Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Magnesium Is a Cornerstone Mineral for Health

This article was previously published April 1, 2019, and has been updated with new information.

By Dr. Joseph Mercola 

Magnesium is the fourth most abundant element in your body,1 and one of the seven essential minerals we can’t live without.2 It’s necessary for the healthy functioning of most cells, but especially your heart, kidneys and muscles. Low levels of magnesium impede cellular metabolic function and deteriorate mitochondrial function.

As it is also required for the activation of vitamin D, deficiency may hamper your ability to convert vitamin D from sun exposure and/or oral supplementation. Unfortunately, deficiency is common and research shows even subclinical deficiencies may jeopardize your health.

If you’ve recently had a blood panel drawn, you may assume it would reveal a magnesium deficiency. However, only 1% of magnesium is distributed in your blood, which means a blood test is not useful to determine whether you are deficient at the cellular level.3 Recent research confirms optimal levels of magnesium are necessary for your heart4 and kidney health.5

Magnesium Deficiency Affects the Vast Majority

Statistics show that at least 50% of Americans are deficient in magnesium, with some estimations going as high as 75% overall, and as many as 84% of postmenopausal women being deficient in it.6,7,8 Other scientists believe the deficiency affects the vast majority of individuals based on current dietary habits, saying:9

“[B]ecause of chronic diseases, medications, decreases in food crop magnesium contents and the availability of refined and processed foods, the vast majority of people in modern societies are at risk for magnesium deficiency.”

The recommended daily allowances (RDA) for magnesium are based on age, gender and pregnancy status.10 Although it may be difficult to pinpoint the exact percentage of individuals who suffer from magnesium deficiency, data do demonstrate subclinical levels of magnesium contribute to a number of widespread health problems.

The number who suffer from deficiency increases with an aging population as the elderly tend to consume less and don’t efficiently absorb magnesium from what is eaten.11

Digestive disorders, such as Crohn’s disease and celiac, may also affect magnesium absorption.12 Individuals who suffer from Type 2 diabetes13 or use diuretics may lose more magnesium through their urine.14

As the number of people suffering Type 2 diabetes is growing, and the age at which the condition arises is getting younger,15 the number who are also at risk for magnesium deficiency is also rising. Type 2 diabetes is associated with a number of health conditions also linked to magnesium deficiency, including heart disease and kidney disease.

Magnesium Integral to Arterial Health

Magnesium is required for energy production and is a cofactor in more than 300 enzyme systems that regulate biochemical reactions, including muscle and nerve function, and blood pressure regulation.16 Magnesium also helps regulate your blood vessels and helps prevent calcification known as coronary artery calcification (CAC).

CAC is an indicator of advanced atherosclerosis, a common predictor of cardiovascular disease and chronic kidney disease.17 In 1948, researchers undertook a nearly 70-year-long heart study under the direction of the National Heart Institute.

The Framingham Heart Study18 became a joint project of the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute and Boston University with the objective to identify factors contributing to cardiovascular disease.

Magnesium Is Necessary for Optimal Heart and Kidney Health

Researchers19 recently examined data of magnesium intake in those free of cardiovascular disease at the beginning of the Framingham Heart Study and followed them over a period of 11 years.

They found a strong association between higher self-reported magnesium intake and lower calcification in the coronary arteries, which translates to lower risk of atherosclerosis and cardiovascular disease.

The researchers believe this may play a role in magnesium’s protective association in stroke and fatal coronary artery disease. The data also revealed a lower risk of abdominal aortic calcification,20 also associated with cardiovascular disease.21 A second study22 analyzed the associated risk of hypomagnesemia with diabetes and hypertension, which can contribute to a decline in kidney function.

The hypothesis was that subclinical levels contributed to a decline in glomerular filtration rate. Researchers engaged over 2,000 participants from the Dallas Heart Study. During a median follow-up of seven years, researchers evaluated glomerular filtration rate, biochemical parameters, C-reactive proteins and the prevalence of hypertension and diabetes.

The results led the researchers to conclude subclinical levels of magnesium were independently associated with decline in glomerular filtration rates indicating declining kidney function.23

Magnesium is a natural calcium antagonist and has several effects on vasodilation, regulation and changes in metabolism enhancing atherosclerotic changes in arterial stiffness, likely in part contributing to heart and kidney disease.24

Magnesium for Your Bone and Muscle Health

Magnesium contributes to the structural development of bone, and adult bone contains nearly 60% of the total magnesium in your body.25 As it is involved in bone formation, subclinical levels may contribute to the development of osteoporosis.

Research26 has found women with osteoporosis have lower serum magnesium levels than those without osteoporosis or osteopenia. Magnesium is also fundamental for physical performance.27 Just as it contributes to heart muscle contraction, skeletal muscles also require magnesium to relax muscle cramping and it is a cornerstone for circulatory health.

Magnesium is also important in energy regulation and plays a role in oxygen delivery and uptake in muscle. The relationship between magnesium and circulation also affects your brain. Dr. Maiken Nedergaard, co-director of the University of Rochester Center for Translational Neuromedicine, commented on the energy supply needed by the brain:28

“Our brains require a tremendous amount of energy and in order to meet this demand the flow of blood must be precisely choreographed to ensure that oxygen is being delivered where it is needed and when it is needed. This study demonstrates that microvessels in the brain play a key role in reacting to spikes in demand and accelerating the flow of blood to respond to neuronal activity.”

Magnesium Deficiency Affects Migraines, Anxiety, Depression

Although the brain is just 2% of your body weight, it uses nearly 20% of your oxygen supply in metabolic processes,29 remaining remarkably constant despite changes in mental and motor activities. Magnesium facilitates processing in the neural networks and is used to keep the blood-brain barrier healthy.30

Magnesium has proven to be essential for learning, concentration and memory and enables the brain’s plasticity, or its ability to adapt to challenges.31 Additionally, maintaining optimal levels of magnesium has proven effective in reducing the number of attacks and the number of days per month you may experience a migraine.32

In a comparison against valproate sodium, a medication used to help prevent migraine headache attacks, a randomized, controlled, double-blind study indicated 500 milligrams (mgs) of magnesium per day was an effective prophylaxis, similar to the effectiveness experienced by those taking valproate sodium, without side effects.

Anxiety disorders affect up to 13% of the population in the U.S.33 The condition may be debilitating, and like other mental disorders, it exists on a spectrum. Low levels of magnesium have been associated with increasing levels of noradrenaline, leading to a higher heart rate and blood pressure.

Conversely, optimal levels of magnesium may decrease the release of adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH), responsible for the controlled release of cortisol. Essentially, this means the release of fewer stress hormones and the modulation of the ones released.34

Optimal levels of dietary intake are also inversely associated with anxiety and depression.35 In an outpatient clinic treating 126 adults with mild to moderate symptoms, researcher found supplementation with magnesium chloride for six weeks resulted in clinically significant improvements in depression and anxiety without side effects.36

Higher Magnesium Intake Lowers Risk of Vitamin D Deficiency

Vitamin D levels below 20 nanograms per milliliter (ng/mL) or 50 nanomoles per liter (nmol/L) have repeatedly been shown to raise your risk of a number of health conditions, including depression and Type 2 diabetes. According to the most recent research, a vitamin D level between 60 and 80 ng/mL (150 and 200 nmol/L) appears to offer the greatest protection against cancer and other chronic diseases.37

Adequate vitamin D levels may also help prevent or treat dry eye syndrome,38 macular degeneration,39 neurological diseases,40 fractures41 and obesity.42 Adequate levels of vitamin D also lower your mortality risk associated with heart disease,43 and may lower your risk of mortality from all causes.44

However, without adequate levels of magnesium, any vitamin D supplementation may be ineffective,45 as magnesium is required for the activation of vitamin D, and vitamin D may trigger vascular calcification if magnesium and vitamin K2 levels are not optimal.46 Higher levels of magnesium may actually lower your risk of vitamin D deficiency by allowing for the activation of more vitamin D.47

Magnesium — Supplementation and Natural Sources

One of the biggest culprits behind deficiencies is processed foods, which unfortunately has become a staple in the American diet. Some of the magnesium rich foods you may add to your diet include:48,49

  • Spinach
  • Swiss chard
  • Avocado
  • Papaya
  • Bok Choy
  • Beet greens
  • Turnip greens
  • Seeds and nuts, such as pumpkin seeds, sesame seeds, cashews and raw almonds
  • Fatty fishes like wild-caught Alaskan salmon
  • Dried seaweed or agar
  • Brussels sprouts

An interesting number of factors may affect your ability to absorb magnesium from your foods. Herbicides like glyphosate act as agricultural chelators, effectively obstructing the uptake of minerals from the soil in many foods grown today. As a result, it may be quite difficult to find truly magnesium-rich foods. Cooking and processing further depletes magnesium.

