent of the SARS CoV-2 IgG antibody titer. The minimum and maximum time at which PP-Spike was detected after vaccination was 69 and 187 days, respectively.” Below is a chart from their study comparing the detection of the spike protein in the body of vaccinated and “after infection non vaccinated.”
The FDA and CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) didn’t care and approved the new COVID booster anyway calling for yearly boosters ‘like the flu shot.’
The mRNA vaccine technology used against a circulating coronavirus is a new, never-before-used approach and method. Proper safety testing and an understanding of what happens when you repeatedly inject billions is unknown. Why the approval? Well because it was an emergency we were told… we just didn’t have time. You understand right?
Yet, with the newly updated booster announced by the CDC for 6 months and older, with no exceptions we are still aggressively injecting. Why? America is the outlier with its cavalier approach to experimenting on its population as new warnings appear almost weekly from this injectable tech platform.
The CDC states mRNA vaccines use mRNA created in a laboratory to teach our cells how to make a protein that triggers an immune response inside our bodies. The Covid vaccine’s one and only purpose is to create that spike protein. It has only one job.
Do you think regulators or the pharmaceutical companies making the shots cared to understand what else that spike did after it was created or how long it persisted?
Pfizer’s Nonclinical overview submitted to FDA’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, a document which doctors had to sue the agency in court to obtain, states:
“The protein encoded by the RNA in BNT162b2 is expected to be proteolytically degraded like other endogenous proteins… Therefore, no RNA or protein metabolism or excretion studies will be conducted.”
In other words, we aren’t going to bother looking because one can’t find what one doesn’t search for.
Two years later, public assertions like the one from The Infectious Disease Society of America still regularly repeated estimates that the spike proteins generated by COVID-19 vaccines last up to a few weeks.
“I’ve asked this before and I just don’t have a clear idea about how long the spike protein the messenger RNA in our bodies produce… how long has it been detected in patient serum or tissues or even in animal studies? Do you know how long it may persist in blood or serum or tissues?”
To this question, Rituparna Das, Moderna’s Therapeutic Area Head of Respiratory Vaccines and the company’s ACIP lead answered:
“The spike protein, ah, availability I believe is on the order of days, but, like less than a week. But I will confirm that with our tox [toxicology] folks as well.”
No one knew for sure, not even the injectable product’s manufacturer, and more importantly, no one cared to know.
Yet the spike continued to turn up as the culprit in more pathogenic insults to humanity. In 2023, researchers reporting circulating spike protein detected in post–COVID-19 mRNA vaccines myocarditis stated:
“A notable finding was that markedly elevated levels of full-length spike protein, unbound by antibodies, were detected in the plasma of individuals with post vaccine myocarditis, whereas no free spike was detected in asymptomatic vaccinated control subjects”
The CDC/ACIP response was that the benefits outweigh the risks… simplistic, insulting, and lacking transparency talking down to the people being targeted by this novel shot.
The authors of the August 2023 suggested that the spike protein may be integrating into the human cells. A similar, and in ways more detailed, warning was just given by well-respected cancer genomics researcher at the University of South Carolina Phillip Buckhaults, Ph.D. during his recent testimony in front of the South Carolina Senate Medical Affairs Committee which he stated, among other things, that:
The Pfizer mRNA vaccine is contaminated with the plasmid DNA vector that was used as the template for in vitro transcription reaction.
This DNA could cause rare but serious side effects like death from cardiac arrest.
The DNA can and likely will integrate into the genomes of transfected cells.
There is a very real hazard for genome modification of long-lived somatic cells, which could cause sustained autoimmune attacks towards that tissue.
There is also a theoretical risk of future cancer, depending on the piece of DNA and site of integration.
The CDC’s website states the following outdated and scientifically lazy explanation, at best, of what happens to human DNA after being injected with COVID-19 shots.
According to Professor Buckhaults, this is just not true… at all.
Two further points raised by Professor Buckhaults were first, that the plasmid DNA contamination was not present in the material used in Pfizer’s initial vaccine trials for regulatory approval. It was only after approval and rapid scale-up of manufacturing did the company used questionable, scientifically reckless techniques which led to the contamination. Second, Professor Buckhalut’s lab, a world leader in this type of research, estimates that each vaccination contains about 200 billion pieces of plasmid DNA encapsulated in the lipid nanoparticle.
