Will COVID Shots Drive Mutated Variants?

Will COVID shots drive the mutation of SARS-CoV-2, creating ever more variants? Or are the mutations primarily occurring in unvaccinated people? In the video report above, The Last American Vagabond host dives into the scientific research to find out.

As noted by The Vagabond, unvaccinated Americans are actually in the majority, still, despite what you’re hearing on the news. Those saying “no” to participating in a medical gene modification experiment are not a small fringe group.

We are the majority, at just over half (51%) of the United States population over the age of 18, as of July 12, 2021. (More specifically, 56% have received one dose, and 49% are fully vaccinated, which for Moderna and Pfizer means having received two doses.1)

Based on the scientific evidence, the narrative that unvaccinated people are viral factories for more dangerous variants is simply false. Worse, it’s the complete opposite of the truth and hides the fact that mass vaccination may be putting us all in a far direr situation than necessary.

Vaccines Drive Viruses to Mutate

As explained in “Vaccines Are Pushing Pathogens to Evolve,” published in Quanta Magazine,2 “Just as antibiotics breed resistance in bacteria, vaccines can incite changes that enable diseases to escape their control.”

The article details the history of the anti-Marek’s disease vaccine for chickens, first introduced in 1970. Today, we’re on the third version of this vaccine, as within a decade, it stops working. The reason? The virus has mutated to evade the vaccine. The virus is also becoming increasingly deadly and more difficult to treat.

A 2015 paper3 in PLOS Biology tested the theory that vaccines are driving the mutation of the herpesvirus causing Marek’s disease in chickens. To do that, they vaccinated 100 chickens and kept 100 unvaccinated. All of the birds were then infected with varying strains of the virus. Some strains were more virulent and dangerous than others.

Over the course of the birds’ lives, the unvaccinated ones shed more of the least virulent strains into the environment, while the vaccinated ones shed more of the most virulent strains. As noted in the Quanta Magazine article:4

“The findings suggest that the Marek’s vaccine encourages more dangerous viruses to proliferate. This increased virulence might then give the viruses the means to overcome birds’ vaccine-primed immune responses and sicken vaccinated flocks.”

Vaccinated People Can Serve as Breeding Ground for Mutations

As noted by Reilly, before 2021, it was quite clear that vaccines push viruses to mutate into more dangerous strains. The only question was, to what extent? Now all of a sudden, we’re to believe conventional science has been wrong all along.

Here’s another example: NPR as recently as February 9, 2021, reported that “vaccines can contribute to virus mutations.” NPR science correspondent Richard Harris noted:5

“You may have heard that bacteria can develop resistance to antibiotics and, in a worst-case scenario, render the drugs useless. Something similar can also happen with vaccines, though, with less serious consequences.

This worry has arisen mostly in the debate over whether to delay a second vaccine shot so more people can get the first shot quickly. Paul Bieniasz, a Howard Hughes investigator at the Rockefeller University, says that gap would leave people with only partial immunity for longer than necessary.”

According to Bieniasz, partially vaccinated individuals “might serve as sort of a breeding ground for the virus to acquire new mutations.” This is the exact claim now being attributed to unvaccinated people by those who don’t understand natural selection.

It’s important to realize that viruses mutate all the time, and if you have a vaccine that doesn’t block infection completely, then the virus will mutate to evade the immune response within that person. That is one of the distinct features of the COVID shots — they’re not designed to block infection. They allow infection to occur and at best lessen the symptoms of that infection. As noted by Harris:6

“This evolutionary pressure is present for any vaccine that doesn’t completely block infection … Many vaccines, apparently, including the COVID vaccines, do not completely prevent a virus from multiplying inside someone even though these vaccines do prevent serious illness.”

In short, like bacteria mutate and get stronger to survive the assault of antibacterial agents, viruses can mutate in vaccinated individuals who contract the virus, and in those, it will mutate to evade the immune system. In an unvaccinated person, on the other hand, the virus does not encounter the same evolutionary pressure to mutate into something stronger. So, if SARS-CoV-2 does end up mutating into more lethal strains, then mass vaccination is the most likely driver.

COVID Variants Are More Similar Than You Think

Now, the fearmongering over variants is just that: fearmongering. So far, while some SARS-CoV-2 variants appear to spread more easily, they are also less dangerous. The Delta variant, for example, is associated with more conventional flu-like symptoms like runny nose and sore throat than the hallmark COVID-19 symptoms involving shortness of breath and loss of smell.7

In an interview for the documentary “Planet Lockdown,”8 Michael Yeadon, Ph.D., a life science researcher and former vice-president and chief scientist at Pfizer, pointed out the fraud being perpetrated with regard to variants. He actually refers to them as “simians,” because they’re near-identical to the original. And, as such, they pose no greater threat than the original.

“It’s quite normal for RNA viruses like SARS-CoV-2, when it replicates, to make typographical errors,” Yeadon explains. “It’s got a very good error detection, error correction system so it doesn’t make too many typos, but it does make some, and those are called ‘variants.’

It’s really important to know that if you find the variant that’s most different from the sequence identified in Wuhan, that variance … is only 0.3% different from the original sequence.

I’ll say it another way. If you find the most different variance, it’s 99.7% identical to the original one, and I can assure you … that amount of difference is absolutely NOT possibly able to represent itself to you as a different virus.”

Your immune system is a multifaceted system that allows your body to mount defenses against all sorts of threats. Parasites, fungi, bacteria and viruses are the main threat categories. Each of these invades and threatens you in completely different ways, and your immune system has ways of dealing with all of them, using a variety of mechanisms.

Whether you’re going to be susceptible to variants has very little to do with whether or not you have antibodies against SARS-CoV-2, because antibodies are not your primary defense against viruses, T cells are. What this means then, is that getting booster shots for different variants is not going to help, because these shots do not strengthen your T cell immunity.

The importance of T cells has been known for a long time, and their role in COVID-19 was confirmed early on in the pandemic. Scientists wanted to find out if patients who recovered from SARS-CoV-1, responsible for the SARS outbreak some 17 years ago, might have immunity against SARS-CoV-2. As it turns out, they did.

They still had memory T cells against SARS-CoV-1, and those cells also recognized SARS-CoV-2, despite being only 80% similar. Now, if a 20% difference was not enough to circumvent the immune system of these patients, why should you be concerned with a variant that is at most 0.3% different from the original SARS-CoV-2?

“When your government scientists tell you that a variant that’s 0.3% different from SARS-CoV-2 could masquerade as a new virus and be a threat to your health, you should know, and I’m telling you, they are lying,” Yeadon says.

“If they’re lying, and they are, why is the pharmaceutical industry making top-up [booster] vaccines? … There’s absolutely no possible justification for their manufacture.”

Mutations Are Good for Vaccine Business

Of course, by pushing fear of variants, vaccine makers ensure a steady supply of people willing to participate as guinea pigs in their for-profit business scheme. Pfizer plans to ask for EUA authorization for a third COVID booster shot in August 2021, Bloomberg reports.9

According to Pfizer’s head of research, Dr. Mikael Dolsten, initial data suggest a third dose of the current Pfizer shot can raise neutralizing antibody levels by anywhere from fivefold to 10-fold.10 The company is also working on variant-specific formulations.

Dolsten points to data from Israel, where Pfizer’s mRNA injection was used exclusively, which shows a recent uptick in breakthrough cases. This suggests protection starts to wane around the six-months mark. For now, the FDA is not recommending boosters,11 but that can change at any moment, and most likely will.

Pfizer recently announced it intends to raise the price on its COVID shot once the pandemic wanes,12 and during a recent investor conference, Pfizer’s chief financial officer Frank D’Amelio said there’s “significant opportunity” for profits once the market shifts to annual boosters.13

In an April 2021 article, The Defender reported expected profits from current COVID shots and boosters in coming years:14

Pfizer expects a minimum revenue of $15 billion to $30 billion in 2021 alone
Moderna expects sales of $18.4 billion in 2021; Barclays analyst Gena Wang forecasts the company’s 2022 revenue to be somewhere around $12.2 billion and $11.4 billion in 2023
Johnson & Johnson expects sales of $10 billion in 2021

Vaccine Treadmill Ahead

The way things have been going, it seems inevitable that we’re facing a vaccine treadmill, where new variants will “necessitate” boosters on a regular basis. Boosters will also drive the “need” for vaccine passports to keep track of it all. As reported by The Defender:15

“Annual COVID booster shots are music to the ears of investors. But some independent scientists warn16 that trying to outsmart the virus with booster shots designed to address the next variant could backfire, creating an endless wave of new variants, each more virulent and transmissible than the one before …

According to Rob Verkerk Ph.D., founder, scientific and executive director of Alliance for Natural Health International, variants can become more virulent and transmissible, while also including immune (or vaccine) escape mutations if we continue on the vaccine treadmill — trying to develop new vaccines that outsmart the virus.

Verkerk said ‘if we put all our eggs’ in the basket of vaccines that target the very part of the virus that is most subject to mutation, we place a selection pressure on the virus that favors the development of immune escape variants.”

Vaccinologist Dr. Geert Vanden Bosche,17 whose resume includes work with GSK Biologicals, Novartis Vaccines, Solvay Biologicals and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, published an open letter18 to the World Health Organization, March 6, 2021, in which he warned that implementing a global mass vaccination campaign during the height of the pandemic could create an “uncontrollable monster” where evolutionary pressure will force the emergence of new and potentially more dangerous mutations.

“There can be no doubt that continued mass vaccination campaigns will enable new, more infectious viral variants to become increasingly dominant and ultimately result in a dramatic incline in new cases despite enhanced vaccine coverage rates. There can be no doubt either that this situation will soon lead to complete resistance of circulating variants to the current vaccines,” Bossche wrote.19

Will COVID-19 Shots Save Lives? Probably Not

As noted in the BMJ paper20 “Will COVID-19 Vaccines Save Lives? Current Trials Aren’t Designed to Tell Us,” by associate editor Peter Doshi, while the world is betting on gene modification “vaccines” as the solution to the pandemic, the trials are not even designed to answer key questions such as whether the shots will actually save lives.

In an October 23, 2020, response21 to that paper, Dr. Allan Cunningham, a retired pediatrician, provided a summary of papers dating back to 1972, showing vaccines have been notoriously ineffective. In many cases, deaths have actually risen in tandem with increased vaccination rates, suggesting they may actually have a net negative effect on mortality.

Cunningham also lists studies arguing that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has exaggerated flu mortality statistics in an effort to increase uptake of the flu vaccine. They’re clearly doing the same thing with COVID-19 mortality statistics. If people had not been so misled by government authorities about the true lethality of COVID-19, half the country would not have rolled up their sleeves to take an experimental gene modification injection. As noted by Cunningham:22

“2020: A 14-year study finds that influenza vaccines are associated with an 8.9% increase in the risk of all-cause mortality in elderly men … During six A/H3N2-predominant seasons their all-cause mortality increase was 16.6%! …

The unfortunate history of influenza vaccines should warn us against repeating the process with Covid-19 vaccines. Peter Doshi may be understating the case when he suggests that influenza vaccines have not saved lives. The foregoing history and other observations suggest that in whole populations over the long run seasonal flu campaigns have actually cost lives …

This idea is hard to grasp in the face of massive publicity and reports of ‘vaccine effectiveness.’ The vaccines provide modest short-term protection against seasonal flu, but the VE studies completely ignore adverse effects (e.g. high fever, seizures, narcolepsy, oculo-respiratory syndrome, Guillain-Barre syndrome) … We don’t need another vaccine treadmill that could do more harm than good.”

Natural Selection Will Win

As we move forward, it’s really important that we not cast aside hard-won science lessons in favor of politically-driven propaganda. The propaganda is not science. Do not confuse the two.

If you don’t have these pathogens evolving in response to vaccines, then we really don’t understand natural selection. ~ Evolutionary Biologist Paul Ewald, University of Louisville

If there’s a silver lining to this whole mess, it’s that more and more people are starting to get educated about health, biology, virology and vaccinology. These are heady topics, but to begin to tease out truth from fiction, many are now taking the time to listen to doctors and scientists who are explaining the science behind it all.

The obvious and blatant lies and propaganda and over-the-top censorship is starting to wake up tens of millions of people in the U.S. about the vaccine frauds; not only the COVID jabs but the whole lot of them. It’s getting easier by the day to tell the quacks from the real McCoy, because the truth tellers will actually explain how things work, whereas the propagandists juggle catchphrases and attack those who ask questions.

In closing, here are two more excerpts from articles detailing the inevitability of vaccines driving the mutation of viruses through natural selection. Quanta Magazine writes:23

“Recent research suggests … that some pathogen populations are adapting in ways that help them survive in a vaccinated world … Just as the mammal population exploded after dinosaurs went extinct because a big niche opened up for them, some microbes have swept in to take the place of competitors eliminated by vaccines.

Immunization is also making once-rare or nonexistent genetic variants of pathogens more prevalent, presumably because vaccine-primed antibodies can’t as easily recognize and attack shape-shifters that look different from vaccine strains.

And vaccines being developed against some of the world’s wilier pathogens — malaria, HIV, anthrax — are based on strategies that could, according to evolutionary models and lab experiments, encourage pathogens to become even more dangerous.24 Evolutionary biologists aren’t surprised that this is happening.