Meanwhile, certain foods may actually influence your body’s absorption of magnesium. High levels of sugar intake may trigger excretion of magnesium through your kidneys, “resulting in a net loss,” according to Dr. Danine Fruge, associate medical director at the Pritikin Longevity Center in Florida.50

When it comes to oral supplementation, my personal preference is magnesium threonate, as it appears to be the most efficient at penetrating cell membranes, including your mitochondria and blood-brain barrier. Other effective ways to boost your magnesium level include:

Taking Epsom salt (magnesium sulfate) baths, as the magnesium will effectively absorb through your skin.

Using a topical solution — I prepare a supersaturated solution of Epsom salt by dissolving 7 tablespoons of the salt into 6 ounces of water and heating it until all the salt has dissolved. I pour it into a dropper bottle and then apply it to my skin and rub fresh aloe leaves over it to dissolve it.

This is an easy and inexpensive way to increase your magnesium and will allow you to get higher dosages into your body without having to deal with its laxative effects.

Magnesium can be taken with or without food. If you’re also taking calcium, take them together. If you exercise regularly, consider taking your calcium and magnesium in a ratio of one part calcium to two parts magnesium with your pre-workout meal.

While the ideal ratio of magnesium to calcium is thought to be 1-to-1, most people get far more calcium than magnesium from their diet, so your need for supplemental magnesium may be two to three times greater than calcium.

Sources and References

July 16, 2022 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | Leave a comment

A ‘Vaccine-Palooza’ Is Underway, Thanks to COVID — But Will Public Accept Endless Jabs?

The Defender | July 12, 2022

Two-and-a-half years ago, the Grand Poobahs of global vaccinology admitted — in behind-closed-door confessions caught on camera at the World Health Organization (WHO) — that public and professional confidence in vaccines was “wobbly,” and deservedly so.

As the gathered experts conceded, the glaring inadequacies of vaccine safety science and the dysfunctional safety monitoring systems that permit routine “obfuscation” of serious adverse events were understandable reasons for public distrust.

At the time, it seemed as though such momentous disclosures would presage a death knell for vaccine “business as usual” — but then along came COVID-19, and with it, the instant memory-holing of the WHO’s stunning admissions.

Rather than finally address the self-confessed vaccine disaster, public health officials and global leaders — ranging from presidents to private-sector employers to top military brass to central bankers — used COVID-19 as an opportunity to double down in the opposite direction, forcibly stuffing the “vaccine hesitancy” genie back in the bottle with ethically untenable vaccine mandates.

After 18 months of force-feeding the COVID-19 jabs, however, manufacturers are now discarding tens of millions of doses “amid sagging demand.”

In some respects, this could be construed as evidence of policy failure, but the fact is that the COVID-19 shots accomplished a significant goal for the parties that pushed them, launching a renewed vaccine gold rush that — with growing emphasis on voguish, biotech-reliant biopharmaceuticals — seems likely to extend well beyond the COVID-19 era.

As the head of Bayer’s pharmaceuticals division observed in late 2021, mRNA vaccine technology and other forms of cell and gene therapy — for all of their by now well-documented and even species-threatening dangers — have crossed over both the regulatory and public palatability threshold.

PfizerJohnson & Johnson (J&J), AstraZenecaSanofi and Eli Lilly — some of major players in the biopharma space — are actively prioritizing “strategic alliances” and “collaborations to expand their [biopharmaceutical] product portfolios.”

Meanwhile, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) are poised to roll out, at breakneck speed, approvals and recommendations for whatever new childhood and adult vaccines are sent their way.

In short, using technologies both “conventional” and new, a multipronged effort is afoot to jump-start and ensure a frenzied vaccine-palooza.

The mRNA pipeline

Having succeeded in foisting COVID-19 mRNA injections on an initially unsuspecting public, manufacturers and government agencies like the National Institutes of Health (NIH) are now salivating at the prospect of an endless series of mRNA vaccines.

It is no coincidence that the mRNA jabs in the works target some of the very conditions being reported as COVID-19 vaccine adverse events, a neat “create-a-problem, develop-a-drug-to-manage-the problem” trick that accounts for many other drugs already on the market.

In the pipeline are mRNA vaccines for the following:

  • Cancer: Researchers are conducting dozens of clinical trials to test “mRNA treatment vaccines in people with various types of cancers.” Dr. Ryan Cole, a pathologist, described the dramatic surge in endometrial and other cancers following the rollout of COVID-19 shots.
  • Shingles: Cole and others also noted the uptick of shingles in COVID-19 vaccine recipients. Moderna in March announced its development of an mRNA shingles vaccine, as well as mRNA vaccines for herpes and cancer.
  • Other forms of immune suppression: With numerous indications that COVID-19 shots are reprogramming the immune response, officials and manufacturers are dusting off HIV as the supposed bogeyman. Moderna and NIH are partnering in mRNA vaccine clinical trials for HIV. This would represent a particular coup for Dr. Anthony Fauci, who over four decades has found development of an HIV vaccine to be “a daunting scientific challenge.”
  • Heart attacks: Cardiac problems are among the few COVID-19-vaccine-related adverse events grudgingly acknowledged by manufacturers and the FDA. In the U.K., researchers are investigating the use of “exactly the same technology as the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines to inject micro RNAs to the heart,” claiming they can get whatever heart cells survive after a heart attack to proliferate.
  • COVID and influenza: Manufacturers also are gearing up for a new generation of mRNA-based flu shots and mRNA combination vaccines which, they promise, will “protect against several different infections at the same time, such as influenza, COVID-19 and other respiratory infections.”In the meantime, CDC just recommended that seniors (aged 65 years or older) receive “enhanced” flu shots — either high-dose, adjuvanted or recombinant — in lieu of “standard-dose unadjuvanted, inactivated vaccines.” Adjuvanted influenza vaccines feature a new generation of “smart” vaccine adjuvants designed to ensure even the most mediocre vaccine sends recipients’ immune systems into overdrive.

For babies — something old, something new

In June, the FDA reaffirmed its long-standing allegiance to an agenda of guaranteed harm when it authorized emergency use COVID-19 shots for infants as young as 6 months old.

After the conflict-of-interest-riddled FDA advisors’ 21-0 vote, Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) commented, “[I]n balancing the risk to rewards here, all the risks are to the innocent children and all of the billion-dollar rewards go to the government-protected pharmaceuticals.”

Seizures and psychosis are already being reported as adverse events in the under-5 age group.

In decrying FDA’s decision to give COVID-19 shots to tots, some dissenters waxed nostalgic about the perceived “rigor” of the pre-COVID-19 vaccine approval process, seemingly amnesiac about the FDA’s lengthy history of regulatory capture and business-friendly shortcuts.

As a reminder, at least two-thirds of the vaccines approved by the FDA from 2006 through late 2020 benefited from “flexibility in the evidence required for approval,” resulting in accelerated approvals.

This “turn-a-blind-eye” pattern also held sway in the FDA’s and CDC’s recent decisions to pile on two more options to the childhood schedule, options that will do nothing to improve the safety of measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) and pneumococcal conjugate vaccines (PCV) that have been injuring children for decades.

First, on June 3, the FDA approved GlaxoSmithKline’s (GSK’s) Priorix, an MMR vaccine initially launched in Europe in the late 1990s.

GSK developed Priorix using the MRC-5 cell line (derived from the lung tissue of a male fetus aborted at 14 weeks).

A 2020 analysis by the Italian association CORVELVA of a version of Priorix that also contains a varicella component found that the amount of DNA in the vaccine was “well above the allowed threshold,” and that continuous use of the cell line over time resulted in “vaccines containing progressively more and more modified human genetic material, that is dangerous for the health of the vaccinees themselves.”