We know it is now a basic technique to find the synthetic spike in vaccinated individuals. Perhaps even more troubling, it’s basic genetic research to find out if the plasmid DNA is integrating into and forever changing the DNA/genetics of vaccinated individuals yet health agencies and labs just don’t seem to want to look.
With the CDC clearly not willing to do even the most basic steps to regain the public trust lost, as new director Cohen claimed was her main goal, the public must back away further from an apparently rogue government body. As prominent scientists and doctors denounce the agency and its products, we have hit breakaway speeds into historically uncharted territory as public health agencies, once a fixture running in the background of America, have become a cyclic, menacing threat with each new booster rollout campaign.
Radiation from all cell phones is dangerous to human health and the devices should be used sparingly, Russia’s consumer rights and human wellbeing agency said on Monday. The agency was responding to speculation that Russia would follow France’s lead and ban the iPhone 12.
“Radiation from all cell phones is dangerous for humans, especially for children. It is important to follow safety rules when talking on a mobile phone: the call should not last more than two minutes, and the minimum pause between calls should be at least 15 minutes,” a spokesman for Rospotrebnadzor said, according to Russia’s Gazeta news site.
The spokesman added that cell phones should be placed aside while the user is sleeping, and should ideally be carried in bags rather than pockets.
Earlier this month, France’s National Frequency Agency (ANFR) demanded that Apple withdraw the iPhone 12 from sale in the country after it found that the device emits more electromagnetic radiation than European Union regulations allow.
The ANFR said that tests at an accredited laboratory revealed that the phone exceeded the specific absorption rate (SAR) value mandated by the EU, which is four watts-per-kilogram (W/kg), when held in hand or in a trouser pocket. The “body” SAR – measured when the phone is in a jacket pocket or a bag at least 5mm away – was within the 2 W/kg limit, however.
Rospotrebnadzor is not considering such a ban. The regulator’s spokesman said that Russia measures electromagnetic radiation using the PES scale rather than the SAR system, the results from which “cannot be compared.”
The iPhone 12 was introduced in October 2020 and has continued to be popular due to a lower price point than the subsequent models. Apple disputes the French findings, claiming that the model has a SAR of 0.99 W/kg when measured by the EU standard.
However, the American tech giant has been accused of violating radiation standards before. In the US, Apple and Korean manufacturer Samsung were sued in 2019 after research found that the iPhone 8, iPhone X, and Galaxy S8 exceeded federal radiation limits by up to 500%.
On March 6, 2020, the mayor of Austin, Texas, canceled the biggest tech and arts trade show in the world, South-by-Southwest, only a week before hundreds of thousands were to gather in the city.
In an instant, with the stroke of a pen, it was all gone: hotel reservations, flight plans, performances, exhibitors, and all the hopes and dreams of thousands of merchants in the town. Economic impact: a loss $335 million in revenue at least. And that was just to the city alone, to say nothing of the broader impact.
It was the beginning of US lockdowns. It wasn’t entirely clear at the time – my own sense was that this was a calamity that would lead to decades of successful lawsuits against the Austin mayor – but it turned out that Austin was the test case and template for the entire nation and then the world.
The reason was of course Covid but the pathogen wasn’t even there. The idea was to keep it out of the city, an incredible and sudden fallback to a medieval practice that has nothing to do with modern public health understanding of how a respiratory virus should be handled.
“In six months,” I wrote at the time, “if we are in a recession, unemployment is up, financial markets are wrecked, and people are locked in their homes, we’ll wonder why the heck governments chose disease ‘containment’ over disease mitigation. Then the conspiracy theorists get to work.”
I was right about the conspiracy theorists but I had not anticipated that they would turn out to be right about nearly everything. We were being groomed for nationwide lockdowns.
At this point in the trajectory, we already knew the gradient of risk. It was not medically significant for healthy working-age adults (which still to this day the CDC does not admit). So the shutdown likely protected very few if anyone.
The extraordinary edict – worthy of a tin-pot dictator of a dark age – completely overrode the wishes of millions, all on the decision of one man, whose name is Steven Adler.
“Was the consideration between maintaining that money, effectively rolling the dice, and doing what you did?” asked Texas Monthly of the mayor.