A vaccine is a novel selection pressure placed on a pathogen, and if the vaccine does not eradicate its target completely, then the remaining pathogens with the greatest fitness — those able to survive, somehow, in an immunized world — will become more common.

‘If you don’t have these pathogens evolving in response to vaccines,’ said Paul Ewald, an evolutionary biologist at the University of Louisville, ‘then we really don’t understand natural selection.'”

Similarly, Alliance for Natural Health International points out:25

“‘Mutants of concern’ are clearly on most of our radars. An important question is: are they growing or declining in frequency? In some countries, including ones where vaccinations have occurred at a high rate … they are increasing and have already become dominant … That should be a very large, flappy, red flag to anyone who has a reasonable grasp of evolutionary selection pressure on viruses with pathogenic capacity.

More infection — including more silent infection among asymptomatic people (even if reduced by vaccination) — provides more opportunities for mutation. If we continue to drag out the time it takes for the virus to just become another endemic component of our virosphere, there will be more opportunities and more mutations. Not dissimilar to a game of Russian roulette — so why don’t we start counting our chances?

If variants become both more transmissible and more virulent, while also including immune (or vaccine) escape mutations — all trends we are witnessing in some parts of the world — we could be in deep trouble down the road.

At the very least, we stay on the vaccine (or monoclonal antibody) treadmill, trying to develop new vaccines (or monoclonal antibody therapies) that outsmart the virus when we should know better; that the virus will continue to outsmart us if we maintain such intense selection pressure on it …

Let me throw in one more concept that is ecological in nature: herd immunity. The base equation used by government scientists that estimates around 70% of the population need to be vaccinated or exposed to the virus to achieve herd immunity is flawed.

It is predicated on a number of assumptions that don’t apply: equal mixing of populations and successful sterilization of the virus in vaccinated people and those exposed to wild virus being just two. This just isn’t the case. In the real world, the situation is much more complex than in an idealized model.

Randolph and Barreiro remind us in their review26 in the journal Immunity that ‘[e]pidemiological and immunological factors, such as population structure, variation in transmission dynamics between populations, and waning immunity, will lead to variation in the extent of indirect protection conferred by herd immunity.’

For vaccinated people, antigen-specific antibodies bind firmly to virus particles and competitively oust natural antibodies, giving vaccinated people potentially less cross-immunity to mutant variants that are more infectious and the wave of infectivity continues.”


Lowers Blood Pressure More Efficiently Than a Prescription

A June 2021 study using high resistance Inspiratory Muscle Strength Training (IMST) demonstrated a reduction in blood pressure measurements as well as aerobic exercise or medication.1 High blood pressure, which is also called hypertension, is one of the most prevalent health conditions in the U.S. It is estimated that 47.3% of U.S. adults, or 116 million people, have high blood pressure.2

High blood pressure can increase your risk of a heart attack and stroke. The American Heart Association reported that the death rate from this condition increased nearly 11% from 2005 to 2015.3 Despite advances in education, screening and treatment, cardiovascular disease remains the leading cause of death in the world, claiming the lives of 659,041 people in the U.S. in 2019 (latest data available).4

The American Heart Association5 recommends making lifestyle changes that include changing your diet, monitoring your blood pressure, limiting alcohol, maintaining a healthy weight and getting exercise.

When these measures do not reduce your blood pressure to within normal limits the standard recommendation is high blood pressure medications.6 The types of medication can include diuretics, beta blockers, ACE inhibitors and calcium channel blockers — which may be prescribed individually or in a combination as determined by your doctor. Each comes with a list of possible side effects that may include weakness, fatigue, a loss of taste and swollen feet and ankles.7

If you have high blood pressure or would like to help reduce your risk of getting high blood pressure, the results of this recent study are encouraging. There are additional strategies you can use that I discuss below.

Breathing This Way May Lower Blood Pressure as Well as Drugs

The current study8 is the strongest evidence presented yet that IMST may play a role in reducing blood pressure, thus reducing the risks of cardiovascular disease. Although aerobic exercise is one foundational strategy for controlling blood pressure, fewer than 40% meet the current recommended guidelines.9

Lead author Daniel Craighead is an assistant research professor in the department of Integrative Physiology. Researchers were seeking a time efficient way of helping to reduce blood pressure, since more than 60% of people were not meeting exercise guidelines. Craighead commented in a press release:10

“There are a lot of lifestyle strategies that we know can help people maintain cardiovascular health as they age. But the reality is, they take a lot of time and effort and can be expensive and hard for some people to access. IMST can be done in five minutes in your own home while you watch TV.

We found that not only is it more time-efficient than traditional exercise programs, the benefits may be longer lasting.”

IMST was originally developed for critically ill patients with respiratory diseases to help improve the strength of their inspiratory muscles. The strategy uses a handheld device that provides resistance to the user as they inhale vigorously, thus strengthening muscles.

Initially, physicians recommended a 30-minute program each day with a low level of resistance. However, recent tests using high resistance six days a week were initiated to determine if the participant would reap the same benefits with respiratory, cardiovascular and cognitive improvements.

In the most recent study researchers engaged 36 adults ages 50 to 79 who had above normal systolic blood pressure. Half the participants used high resistance IMST and half used lower resistance IMST for six weeks. At the end of the intervention the group using high resistance IMST experienced a nine-point reduction in their systolic blood pressure.11

Respiratory Conditioning May Benefit Cognitive Function

Six weeks after stopping the program, the group maintained most of their improvement. Additionally, the researchers measured a 45% improvement in vascular endothelial function, an increase in the level of nitric oxide and a reduction in markers of oxidative stress and inflammation. The researchers were encouraged by the compliance rate in the group as they completed 95% of the sessions.

Senior author of the study, Doug Seals, is a distinguished professor of integrative physiology. In his past research, data demonstrated that postmenopausal women don’t get as much benefit from aerobic exercise as men do. However, in the current study, IMST improved markers in postmenopausal women as much as in men. “That’s noteworthy,” Seals said.

Preliminary results also suggest that it improves some cognitive function and physical fitness. The researchers are unable to explain how using IMST can lower blood pressure, but they postulate it has something to do with raising the level of nitric oxide. Craighead uses IMST in his marathon training. He says:12

“If you’re running a marathon, your respiratory muscles get tired and begin to steal blood from your skeletal muscles. The idea is that if you build up endurance of those respiratory muscles, that won’t happen and your legs won’t get as fatigued. It’s easy to do, it doesn’t take long, and we think it has a lot of potential to help a lot of people.”

There are some physiological conditions that contraindicate IMST,13 including a history of spontaneous pneumothorax, a pneumothorax related to a traumatic injury that isn’t healed and a ruptured eardrum that is not fully healed.

Some asthma patients with unstable disease or individuals with abnormally low perception of dyspnea may also be unsuitable candidates. Researchers encourage people who want to consider trying IMST to first consult with their health care provider.14

What Does Blood Pressure Measure?

Your blood pressure measurement is an indication of how much pressure exists within your arterial system. As blood moves through your arteries, it places pressure along the walls of the vessels.

Your systolic blood pressure is the pressure exerted on the arteries when the heart beats and is the top number in the measurement. Your diastolic blood pressure is the pressure in the blood vessels as the heart muscle relaxes between beats.

The systolic blood pressure is always higher than the diastolic blood pressure. Blood pressure measurements are given in units of millimeters of mercury (mm Hg). In 2017, the American Heart Association and the American College of Cardiology,15 in collaboration with nine other health organizations,16 developed new guidelines lowering the systolic and diastolic blood pressure numbers for the diagnosis of high blood pressure.

Previously, elevated blood pressure started at 140/90 for people younger than age 65 and 150/80 for people 65 and older.17 The new guidelines were created to help address high blood pressure earlier and thus hopefully reduce the risk of heart attack and stroke. There are five categories of blood pressure measurements that are recognized by the American Heart Association.18

Normal blood pressure is consistently 120/80 or less
Elevated blood pressure is consistently 120-129/80
Hypertension Stage 1 is blood pressure that is consistently 130-139/80-89
Hypertension Stage 2 is blood pressure that is consistently 140/90 or greater

A hypertensive crisis occurs when blood pressure readings are suddenly 180/120 or greater, which may trigger organ damage with symptoms that include chest pain, shortness of breath, changes in vision or difficulty speaking. It is crucial you seek emergency medical treatment immediately.

Risks Associated With High Blood Pressure

There are multiple risks associated with chronic high blood pressure. These include kidney disease and kidney failure, heart attack, stroke, vision loss, heart failure and sexual dysfunction.19

High blood pressure also increases your risk for peripheral artery disease (PAD). This occurs when the arteries in your extremities, stomach or head become narrowed. It causes pain and fatigue when the arteries cannot deliver enough oxygen to the muscles.20 Another recent risk factor of high blood pressure is the increased risk of death with COVID-19.

If high blood pressure is allowed to continue it can also lead to vascular dementia.21 In one study,22 researchers found that older adults who had a consistently elevated average systolic blood pressure had a greater risk for brain lesions and tangles associated with Alzheimer’s disease. In this study, the average pressure in the senior adults was 134/71. As reported in the press release:23

“Researchers found that the risk of brain lesions was higher in people with higher average systolic blood pressure across the years. For a person with one standard deviation above the average systolic blood pressure, for example 147 mmHg versus 134 mmHg, there was a 46 percent increased risk of having one or more brain lesions, specifically infarcts.

For comparison, the effect of an increase by one standard deviation on the risk of having one or more brain infarcts was the equivalent of nine years of brain aging.”

This Also Raises Nitric Oxide to Relax Blood Vessels

Researchers in the current study postulated that one of the reasons the breathing exercise helps reduce blood pressure may be because it helps release nitric oxide into the arterial system. Another way to get nitric oxide naturally is using a simple and quick exercise developed by Dr. Zach Bush.

The exercise is called the Nitric Oxide Dump and is an efficient anaerobic activity that works better the more you do it. I demonstrate a version of that work out in the video above. The routine works best if you complete it three times a day and wait at least 2 hours between each session.

This allows nitric oxide to be synthesized so it can be released. Benefits to naturally releasing nitric oxide include relaxing your arterial system and potentially lowering blood pressure, improving age-related decline in muscle mitochondria and reducing insulin resistance.

For further explanation of the many benefits behind releasing nitric oxide naturally, see “Fitness Checkup: Why You Need to Try the Nitric Oxide Dump Workout.”

These Strategies May Also Help Lower Blood Pressure

In addition to strategies you can use to reduce your blood pressure, it’s important to note one study24 published in the Journal of the American College of Cardiology demonstrated there are differences between taking a central aortic blood pressure, which is an invasive procedure, and a peripheral blood pressure using a cuff on your arm or leg.

To reduce the potential inaccuracies in taking a peripheral blood pressure, several factors must be taken into consideration. These include the size of the cuff and relationship to your arm, the placement of the blood pressure cuff, your body position and activity during blood pressure reading and nicotine, caffeine or alcohol intake prior to having your blood pressure measured.

You’ll find further explanations and ways to reduce potential inaccuracies in “Blood Pressure Testing Is Mostly Inaccurate.” You must also take care to reduce the effect of identified factors that contribute to high blood pressure. These include insulin and leptin resistance,25 elevated uric acid levels,26 lead exposure27 and air28 and sound pollution.29 Below are several additional lifestyle strategies that can help lower your blood pressure naturally.

Optimize your vitamin D level — Vitamin D deficiency is associated with both arterial stiffness and hypertension.30 For optimal health, maintain a vitamin D level between 60 and 80 nanograms per milliliter year-round.

Mind your sodium-to-potassium ratio — According to Dr. Lawrence Appel,31 lead researcher on the DASH diet and director of the Welch Center for Prevention, Epidemiology and Clinical Research at Johns Hopkins, your diet as a whole is the key to controlling hypertension — not salt reduction alone. He believes a major part of the equation is this balance of minerals — i.e., most people need less sodium and more potassium, calcium and magnesium.

Consider intermittent fasting — Intermittent fasting is one of the most effective ways I’ve found to normalize your insulin/leptin sensitivity, which is a root cause of hypertension.

Exercise regularly — A comprehensive fitness program can go a long way toward regaining your insulin sensitivity and normalizing your blood pressure. If you are insulin resistant, you’ll also want to include weight training. When you work individual muscle groups, you increase blood flow to those muscles, and good blood flow will increase your insulin sensitivity.

Walk barefoot — Going barefoot will help you ground to the earth. Experiments show that walking barefoot outside (also referred to as Earthing or grounding) improves blood viscosity and blood flow, which help regulate blood pressure. So, do yourself a favor and ditch your shoes now and then.
Grounding also calms your sympathetic nervous system, which supports your heart rate variability. This in turn promotes homeostasis, or balance, in your autonomic nervous system. In essence, anytime you improve heart rate variability, you’re improving your entire body and all of its functions.

Address your stress — The connection between stress and hypertension is well documented, yet still does not receive the emphasis it deserves. Suppressed negative emotions such as fear, anger and sadness can severely limit your ability to cope with the unavoidable everyday stresses of life. It’s not the stressful events themselves that are harmful, but your lack of ability to cope.
The good news is, strategies exist to quickly and effectively transform your suppressed, negative emotions, and relieve stress. My preferred method is the Emotional Freedom Techniques (EFT), an easy to learn, easy to use technique for releasing negative emotions. EFT combines visualization with calm, relaxed breathing, while employing gentle tapping to “reprogram” deeply seated emotional patterns.