The FDA’s go-ahead for Priorix shatters Merck’s position as the sole U.S. purveyor of MMR vaccines. Previously, FDA showed no sign of being troubled by Merck’s monopoly, despite the pharmaceutical behemoth being dogged by “a slew of controversies” that included whistleblower allegations of MMR-related fraud and undeniable evidence of a link with autism.

Moreover, as Children’s Health Defense Chairman Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. pointed out in late 2019, when the FDA belatedly began to “tee up” Priorix as a replacement for Merck’s scandal-ridden MMR-II, rather than use an inert placebo to test Priorix, the FDA allowed GSK to use MMR-II as the comparator!

Even these sham clinical trials, Kennedy noted, had “horrifying” results. Within 42 days, nearly 50% of recipients of both manufacturers’ formulations experienced adverse events, with over 10% ending up in the emergency room. By six months, almost 4% of recipients had been diagnosed with a “new onset chronic disease.”

To date, the European Medicines Agency (EMA) has received more than 37,000 adverse event reports for Priorix and another 11,000-plus for the varicella-containing version — with 58% and 79% of adverse events, respectively, occurring in the under-two age group that will now receive the jabs in the U.S.

Following the nominal slap on the wrist for Merck’s MMR-II, the FDA and CDC also offered Merck some good news, approving on June 17 and then recommending — for routine use in infants and children 6 weeks to 2 years of age — the company’s 15-valent PCV15 (brand name “Vaxneuvance”) as an interchangeable alternative to Pfizer’s Prevnar 13 (PCV13).

The CDC stopped short of issuing a “preferential recommendation” for PCV15, however. Admitting to “certain uncertainties, including concerns related to potentially higher reactogenicity” —  with “reactogenicity” defined as the “state of being able to produce adverse reactions” — the CDC leaves it up to the hapless infants who receive Vaxneuvance to discover the shots’ “higher reactogenicity” for themselves.

Even without the addition of Vaxneuvance to the schedule, pneumococcal conjugate vaccines — with ingredients like aluminum and polysorbate 80 — have shown themselves plenty capable of wreaking havoc on the health of the infants expected to get four doses by the time they are 12 to 15 months old.

Eager to add even more injections to the childhood vaccine schedule, the industry is also eyeing as a potential cash cow a pediatric (and adult) mRNA vaccine against respiratory syncytial virus (RSV).

In 2019, 30 candidate RSV vaccines were in the pipeline, and in 2021, the FDA fast-tracked an mRNA-based RSV vaccine developed by Moderna.

HPV downsizing — getting HPV shots into young people by any means necessary

The competition between Merck and GSK is also fierce where human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines are concerned.

In the U.S., Merck’s Gardasil (and later, Gardasil 9) handily beat out GSK’s Cervarix, which is no longer available to American youth — but with 100 or more countries having added HPV jabs to their national vaccination schedules, much more than the U.S. market is in play.

Data suggest HPV vaccine coverage in the U.S. starts out relatively high, with an estimated 66% of 13- to 17-year-olds getting a first dose, but the percentage completing the series (an additional one to two doses) drops off to 49%.

Worldwide, acceptance of HPV vaccines is even lower — for girls, global coverage is estimated at about 15% of those in the target age range.

Undoubtedly, one of the reasons for the global public’s lukewarm stance on HPV vaccination is the occurrence of serious adverse autoimmune reactions that have left many recipients, both female and male, disabled for life.

Merck is mired in lawsuits (with attorneys, including Kennedy) alleging it knowingly concealed Gardasil-associated adverse events.

Rather than re-evaluate — as some researchers have strongly urged — the adverse event profile that, until COVID-19 shots, made HPV vaccines some of the most dangerous on the market, agencies like the National Cancer Institute (NCI) are instead beginning to argue in favor of single-dose HPV vaccination (either Cervarix or Gardasil 9).

Punting to a one-dose regimen would, NCI officials disingenuously say, “simplify the logistics of vaccination, which could allow more girls [and boys] worldwide to be vaccinated.”

Monkeypox profiteering

As Rob Verkerk, Ph.D., reported last month, the suspected case definition of monkeypox is broad enough to include anyone with a common cold — or with post-COVID-19-vaccine immune suppression — who has a shingles rash.

Verkerk’s counsel is to worry about “what the WHO and collaborating institutions, governments and corporations are up to,” rather than succumb to fear-mongering about monkeypox itself.

In the U.S., what the government is “up to” is ordering more than 4 million doses of monkeypox vaccine — a whitewashed smallpox vaccine linked to heart inflammation — and formulating a “national monkeypox vaccine strategy,” including a protocol aimed at the vaccine’s use in children.

In other words, with a “COVID-19 corporatocracy playbook” that, in Verkerk’s words, “is now well and truly oiled,” corporate and government leaders of ill intent appear to believe they can continue to play the vaccine game indefinitely, using “fear and manipulated science to engender support for the global control of health.”

It is up to us to prove them wrong.

© 2022 Children’s Health Defense, Inc. This work is reproduced and distributed with the permission of Children’s Health Defense, Inc. Want to learn more from Children’s Health Defense? Sign up for free news and updates from Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and the Children’s Health Defense. Your donation will help to support us in our efforts.

July 15, 2022 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | , , , | Leave a comment

There’s something wrong with Joe

Paul Joseph Watson | July 14, 2022

Democrats are starting to panic.

INTRO MUSIC: Sagittarius V – Lucidator: http://sagittariusvmusic.bandcamp.com

July 15, 2022 Posted by | Timeless or most popular | , | Leave a comment

How Jewish Is the War Against Russia? Let’s be honest about who is promoting it

BY PHILIP GIRALDI • UNZ REVIEW  • JULY 12, 2022

Five years ago, I wrote an article entitled “America’s Jews Are Driving America’s wars.” It turned out to be the most popular piece that I have ever written and I was rewarded for it by immediately being fired by the so-called American Conservative magazine, where I had been a regular and highly popular contributor for fourteen years. I opened the article with a brief description of an encounter with a supporter whom I had met shortly before at an antiwar conference. The elderly gentleman asked “Why doesn’t anyone ever speak honestly about the six-hundred-pound gorilla in the room? Nobody has mentioned Israel in this conference and we all know it’s American Jews with all their money and power who are supporting every war in the Middle East for Netanyahu? Shouldn’t we start calling them out and not letting them get away with it?”

In my article I named many of the individual Jews and Jewish groups that had been leading the charge to invade Iraq and also deal with Iran along the way. They used fake intelligence and out-and-out lies to make their case and never addressed the central issue of how those two countries actually threatened the United States or its vital interests. And when they succeeded in committing the US to the fiasco in Iraq, as far as I can determine only one honest Jew who had participated in the process, Philip Zelikow, in a moment of candor, admitted that the Iraq War, in his opinion, was fought for Israel.

There was considerable collusion between the Israeli government and the Jews in the Pentagon, White House, National Security Council and State Department in the wake of 9/11. Under President George W. Bush, Israeli Embassy staff uniquely had free access to the Pentagon office of Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz, not being required to sign in or submit any security measures. It was a powerful indication of the special status that Israel enjoyed with top Jews in the Bush Administration. It should also be recalled that Doug Feith’s Office of Special Plans was the source of the false WMD information used by the Administration to justify invading Iraq, while that information was also funneled directly to Vice President Dick Cheney without any submission to possibly critical analysts by his chief of Staff “Scooter” Libby. Wolfowitz, Feith and Libby were of course Jewish as were many on their staffs and Feith’s relationship with Israel was so close that he actually partnered in a law firm that had a branch in Jerusalem. Feith also served on the board of the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA), which is dedicated to nurturing the relationship between the US and Israel.

Currently, the top three State Department officials (Tony Blinken, Wendy Sherman and Victoria Nuland) are all Zionist Jews. The head of the Department of Homeland Security, which is hot on the trail of domestic “terrorist” dissidents, is also Jewish as is the Attorney General and the president’s chief of staff. They and their boss Joe Biden do not seem concerned that their client Ukraine is no democracy. The nation’s current government came into power after the 2014 coup engineered by President Barack Obama’s State Department at an estimated cost of $5 billion. The regime change carried out under Barack Obama was driven by State Department Russophobe Victoria Nuland with a little help from international globalist George Soros. It removed the democratically elected President Viktor Yanukovych who was, unfortunately for him, a friend of Russia.