His answer: “No.”
Clarifying: “We made a decision based on what was in the best health interest for the city. And that is not an easy choice.”
After the shocking cancellation, which overrode property rights and free will, the mayor urged all residents to go out and eat at restaurants and gather and spend money to support the local economy. In this later interview, he explained that he had no problem keeping the city open. He just didn’t want people from hither and yon – the dirty people, so to speak – to bring a virus with them.
He was here playing the role of Prince Prospero in Edgar Allan Poe’s “The Masque of the Red Death.” He was turning the capital city of Texas into a castle in which the elite could hide from the virus, an action that also became a foreshadowing of what was to come: the division of the entire country into clean and dirty populations.
The mayor further added a strange comment: “I think the spread of the disease here is inevitable. I don’t think that closing down South Bay was intended to stop the disease from getting here because it is coming. The assessment of our public health professionals was that we were risking it coming here more quickly, or in a greater way with a greater impact. And the longer we could put that off, the better this city is.”
And there we have the “flatten the curve” thinking at work. Kick the can down the road. Postpone. Delay herd immunity as long as possible. Yes, everyone will get the bug but it is always better that it happens later rather than sooner. But why? We were never told. Flatten the curve was really just prolong the pain, keep our overlords in charge as long as possible, put normal life on hold, and stay safe as long as you can.
Prolonging the pain might also have served another surreptitious agenda: let the working classes – the dirty people – get the bug and bear the burden of herd immunity so that the elites can stay clean and hopefully it will die out before it gets to the highest echelons. There was indeed a hierarchy of infection.
In all these months, no one ever explained to the American public why prolonging the period of non-exposure was always better than meeting the virus sooner, gaining immunity, and getting over it. The hospitals around the country were not strained. Indeed, with the inexplicable shutdown of medical services for diagnostics and elective surgeries, hospitals in Texas were empty for months. Health care spending collapsed.
This was the onset of the great demoralization. The message was: your property is not your own. Your events are not yours. Your decisions are subject to our will. We know better than you. You cannot take risks with your own free will. Our judgment is always better than yours. We will override anything about your bodily autonomy and choices that are inconsistent with our perceptions of the common good. There is no restraint on us and every restraint on you.
This messaging and this practice is inconsistent with a flourishing human life, which requires the freedom of choice above all else. It also requires the security of property and contracts. It presumes that if we make plans, those plans cannot be arbitrarily canceled by force by a power outside of our control. Those are bare minimum presumptions of a civilized society. Anything else leads to barbarism and that is exactly where the Austin decision took us.
We still don’t know precisely who was involved in this rash judgment or on what basis they made it. There was a growing sense in the country at the time that something was going to happen. There had been sporadic use of lockdown powers in the past. Think of the closure of Boston after the bombing in 2013. A year later, the state of Connecticut quarantined two travelers who might have been exposed to Ebola in Africa. These were the precedents.
“The coronavirus is driving Americans into unexplored territory, in this case understanding and accepting the loss of freedom associated with a quarantine,” wrote the New York Times on March 19, 2020, three days after the Trump press conference that announced two weeks to flatten the curve.
The experience on a nationwide basis fundamentally undermined the civil liberties and rights that Americans had long taken for granted. It was a shock to everyone but to young people still in school, it was utter trauma and a moment of mental reprogramming. They learned all the wrong lessons: they are not in charge of their lives; someone else is. The only way to be is to figure out the system and play along.
We now see epic learning loss, psychological shock, population-wide obesity and substance abuse, a fall in investor confidence, a shrinkage of savings reflecting less interest in the future, and a dramatic decline in public participation in what used to be normal life events: church, theater, museums, libraries, fares, symphonies, ballets, theme parks, and so on. Attendance in general is down by half and this is starving these venues of money. Most of the big institutions in large cities like New York, such as Broadway and the Met, are on life support. The symphony halls have a third empty seats despite lowering prices.
It seems remarkable that this three-and-a-half year-long war against basic liberty for nearly everyone has come to this. And yet it should not be a surprise. All ideology aside, you simply cannot maintain much less cultivate a civilized life when governments, in combination with the commanding heights of media and large corporations, treat their citizens like lab rats in a science experiment. You only end in sucking away the essence and vibrancy of the human spirit, as well as the will to build a good life.