Essential oils — Several essential oils can also be helpful, including lavender, ylang-ylang, marjoram, bergamot, rose, frankincense, rosemary, lemon balm and clary sage. In one study,32 scientists found exposure to essential oil for one hour effectively reduced stress as measured by a reduction in the participants’ heart rate and blood pressure.
The effect was only temporary, however. In another, similar study,33 inhalation of a blend of lavender, ylang-ylang, neroli and marjoram essential oils was associated with a reduction in blood pressure and cortisol secretion, which is often elevated during stress.


Weekly Health Quiz: Spike Protein and Real Estate

1 Recent animal research shows the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein can cause myocarditis by:

Triggering an exaggerated immune response — a cytokine storm — in the heart cells

Animal research shows the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein subunit directly damages the heart and causes myocarditis by triggering an exaggerated immune response — a cytokine storm — in the heart cells. Learn more.

Permanently attaching to and poking holes in the heart cells
Activating the innate immune system
Deactivating the ACE2 receptor on the heart cells

2 Powerful investment firms are purchasing a sizeable number of U.S. homes, often over asking price, in order to:

Offer them back to Americans at a discounted price
Turn them into single-family rentals

While they’re competing with middle-class Americans for the homes, the average American has no chance of winning a home over an investment firm, which may pay 20% to 50% over asking price, in cash, sometimes scooping up entire neighborhoods at once so they can turn them into rentals. Learn more.

Ensure that everyone has a place to live
Equitably distribute them to low- and middle-class families

3 What’s at stake if society truly goes cashless?

Loss of your local bank
Hidden fees could become the norm
Your privacy and your freedom

But, in the DW documentary “Cash or Card — Will COVID-19 Kill Cash?” producer Kersten Schüssler asks some important questions, like what’s at stake if society truly goes cashless? The answer is both your privacy and your freedom. Learn more.

You’ll have to upgrade your cellphone annually

4 What is the Fourth Industrial Revolution?

Reverting from chemical to organic and biodynamic farming
A mind-body-spirit centered approach to medicine
The transition to individualized medicine
The merger of digital, physical and biological systems, and the reliance on technological surveillance rather than the rule of law to maintain public order

The Fourth Industrial Revolution refers to the merging of digital, physical and biological systems, and the reliance on technological surveillance rather than the rule of law to maintain public order. The Fourth Industrial Revolution will transform not only how we live and interact but who we are as a human species, as man will ultimately be merged with machine. Learn more.

5 Which of the following are totalitarian brainwashing tactics routinely deployed in American institutions of learning?

Focus on race and gender divisions and political correctness

Totalitarian brainwashing tactics routinely deployed in American institutions of higher education include anti-American propaganda, the creation of race and gender divisions, the promotion of collective guilt and stifling political correctness enforced through shaming and cancel culture. Learn more.

Forcing students to read classical works of fiction
Memorizing the U.S. Constitution
Comparing systems of government within a historical context

6 There are several ways to make a virus more lethal. According to Dr. Steven Quay, one way to do that is to:

Genetically manipulate the virus with mouse cells in a lab and then release the cells in a human vector
Insert a new synthetic amino acid into a pathogen and then do what is called a “serial passage” that passes through a series of animal and human tissues

If you know what you want to alter, you can insert a new synthetic amino acid into the pathogen. If you don’t have a precise idea of the change you want to achieve, but you want the pathogen to adapt from an animal to a human, you can do what is called serial passage, where the virus is passed through a series of animal and human tissues. Learn more.

Cross the virus with a known pathogen and allow the pathogen to mutate
Allow the virus to grow unhindered with the help of carcinogenic compounds and splice it into the DNA of another dangerous pathogen


Will mRNA Flu Vaccines Get Emergency Use Authorization Next?

As detailed in “How COVID Vaccines Can Cause Blood Clots and More,” the gene-based COVID-19 injections are a disaster in the making. mRNA-based “vaccines” have been in the works for years, and were never perfected. Now all of a sudden, despite evidence of serious danger, a number of mRNA “vaccines” are in the pipeline.

Among them is a COVID-flu RNA vaccine combo, which is currently being tested on ferrets,1,2,3 and several different mRNA seasonal influenza vaccines,4 which have already entered human trials. As reported by The Verge, July 7, 2021:5

“Moderna gave its mRNA-based seasonal flu vaccine to the first set of volunteers in a clinical trial, the pharmaceutical company announced today. The start of the trial marks the next stage of the company’s work on this type of vaccine technology after the overwhelming success of its COVID-19 vaccine, which was built using the same strategy …

People who get an mRNA vaccine are injected with tiny snippets of genetic material from the target virus. Their cells use that genetic information to build bits of the virus, which the body’s immune system learns to fight against …

Moderna is the second group to start testing its mRNA flu shot in human trials — Sanofi and Translate Bio kicked off a trial this summer. Pfizer and BioNTech have been interested in mRNA flu shots for a few years, and they’re pushing forward with those plans as well.”

Moderna Tests Quadrivalent mRNA Flu ‘Vaccine’

Moderna plans to enroll 180 participants aged 18 and older in its Phase 1/2 randomized, stratified, observer-blind, dose-ranging6 study of mRNA-1010, a quadrivalent flu “vaccine” that aims to protect against seasonal influenza A H1N1, H3N2 and influenza B Yamagata and Victoria.

In a press release, Moderna’s CEO Stephanie Bancel stated the company hopes to be able to create combination vaccines to protect against several different infections at the same time, such as influenza, COVID-19 and other respiratory infections:7

“Respiratory combination vaccines are an important pillar of our overall mRNA vaccine strategy,” Bancel said. “We believe that the advantages of mRNA vaccines include the ability to combine different antigens to protect against multiple viruses and the ability to rapidly respond to the evolution of respiratory viruses, such as influenza, SARS-CoV-2 and RSV.

Our vision is to develop an mRNA combination vaccine so that people can get one shot each fall for high efficacy protection against the most problematic respiratory viruses.”

The rapid push to replace conventional flu vaccines with mRNA-based alternatives — before mRNA COVID shots have even been licensed — raises the question, and risk, of whether mRNA flu shots might be getting emergency use authorization (EUA) next.

Worldwide, 3 million to 5 million people come down with influenza, which places “substantial burden on health care systems,” according to Moderna,8 so it’s not hard to imagine the U.S. Food and Drug Administration giving EUA to any number of shots under the justification that we need to protect the health care system from being overloaded with respiratory infection cases.

Vaccines and Virus Interference

Whether combo mRNA shots against several different types of respiratory viruses will actually work or have an even worse disaster potential than the COVID shots remains to be seen. What we do know is that conventional flu vaccines have the potential to cause viral interference with the mRNA COVID shots, essentially making you more prone to severe COVID-19 if you’ve received a conventional flu vaccine.

We discussed this in my May 2020 interview with Judy Mikovits, Ph.D. Dr. Michael Murray, a naturopathic physician and author, also pointed this out in his blog post, “Does Flu Shot Increase COVID-19 Risk?”9 The trend was particularly evident in Italy at the beginning of the COVID pandemic, where many elderly succumbed to the infection.

As it turns out, Italy had introduced a new, more potent type of flu vaccine, called VIQCC, in September 2019. VIQCC is produced using cultured animal cells rather than embyonated chicken eggs, which gives a greater boost to the immune system. It also contains four types of influenza viruses.10 “It looks like this ‘super’ vaccine impacted the immune system in such a way to increase coronavirus infection through virus interference,” Murray wrote.

Lessons From the 2009 Swine Flu Pandemic

The kind of virus interference Murray was referring to had been shown to be at play during the 2009 pandemic swine flu. A 2010 review11,12 in PLOS Medicine led by Dr. Danuta Skowronski, a Canadian influenza expert with the Centre for Disease Control in British Columbia, found the seasonal flu vaccine increased people’s risk of getting sick with pandemic H1N1 swine flu and resulted in more serious bouts of illness.

People who received the trivalent influenza vaccine during the 2008-2009 flu season were between 1.4 and 2.5 times more likely to get infected with pandemic H1N1 in the spring and summer of 2009 than those who did not get the seasonal flu vaccine.

To double-check the findings, Skowronski and other researchers conducted a follow-up study on ferrets. Their findings were presented at the 2012 Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy.

In all, five observational studies conducted across several Canadian provinces found identical results. These findings also confirmed preliminary data from Canada and Hong Kong. As Australian infectious disease expert professor Peter Collignon told ABC News:13

“Some interesting data has become available which suggests that if you get immunized with the seasonal vaccine, you get less broad protection than if you get a natural infection …

We may be perversely setting ourselves up that if something really new and nasty comes along, that people who have been vaccinated may in fact be more susceptible compared to getting this natural infection.”

Flu Vaccination Raises Unspecified Coronavirus Infection

Virus interference was also demonstrated in a January 2020 study14,15 which found Department of Defense personnel who were vaccinated against influenza were significantly more likely to contract other respiratory viruses, including unspecified coronavirus infections and human metapneumovirus (hMPV16).

Service members who had received a seasonal flu shot during the 2017-2018 flu season were 36% more likely to contract coronavirus infection and 51% more likely to contract hMPV infection than unvaccinated individuals.17,18 As it turns out, hMPV is one of the respiratory viruses Moderna plans to combat using mRNA combination shots.19

Another is respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), which is similar to coronavirus. RSV is yet another virus shown to be very difficult to prevent with a vaccine. RSV vaccine experiments done in the 1960s ended in disaster, as several of the children studied developed antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE) and died from the resulting cytokine storm when exposed to the wild virus.20

Considering influenza antibodies increase your risk for hMPV and coronavirus infection, and an RSV vaccine has yet to be developed due to the well-known risk of RSV vaccine-enhanced disease, why is Moderna focusing on making an mRNA shot against all four viruses at the same time?

COVID-19 Shots Confer Narrow Immunity

The problem that all of these studies highlight is that influenza vaccination confers very narrow immunity against a specific viral strain, leaving your body open to other viruses. The mRNA shots confer even more specific immunity, as your body is responding to the antigen alone rather than the whole virus.

If you instruct your body to develop a narrow range of antibodies against, say, SARS-CoV-2, a couple of influenza strains, along with hMPV and/or RSV, will that make you more susceptible to other far more serious infections? Or will they start canceling each other out or cause cross-reactions? Might such a combination exhaust and destroy your immune system entirely?

When it comes to SARS-CoV-2 — which appears to be a genetically manipulated virus designed to attack your cardiovascular system and basic immune function — the spike protein is actually the most dangerous part. This explains why so many are having serious side effects from these COVID shots. The spike protein acts as a toxin in and of itself.

The question is: If you instruct your body to develop a narrow range of antibodies against, say, SARS-CoV-2, a couple of influenza strains, along with hMPV and/or RSV, will that make you more susceptible to other far more serious infections? Or will they start canceling each other out or cause cross-reactions?

Might such a combination exhaust and destroy your immune system entirely? These are just some of the questions that come to mind, based on what we’ve seen happen with other conventional vaccines and the current mRNA shots for COVID.

Pfizer Requests EUA for Third Booster Dose

Pfizer plans to ask for EUA authorization for a third COVID booster shot in August 2021, Bloomberg reports.21 According to Pfizer’s head of research, Mikael Dolsten, initial data suggest a third dose of the current Pfizer shot can raise neutralizing antibody levels by anywhere from fivefold to 10-fold.22 The company is also working on variant-specific formulations.

The booster would be given six to eight months after the second dose. Dolsten points to data from Israel, where Pfizer’s mRNA injection was used exclusively, which shows a recent uptick in breakthrough cases. This suggests protection starts to wane around the six-month mark, although Dolsten said it still appears to offer good protection against more severe illness.

For now, the FDA is shying away from authorizing boosters, saying the current shots appear effective enough. In a joint statement published July 8, 2021, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and FDA stated:23

“Americans who have been fully vaccinated do not need a booster shot at this time. We are prepared for booster doses if and when the science demonstrates that they are needed.”

The way things have been going, though, there’s no doubt in my mind they’ll greenlight an entire line of boosters for emerging variants. The call for boosters will probably grow in tandem with recognized breakthrough cases, which will be interpreted as waning immunity rather than a sign of outright vaccine failure or ADE.

Freedom Based on the Drugs You Accept

Another reason why I’m certain booster shots will gain EUA authorization is because the treadmill of boosters will support the stated “need” for vaccine passports to keep track of them all. Let’s face it, vaccine passports are really pharmaceutical passports.

Eventually, they will dictate what you can and cannot do based on what pharmaceutical products and treatments you accept. Beyond that, they’re part of a much larger social credit system, where any infraction will sorely limit your freedom. As noted by former Clinton adviser and author Naomi Wolf in a Fox News interview:24,25

“It is not about the vaccine, it’s not about the virus, it’s about your data … What people have to understand is that any other functionality can be loaded onto that platform with no problem at all. It can be merged with your Paypal account, with your digital currency.

Microsoft is already talking about merging it with payment plans. Your network can be sucked up. It geolocates you everywhere you go. Your credit history can be included. All of your medical and health history can be included.

This has already happened in Israel, and … we’re hearing from activists that it’s a two-tiered society and that basically, activists are ostracized and surveilled continually. It is the end of civil society, and they are trying to roll it out around the world.