Ukraine is reputedly both the poorest and most corrupt country in Europe, witness the Hunter Biden saga. The current President Volodymyr Zelensky, who is Jewish and claims to have holocaust victims in his family tree, is a former comedian who won election in 2019. He replaced another Jewish president Petro Poroshenko, after being heavily funded and promoted by yet another fellow Jew and Ukraine’s richest oligarch Ihor Kolomoyskyi, who is also an Israeli citizen and now lives in Israel.

It all sounds like deja vu all over again, particularly as many of the perpetrators are still around, like Nuland, priming the pump to go to war yet again for no reason. And they are joined by journalists like Bret Stephens at the New York Times, Wolf Blitzer and Jake Tapper at CNN, and also Max Boot at the Washington Post, all of whom are Jewish and can be counted on to write regular pieces both damning and demonizing Russia and its head of state Vladimir Putin, which means it is not only about the Middle East anymore. It is also about weakening and even bringing about regime change in nuclear armed Russia while also drawing some lines in the sand for likewise nuclear armed China. And I might add that playing power games with Russia is a hell of a lot more dangerous that kicking Iraq around.

To put it bluntly, many US government and media Jews hate Russia and even though they benefited substantially as a group by virtue of their preeminent role in the looting of the former Soviet Union under Boris Yeltsin and continue to be among the most prominent Russian oligarchs. Many of the oligarch billionaires, like Boris Berezovsky, self-exiled when Vladimir Putin obtained power and began to crack down on their tax avoidance and other illegal activity. Many moved to Western Europe where some bought up football teams while others went south and obtained Israeli citizenship. Their current grievances somewhat reflect their tribe’s demand for perpetual victimhood and the deference plus forgiveness of all sins that it conveys, with the self-promoted tales of persecution going back to the days of the Tsars, full of allegations about pogroms and Cossacks arriving in the night, stories that rival many of the holocaust fabrications in terms of their lack of credibility.

Many Jews, particularly younger Jews, are finding it difficult to support apartheid Israel and the constant wars being initiated and fought for no particularly credible reason by both Democratic and Republican parties when in power, which is a good thing. But Jewish power in Washington and across the US is difficult to ignore and it is precisely those Jewish groups and individuals who have been empowered through their wealth and connections who have been the most vocal leading warmongers when it has come to the Middle East and to Russia.

Interestingly, however, some pushback is developing. The Jewish peace group Tikkun has recently published a devastating article by Jeffrey Sachs on the Jews who have been agitating for war. It is entitled “Ukraine Is the Latest Neocon Disaster” and describes how “The war in Ukraine is the culmination of a 30-year project of the American neoconservative movement. The Biden Administration is packed with the same neocons who championed the US wars of choice in Serbia (1999), Afghanistan (2001), Iraq (2003), Syria (2011), Libya (2011), and who did so much to provoke Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. The neocon track record is one of unmitigated disaster, yet Biden has staffed his team with neocons. As a result, Biden is steering Ukraine, the US, and the European Union towards yet another geopolitical debacle…”

Tikkun explains how “The neocon movement emerged in the 1970s around a group of public intellectuals, several of whom were influenced by University of Chicago political scientist Leo Strauss and Yale University classicist Donald Kagan. Neocon leaders included Norman Podhoretz, Irving Kristol, Paul Wolfowitz, Robert Kagan (son of Donald), Frederick Kagan (son of Donald), Victoria Nuland (wife of Robert), Elliott Abrams, and Kimberley Allen Kagan (wife of Frederick).” It might be added that Kimberley Kagan heads the Institute for the Study of War, which is often cited in media coverage and even in Congress to explain why we must fight Russia.

It has long been recognized by many that a particular antipathy directed against Russia permeates the so-called neoconservative world view. The neocons are hugely overrepresented at the top levels of government and, as noted above, a number of them are running the State Department while also holding high level positions elsewhere in the Biden Administration as well as in the foreign policy think tanks, including Richard Haass at the influential Council on Foreign Relations. Likewise, the intensely Russophobic US and Western media, foundations and social networking sites are disproportionately Jewish in their ownership and staffing.

And beyond that, Ukraine is to a certain extent a very Jewish-identified place. The Jewish media in the US and elsewhere has been showering Zelensky with praise, referring to him as a genuine “Jewish hero,” a modern Maccabee resisting oppression, a David versus Goliath. T-shirts bearing his image are being sold that read “Resisting tyrants since Pharaoh” while the largely Orthodox Jewish community in New York City has already been raising millions of dollars for Ukrainian aid.

The Jewish Telegraphic Agency reports that a “2020 demographic survey estimated that besides a ‘core’ population of 43,000 Jews, around 200,000 Ukrainians are technically eligible for Israeli citizenship, meaning that they have identifiable Jewish ancestry. The European Jewish Congress says that number could be as high as 400,000.” If that is true, it is one of the largest Jewish communities in the world and it includes at least 8,000 Israelis, many of whom have returned to Israel.

As US-Russian negotiations leading up the current fighting were clearly designed to fail by the Biden Administration, one therefore has to wonder if this war against Russia is largely a product of a long enduring ethno-religious hatred coupled with a belief in the necessity for a strong American military applied as needed to dominate the world and thereby protect Israel. The neocons are most visible, but equally toxic are the Jews who would prefer to describe themselves as neoliberals or liberal interventionists, that is liberals who promote a strong, assertive American leadership role to support the basically phony catchwords “democracy” and “freedom.” Both neocons and neoliberals inevitably support the same policies so they have both ends of the political spectrum covered, particularly concerning the Middle East and against Russia. They currently dominate the foreign policy thinking of both major political parties as well as exercising control over media and entertainment industry coverage of the issues that concern them, largely leaving the American public with only their viewpoint to consider.

There is plenty of other evidence that prominent Jews both inside and outside the Administration have been stirring things up against Russia with considerable success as President Biden has now declared insanely that his Administration is engaged in “a great battle for freedom. A battle between democracy and autocracy. Between liberty and repression.” He has confirmed that the US is in Ukraine’s war against Russia until we “win.” How else does one explain the ridiculous trip by Attorney General Merrick Garland to Kiev in late June to help set up a war crimes investigation directed against Russia?

As Garland is supposed to be the US Attorney General, it might first be useful to investigate crimes relating to the United States. He might start with American war crimes in Iraq and Afghanistan or Israeli war crimes using Washington provided weapons in Lebanon and Syria, not to mention the human rights violations using those same weapons that occur on a daily basis directed against the Palestinians. Some conservatives are also wondering why the Attorney General spends his time pursuing “white supremacists” and has failed to investigate the rioting, looting and killing that rocked the nation in the BLM Summer of 2020.

Nevertheless, an undeterred and fearless Garland announced while in Kiev that Eli Rosenbaum, Jewish of course, and a 36-year veteran of the Justice Department who previously served as the director of the Office of Special Investigations, which was primarily responsible for identifying, denaturalizing and deporting Nazi war criminals, will lead a War Crimes Accountability team made up of DOJ experts in investigating Russian human-rights abuses. After the obligatory photo op sucking up to Zelensky, the diminutive but steely eyed Attorney General declared that “There is no hiding place for war criminals. The US Justice Department will pursue every avenue of accountability for those who commit war crimes and other atrocities in Ukraine. Working alongside our domestic and international partners, the Justice Department will be relentless in our efforts to hold accountable every person complicit in the commission of war crimes, torture and other grave violations during the unprovoked conflict in Ukraine.” And if any further evidence is required to demonstrate the Jewishness of that week in Kiev, actor Ben Stiller, also a Jew, visited Zelensky and gave him a big hug.

If Eli Rosenbaum is still seriously interested in finding Nazis he will find many more of them in Ukraine than within the Russian Army. So, one has to ask “Whose war is it and who is making it happen?” Can you please explain Joe Biden? Or, given your perpetual blank look, should I ask Merrick Garland or Tony Blinken or maybe even Victoria Nuland?

Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is inform@cnionline.org.

July 12, 2022 Posted by | Timeless or most popular, Wars for Israel | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Don’t vaccinate your children with covid-vaccines! Ever!

Tomaris

In a video message, Dr. Geert Vanden Bossche begs parents not to have their children vaccinated against COVID under any circumstances. “If you do, it could mean their death sentence.”