In the name of public health, they sapped the will to health. And if you object, they shut you up. This is still going on daily.
The ruling class that did this to the country has yet to speak honestly about what transpired. It was their actions that created the current cultural, economic, and social crisis. Their experiment left the country and our lives in shambles. We’ve yet to hear apologies or even basic honesty about any of it. Instead, all we get is more misleading propaganda about how we need yet another shot that doesn’t work.
History provides many cases of a beaten down, demoralized, and increasingly poor and censored majority population being ruled over by an imperious, inhumane, sadistic, privileged, and yet tiny ruling class. We just never believed we would become one of those cases. The truth of this is so grim and glaring, and the likely explanation of what happened so shocking, that the entire subject is regarded as something of a taboo in public life.
There will be no fixing this, no crawling out from under the rubble, until we get something from our rulers other than public preening about a job well done, in ads sponsored by Pfizer and Moderna.
Jeffrey A. Tucker is Founder and President of the Brownstone Institute. He is also Senior Economics Columnist for Epoch Times, author of 10 books, including Liberty or Lockdown, and thousands of articles in the scholarly and popular press. He speaks widely on topics of economics, technology, social philosophy, and culture.
I listen attentively when doctors and other health professionals who once shilled for the covidian tactics of ‘sheltering in place’ (what a quaint euphemism for imprisonment!), masks (how much more evidence do we need to show that they are and always have been useless for viral respiratory pathogens?), and, of course, the innovative mRNA-based jab, all the while never caring to spare a breath for natural immunity or early treatment, have a change of heart.
Well, after a bit of travelling down their personal roads to Damascus and seeing a light strong enough to make them revise their former gospels, they have had their conversion, have joined our side and are now front and centre on the resistance pulpit.
I acknowledge that we need all the help we can get and I am grateful for their assistance, but I am often mindful that the explanations offered by some of them, in their hindsight, only go so far. In fact, they fall far short of an appreciation that the whole phoney covid pandemic was an ‘operation’ perpetrated upon the globe by a powerful faction that sought not only to enrich their already rich selves but to enslave us and, with their bioweapons, to kill and maim.
It wasn’t just a matter of Pfizer, Moderna and Astrazeneca licking their chops at the opportunity to make wild profits by pushing an inadequately tested agent while nervous health officials erred on the side of ‘vaccinating’ everyone who breathed as a precautionary measure based on fearful and ignorant worry … No. It was more, it was more profound, it was more devilishly destructive and centrally planned.
Yes, there was — there is — a conspiracy, not just organic goosestepping and Sierpinski triangles. It was a bunch of high-placed people who set about controlling and literallydestroying a large swath of the world’s population, deliberately, and relentlessly.
They are still going at it and with more than just the lethal Jab. The ‘reset’ they planned includes widespread censorship, the destruction of foundational principles of medicine, digital identification, social credit permissions, total surveillance, a fraudulent climate ‘emergency’ leading to further restrictions upon human autonomy, and, naturally, more and more inoculations. The scale of their operation is immense and its fruits should be visible by now to anyone who dares to think.
Ignorance and corporate greed are not the prime movers. Not to finger the Globalist Cabal for the murderers they are is to let them off the hook and to dissipate the energies of our resistance. Not to connect the dots is to be left with a picture so incomplete that responsibilities are diffused and the most significant guilty parties are at leisure to continue their machinations unscathed.
I chanced to have a conversation with a health practitioner the other night, a person who had been coerced into the Jab to preserve his job, a person who joined us at Parliament here in Wellington as we protested the mandates, a person who has worked behind the scenes to assist others in the health care system who opposed the regimen of masks, quarantine and jabs. When I asked him point-blank whether he thought there was indeed a ‘depopulation agenda’, he shook his head. It was the proverbial bridge too far, but it gave me an idea.
Those celebrated doctors and nurses, familiar to MSM audiences as mouthpieces for the Programme at the outset, who influenced countless people to toe the line — what if they, in their new shining garb within the freedom community, painted the full picture?
I still can’t explain how any self-respecting health professional could have lost his or her wits so completely in 2020 so as to have discarded the principles of their discipline. Could they really have forgotten about natural immunity and early treatment and the need for a genuine vaccine to be tested over years for safety and efficacy?