It is absolutely so much more than a vaccine pass … I cannot stress enough that it has the power to turn off your life, or to turn on your life, to let you engage in society or be marginalized.”

Wolf also pointed out the horrific history of IBM,26 whose Digital Health Pass will tie biometric IDs to health data through its smartphone app. This “health pass” will then grant or deny you access to public spaces and events, based on your vaccination status.

This is essentially the modern-day version of the punch card system — the forerunner to digital entry on computers — that IBM developed for the Nazi regime, which allowed them to create a census of Jews and other undesirables, who could then be identified, tracked and sorted into groups slated for incarceration or extermination.

Not only did IBM survive past the end of the war, despite having played an integral role in the genocide, it has now been chosen to create an identical but more technologically advanced copy of the identification and tracking system it created for the Nazi regime. Somehow, that doesn’t strike me as entirely accidental. To learn more about IBM’s frightening track record, see “IBM Colluded With Hitler, Now Makes Vaccine Passports.”

Combating Zoonotic Transmission With Transmissible Vaccines

Disturbingly, in addition to the extremely dangerous mRNA COVID “vaccines” we’re now being coerced into taking, we’re also facing a future of transmissible vaccines, which would erase free will and informed consent altogether.

The promise of transmissible vaccines is detailed in a January 2021 article in the journal Virus Evolution,27 where they discuss “the development of recombinant viral vaccines that are transmissible, and thus capable of self-dissemination through hard to reach populations of wild animals.”

According to mathematical models, transmissible vaccines would significantly reduce the effort required to control pathogens in animal reservoirs, and by lowering the infection rate there, chances of human infection would be diminished. The problem, however, is that vaccination puts the pathogen under evolutionary pressure, which speeds up mutations. Here’s how the authors describe it:28

“A key challenge facing these new vaccines … is the inevitability of evolutionary change resulting from their ability to self-replicate and generate extended chains of transmission. Further, carrying immunogenic transgenes is often costly, in terms of metabolic burden, increased competition with the pathogen, or due to unintended interactions with the viral host regulatory network.

As a result, natural selection is expected for favor vaccine strains that down-regulate or delete these transgenes resulting in increased rates of transmission and reduced efficacy against the target pathogen.

In addition, efficacy and evolutionary stability will often be at odds; as when longer, more efficacious antigens experience faster rates of evolutionary decay … However, we find that, at least in some cases, vaccine stability and overall performance can be improved by the inclusion of a second, redundant antigen.”

Interestingly enough, the authors include COVID-19 in their list of “zoonoses for which the risk of spillover could possibly be reduced or eliminated through the use of transmissible vaccines.” However, as detailed in Dr. Steven Quay’s Bayesian analysis,29 SARS-CoV-2 has not been found in any of the 80,000 samples taken from 209 different animal species.

This fact alone proves SARS-CoV-2 is laboratory derived and did not occur through zoonotic spillover. Moreover, none of the first 259 cases in China were traced back to animal contact.30 All were human-to-human transmissions. It’s understandable that researchers would allude to their work being beneficial against COVID-19 though, seeing how it has completely taken over the global dialogue.

Are Human Transmissible Vaccines Next?

What bothers me most about the development of transmissible vaccines is that it’s only a matter of time before they’ll be used in the human population. I predict transmissible vaccines will be the next big thing after mRNA “vaccines.”

In a best-case scenario (and it’s far from good), transmissible vaccines could be rolled out if COVID-19 shots were to become mandatory worldwide. In a worst-case scenario, they might be introduced even in the absence of a global vaccine mandate. In either case, you can kiss medical freedom goodbye.

Anecdotal evidence of spike protein or exosome transmission between people who have gotten the COVID shot and those who have not also raises the question of whether transmissible vaccines are here already.

While that’s still speculative, we can be sure that mRNA flu “vaccines” that turn your body’s cells into antigen factories are coming. Scientists have locked in on this transhumanist model of altering your God given genetic instructions rather than preventing illness through healthy lifestyles and treatments using safe medicines.


Analysis Proves SARS-CoV-2 Lab Origin

In this interview, Dr. Steven Quay — one of the most-cited scientists in the world1 — discusses his Bayesian analysis,2 published January 29, 2021, which concludes beyond a doubt that SARS-CoV-2 is laboratory derived. Quay is an M.D. with a Ph.D. in chemistry. You can learn more about Dr. Quay on his website.

He did his medical residency at Mass General at Harvard Hospital and his postdoctoral work at MIT with a Noble laureate. He holds 87 patents in 22 fields of medicine, including the gadolinium used with MRI imaging.

During his career, Quay published 360 papers, which have been cited over 10,000 times. His COVID origin paper, however, has already been downloaded 170,000 times. Bayesian analysis,3 or Bayesian inference, is a statistical tool used to answer questions about unknown parameters by using probability distributions for observable data.

Quay’s highly conservatively-skewed analysis shows there’s only a 0.2% likelihood that this virus came from nature, and a 99.8% probability that it came from a lab. His 140-page paper can be downloaded from zenodo.org4 for those who want to dive into the nitty gritty of this statistical analysis. He presented these data to House Representatives during a June 26, 2021, subcommittee on the coronavirus crisis meeting.5

Instead of using the observed statistics of the data he gathered, he radically reduced the probability to 1 in 20. When one combines all the statistical anomalies from the 26 different data points he collected, the real likelihood of the virus coming from nature is less than 1 in all the atoms of the universe — 1080 — which is a very, very large number, making it virtually impossible.

SARS-CoV-2 Has a Protein Sequence Found in Bee Venom Toxin

As early as January 2020, Quay knew SARS-CoV-2 could be problematic. 

“Nobody was paying any attention because there was no need to at that point,” he says. “I saw this virus coming out of China. I looked at the sequence of it and I remember telling my wife, ‘I know what this thing is going to do in cells,’ because for five years at Stanford, I was studying and was the world expert on the toxin melittin, which is a bee venom toxin, the thing that hurts when you get a bee venom …

This melittin, this toxin in bee venom, has the same sequence that SARS-CoV-2 had … I run a public company, so I went to the board a couple weeks later and said, ‘Look, I think we can come up with some therapeutics and some ideas around this.’ We actually are in clinical trials with some products for therapeutics against SARS-CoV-2.

Then I started hearing some really crazy public health advisories around masks, social distancing and things, so I ended up writing a little book that was a No. 1 best seller for a few weeks called ‘Stay Safe: [A Physician’s Guide to Survive Coronavirus,]’ on Amazon. That took me through the summer. Then I started going back to something. I was very concerned about what I saw as properties of this virus that had never been seen before.

It’s now public knowledge that the government identified one of my papers, so I was contacted by the State Department in the fall and basically was an adviser to their programs there, including a three-hour deep dive from all of the different committees or agencies there …

I continue to push this because … if it came from nature, there are certain things we should do differently to not have this happen again. If it came from a laboratory, there’s a completely different set of things you need to do. It’s not a blame game.”

There Are Several Ways to Make a Virus More Dangerous

Quay recently published another paper in which he reveals that the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) is also working on another virus, the Nipah virus, which has a 90% lethality rate. It doesn’t take a genius to figure out what might happen if a virus with that lethality got out. Quay explains:

“[The WIV] published an early paper on samples from COVID patients in the hospital … It’s the most-read paper from the beginning of the pandemic. I did a deep dive into their raw data. The sequence is 30,000 nucleotides — the raw data’s 55 million nucleotides. What you can see in there is a fingerprint of everything they’ve been doing for the last two years. They’re doing a lot of crazy research.”

As explained by Quay, the WIV has been around for about 40 years. In 2003, after SARS-Cov-1 emerged, the U.S. and France helped China refurbish the WIV into a more secure BSL 4 biolab, the only one in China. Since then, the WIV has become a primary laboratory for zoonotic viruses. It’s also one of the top three laboratories for gain-of-function synthetic biology, which can be accomplished in several ways.

If you know what you want to alter, you can insert a new synthetic amino acid into the pathogen. If you don’t have a precise idea of the change you want to achieve, but you want the pathogen to adapt from an animal to a human, you can do what is called serial passage, where the virus is passed through a series of animal and human tissues. 

For example, you could start by infecting 20 humanized mice with a virus, then isolate the virus from the sickest mouse and give it to another 20. Humanized mice are genetically modified mice to have human lung tissue. After four or five passages like that, the virus will have mutated to attack and kill human hosts.

“The third way is to drop big chunks of material in there. For example, the part of the virus of SARS-CoV-2 that interacts with the cell is about 200 amino acids, so times three for nucleic acid, so that’s 600. You can just drop a big piece of 600 in and instantly go from an animal to humans, or whatever direction you want.

So, those are the three [primary strategies]: Knowing what to do with single spots, randomly letting nature do it in serial passage, and then dropping big chunks in.”

The Bayesian Theorem

As mentioned, Bayesian analysis is a statistical tool using probability distributions. The theorem was developed by Thomas Bayes, a 17th century Presbyterian minister and statistician-mathematician who published many papers during his lifetime. After his death, his estate discovered private notes detailing a process for understanding large complex events in a simple straightforward fashion. The Bayesian equation is A multiplied by B, divided by C. Quay explains:

“It’s exactly the same thing we do when we have a favorite baseball team and we watch it during the season. Before the season, we know what they did last year. We know who the new players are, the new coaches, all those things, and we come up with what we call a prior prediction.

We rank the teams according to what we think will happen at the World Series, and that’s what’s called our prior, our posterior probabilities. Then the season happens and you start winning games, losing games, people get injured, new players, transfers, and you update that every week.

At the start of the World Series, you’re probably quite far from where you were at the beginning of the season, because you’re now down to two teams but, nonetheless, you still don’t know the final analysis. One of the caveats for this 140-page work is, at the end, although I say there’s a 1 in 500 chance it came from nature, but that means … 499 times out of 500 it came from a laboratory.”

Bayesian Analysis of SARS-CoV-2 Origin

With regard to SARS-CoV-2, “A” would be the prior estimate of the likelihood of it coming from a lab or from nature. “B” is the new evidence, the new probability that it came from a lab, and “C” is the probability that it came from nature. When you multiply A and B and divide it by C, you get a new A prime, a single probability. However, as new data accumulate, the answer changes.

“The first thing I did was assume the prior likelihood it came from nature or a lab, knowing nothing, basically. That has to be your starting point. Three papers informed that. One paper says that eight times a year, there’s a natural jump from nature to a human.

Another paper said, once a year, there’s a lab leak in Asia, so 8-to-1 [in favor of natural origin]. That’s like 85% probability [that it came] from nature. I used three papers, and my starting point was a 98% probability it came from nature, knowing nothing else.”

Quay did not include the three papers mainstream media and fact checkers have leaned on to debunk the lab origin theory, and in his paper he explains why they were excluded. In short, they relied on speculation and not science, so the clear bias and lack of scientific facts made them too unreliable.

Next, he entered 26 different pieces of evidence into the equation. The first piece of data was the fact that the virus first emerged in Wuhan, China, which has never happened before. Wuhan has a population of 11 million people. It’s a very urban area with little man-nature contact. Wuhan also has one of only three biosafety level (BSL) 4 laboratories in the world that are conducting coronavirus research specifically. Next, he calculated probabilities.

“You know the area of China; you know the population of China. If the virus happened randomly, what is the chance it would happen in Wuhan? If there’s a laboratory in Wuhan, what are the chances it would have escaped somewhere else in China and not appeared in Wuhan?

You do the flip. If it came from nature, why did it end up in Wuhan? If it came from Wuhan, what is the probability it could have first appeared somewhere else in China? That hits your probabilities pretty hard out of the box. That was item No. 1. Then you just work through the others.”

Zoonotic Transmission

One key piece that makes a big difference in this Bayesian calculation is the question of zoonosis. In order for zoonosis to apply, you must have an animal with a backbone (vertebrae) that is infected with a microbe. Malaria, for example, is not a zoonotic disease, because mosquitoes do not have vertebrae. Malaria is a vector-transmitted disease.

The key to finding the origin of a zoonotic transmission is to locate the animal. If the animal is in the community, then zoonotic transmission occurs through a natural process. If the transmission occurs in a lab, then it’s a laboratory-acquired infection, not a zoonotic transmission. Early on, we were told up to 70% of the earliest COVID patients had visited one or more markets in Wuhan, some of which have live animals for sale.

The problem is SARS-CoV-2 was not found in any of the more than 1,000 animal specimens collected from those markets. They also sampled more than 1,000 pieces of frozen food imported from outside of China, all of which came back clean. About 15% of environmental samples, however, did have the virus.

They also collected samples from all the other markets across the Hubei Province, where Wuhan is located. No virus. About 1,000 bats in Hubei were tested, and no virus was found. Over 80,000 animals representing 209 species from every province of China were eventually tested, and no SARS-CoV-2 was found.

For comparison, SARS-1 was found in 85% of animals tested. The original host was identified as the civet cat. MERS, which came from the Middle East, originated in a bat that had jumped to a camel before turning into a human virus, and it was found in 90% of animals. Yet, after the largest surveillance ever conducted in the history of the world, having tested 80,000 animal specimens, not one has been found to carry SARS-CoV-2.