Full transcript:

“My name is Geert Vanden Bossche. I am a vaccinologist. I have worked in the vaccine industry for many, many years. I am trained as a virologist, having worked for many years not only in the vaccine industry but also with Gavi and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Today I want to talk about your children.

I beg you, I really beg you, do not vaccinate your children against COVID.

I will do my best to explain as best I can why this would be dramatic.

I’m not even going to talk about the fact that there’s no need to vaccinate children against COVID. And that there are too many and too dangerous side effects.

I’m going to talk about how these vaccines affect children’s immune systems. I am not exaggerating when I say that these vaccines could be a death sentence for your child.

Innate Antibodies
Let me explain how these vaccines will damage your child’s innate immune system.

First, and these are facts and data that you can check, we have never, really ever used a viral vaccine other than live attenuated vaccine. During childhood, we never use any vaccine other than live attenuated vaccine. And there’s a good reason for that.

This has everything to do with the innate or innate antibodies in the child. A child is equipped with a special kind of antibodies, innate antibodies. And those antibodies are only present for a limited time during childhood, then they disappear.

Kick-off immune system
These innate antibodies have an extremely important function. They help the child to kick-off his own immune system. The only way it can do this properly is thanks to its innate antibodies. What do these antibodies do?

First, the innate antibodies can neutralize the virus. And not just COVID but all kinds of viruses. Viruses are everywhere and people are continuously exposed to them.

But more importantly, by binding to the live virus, the innate antibodies learn to give proper instructions to the immune system to recognize not only the viruses it faces, but many other viruses as well. And that is important because the innate antibodies will disappear over time. So the immune system has to be trained to recognize viruses later in life, when the innate antibodies are no longer there.

But that’s not all. By binding to viruses, the innate antibodies will prevent your innate immune system from recognizing self-components. These are components of the child’s own body that should not be recognized.

What Happens When You Vaccinate Your Child?
What Happens When You Vaccinate Your Child? Then the vaccine creates antibodies, which will bind strongly to the virus and they will displace the innate antibodies. The innate antibodies are then no longer able to bind to the virus.

Source: https://rumble.com/v1az8uc-dont-vaccinate-your-children-with-covid-vaccines-ev

July 11, 2022 Posted by | Timeless or most popular, Video | | Leave a comment

From Wild-Type SARS-2 to Omicron: Towards a Theory of Corona Evolution

With additional thoughts on why mass containment probably made everything worse, by playing to the most central strategy of the virus

eugyppius | July 10, 2022

Scientific discourse on Corona remains focused on microbiological minutiae, while ignoring the broader evolutionary and behavioural patterns of SARS-2. This is especially frustrating, because our mass containment policies were at base attempts to change the behaviour of the virus, and their failure has prompted no introspection about the limits of our understanding.

Equally neglected is the evolutionary trajectory of Corona. Aside from simplistic, one-dimensional concerns about things like escape variants, almost nobody in mainstream scientific circles has tried to account for observed evolution or describe the various selection pressures SARS-2 faces.

Among the few people to have given serious thought to the evolution of viral pathogens is Paul Ewald, author of the book Evolution of Infectious Disease, as well as numerous articles explaining the evolutionary pressures on the virulence and transmissibility of viruses.

As he explains in this piece from 2011:

Much of the variation in the harmfulness of acute infections is associated with the dependence of transmission on host mobility. When transmission occurs by direct contact, infected hosts generally need to be mobile to facilitate contact with susceptibles. When transmission of pathogens does not depend on the mobility of infected hosts, evolutionary considerations predict that natural selection should favor high degrees of host exploitation and hence high degrees of virulence.

Basically, the virus wants to make as many copies of itself as possible. But, very roughly speaking, the more aggressively the virus copies itself, the sicker its hosts become. This places an upper limit on the virulence of viruses that depend on person-to-person contact, and it explains why widely transmitted respiratory viruses all fall within the same narrow range of pathogenicity and cause the same kinds of symptoms. The pandemicists raise money by wargaming pandemic viruses with 10% fatality rates, but in the real world, the truly deadly viruses never get very far. They’re all like SARS-1 – they put people in the hospital too soon.

But what about smallpox? And cholera, and yellow fever and dengue fever? Are these not deadly viruses?

They are, but they don’t spread via direct contact. Smallpox falls into what Ewald calls a “sit-and-wait” category of transmission. These are viruses that have remarkable durability, remaining viable in the external environment for months or (in the case of Variola) even years. They can thus disable their hosts while still having hope of new victims. Yellow fever and dengue, meanwhile, are “vector-borne.” They depend on mosquitoes to hop from host to host, and they’re free to make their victims as sick as they want. “Waterborne” pathogens like cholera are similarly advantaged.

More importantly for our purposes, Ewald defines a fourth category of what we might call mediated transmission facilitating higher virulence. This is “attendant-borne” transmission, which occurs primarily in hospitals, where staff unwittingly circulate viruses among patients. Attendant-borne viruses, like their vector-borne and waterborne colleagues, are free to develop remarkably high virulence. Ewald believes that the 1918 influenza outbreak achieved its unusually high mortality via attend-borne transmission related to troop transports at the end of the First World War.

SARS-1, although never properly adapted to human hosts, also depended on attendant-borne transmission, and MERS is a more straightforward case of this phenomenon. But the clearest example of all is surely pre-Omicron SARS-2, which caused elevated mortality near the top of what we would expect for pandemic influenza; and which flourished nowhere as effectively as in healthcare institutions, including hospitals and especially nursing homes.

Remember that SARS-2 arrived in Europe no later than November 2019, and in America no later than December 2019. The West saw multiple months of community Corona transmission, in other words, without anybody noticing that anything was amiss. Hospitals remained as empty or as full as ever. As soon as we imposed lockdowns and started testing everybody, though, mortality spiked. These containment procedures involved nothing so much as identifying Corona patients and putting as many of them as possible in environments favouring attendant-borne transmission – from Corona testing centres to hospitals. And as the mass containment regime continued through 2021, SARS-2 began evolving towards greater virulence, as nosocomial and nursing home infections came to dominate the case statistics almost everywhere.

Omicron, whatever its origins, broke this dynamic. Unlike prior SARS-2 lineages, this is a classic direct-contact respiratory pathogen. With the advent of Omicron, Corona no longer spreads preferentially in healthcare institutions, and behaves much more like a mild flu or the common cold, with an emphasis on keeping its hosts healthy and mobile.

The worst thing we could do, from an evolutionary perspective, is continue the mass containment regime. We want to keep SARS-2 circulating via direct contact in the community. All such respiratory viruses, despite their stark differences, have been subject to the same convergent evolution, with remarkably similar effects on their human hosts. We must stop intervening in matters we don’t understand, or we’ll just continue our recent history, of always making everything worse.

July 10, 2022 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | | Leave a comment

Infertility: A Diabolical Agenda

https://www.bitchute.com/video/aJDAjtkBchfw

ChildrensHealthDefense
Dr. Joseph Mercola | July 9, 2022

“Infertility: A Diabolical Agenda,” is the fourth vaccine-related documentary by Dr. Andrew Wakefield. It tells the story of an intentional infertility vaccine program conducted on African women, without their knowledge or consent.

While it’s been brushed off as a loony conspiracy theory for years, there’s compelling evidence showing it did, in fact, happen, and there’s nothing to prevent it from happening again.

The Backstory

As explained in the film, the World Health Organization began working on an anti-fertility vaccine, led by Dr. G.P. Talwar in New Delhi, India, in the 1970s, “in response to perceived overpopulation.” For 20 years, the WHO’s Task Force on Vaccines for Fertility Regulation worked with population control in mind.

In 1993, the WHO finally announced a birth-control vaccine had successfully been created to help with “family planning.”1 The paper trail reveals that by 1976, WHO researchers had successfully conjugated, meaning combined or attached, human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) onto tetanus toxoid, used in the tetanus vaccine. As a result, when given to a woman, she develops antibodies against both tetanus and hCG.

HCG is a hormone produced by cells surrounding the growing embryo. These hormone-producing cells protect and support embryonic growth and eventually form the placenta.

As explained in the film, hCG is the first signal that tells the woman’s body she’s pregnant. In response to this signal, her ovaries then produce a second hormone, progesterone, which maintains the pregnancy to term.