But never mind. If our new apostles of good sense can now use their heft and influence to enlighten the many who waver in the middle about the true extent and depravity and the planned coordination informing the covidian psyops, they will have atoned for their earlier lapses and complicity. But unless they have the courage to go that far, I, for one, will regard their intentions with grave suspicion.
Unless they have the guts to serve up the whole enchilada, they can take their morsels elsewhere.
However hard Big Pharma is pushing the new Covid jabs, investors know the truth.
Even though we are getting closer to winter, a perfect time to sell Covid jabs, Moderna’s share price is down 44%.
And Pfizer’s is down 36%.
Clearly investors in the know realise that people just aren’t taking the Covid shots anymore.
So the sales team has been brought in to try and drum up business. All over the MSM news today are reports of a new study which claims to show that Long Covid can cause long-term damage to multiple organs.
The study, published in The Lancet is titled “Multiorgan MRI findings after hospitalisation with COVID-19 in the UK (C-MORE): a prospective, multicentre, observational cohort study”.
Read any MSM coverage of this study and you will be led to believe that a third of Long Covid patients sustained damage to multiple organs five months after infection. Lung injuries were almost 14 times higher among Long Covid patients, whilst brain and kidney injuries were three and two times higher respectively.
‘Study lead Dr Betty Raman said people who had more than two organs affected were “four times more likely to report severe and very severe mental and physical impairment”’.
Scary stuff, sign me up for my booster now.
But is the study all that it is made out to be?
First of all the declarations of interests page is over 1,600 words long with reference after reference to links with Big Pharma.
Secondly, and most importantly, the study is massively flawed. It recruited 2,710 participants and whittled these down to 259 who were discharged from hospital with PCR-confirmed or clinically diagnosed COVID-19 between March 1 2020 and Nov 1 2021.
This group was then compared with 52 non-Covid-19 controls from the community. The average age of the study group was 57 and the control group was 49. As the study says, “compared with non-COVID-19 controls, patients were older, living with more obesity and had more comorbidities”. 50% of the study group were obese compared with only 37% of the control group. 40% had smoked at some point in their lives compared with only 17% of the control group. I could continue with percentages of all the pre-existing comorbidities but I think you get the picture.
(For those who will ask the question, 40% of the control group were vaccinated at follow-up compared with 44% of the study group.)
So what do you think happens when you take an unhealthy, older group of people who have been in hospital with Covid and you compare them with a younger, healthier group of people from the community. You geniuses, you guessed it. You find that the unhealthier group are unhealthier.
Give the Big Pharma sales team a genius medal for that one and a sucker medal to the MSM who did the sales pitch for them.
But don’t take it from me, here is what Professor Francois Balloux, Director of the UCL Genetics Institute in London, has to say about the study:
Thus, my point is not that the conclusions of the study are necessarily false but that the control group is inadequate. I worry the study may have been published as is because it fits a particular narrative, and not necessarily because it is sound and robust.
By choosing a control group made of elderly, frail, terminally ill patients, it might be possible to demonstrate that Covid actually repairs organ damage, which would obviously be an absurd conclusion, and which should rightly be called out. Yet, here we are …
There is evidence that cancers are occurring in excess after people receive COVID-19 vaccinations, according to Dr. Harvey Risch.
Dr. Risch is professor emeritus of epidemiology in the Department of Epidemiology and Public Health at the Yale School of Public Health and Yale School of Medicine. His research has focused extensively on the causes of cancer as well as prevention and early diagnosis.
In an interview for EpochTV’s “American Thought Leaders,” Dr. Risch said patients must now wait months, not weeks, to get an appointment at an oncology clinic in New York.
There is difficulty in observing whether a vaccine can cause cancer, because cancer usually takes time to develop, Dr. Risch said. It can take anywhere from two years to 30 years, depending on the different types of cancer, from leukemia to colon cancer.
“What clinicians have been seeing,” said Dr. Risch, “is very strange things: For example, 25-year-olds with colon cancer, who don’t have family histories of the disease—that’s basically impossible along the known paradigm for how colon cancer works—and other long-latency cancers that they’re seeing in very young people.”
He said this is not how cancer normally develops.
“There has to be some initiating stimulus to why this happens,” he said.