“In my Bayesian analysis … even though I should drop 80,000 into the denominator of my equation, what I did was I degraded it to the standard in clinical trials of biology to a P of .05. I said, ‘Despite the fact that zero out of 80,000 had this [virus], I’m going to treat this as if it’s a 1 in 20 event,’ because that’s the only way I could keep doing the analysis. Otherwise, I was done at the get-go,” Quay explains.

To be clear, this gives a very unfair advantage to the zoonotic origin theory, but Quay wanted to have a complete analysis of all the parameters. Diversity is a hallmark of nature, yet there’s no diversity in nature for this virus. Zoonotic proponents have argued that the virus must be found in high concentration in an intermediate species, yet not one out of 80,000 samples from 209 different animal species is a carrier of the virus.

No Animal Reservoir or Intermediate Host Has Been Found

Another key piece of the analysis is the virus itself. Bats are nature’s reservoirs for coronaviruses. The bats are never sickened by them, so the virus is never rooted out. It just lives in the bats for decades, mutating and recombining with other viruses along the way. Bat-to-human contact is very rare, so most of the time, the transfer occurs between the bats, the reservoir host and an intermediate host before it enters the human population.

Of the first 259 cases in China, not one was traced back to animal contact. All were human-to-human transmissions. This is the equivalent of going to Las Vegas and flipping a coin and getting heads 259 times, which is virtually impossible.

That’s what happened with SARS-1 and MERS. Early cases of SARS-1 and MERS were divided evenly between human to human transmission, and transmissions that occurred between different animals and humans. This means both of these viruses were most likely zoonotic in origin.

As mentioned earlier, Quay cites research showing natural jumps from nature to a human occur eight times a year, and lab escapes occur once a year. That gives us an 8-to-1 chance of zoonotic origin. However, of the first 259 cases in China, not one was traced back to animal contact. All were human-to-human transmissions.

As noted by Quay, “This is the equivalent of going to Las Vegas and flipping a coin and getting heads 259 times. When you ask your statistician to do that, it’s a P value with 84 zeros and a number, so again, that’s absolutely impossible.”

To understand how big this number is, the estimated number of atoms in the universe is 10 to the 80th power. Despite this showing it’s more or less impossible for SARS-CoV-2 to have a zoonotic origin, Quay gave this a P value of just 0.5 (or a 1 in 20 chance) — again, just to keep the analysis going.

“It’s not in the animals in nature. The virus is a pure virus … It hit the ground with one sequence, and it makes a mistake every two weeks randomly and if it’s the kind of mistake it really likes, it keeps it and then that one takes off,” he says.

“Again, SARS-1, MERS, every other zoonosis, when it jumps into humans, it’s a two-step process. Initially, it jumps into humans, but it doesn’t have all the things it needs. It can’t make very many baby viruses, et cetera, and so it burns out, and then it tries again, and it tries again. It jumps back to camels, that sort of thing.

Eventually, it gets all the mutations it needs to support human to human transfer. Then you have the foundation for an epidemic, but that’s a long process. With SARS-1 it took a year and a half. With MERS, it took two and a half years in camels before it got there. What does that mean though? Every time a human gets an infection … there is a record in their blood. They make antibodies to the virus.

Once you know that a zoonosis is going to jump into humans and leave a record in the hospital specimens and you have a test from the epidemic of the virus itself, you can go back into the hospital and find specimens. Typically, it can range from 1, to 4, to 7, to almost 20% of the specimens.

For example, people working in the market will have antibody evidence that they had the infection, whether they knew it or not.

This is a very powerful tool … Because of the unique capability of this virus to hit human to human transmission from the get-go, [Kristian Andersen, a virologist at the Scripps Research Institute in California who published a paper6 supporting zoonotic origin] predicted that there would be a lot of pre-epidemic seroconversion.

These are fancy words for ‘go into a hospital, take samples out of the refrigerator, test them and find a high percentage.’ Of course, people took him up on that and tested over 9,900 banked specimens from December [2020] and before in Wuhan. How many do you think they found that were positive?

My statistician says they should have had 100 to 400. They got zero. You run the crank on that, and that’s a 1 in a million probability.

The virus has the incredible capability of being the most aggressive human to human virus that’s ever been seen in the history of virology, but it does not have the hallmark of how you would build that in nature, which is pre-epidemic human contact. You can’t have both of these properties in the same virus if it came from nature.

Now, if you take a mouse that’s been humanized in a laboratory to have human lungs and you serial passage there, that is an effective way to do it.

Amazingly, two months after the epidemic broke out, we’re February-March 2020 now, Dr. Shi at the Wuhan Institute of Virology and Dr. Baric in America, the No. 1 synthetic biologist in the world of coronavirus research in North Carolina, published a paper saying, ‘Hey, if you grow this virus in transgenic mice, it kills the mice and, by the way, they get brain infections, which is really unusual.’

I’m saying, ‘Yeah, that’s probably the experiment that was done in 2019 that led to the spill.'” 

Again, using extremely conservative data, Quay’s analysis shows there’s a 99.8% probability that SARS-CoV-2 is a laboratory creation. If you want to read through it all, his paper can be downloaded from

Odd SARS-CoV-2 Proteins Suppress Your Immune Function

At the end of the interview, Quay delivers yet another bombshell. SARS-CoV-2 makes three primary kinds of proteins. The first are the structural proteins for a virus — the spike, envelope and nucleoplasm proteins. It also makes proteins that take over the cells’ manufacturing process, thereby allowing the virus to replicate inside the cell. In addition to those, it also makes two very odd proteins that are excreted into your blood.

“These strange proteins, they’re not the virus, they’re not in the cell,” Quay explains. “When you get an infection, you get a fever, you get sweaty and you get chills, you feel like crap. That’s not the virus. That’s your own interferon signaling and it helps you fight the virus and probably in prehistory it told your fellow tribe members to isolate you in your own tent. So, it evolved as a social signal for survival of the tribe.”


Might COVID Injections Reduce Lifespan?

Dr. Mercola Interviews the Experts
This article is part of a weekly series in which Dr. Mercola interviews various experts on a variety of health issues. To see more expert interviews, click here.

In this interview, return guest Dr. Vladimir Zelenko discusses an incredibly serious concern, one shared with at least two other highly credible experts — Michael Yeadon, Ph.D., a life science researcher and former vice-president and chief scientist of allergy and respiratory research at Pfizer, and professor Luc Montagnier, a world-renowned virologist who won the Nobel prize for his discovery of HIV.

Yeadon, Montagnier and Zelenko all believe the COVID-19 shots could reduce life expectancy by several decades, depending on several factors, including whether you’re required to get booster shots. In fact, there may be reason to suspect that many who get the jabs and subsequent boosters could lose their lives within two to three years, as a result of pathogenic priming.1,2

Many may not realize that when I was a youngster I was a Boy Scout, but you might know their motto is “Be Prepared.” It is an approach that has served me well over the years. I am not stating unequivocally that dire outcome will materialize, as my interview next week with Dr. Peter McCullough goes into. However, it would seem prudent to have a good protocol in your hands in anticipation of a worst-case scenario.

So, on that note, Zelenko and I take a deep dive into what can be done to prevent such a fate. Zelenko categorizes the risks of COVID-19 “vaccines” into three categories: acute, subacute and long-term, so let’s begin by reviewing the primary risks found in each of these categories.

Risk Category No. 1 — Acute Risks

The acute phase of harm begins at the moment of injection and likely lasts for about three months or so. Based on reports filed with the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), it’s clear that many cannot survive past the acute phase.

About 6,000 deaths have been reported so far, and death commonly occurs within 48 hours of injection. Many serious disabling events also occur rather rapidly, typically within a few days or weeks. However, Zelenko has a very dismal perspective on the accuracy of the VAERS database. He explains:

“According to a paper published by the Salk Institute in San Diego, they’ve discovered that the spike protein that’s generated through the vaccination itself has negative health effects. It’s toxic … on its own …

There’s plenty of evidence that shows that it spreads from the injection site and goes to the bloodstream, and basically comes into every single cell in the body.3,4

mRNA has a half-life of around one to two weeks, depending on the mRNA, and during that interim, each mRNA molecule makes around 2,000 to 5,000 spike proteins. So, we’re talking about trillions and trillions of spike proteins.

Your entire body becomes a spike protein factory. Several orders of magnitude more than if you were to get COVID, because COVID infects the upper and lower airways primarily. Those are the cells that get infected and begin to produce spike proteins. But here we’re injecting the vaccine and it actually travels to every single cell in your body and converts every single cell in your body into a factory for spike proteins.”

As the mRNA disseminates through your vascular system, the cells lining your blood vessels begin producing spike protein. This is why we’re seeing such a staggering number of reports of people experiencing blood clots from these injections.

According to Zelenko, 40% of these events occur within the first two days after injection. The risk then diminishes, but vascular events such as heart attacks, strokes, renal infarcts and pulmonary infarcts don’t completely peter out until about three months after the last injection.

But these events of the past three months are not being reported to VAERS. It is, of course, possible that people simply aren’t connecting them to the COVID shot they got several months earlier.

How Many Have Actually Died From the COVID Shots?

As noted by Zelenko, underreporting is part of the problem we’re facing. The real number of side effects is impossible to determine, given the fact that the Food and Drug Administration didn’t insist on a robust post-vaccination data collection system, but it’s most certainly higher than what VAERS is listing.

“If you look at the VAERS [vaccine adverse event reporting system], which in my opinion is a piece of garbage … as of today, let’s say says there’s 6,000 deaths associated with taking the vaccine. Well, we need to understand what that actually means,” Zelenko says.

“If you look at the 2009 Harvard study on the VAERS system, they said only 1% of events are actually reported. So, OK … whatever the number is, it’s not 6,000. Maybe only 10% are being reported. I don’t know. But definitely it’s being underreported.

And then there’s two [additional] big problems. There’s evidence coming out that VAERS reports that have been filed are being erased off the server, No. 1. No. 2, I personally know of two dozen cases of deaths associated with the vaccine, and the doctor and/or family members that tried to file a VAERS report, their reports were rejected due to some technicality.

The fact that they all couldn’t make a report, that raises my eyebrows. What percentage of the information are we actually seeing? The answer is, I estimate, there are already around 200,000 dead Americans, directly related to the vaccinations.”

To get to that number, Zelenko assumes only 10%5 of adverse effects are reported. Studies have indicated it could be as low as 1%.6,7 That gives us a death toll of about 60,000, to which he adds another 140,000 given the fact that reports are being scrubbed and refused.

“The point is that it should definitely raise eyebrows and have the public start screaming and saying, ‘We want to know the truth. We want to know the accurate numbers. Stop suppressing the truth … I want to be able to make an informed choice whether or not I want to take this injection.’ And that’s not being given to the people.

My problem is not with the vaccine. My problem is with the government, governing bodies and certain people that are obstructing the flow of life saving information and suppressing the truth from people, and then using coercion to force people to take this vaccine. That’s the nefarious part.

The suppression is so blatant and so overt that doctors with impeccable credentials are being deplatformed for just voicing an opinion. And then you couple that together with proven prehospital treatment approaches and protocols that have been proven to reduce hospitalization and death by 85%, and that information is being suppressed.

So here you have a dual censorship where the positive, hopeful, life-saving information is being suppressed and the dangerous outcomes of the vaccination approach is being suppressed. It’s a perfect setup for genocide.”

Risk Category No. 2 — Subacute Risks

The subacute risk phase, which begins around three months’ post-injection, is exceedingly difficult to quantify. At bare minimum, it’s likely to last several months to a couple of years. The primary concern now is antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE), also referred to as pathogenic priming and/or paradoxical immune enhancement (PIE) as it more accurately describes the disease mechanism.

Zelenko believes the mRNA will have degraded by this time, and your cells will hopefully no longer produce spike protein. I believe he may be overly optimistic here, as the synthetic mRNA has been genetically modified to be less perishable, plus it’s encased in a nanolipid to resist breakdown.

I suspect this modified mRNA may remain viable far longer than anyone suspects, thanks to its synthetic nature. What’s more, there’s a mechanism by which the mRNA can be reverse transcribed into your DNA, which would make the spike protein production permanent — and probably intergenerational. I describe this process in “The Many Ways in Which COVID Vaccines May Harm Your Health.”

If Zelenko is correct, then the primary disease agent now switches from the spike protein to the antibodies produced in response to the spike protein. We don’t know how long these antibodies will last, but chances are they’ll stick around for a number of months or years.

While antibody production is the primary purpose of these shots, and the response said to provide you an immune benefit, they can actually be the source of problems.

Animal trials in which conventional coronavirus vaccines were tested have shown coronavirus vaccines routinely cause ADE,8,9,10,11,12 so when the animals are challenged with the real virus they’ve been immunized against, they can get seriously ill and even die. If hospitals start filling up with vaccinated individuals this fall, you’ll know why. They’re suffering the effects of ADE.

“In other words, those antibodies that were produced with the vaccination were pathologic,” Zelenko says. “They were lethal and they led to an exaggerated immune response. That’s what it means, antibody-dependent enhancement. It’s an enhancement of your immune response in a way that it will kill you …

The question is, how safe is it long-term, or in the subacute [phase] from three months to three years? That is a big question mark. Based on animal models — and this is what Dr. Mike Yeadon is saying — it could be absolutely genocidal. It’s the biggest gamble on the survival of humanity in the history of humanity.”