By combining hCG with tetanus toxoid, it causes this crucial pregnancy hormone to be attacked and destroyed by your immune system, as it’s now misperceived as an invading pathogen. Since hCG is destroyed, progesterone is never produced and, hence, the pregnancy cannot be maintained.

So, if you’re already pregnant when taking this witches’ brew, it will likely result in a spontaneous abortion, and if you’re not already pregnant, you won’t be able to get pregnant, as this crucial pregnancy hormone is under constant attack by your immune system. Repeated doses prolong these effects, effectively rendering you sterile.

The WHO Has Been in the Depopulation Business for Decades

As detailed in a Scientific Research paper published in 2017,2 “WHO publications show a long-range purpose to reduce population growth in unstable ‘less developed countries.’”

In other words, the WHO’s longstanding policy has been to support depopulation in third world countries, and they’ve studied depopulation strategies in India, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Nigeria, Mexico, Indonesia, Brazil, The Philippines, Thailand, Egypt, Turkey, Ethiopia and Colombia for decades.3

While creating an anti-fertility vaccine for those who really don’t want children is one thing, using deception to lure girls and young women into taking it is another entirely. As it turns out, the WHO is not above using deception and trickery to shut down fertility in populations they deem unworthy of reproduction.

The Great Deception

The central figures of the film are two Kenyan gynecologists, Drs. Wahome Ngare, and the late Stephen K. Karanja. Both state in the film that infertility is now the biggest gynecological problem in Africa. In recent years, there’s been a significant increase in women losing their pregnancies and couples who cannot conceive.

“I have seen the tears. They lose their identity. You die inside,” Antoninah Mutinda says. She knows, because she’s one of the African women whose fertility has been mysteriously impacted. After her third miscarriage, she was tested and found to have extremely high anti-hCG antibodies. She now suspects the tetanus vaccine she was given may be the culprit.

The anti-fertility vaccine was rolled out in the mid-‘90s, but despite support from the Kenyan leadership and “elite groups,” it was not popular among Kenyan women, who were concerned about the potential for abuse. They worried it might be disguised as a regular tetanus vaccine program.

Their concerns were valid because, as it turns out, this had already happened. In 1995, the Catholic Women’s League of the Philippines won a court order halting a UNICEF tetanus program that was using tetanus vaccine laced with hCG. Three million women between the ages of 12 and 45 had by that time already been vaccinated. Anti-hCG-laced vaccines had also been found in at least four other countries.

Undeterred by bad press, that same year, 1995, the Kenyan government launched a WHO tetanus campaign under the guise of eradicating neonatal tetanus. There were telltale signs that something was wrong, however, because it was already standard practice to vaccinate pregnant women against tetanus. Now, the WHO insisted women who weren’t pregnant needed the shot as well, in case they were to become pregnant.

Karanja learned of the deceptive anti-fertility campaigns in other countries during a medical conference in 1995, and became immediately suspicious of the tetanus campaign in his own country. Karanja convinced leaders of the Catholic church — one of the largest health care providers in Kenya — to test the tetanus vaccine being given, to make sure there was no foul play.

Without explanation, the WHO suddenly abandoned the campaign. Alas, 19 years later, in 2013, they were back. All girls and women, 15 to 49 years of age, were instructed to get vaccinated with a series of five injections, six months apart. This, it turns out, is the exact schedule required for the anti-fertility vaccine to produce sterility. Regular tetanus prevention requires only one injection every five to 10 years, and under no circumstance would you need five of them.

Vaccines Test Positive for Anti-hCG

The Catholic Church decided to test the vaccines, and collected three sample vials directly from clinics during the 2014 campaign. The samples were then sent to three independent laboratories for testing. As feared, they found hCG in them. Another six vials were then collected, and tested by six independent labs. This time, half were found to contain hCG.

At this point, the Catholic Church went public, urging girls and women to not comply with the vaccination campaign. In an effort to settle the dispute, an investigative committee was formed, consisting of three representatives selected by the Catholic bishops, and three government officials.

It was agreed that the nine vials already collected would be retested, along with 52 samples from a distributor who sells tetanus vaccine to the Kenyan government. This time, a more precise type of test, high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC), was chosen.

Dr. Nicholas Muraguri, director of medical services for the Kenyan government, contracted agriQ Quest to perform this testing. However, he urged them to test samples provided directly by him rather than the vials previously agreed upon. AgriQ Quest decided to analyze both batches.

The vials that tested positive for hCG using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), still tested positive using HPLC, but none of the samples provided by Muraguri tested positive.

A Decades’ Long Cover-Up

Shockingly, the government then demanded agriQ Quest “alter their report to indicate that they were safe to be administered.” When agriQ Quest refused, the government, the WHO and UNICEF responded by launching a public attack, accusing the Catholic Church of “peddling misinformation.”

And, since the only samples found to contain hCG were those provided by the Church, the government accused them of tampering with the vials in an effort to undermine confidence in the vaccine.

An added twist here is that the vials that tested positive had the same batch numbers as vials that tested negative. Only later did agriQ Quest discover that these negative vials had fake labels on them. They were not, in fact, from the same lots as those that tested positive. They weren’t even made by the same manufacturer.

AgriQ Quest also claims they can prove the positive samples were not tampered with, because they did not test positive for hCG in general. The test clearly shows the hCG was conjugated with tetanus toxoid, and this cannot occur by simply adding hCG to a vial of tetanus vaccine.

The conjugation — the chemical linking or bonding — of hCG to the tetanus toxoid can only occur during the manufacturing process. This is the smoking gun that proves the neonatal tetanus vaccine campaign was a cover for a population control campaign.

Muraguri also lied when he claimed the Kenyan government had only one supplier of tetanus vaccine. As it turns out, there were two. Biological E. Limited provided a regular tetanus vaccine, while the hCG-positive batches came from Serum Institute of India — the same country where most of the WHO’s anti-fertility research had been conducted.

Both Ngare and Karanja paid a steep price for their vigilance. The medical board called them for disciplinary action. Karanja was issued a gag order, and since 2014 was not allowed to speak publicly about vaccines in Kenya. He broke that gag order for this film. April 29, 2021, Karanja died, allegedly from COVID infection.

A Truly Diabolical Agenda

Speaking for millions of women just like her, Mutinda, who has now struggled with infertility for years, says:

“To imagine there’s a system somewhere, that some people somewhere are behind my inability to carry pregnancy to term, that is a diabolical agenda!”

Before his untimely death, Karanja shared a message with the world, through the makers of this film:

“When they are through with Africa, they’re coming for you.”

Sources and References

July 10, 2022 Posted by | Deception, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity, Timeless or most popular, Video | , , | Leave a comment

Taiwan: Birth Rate CRATERED -27.66% in June 2022!!!

By Igor Chudov | July 9, 2022

A couple of weeks ago, I wrote an article based on the shocking news that Taiwan’s birth rate in May 2022 fell by 23.34% compared to May 2021.

Depopulation of Taiwan

I explained that in terms of statistics, the change in Taiwan is an unthinkable 26-sigma event of enormous magnitude.

Like most people would, I was hoping, despite evidence from other countries, that this is a data fluke.

Well, it is not, and the data for June was just released in Taiwan. I am very upset.

June Birth Rate Cratered by 27.66%!

Compared to June 2021, birth rate in Jun 2022 is down by -27.66%. This is far worse than the previous month (May) drop of -23.34% and indicates a worsening birth rate trend.

Here’s the updated chart:

Mind you, last August of 2021, when June 2022 babies were conceived in Taiwan, the people of Taiwan were mostly unaware of what was going to happen, and kept their family making plans intact. They probably did not notice a 27.66% decrease in pregnancies, or an increase in stillbirths. If someone told them, the young people of Taiwan probably thought that it was antivax propaganda that they should dutifully ignore, like their government and TV told them.

Young people were being happily vaccinated.

The result? An “impossible” birth rate drop of -27.66% is basically a slow death sentence for the population of Taiwan, if it continues, especially combined with a 26% increase in deaths.

Media Coverage

The mainstream media is beginning to cover drops in birth rates:

Further Reading

Concerned?