Fighting Cancer
Dr. Risch said that in his opinion, cancer is something a healthy human body can fight and disable, as the non-normal cancerous cells are gobbled up when detected in a body with a functional immune system. If the immune system is compromised, however, it cannot cope with the task of neutralizing cancerous cells, and cancerous cells are left to multiply and grow, leading to symptoms of cancer.
“That’s the mechanism I think is most likely here,” Dr. Risch said. “We know that the COVID vaccines have done various degrees of damage to the immune system in a fraction of people who have taken them.”
That damage could translate to getting COVID more often, getting other infectious diseases, or getting cancer.
Another example Dr. Risch gave was breast cancer, which normally, if there is a remanifestation after surgical removal, the remanifestation occurs after two decades. However, vaccinated women are now seen to remanifest breast cancers in much shorter periods of time.
“Those are the initial signals that we’ve been seeing, and because these cancers have been occurring to people who were too young to get them, basically, compared to the normal way it works, they’ve been designated as turbo cancers,” Dr. Risch said.
“Some of these cancers are so aggressive that between the time that they’re first seen and when they come back for treatment after a few weeks, they’ve grown dramatically compared to what oncologists would have expected for the way cancer normally progresses,” he added.
“Be attuned to your body,” Dr. Risch recommended, for noticing any new signals the body might give.
Adverse Events After Vaccination
Dr. Risch also talked about the aspect of official medical agencies not recognizing someone as being vaccinated inside the first two weeks of vaccination. This happens, he said, because the medical agencies say that the effects of the vaccine need two weeks to start manifesting. Adverse effects occurring a few days after vaccinations were officially counted as health conditions manifesting in unvaccinated people, he said.
However, serious adverse events after receiving the vaccine have occurred within the first four days, Dr. Risch said. He said three-quarters of adverse effects are being recorded as happening to unvaccinated people.
The decision makers who were in charge during the pandemic “threw out the principles of public health six days into the pandemic and did the opposite of everything that we knew should be done for respiratory viruses,” he said.
One example was the denial of effective early treatment and unnecessary vaccinations, which show a “colossal failure of public health through this period,” he said.
Dr. Risch said that a lot of people are now less likely to be “propagandized” regarding COVID, and that news reports about a new variant that is going to take over the world in the next month are “propaganda to sell the next batch of vaccines coming out in a few weeks.”
“People are fed up with this and it’s going to be a lot more pushback,” he said.
Risks to Society
Dr. Risch said that while the individual risk of an adverse reaction to the vaccine is relatively low, once that risk manifests itself at a greater scale, when millions of people have received the vaccine, the result is that hundreds of thousands of people are left with injuries and serious adverse events that are often worse than the virus itself.
Dr. Risch’s opinion is that nobody should get vaccinated with an mRNA vaccine, as the new variants are mild and not life threatening. He has heard of a few hospitalizations that lasted for some days, but as most people had COVID in the past, they have some immunity to these new variants as well.
“There is no reason for people to be vaccinated now, to any degree,” he said.
He said COVID has become an illness similar to the flu in its degree of severity, and that propaganda to scare people is being pushed by the government on behalf of pharmaceutical companies to sell more vaccines.
“We live in social contact with each other and therefore spread low-level infections. This is part of human life that we take for granted and we try to treat it the best we can,” he said. “That’s how we should be managing this.”
BY LAURENT GUYÉNOT • UNZ REVIEW • NOVEMBER 13, 2021
By a strange paradox, most Kennedy researchers who believe that Oswald was “just a patsy” spend an awful lot of time exploring his biography. This is about as useful as investigating Osama bin Laden for solving 9/11. Any serious quest for the real assassins of JFK should start by investigating the man who shot Oswald at pointblank in the stomach at 11:21 a.m. on September 24, 1963 in the Dallas Police station, thereby sealing the possibility that a judicial inquiry would draw attention to the inconsistencies of the charge against him, and perhaps expose the real perpetrators. One would normally expect the Dallas strip-club owner Jack Ruby to be the most investigated character by Kennedy truthers. But that is not the case. … 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.
Some UK military personnel and their families have been turning to food banks because of the increasing pressures from the cost of living crisis, a British news network has reported.
Aletho News
Aletho News 