However, as a counter to this view, Dr. Peter McCullough, who is in complete agreement with the engineering of this event and it being one of the most egregious crimes against humanity, is not convinced that there will be a massive die-off in the fall.

He is well-trained in the science and has essentially completed a fellowship in COVID-19 along with being the senior editor of two prestigious medical journals so his opinion also deserves consideration. We will be posting his interview next Sunday, July 11, 2021.

Why Is Humanity’s Survival Being Risked?

The questions on many people’s mind right now are, “Why are lifesaving early treatment approaches suppressed?” “Why are the toxic side effects and death rates of the vaccines being suppressed?” and “Why are entire continents being coerced into taking a vaccine that is both medically unnecessary and unproven in terms of safety and effectiveness?”

Taken together, none of it makes any sense, which is why people like Yeadon, Montagnier, Zelenko and others are raising concerns about global genocide. Is that what this is all about? Is there an alternative interpretation of what’s happening? When you consider the actual data, mass vaccination simply isn’t necessary, so why the frantic push to get a needle in every arm? Zelenko explains:

“There’s something called medical necessity. So, let’s analyze if there’s any medical necessity for this vaccine, and you have to do that in a systematic way based on demographics.

If you look at the CDC’s data, anyone 18 and younger has a 99.998% chance of recovery from COVID-19 with no treatment. [Their risk of dying is] 1 in a million. It’s safer than influenza virus. If you gave me a choice, I would rather my kids have COVID-19 than influenza. So, why would I immunize a demographic that has close to 100% chance of recovery with an experimental vaccine that has already killed more kids than the virus?

If you look at the demographic between 18 and 45, people who are healthy have a 99.95% chance of recovery with no treatment … according to the CDC. Same question, why would I vaccinate a demographic that recovers on its own with no treatment?

Third question, if someone has antibodies — and there’s a plethora of evidence [showing] naturally produced antibodies are much more effective in clearing future viruses than vaccine-induced antibodies … Natural immunity is much better, more effective and safer, than vaccine-induced immunity. So, someone who has antibodies already from having COVID before, why would I vaccinate them? …

Fear is an extremely useful tool in manipulating the behavior of people. And that fear has been used to create a psychological motivation to get vaccinated with a vaccine that, in my opinion, has no medical necessity, has tremendous amount of actual and potential risks, and very questionable efficacy.”

Risk Category No. 3 — Long-Term Risks

Beyond the two-to three-year mark are the long-term risks, which are even more difficult to predict. One particularly difficult risk to predict or quantify is infertility. It’ll take decades before we have the data on reproductive effects. Women in their 20s who get the jab might not get serious about trying to get pregnant until they’re in their 30s.

Teens and young children will have to wait decades before fertility can be ascertained. Of course, by then, it’ll be too late. The damage will be done, and hundreds of millions will be in the same boat.

Zelenko cites research published in The New England Journal of Medicine, which concluded COVID vaccination during pregnancy had no increased risk of miscarriage. However, a closer look at the data set revealed that this was only true for women who got vaccinated during their third trimester. Women who get the COVID jab in their first and second trimester have a 24-fold higher risk of miscarriage.

There are also reports of declining sperm counts and testicular swelling in men, and menstrual cycle disruptions in women of all ages. “There is an absolute effect on fertility,” Zelenko says. We just don’t know to what degree yet.

Overall life expectancy is likely to be affected across the board but, again, it’s very difficult to predict just how many years or decades will be lost. Zelenko, like many other doctors, suspect autoimmune diseases and cancer rates will go up as a result of the jabs. As noted by Zelenko:

“Whether you look at the acute spike protein-induced death, the miscarriages, or the myocarditis in young adults, or you look at the subacute pathogenic priming issue, or you look at the potential long-term effects of infertility, auto immune disease and cancer, you have an absolute setup for a genocide. And that’s why these world-leading thought leaders, scientists, are cautioning people …

Let’s do a thought experiment. If COVID-19 were to infect every single human being on this planet and was not to be treated, what would be the overall global death rate? The answer is less than 1%, and I’m not advocating for that, by the way. That’s a lot of people still.

Now, what is going to be the death rate from global vaccination? That is going to be several orders of magnitude greater. And it actually depends how far out you look. Because if someone’s meant to live 80 years and they live 60 years, how do you quantify that? …

We’re talking about 1.5 to 2 billion people [dying] for no reason, except the agendas of a few psychopaths or sociopaths. Why do I say that? It’s because there have been people advocating for population reduction for decades. I just saw a video from [U.K. prime minister] Boris Johnson’s father … advocating for the reduction of England’s population to 15 million …

This type of ideology exists. In this generation, it’s not really anti-Semitic. What it is, is there’s a small group of sociopaths that believe … they’ve evolved into a superhuman enlightened [state] that entitles them the right to dictate the course of history.

For example, Bill Gates in 2015 said the world population needs to be reduced by a certain percentage because of global warming or whatever. So, my question is a very simple question. He’s one of the main supporters and profiteers of global vaccination. Why would I take a vaccine for my health from someone is advocating for the reduction of the world population?

Another scary individual is Klaus Schwab, the founder of the World Economic Forum. He’s very influential. He wrote the book ‘COVID-19 The Great Reset.’ In 2016, in a French interview … Schwab made an announcement that within 10 years, all of humanity will be tagged with an identifier. If you look at the UN 2030 plan, which was crafted by the World Economic Forum, it says ‘America will no longer be a superpower.’

That’s a stated agenda. Then, my favorite is, ‘You’ll own nothing and you’ll be happy. You won’t eat any meat. Fossil fuels will be prohibited. There’ll be a billion refugees, which will have to be integrated into your societies.’ So, my question is, what sociopath feels entitled to make a statement like ‘You will own nothing and you will be happy’?

What entitles this type of individual, or group of individuals, to think that way? Well, they believe that they’re enlightened far beyond the average human or subhuman.”

War Against God

Zelenko, a devout Jew, believes the root of this global takeover is really a war against God. The implication is that life has sanctity, and if life has sanctity, we have human rights, “earned” by our birth alone. This is the source of natural law. And, if we have human rights, handed down by God, then no one has the right to decide how long any one of us should live, or how many people there should be on the planet.

“That’s God’s prerogative,” Zelenko says. “However, if you take that out and view people as no different than an animal, a Darwinist perspective or eugenics perspective, and basically survival of the fittest is the yardstick that you measure the dominance hierarchy of humanity, in that case, these people feel that they are on top of the pyramid, and that entitles them to decide if you and me should live …

I call the [COVID] vaccine ‘Zyklon-V.’ That is the gas the Nazis used to kill my relatives. So to express my sentiments, I call it Zyklon-V. It’s an absolute weapon of mass destruction. People are being lied to, and they’re running into the gas chambers themselves because of the pathogenic fear.”

How to Protect Your Health Post-Jab

If you or someone you know or love got the COVID jab and now have serious regrets, there are definite strategies you can use to protect your health.

It appears if you made it through the first three months OK, then your risk for blood clots is likely radically diminished. To counteract excessive clotting, an anticoagulant may be appropriate. A natural alternative with great promise is n-acetyl cysteine (NAC), as it has both anticoagulant13 and thrombolytic effects,14 meaning it may both prevent clots and break up clots that have already formed. Obviously, do not get any more booster shots.

In the subacute phase, your No. 1 goal will be to avoid ADE. The key to this is to avoid triggering a pathogenic immune reaction, and the only way to do that is to implement some sort of prophylactic protocol, i.e., a COVID, common cold and influenza prevention protocol.

This is especially important for anyone that has received the COVID jab as they are at a high risk of having complications and are under the false impression that they are “protected” when actually they are at increased risk now that they got the jab and need to take extraordinary precautions.

Any symptoms of upper respiratory infection should also be treated immediately, not later. COVID is a multi-phase disease. The first phase is the viral phase, which lasts five to seven days. This is when it’s most easily treated. After Day 7, the disease typically progresses into the inflammatory phase, which requires different treatment.

Zinc supplementation is an important component for prevention and early treatment in the viral stage, as it impairs viral replication. You need to take it with a zinc ionophore, however, such as quercetin, EGCG (green tea extract), hydroxychloroquine or ivermectin.

“The majority of the COVID protocols focus on inhibition of our RNA virus replication. What that means is that for a virus to make copies of itself, it needs to enter the human cell. In the case of RNA viruses, all the COVID, coronaviruses and even the influenza viruses, they use a common pathway called RNA dependent RNA polymerase. That’s a very important enzyme.

That enzyme is what makes copies of the viral genetic material, which then enables for new viruses to be formed and spread. So, if you inhibit the viral RNA replication process, you’ll eliminate viral spreading, viral growth. The beautiful thing about what we found with zinc is that zinc inhibits this enzyme extremely well, if there’s another zinc [molecule] inside the cell.

But zinc cannot really get into the cell on its own. That’s where the concept of zinc ionophores come in. Zinc ionophores opens the door in the cell membrane and allows for zinc to go from outside of the cell, to inside of the cell. And when you increase the concentration of zinc inside the cell, then it can effectively inhibit this enzyme, stopping most if not all, coronaviruses and influenza viruses from replicating.”

If you want to use either hydroxychloroquine or ivermectin and live in a state that restricts their use, look for online telehealth options. The American Frontline Doctors is one resource. They only charge $90 for a consultation and you will be able to get the prescription that you need. Do not use Ivermectin from veterinary sources as it may be contaminated and is not designed for human use.

If you’ve gotten the jab, consider yourself high risk for COVID and implement a daily prophylaxis protocol. This means optimizing your vitamin D, and taking vitamin C, zinc and a zinc ionophore on a daily basis, at least throughout cold and flu season.

In addition to zinc and a zinc ionophore, you also need to optimize your vitamin D level. The range you’re looking for is 60 ng/mL to 80 ng/mL year-round. The appropriate dose of oral vitamin D3 is the dose that gets you within that range.

Vitamin C is another important component, especially if you’re taking quercetin, as they have synergistic effects. To effectively act as a zinc ionophore, the quercetin needs vitamin C.

In an effort to make it easier for patients, Zelenko has developed an oral supplement that contains all four: vitamin C, quercetin, vitamin D3 and zinc. It’s called Z-Stack and can be purchased on For a downloadable “cheat sheet” of Zelenko’s protocol for COVID-19, visit

The take-home message here is that if you’ve gotten the jab, consider yourself high risk for COVID and implement a daily prophylaxis protocol. This means optimizing your vitamin D, and taking vitamin C, zinc and a zinc ionophore on a daily basis, at least throughout cold and flu season.

It would also be useful to do a daily sauna. Ideally one that can heat up to 170 degrees Fahrenheit. The best saunas are far-infrared and have low EMFs. Sadly, I don’t know any that go to 170 degrees and are low EMF.

I use one that goes to 170 and then I turn it off and turn on the SaunaSpace four near IR bulb system in the sauna and go in for 20 minutes. This practice activates heat shock proteins which will help remove the spike proteins and improve other damaged proteins in your body.

If you’re low risk for COVID and have not been vaccinated, make sure you have these items on hand and begin treating at the very first signs of cold or flu symptoms.

Strategies to Lower Risk in Those Who Received COVID Jab

Nebulized hydrogen peroxide 0.1%
Daily or more frequently if needed

NAC (N-acetyl Cysteine)
500 mg once a day

15 mg once a day

Vitamin C
500 mg once a day or 250 mg twice a day

Eliminate ALL vegetable (seed) oils
Goal is zero

Vitamin D
Most adults need 8000 IU per day but it is imperative to check blood levels 60-80 ng/ml or 100-150 nmol/l

Daily sauna
20 minutes at 170 degrees will help destroy spike proteins

Time restricted eating
Helps remove spike proteins through autophagy

Seek to eat organic only foods, especially avoid the dirty dozen
This will help limit glyphosate intake

Nebulized Peroxide and Other Health Promoting Measures

In addition to NAC (to prevent and break up clots), vitamin D, vitamin C, quercetin and zinc, buy yourself a tabletop jet nebulizer, some saline solution and food grade hydrogen peroxide. You’ll want to dilute the peroxide with saline to get a 0.1% solution.Due to risks to my personal safety we had to remove the nebulized peroxide videos from the site but they are now up on our substack site and you can view all of them here.

Nebulized peroxide is my personal go-to both for prevention and treatment, regardless of the stage the respiratory infection is in. To learn more, download Dr. Thomas Levy’s free e-book, “Rapid Virus Recovery.” As a preventive measure, simply nebulize every other day. Vitamin C is important here too, as it works as a catalyst for the peroxide. A daily dose of 500 milligrams would likely be sufficient for most.

We were forced to remove all the hydrogen peroxide videos that I had previously posted for liability reasons but fortunately they are all now posted on our Substack site. This is important as, in my view, this is the most important step you can take. I would recommend nebulizing a 0.1% solution every day as indicated in the videos, linked below.

There is no danger in doing it every day and likely there is a health benefit. As Dr. Tom Levy describes in one of the videos below, it seems to help improve your bowel movements, which may be a result of eliminating respiratory pathogens that were having negative impact on your microbiome.