Check out my “depopulation series”:

Hungary: Highest Vaccinated Counties Have Worst Birth Rate Drops!
Interesting news on the birth rate drop front! It turns out that the highest vaccinated counties of Hungary have the worst drop in birth rates in 2022! This is a within-country comparison, comparing Hungarians to Hungarians, for the same time period…

Read more

Sweden’s Birth Rate Dropping Precipitiously Every Month
Sweden, a good country that cares about its citizens, publishes up-to-date birth statistics. The statistics are very concerning and show a deepening decline in births this year. It is actually WORSE than it looks on this chart, as I will show later…

Read more

Depopulation of Taiwan
This is a continuation of my post from yesterday about a massive 13% decline in births in Germany. Such a decline is a nine-sigma event, meaning that it is so unlikely to occur by chance, that it would naturally happen as rarely as an asteroid striking the Earth…

Read more

Dramatic Decline in Births in Germany
Germany is experiencing a strange decline in births in the first quarter of 2022, totally inconsistent with their experience in recent years. Strange, right? Fortunately, the vaccine-crazy German government already has the answer: it says people had so many children already, that they no longer want any…

Read more

July 9, 2022 Posted by | Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | , | Leave a comment

The self-inflicted genocide of late capitalism

By Toby Rogers | July 8, 2022

At some point over the last 50 years, the bourgeoisie (in the U.S. and throughout the developed world) embarked on the first self-inflicted genocide in human history.

While the roots may go way back, the self-inflicted genocide became systematized and legalized with the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act.

By 2001 with the publication of Autism: a novel form of mercury poisoning by Bernard, Enayati, Redwood, Roger, and Binstock it was clear that vaccines were largely responsible for the explosion in autism cases.

Faced with this news, the mainstream went all in to cover up the genocide and accelerate the pace of the destruction.

Thomas Verstraeten at the CDC took a job from GlaxoSmithKline in Belgium rather than tell the truth about the genocide.

William Thompson took a promotion from CDC rather than call a press conference to stop the genocide.

Julie Gerberding, Frank DeStefano, and Coleen Boyle at CDC aggressively covered up widespread harms to children like eager S.S. officers at Auschwitz.

Once everyone knew that methyl mercury was neurotoxic, Pharma with the blessing of FDA and CDC took most of the mercury out of vaccines and replaced it with even more aluminum — which leads to more autism cases but less severe symptoms. The genocide marched on.

A new generation of fixers including Tom Shimabukuro, John Su, and Matthew Oster at CDC as well as Nicola Klein at Kaiser Permanente dedicate their careers to hiding vaccine injury.

And now with rushed experimental Covid-19 shots, the genocide has accelerated and expanded to include adults throughout the developed world.


Responsible Parties

Harms are driven by the pharmaceutical industry. It’s gigantic — $1 trillion a year in revenue even before Covid-19. Toxic Covid-19 shots, useless treatments including Paxlovid and Remdesivir, and medicines to treat vaccine injury (including a sharp increase in myocarditis cases) will generate hundreds of billions of dollars of additional profits for Pharma. Pharmaceutical industry executives are avaricious, predatory, and they absolutely do not care who they hurt and kill. Many are also likely eugenicists who want to shrink the size of the global population.

Grifter billionaire psychopaths — including Bill Gates, Klaus Schwab, and Alain Mérieux — gravitate towards vaccines because they see the opportunity to vastly increase their wealth while inflicting pain. Their billions of dollars buy them talent — the best management consultants, the best PR firms, and the best private Psy-Ops firms. They also purchased the global public health system, the political system, and the regulatory state. They clearly want to take over the world and enslave (via chronic illness and twice yearly injections of gene modifying substances) anyone who is not a billionaire.

But the genocide also relies on the participation of bourgeois civil society. As we have seen over the last two years, bougiecrats are gleeful about participating in their own self-destruction.

Yes, Pharma propaganda, marketing, and psy-ops are very good. Over the last forty years, the average person just did not know about the dangers of vaccines. But at this point, there is more than enough information in the public square about the dangers of these products (just look around for gawdsakes!) for the bourgeoisie to opt out of shots. And yet they drive themselves to their own demise.

Self-preservation is the most fundamental of all human instincts, more primal even than sex. Yet the most educated class in human history has lost its ability to feel the urgent necessity to protect one’s own life and protect their kids from those who are harming them.

All of our elite institutions failed over the last two years. The fact that Harvard, Princeton, Yale, and Columbia require staff and students to be vaccinated with useless toxic Covid-19 shots shows that almost no one at these institutions is capable of understanding basic statistics nor risk benefit analysis. Why do these institutions even exist at this point?

I think there is a common factor that explains the participation of the bourgeoisie in their own self-destruction and the failure of all of our institutions to respond appropriately to a virus that could have been handled with existing off the shelf medicines.

We are in the midst of a mass-poisoning-event.

As I explained above, the children born after 1986 are massively over-vaccinated. But wide-scale vaccine programs began in the 1960s with polio and measles so anyone who lived through those eras may be affected as well (albeit to a lesser degree). 2,021 nuclear weapons tests during the Cold War likely made matters worse.

A strong case can be made that the societal chaos we are experiencing — from a lack of fundamental self-preservation instincts to the inability to think critically — is evidence of society-wide neurological injury. People are not experiencing ennui, they are experiencing too much aluminum (and other toxic chemicals) in their brains. There is likely a dose response relationship as well — the more shots, the more crazy things become. And with globalization and concentrated wealth, neurologically injured psychopathic billionaires can inflict unprecedented harm around the world and turn global politics into their own live action version of Orwell’s 1984.

So the task before us is this:

1. We must opt out of the crazy and say no to their toxic drugs;

2. Detox from the toxic chemicals that already exist in our bodies; and

3. Build the better sane world out of the ashes of the collapse of mainstream society.

July 8, 2022 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | | Leave a comment

John Deere Engineers Really Aiming To Build Battery-Powered Harvesters?

By P Gosselin – No Tricks Zone – 8. July 2022

It’s hard to believe that an internationally renowned company like John Deere would be led down such a dubious technical route: electric powered heavy agricultural equipment.

Consider that a battery for a typical electric car weights half a ton. Imagine what it would need to weigh for a machine that weighs over 25 tons.

With diesel, harvesters can run day and night. Image: John Deere Company

Perhaps it’s just lip service to placate idiot politicians and activist groups. I wonder if Caterpillar is thinking along the same lines: powering its massive excavators with batteries?

Here’s a post I found at Facebook from Will F. Leeman and that I’m having a hard time to believe it’s true:

For those of you that think electric vehicles are the answer- this is a true story from a farmer in the Midwest- and I’m reposting it-
A close friend farms over 10,000 acres of corn in the midwest. The property is spread out over 3 counties. His operation is a “partnership farm” with John Deere. They use the larger farm operations as demonstration projects for the promotion and development of new equipment. He recently received a phone call from his John Deere representative, and they want the farm to go to electric tractors and combines in 2023. He currently has 5 diesel combines that cost $900,000 each that are traded in every 3 years. Also, over 10 really BIG tractors.
JD wants him to go all-electric soon.
He said: “Ok, I have some questions. How do I charge these combines when they are 3 counties away from the shop in the middle of a cornfield, in the middle of nowhere?”
“How do I run them 24 hours a day for 10 or 12 days straight when the harvest is ready, and the weather is coming in?”
“How do I get a 50,000+ lb. combine that takes up the width of an entire road back to the shop 20 miles away when the battery goes dead?”
There was dead silence on the other end of the phone.
When the corn is ready to harvest, it has to have the proper sugar and moisture content. If it is too wet, it has to be put in giant dryers that burn natural or propane gas, and lots of it. Harvest time is critical because if it degrades in sugar content or quality, it can drop the value of his crop by half a million dollars or more.
It is analyzed at the time of sale.
It is standard procedure to run these machines 10 to 12 days straight, 24 hours a day at peak harvest time.
When they need fuel, a tanker truck delivers it, and the machines keep going. John Deere’s only answer is “we’re working on it.”
They are being pushed by the lefty Dems in the government to force these electric machines on the farmer.
These people are out of control.
They are messing with the production of food crops that feed people and livestock… all in the name of their “green dream.”
Look for the cost of your box of cornflakes to triple in the next 24 months…”

As mentioned above, a harvester weighs some 50,000 lbs, which means the battery would have to weigh in the neighborhood of 25,000 pounds (staying proportional to an e-car battery). Note that an e-car’s energy is used mostly for moving the vehicle on a hard even surface. For a harvester, energy is not only needed for moving it on high rolling resistance surfaces, but also for driving all the mechanical equipment onboard needed for cutting, conveying and chopping up the crop. Consequently an even bigger and heavier battery would be needed.

One problem today with modern tractors and harvesters is weight. Farmers are concerned about excessive weight because they don’t want their equipment excessively compacting the soil. Adding 15 tons or more of weight just for batteries for being able to power the machinery for just a couple of hours would be horribly inefficient.

Of course batteries for small garden equipment might make some sense, but for heavy machinery that needs to operate non-stop for hours and hours seems technically very impractical.

But with today’s green energy cult movement, where common sense has been thrown overboard to make room for ideology, it should not surprise us if the story really is true.

July 8, 2022 Posted by | Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity, Timeless or most popular | Leave a comment

Is a Colonoscopy Worth the Risk?

By Dr. Joseph Mercola | October 16, 2019

Knowing your potential risk for developing cancer can help you weigh the risks against the benefits of different tests for your situation. According to the American Cancer Society,1 more than 16.9 million people in the U.S. have a history of cancer. At least 1.9 million new cases will be diagnosed in 2022, which does not include a diagnosis of carcinoma in situ (noninvasive cancer).

The society estimates 609,360 people will die from cancer in 2022, which is about 1,670 deaths per day. The four most common types include lung, breast, prostate and colorectal cancer. One of the screening tests commonly prescribed to rule out colorectal cancer is a colonoscopy.

Colorectal cancer can start in the colon or in the rectum but the two types are grouped together since they have many of the same characteristics.2 The society estimates that in 2022 there will be 106,180 new cases of colon cancer diagnosed and 44,850 new cases of rectal cancer. Although it remains the third leading cause of cancer-related deaths in men and women, the rate has been dropping for several decades.3

According to the Colorectal Cancer Alliance,4 the five-year survival rate has been rising and there are more than 1 million colorectal cancer survivors alive in the U.S. Knowing your risk factors and making lifestyle changes to prevent the development of colorectal cancer are the basis of the most recently published Rapid Recommendation of The BMJ initiative.5

In Many Cases Routine Colonoscopies Are Unnecessary

The 2019 practice guidelines published in The BMJ 6 recommend physicians use a tool to estimate an individual’s potential risk for developing colorectal cancer in the next 15 years. The team recommends that only those who have a risk of 3% or greater should undergo screening tests.

Current guidelines recommend screening for everyone over the age of 50, without regard to their individual risk. At the age of 50, this is typically less than 3%.7 The international panel reviewed scientific evidence and research data to evaluate the risks versus the benefits of colonoscopies.

They found their recommendations could accurately be applied to healthy people from 50 to 79 years who expected to live another 15 years. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends colorectal cancer screening for those over 50.8

Using data from across the U.S., they found the number who were up to date with their screening went up 1.4% from 2016 to 2018, representing an additional 3.5 million people.

In addition to asking if screening made a difference in health outcomes, The BMJ initiative team also attempted to differentiate the type of testing best used to screen for colorectal cancer.9 They recommended that those with a 3% risk or greater over the following 15 years could choose from one of four screening options.

The first was a fecal immunochemical test (FIT) done every year, or every two years depending upon their risk factors. Patients may also choose a single sigmoidoscopy or, the weakest recommendation from the team, a single colonoscopy.

Possibility of Cancer Compared to Screening Hazards

From their examination of the evidence, the team believed a yearly FIT, sigmoidoscopy or colonoscopy could reduce the incidence of cancer while a FIT every two years may not have an effect on incidence over 15 years. They wrote:

“Based on benefits, harms, and burdens of screening, the panel inferred that most informed individuals with a 15-year risk of colorectal cancer of 3% or higher are likely to choose screening, and most individuals with a risk of below 3% are likely to decline screening. Given varying values and preferences, optimal care will require shared decision making.”

The team determined that the risks associated with colorectal cancer screening outweighed the benefits in many cases. For instance, the risk of death from a colonoscopy from one source was 1 in 16,318 procedures evaluated.10 In the same analysis, the researchers also found 82 suffered serious complications.

Colonoscopies Are Not Risk Free

Although a colonoscopy is supposed to help find early tumor growth, one study reported a 17% rate of missed diagnosis.11 Other risks associated with a colonoscopy include worsening stool patterns and contributing to the growth of colorectal polyps or tumors.

Perforation of the colon during the exam has an incidence of 0.2% to 5% and is widely recognized as a serious complication associated with a high morbidity and mortality rate.12 The risk of perforation rises with the age of the patient and the presence of two or more other health conditions. One study showed 51.9 people per 1,000 whose colons were perforated died within the first 14 days.13

Dysbiosis may occur after using harsh laxatives to prepare for a colonoscopy. A study published in Cell14 suggested even a short-term course of laxative use could trigger an immune response. Research on an animal model15 found treatment eliminated one family of beneficial gut bacteria and allowed another to flourish. Even two weeks after completing the laxatives the bacteria showed reduced diversity.

Many experts agree you should opt for the lightest level of sedation possible, or none at all, as full anesthesia increases risks. Those who have sleep apnea, are obese, have high blood pressure or diabetes are at increased risk from the anesthesia.16 Across the U.S. 34.4% of those undergoing a colonoscopy used anesthesia.17

The use of anesthesia was associated with a 13% increased risk of experiencing complications within 30 days of the procedure and specifically associated with an increased risk of perforations of the colon and/or a stroke. The risk of complications varied by area, with those in the Northeast reporting an increase of any complication of 12%, but among those performed in the West this increased to 60%.

Researchers who conducted one study found an increased risk of aspiration pneumonia.18 Another19 sought to determine if the procedure could be successfully completed without any sedation. Patients were given the option of undergoing a colonoscopy without premedication and then evaluated immediately following the procedure, two and five days later.

The researchers asked about the severity of pain and willingness to consider the procedure again without sedation. When questioned, only 5% experienced no pain; 41% had mild pain; 34% reported moderate pain and 20% said they experienced severe pain. However, despite the level of pain experienced, 73% were willing to repeat it without sedation and only 18% said they would request sedation the next time.

Equipment Contamination Another Risk of Colonoscopies

A real risk of undergoing an endoscopy of any nature is chance of improper sterilization of the flexible scope. David Lewis, Ph.D., and I discuss this in the short video above. One issue is the inability to thoroughly clean the inside of the scope.

Lewis describes a problem that he states is commonly experienced by physicians. During the examination the physician may be unable to see through the scope and is unsuccessful in the attempt to flush it using the air/water channel as it is clogged with human tissue from a past exam.20 The scope must be retracted and another one used.

Since endoscopes have sensitive equipment attached, they cannot be heat sterilized. Unfortunately, manufacturers have not been made to produce a scope with the ability to be heat sterilized. As Lewis points out:21 “We can put a Rover on Mars, surely we can build a flexible endoscope that we can put in an autoclave.”

These expensive tools are not disposable but require sterilization between each patient. Lewis reports that up to 80% of hospitals are sterilizing the flexible endoscopes with glutaraldehyde (Cidex). On testing, he finds this has complicated the process as it does not dissolve tissue in the endoscope but rather preserves it.

When sharp biopsy tools are run through the tube, patient material from past testing is scraped off and potentially carried into your body. This is why it’s important to find a clinic or hospital that uses peracetic acid to thoroughly sterilize the equipment by dissolving proteins found in the flexible endoscopes. Before scheduling any endoscopic examination call to ask how the equipment is sterilized between patients.

Tailor Lifestyle Choices to Reduce the Risk of Colon Cancer

Like many other types of cancer, colorectal cancer is often preventable. Research suggests only 5% to 10% of all cancer cases are due to genetic defects, while the rest are linked to environmental and lifestyle factors.22 The Mayo Clinic writes that one-third of the most diagnosed cancers in the U.S. could be prevented through diet and nutrition alone, i.e., with plenty of fresh fruits and vegetables.23

The extent that diet contributes to cancer death varies by the type of cancer, which researchers find is associated by as much as 70% in the case of colorectal cancer.24 For example, long-term exposure to chlorinated drinking water can increase the risk of leukemia, colorectal cancer and bladder cancer.

There are several strategies you can use to lower your risk of developing this potentially deadly disease as it is impacted by your diet, vitamin D levels, exercise and alcohol intake.

Sources and References

July 8, 2022 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | Leave a comment