>>>>> Click Here <<<<< Other important health-preserving strategies include the following: • Make sure you’re metabolically flexible so that your body can seamlessly transition between burning fat and sugar as your primary fuel. This will allow your innate immune system to function optimally. Time-restricted eating is one surefire way to accomplish this. • Avoid processed seed oils in your diet, such as sunflower oil, corn oil, safflower oil or avocado oils. All contain high levels of linoleic acid, which impairs your mitochondrial function, and in upper respiratory infections, it's the precursor for the Leukotoxin that occurs in these infections. • Focus on certified-organic foods to minimize your glyphosate exposure, and include plenty of sulfur-rich foods to keep your mitochondria and lysosomes healthy. Both are important for the clearing of cellular debris, including these spike proteins. You can also boost your sulfate by taking Epsom salt baths. • To combat the toxicity of the spike protein, you’ll want to optimize autophagy, as this may help digest and remove the spike proteins. Time-restricted eating will upregulate autophagy, while sauna therapy, which upregulates heat shock proteins, will help refold misfolded proteins. They also tag damaged proteins and target them for removal. It is important that your sauna is hot enough (around 170 degrees Fahrenheit) and does not have high magnetic or electric fields. • If you’re having post-vaccination symptoms, you could consider: ? Low-dose interferons such as Paximune, to stimulate your immune system ? Peptide T (an HIV entry inhibitor derived from the HIV envelope protein gp120; it blocks binding and infection of viruses that use the CCR5 receptor to infect cells) ? Cannabis, to strengthen Type I interferon pathways, which are part of your first line of defense against pathogens ? Dimethylglycine or betaine (trimethylglycine) to enhance methylation, thereby suppressing latent viruses ? Silymarin or milk thistle to help cleanse your liver


Expert Scientists Testify on Virus Origin

Two scientists were called as witnesses at the House Oversight and Reform Subcommittee on Select Coronavirus Crisis hearing, held June 29, 2021.1 Their testimony adds evidence that clarifies the origin of COVID-19, which they believe leaked from a laboratory in Wuhan, China, as a result of controversial gain-of-function (GOF) research.

Many have stated that we’ll never truly know the origin, short of China confessing or a whistleblower coming forward. But as Richard Muller, Professor Emeritus of physics at the University of California, Berkeley, stated during his testimony, “We have a whistleblower, the virus itself.”2

Muller, who has worked on scientific efforts that have won Nobel Prizes, states that the virus, which came out of China, carried with it genetic information about its origins.

“In my mind, there are five compelling sets of scientific evidence that allow us to reach this very strong conclusion that, yes, it was a laboratory leak,” Muller said. Dr. Steven Quay, the first scientist to testify, came to the same conclusion that COVID-19 has a laboratory origin, based on “six undisputed facts that support this hypothesis.”

A summary of the evidence, which they review in detail in the video above, follows, in the hope that, by revealing the true origin of COVID-19, we can help to prevent future pandemics and related loss of life.

‘Could They Have Come From Our Lab?’

Quay is a physician and scientist with an impressive background, including hundreds of published articles that have been cited over 10,000 times. Quay holds 87 patents across 22 different fields of medicine, has invented seven FDA-approved medicines — and believes that SARS-CoV-2 came from a laboratory in China.

I recently interviewed Dr. Quay and we will post it soon. But in his research paper of 140 pages, which is more like a book, he makes a strong argument that there is virtually no chance that the SARS-CoV-2 virus is from nature. How unlikely? Imagine all the atoms in the universe and then imagine trying to find the same atom twice. That would be far more likely than the virus coming from nature.

As early as December 30, 2019, there were signs. This was the day Shi Zhengli, Ph.D., the director of the Wuhan Institute of Virology’s (WIV) Center for Emerging Infectious Diseases, also known as “bat woman,” was told about a novel coronavirus that had caused an outbreak of pneumonia cases close to WIV.

“Could they have come from our lab?” Shi, who had been studying bat-borne viruses since 2004, including SARS-like coronaviruses, wondered.3 Since then, evidence has continued to accumulate that COVID-19 likely emerged from a laboratory in China after having undergone some sort of manipulation to encourage infectiousness and pathology in humans, known as gain-of-function (GOF) research. According to Quay:4

“In the last 18 months, we’ve learned an intense amount about the origin of the pandemic, but one of my frustrations is that virologists and science writers around the world seem to want to ignore what has been learned and the inevitable conclusion it reveals.

As inconvenient as it is, I believe the evidence conclusively establishes that the COVID pandemic was not a natural process, but instead came from a laboratory in Wuhan, China, and that it has the fingerprints of genetic manipulation for a process called gain of function research.”

Quay: Six Undisputed Facts Suggest COVID Leaked From Lab

Quay stated that six undisputed facts support the hypothesis that SARS-CoV-2 leaked from a lab.5

1. COVID Didn’t Begin in a Seafood Market — In the early days of the outbreak, China told the world that the COVID-19 pandemic began at the Hunan Seafood Market, a wet market in Wuhan, because half the initial cases were associated with that location. This is reminiscent of other coronavirus outbreaks, including SARS-Cov-1 (SARS) and Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), both of which began in animal markets.

However, “after 18 months, we know it [COVID-19] did not begin in a market in Wuhan for three reasons,” Quay said. First, none of the early COVID patients from the Hunan market were infected with the earliest version of the virus, meaning that when they came to the market, they were already infected.

“Four patients with the earliest version of virus had one thing in common,” Quay said. “None had exposure to the market.” Second, none of the environmental specimens taken from the market had the earliest virus either, which means they also came into the market already infected.

In addition, 457 animals from the Hunan market were tested, and all were negative for COVID. Another 616 animals from suppliers to the Hunan market were also tested, and all were negative. Wild animals from southern China — 1,864 of them, of the type found in the Hunan market — were also tested and found to be negative for the virus.

2. The Virus Has Not Been Found in an Animal Host — Scientists have tested 80,000 samples from 209 different species, but the SARS-CoV-2 virus has not been found in a single specimen. “The probability of this for a community-acquired infection is about 1 in a million,” Quay said. “This is what you’d expect for a lab-acquired infection.”

3. No Cases of COVID Were Detected in Blood Samples Prior to December 29 — If the virus had emerged naturally from a wild animal, a small number of cases would likely have already been in circulation. But, “after testing 9,952 stored human blood specimens from Wuhan hospitals from before December 29, there was not a single case of COVID in any specimen,” Quay said.

“It was expected that between 100 and 400 would be positive. The probability of this for a community-acquired infection is also about 1 in a million, but this is what you’d expect for a lab-acquired infection.”6

4. No Evidence of Multiple Animal-to-Human Transmissions — With prior coronavirus outbreaks like SARS and MERS, 50% to 90% of the early cases were clearly linked back to various animal-to-human infections. For SARS-Cov-2, 249 early cases of COVID-19 were examined genetically and they were all human-to-human transmission.

For a community-acquired infection, Quay said, “This is the probability of tossing a coin 249 times and getting heads every single time. This is, however, what you’d expect for a lab-acquired infection.”

5. SARS-CoV-2 Has Two Unique Factors That Point to GOF — SARS-CoV-2 has a unique trigger on the surface called a furin cleavage site and a unique code in the genes for that site called a CGG-CGG dimer. “These are two independent levels of uniqueness,” Quay noted. Furin is a protein coding gene that activates certain proteins by snipping off specific sections.

To gain entry into your cells, the virus must first bind to an ACE2 or CD147 receptor on the cell. Next, the S2 spike protein subunit must be proteolytically cleaved (cut). Without this protein cleavage, the virus would simply attach to the receptor and not get any further. “The furin site is why the virus is so transmissible, and why it invades the heart, the brain and the blood vessels,” Quay explained.7

While furin cleavage sites do exist in other viruses like Ebola, HIV, zika and yellow fever, they’re not naturally found in coronaviruses, which is one reason why researchers have called the furin cleavage site the “smoking gun” that proves SARS-CoV-2 was created in a lab. The entire group of coronaviruses to which SARS-CoV-2 belongs does not contain a single example of a furin cleavage site or CGG-CGG code, Quay said.

Quay’s Bayesian analysis of SARS-CoV-2 origins revealed that finding a CGG-CGG codon pair in the furin site of SARS-CoV-2 is “a highly improbable event,” and this can be used to adjust the likelihood that SARS-CoV-2 is of zoonotic origin to only 0.5%, while the likelihood of laboratory origin is 99.5%.8

Further, since 1992, WIV and other laboratories around the world have inserted furin sites into viruses repeatedly as part of GOF experiments. “It is the only sure method that always works and always makes them more infectious,” Quay said. WIV was also known for their broad use of CGG-CGG codon pairs.

Quay wrote in his analysis, “Scientists from the Wuhan Institute of Virology provided the scientific community with a technical bulletin on how to make genetic inserts in coronaviruses and proposed using the very tool that would insert this CGGCGG codon.”9

6. SARS-CoV-2 Optimized for Human Transmission — Quay’s last point focused on SARS-CoV-2 being preadapted for human-to-human transmission. “Specifically,” he said, “the part of the virus that interacts with human cells was 99.5% optimized. When Sars-1 first jumped into humans, it had only 17% of the changes needed to cause an epidemic.” How was SARS-CoV-2 “taught” to infect humans so efficiently in a laboratory?

A commonly used GOF method to optimize SARS-CoV-2, Quay explained, would have been serial passage in a lab on a humanized mouse to develop human-like pneumonia. In short, researchers infect the humanized mouse with the virus, wait a week, then recover the virus from the sickest mouse. That virus is then used to infect more mice, and the process is repeated until you get a virus that can kill all of the mice.

The challenge is to create the humanized mice to begin the process in the first place, but it’s known that part of WIV’s GOF research involved using humanized mice for experiments to determine which coronaviruses could infect humans, as well as research to make viruses that weren’t able to infect humans do just that.10

Other reports also claimed that WIV was carrying out research infecting humanized mice with novel bat SARS coronaviruses in 2019, and years earlier video was released showing WIV scientists working with little or no protective gear while working with live viruses.11

What’s more, according to Quay, WIV acknowledged they’ve been working with humanized mice, developed by Ralph Baric, Ph.D., at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, at U.S. taxpayers’ expense.12

Five More Signs That Point to a Lab Origin

Muller largely agreed with Quay’s testimony and added five points of his own, which further solidify the high likelihood that COVID-19 came from a lab.13

1. Absence of prepandemic infections — Like Quay, Muller found the absence of prepandemic infections in more than 9,000 samples taken in Wuhan to be highly suspect. “It’s unprecedented,” he said. “It didn’t happen with MERS or SARS.”

2. Absence of a host animal — Muller brought up the February 2020 Lancet letter,14 in which a group of 27 scientists, including Peter Daszak, who has close ties to WIV, condemned “conspiracy theories suggesting that COVID-19 does not have a natural origin.”

If you look at The Lancet letter, Muller said, they say you can dismiss a lab origin because China identified the host animal and even went so far as to praise China for its openness. “This paper, The Lancet, does not read well when we look at it 16 months later,” Muller said, noting that a host animal hasn’t been found.

3. Unprecedented genetic purity — Echoing Quay, Muller also said that SARS-CoV-2’s unique genetic footprint is unlike that of other coronaviruses like MERS and SARS, as well as that of other types of natural viruses. But, he said, “It is exactly what you would expect if you’d gone through gain of function.”

4. Spike mutation — Muller also highlighted the unique mutations in the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein. “The fact that there’s no known way for that spike mutation to get there other than a gene insertion in a laboratory is a very powerful argument,” Muller said.

5. Virus was optimized to attack humans — This is something that has never happened in natural virus releases, Muller said, “but it does happen if you run it through gain of function.”

While there is no evidence in favor of a zoonotic origin for SARS-CoV-2, “each one of these things is compelling by itself,” Muller said. “If we had any one of the five things, we should conclude that the evidence strongly favors the lab origin.” And we have not one of the five, but all of them. Muller also shared an anecdote that occurred with a colleague of his — a story he says is “as horrifying and more frightening than almost anything else in my life.”

In the early days of the pandemic, he called on an expert virologist friend to help him review literature suggesting there may have been a lab leak. The friend said no, so he asked if someone in his laboratory could do it. But the answer was no again. Muller pressed him on the refusal, to which he responded:

“If anyone in my laboratory is discovered to be working on a laboratory leak hypothesis, China will label us enemies of China and the laboratory will be blacklisted and we will no longer be able to collaborate. We collaborate all the time with China. Nobody will take that risk.”

“The idea that China has managed to interfere, to break United States’ freedom of expression, freedom of investigation, freedom of thought through this collaboration is really scary,” Muller said, calling it “one of the most chilling conversations I’ve had in my life.” Ultimately, however, the truth will prevail as long as the long-censored lab-leak theory and evidence in support of it continue to go mainstream.


Highly Vaccinated Israel Has a Nagging Coronavirus Problem

With 81 percent of Israel’s adult population (and nearly 59 percent of its overall population) fully vaccinated against COVID-19 and the number of reported SARS-CoV-2 infections down to under 20 cases per day, the Israeli government lifted most COVID-19-related restrictions in the country on June 1, 2021.

One of the main remaining restrictions was the requirement that people continue to wear masks in indoor public spaces, but even that restriction was dropped by mid-June.1,2,3,4 However, by the end of June, suddenly there was an increase in reported COVID-19 cases in the highly vaccinated population.

The Israeli vaccination program has been heralded as being “enormously successful.” During Israel Independence Day celebrations (sundown Apr. 14 through sundown Apr. 15), Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu declared:

“Israel is the first country in the world to beat Corona. It’s all thanks to our successful national vaccination program.”5

In an Independence Day ceremony, there was even a tribute to Pfizer, Inc. for its role in providing the experimental messenger RNA (mRNA) BNT162b2 COVID biologic used in Israel. Pfizer’s CEO, Albert Bourla, gave a short video address to the public. He said:

“Together, we have demonstrated that through mass vaccination we can defeat the COVID-19 pandemic and save lives.”6

“The situation here is quite amazing if you look at what happens around the world it’s proof how vaccines can actually get us back to our normal lives,” said Lior Haiat, spokesperson for Israel’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs. “The bottom line is that vaccination is the solution for the COVID. If there’s one message we can send abroad is that this is how we get over this crisis — the health crisis and also the economic crisis.”7

Delta Variant Fuels Spike in Coronavirus Cases and Naming of New Response Team

Everything seemed to be going Israel’s way up until around the third week in June when the Ministry of Health announced that it had registered 227 new coronavirus cases, compared to 13 cases of the virus the previous week, and that 70 percent of those cases had been caused by the Delta variant of the virus.8,9

Due to the sudden spike in reported SARS-CoV-2 cases, on June 25, Ministry of Health officials reinstated the indoor mask mandate in Israel and recommended that people wear masks even at outdoor events.10

On June 27, the director general of Israel’s Ministry of Health, Chezy Levy, resigned from his post. Later that day, Israel’s new Prime Minister, Naftali Bennett, announced the appointment of Major General (retired) Roni Numa as special czar to manage the coronavirus response at the country’s primary port of entry, Ben Gurion International Airport.11,12 In explaining the Numa appointment, Prime Minister Bennett said:

“For a year and a half now, there has been a huge national weak point, and that is Ben-Gurion Airport.

Therefore, in coordination with the transportation minister, the health minister and the interior minister, we decided to appoint a special director to handle transitions and prevent the entry of this virus and future variants and viruses from around the world into Israel.”13

Bennett added …

“Israel does not have a lot of border crossings — in fact, it is kind of an island state. There is no reason why we cannot defend ourselves even if there was no vaccine.”14

On June 28, Israel’s National Coronavirus Project Coordinator Nachman Ash was appointed as the new director general of the Ministry of Health.15 Suddenly, almost overnight, there is again a sense of urgency in Israel — a renewed COVID-19 crisis in a country that had recently declared itself the first to be the first in the world to “beat Corona” and had lauded its mandatory mass vaccination program as the reason for the victory.

Israel Tightens Measures to Combat Coronavirus Infections

Israel is gearing up for a new war against an enemy it believed it had vanquished. It has appointed two new generals to implement a battle strategy. One of the strategies is to more strictly manage travelers to and from Israel.

The Ministry of Health continues to advise Israelis not to leave the country unless absolutely necessary and instructed those who leaving the country to declare that they would not visit countries where there is a high risk of coronavirus infection. Anyone who enters Israel who is not vaccinated or recovered from COVID-19 will be required to quarantine.

Also, anyone returning to Israel from countries under a travel ban (Argentina, Brazil, India, Mexico, Russia and South Africa) will required to quarantine even if they’ve been fully vaccinated.16,17,18

In addition to the stricter travel regulations, the Ministry of Health will re-emphasize the wearing of masks and getting vaccinated, particularly children. “Our approach is simple: maximum protection for Israeli citizens, with minimum harm to routine and the economy in Israel; masks instead of restrictions, vaccines instead of lockdowns,” Prime Minister Bennett said.19

Israel has a supply of approximately 1.4 million doses of Pfizer/BioNTech’s BNT162b2 biologic, which, apparently, will expire on July 31, 2021. The Ministry of Health will be making an effort to get as many people as possible fully vaccinated before then.20

Of course, the underlying assumption behind the Israeli government’s renewed push to vaccinate is that BNT162b2 will be effective in curbing the rise of the SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant. But that assumption may be flawed, as evidenced by the fact that an estimated 40-50 percent of the new coronavirus infections in Israel are in people who have already been vaccinated for COVID-19.21

That poses a huge dilemma for the Israeli government or any government, for that matter, which has bet the store on these shots.


Meet the World Economic Forum

Over the past year and a half, I’ve written many articles detailing the evidence supporting the claim that the COVID pandemic is a ruse to usher in a new system of global centralized governance by unelected leaders, the so-called Great Reset. While the World Economic Forum (WEF) may not necessarily be the very top of this pyramid of technocratic elitists, it certainly appears to be a central power player.

Its founder and executive chairman, Klaus Schwab, has emerged as the front man of the Great Reset and the Fourth Industrial Revolution, which has an unmistakable transhumanist component, or merging of biological or physical technologies in the human body,1 through his speeches and books on these topics, which include “The Fourth Industrial Revolution” (2016), “Shaping the Fourth Industrial Revolution” (2018) and “COVID-19: The Great Reset”2 (2020).

In the featured Corbett Report, “Meet the World Economic Forum,”3 independent journalist James Corbett takes a deep-dive into the WEF’s history and “the nightmarish future it is seeking to bring about.” Corbett also offers suggestions for how we can use this knowledge to derail this enslavement agenda.

New World Order Rebranded

As noted by Corbett, the Great Reset is nothing but a rebranding of what in the last decade became known as the New World Order. Of course, the creation of a New World Order was considered a conspiracy theory believed only by tinfoil hat-wearing kooks with too much time to surf the internet and too active an imagination.

Today, we can see that the New World Order was in fact real, and that the name-calling was simply a way to make sure the cat didn’t leap from the bag too soon. In June 2020, Schwab publicly announced the Great Reset,4 so there’s no way to dismiss it now. It’s happening.

As noted in a July 21, 2020, World Economic Forum article,5 the economic devastation caused by COVID-19 pandemic shutdowns “has the potential to hobble global prosperity for generations to come.” The answer is to come up with stimulus measures, such as infrastructure development, that can allow countries to move forward.

But while at it, countries are urged to make sure the economic system is “built back better.” Make no mistake, this catchy slogan is part and parcel of the Great Reset plan and cannot be separated from it, no matter how altruistic it may sound.

Part of the “building back better” is to shift the financial system over to an all-digital centrally controlled currency system, which in turn is part of the system of social control, as it can easily be used to incentivize desired behaviors and discourage undesired ones.

While Bitcoin is decentralized and a rational strategy to preserve your personal financial freedom and opt out of the existing central bank controlled system, the central bank digital currency (CBDC) will be centralized and completely controlled by the central banks and will have smart contracts that allow the banks to surveil and control your life.

You’ll Own Nothing

There’s even talk of programming the currency such that they can control how you spend your money. The money may even have expiration dates, so you lose what you don’t spend within a certain time frame. One of the WEF’s promises is that by 2030, you will own nothing,6 and needless to say, if the central bank can control how and when you spend your money, they can eliminate your ability to save up for large purchases, such as, say, a house or a car.

The idea is that we will have to rent everything. Corbett shows a video clip from a lecture where the presenter explains that the direction we’re going in is “from products to services.” “Every product is a service waiting to happen,” she says.

What she means is that instead of buying something once and owning for as long as you please, eventually, you won’t have the option to buy anything outright. Your only option will be to lease the product you want, which means paying a fee every month for as long as you keep it.

And who owns all the items that we the public rent? “They” do. But who are “they”? Identifying the actual individuals who are pulling the strings and laying down these long-term plans is extremely difficult.

We can, however, identify organizations that play important roles, based on their ideologies and actions, and from there, specific people within those organizations who seem to wield a great deal of influence. We can also tell that the Great Reset is a technocratic agenda, so it stands to reason that those involved are referred to as technocrats. The WEF is undoubtedly part of this agenda, and Schwab is undoubtedly a technocrat of the highest order.

The Fourth Industrial Revolution — A Technocratic Agenda

Aside from the slogan “Build Back Better,”7 the “Fourth Industrial Revolution”8 is yet another term that goes hand in hand with the Great Reset. This refers to the merging of digital, physical and biological systems, and the reliance on technological surveillance rather than the rule of law to maintain public order.

The Fourth Industrial Revolution will transform not only how we live and interact but who we are as a human species. Man will ultimately be merged with machine. The COVID shots may well be the very first step into this transhumanist mass transformation.

Just like the Great Reset is a rebranding of the New World Order, the Fourth Industrial Revolution is nothing but a rebranding of technocracy, melded with the transhumanist movement. While many are still blind to this, the transhumanist agenda is being rolled out worldwide through COVID-19 gene modification injections. Seemingly without much thinking, about half the U.S. population has already signed up to become first generation transhumans.

As noted by Schwab in a video clip in the featured report, the Fourth Industrial Revolution will transform not only how we live and interact but who we are as a human species. Man will ultimately be merged with machine. The COVID shots may well be the very first step into this transhumanist mass transformation.

In this paradigm, your body is viewed as a combination of hardware and software, your genes being “the software of life,” which can be updated through a simple injection of mRNA.

Ultimately, everything, including our physical bodies, will be incorporated into an “ecosystem driven by big data,” Schwab explains (which is what 5G and 6G are ultimately for). What he does not mention is how this will eliminate human rights and personal freedoms. That these will be taken from you, however, is clear for anyone with eyes to see.

What Is the World Economic Forum?

Schwab founded the WEF in 1971, and the organization is clearly a family affair and a family legacy. Its regulations state that Schwab, as the founder, is the ex officio member of the board of trustees and only he, or an immediate family member, can designate his successor. In other words, the only people who will always have a seat at the table and cannot be kicked out are Schwab’s heirs.

Members and stakeholders of the WEF include world government leaders, corporate leaders, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), journalists, activists, cultural leaders and artists, all of whom collaborate to push the WEF’s technocratic, transhumanist missions forward. And, as noted by Corbett, there’s hardly a single topic currently being discussed in the media that isn’t pushed and promoted by the WEF or someone with direct ties to the WEF.

Examples of areas the WEF is spearheading and pulling strings on include global cyber security problems and solutions, the reengineering of the global food system, the rewriting of a social contract.

This has never existed in the first place and appears to be part and parcel of the plan to control populations through social engineering and a social credit score, the education of our children, the resetting of the global monetary system, reimagining health care using nanotechnology and synthetic biology and much more.

It’s quite clear that the WEF serves as a central hub for the implementation of this new global social order through its public-private partnerships. The fact that people don’t announce their connections to the WEF makes it appear as though the technocratic, transhumanist movement is somehow organic, popping up here, there and everywhere, more or less organically.

In reality, however, there is nothing organic about it at all. It’s well-coordinated propaganda. Here’s how Corbett explains the WEF’s role in the future governance of world affairs:9

“The World Economic Forum has always sought to be, and is increasingly becoming, that organization that situates itself at the nexus of the public-private cooperation that will be governed by the ESGs [Environmental, Social and Governance.

This is an umbrella term for ‘sustainable investing’’] and other sorts of frameworks that the World Economic Forum is spearheading, by which they are going to tell the world exactly what they can and cannot, should or should not be doing in their individual business efforts to be part of this stakeholder capitalism.

Because you don’t own what you own. No, the society at large owns it and we all have to listen to society’s interests in these things. But you can’t talk to society, so you might as well talk to the World Economic Forum, who will tell you what society thinks.”

International Man of Mystery

So, who is this “international man of mystery,” Klaus Schwab? As noted by Corbett, Schwab’s online history has been thoroughly sanitized to leave few traces and threads to unravel. One of the more revealing investigations into Schwab’s past is Johnny Vedmore’s Unlimited Hangout report, “Schwab Family Values.”10

In it, he reveals Schwab as “the son of a Nazi collaborator who used slave labor and aided Nazi efforts to obtain the first atomic bomb.” The Schwab family was also involved in South Africa’s illegal nuclear program, Vedmore claims, as well as the European eugenics movement. He writes:11

“Especially revealing is the history of Klaus’ father, Eugen Schwab, who led the Nazi-supported German branch of a Swiss engineering firm into the war as a prominent military contractor. That company, Escher-Wyss, would use slave labor to produce machinery critical to the Nazi war effort as well as the Nazi’s effort to produce heavy water for its nuclear program.

Years later, at the same company, a young Klaus Schwab served on the board of directors when the decision was made to furnish the racist apartheid regime of South Africa with the necessary equipment to further its quest to become a nuclear power.

With the World Economic Forum now a prominent advocate for nuclear non-proliferation and “clean” nuclear energy, Klaus Schwab’s past makes him a poor spokesperson for his professed agenda for the present and the future.

Yet, digging even deeper into his activities, it becomes clear that Schwab’s real role has long been to ‘shape global, regional and industry agendas’ of the present in order to ensure the continuity of larger, much older agendas that came into disrepute after World War II, not just nuclear technology, but also eugenics-influenced population control policies.

… through the World Economic Forum, Schwab has helped to rehabilitate eugenics-influenced population control policies during the post-World War II era, a time when the revelations of Nazi atrocities quickly brought the pseudo-science into great disrepute.

Is there any reason to believe that Klaus Schwab, as he exists today, has changed in any way? Or is he still the public face of a decades-long effort to ensure the survival of a very old agenda?”

The Green Agenda Was Invented to Justify Depopulation Agenda

Aside from the WEF, there are many other organizations that work toward technocratic goals. These include the Club of Rome, the Aspen Institute, the Trilateral Commission, the Atlantic Institute, the Brookings Institute and other think tanks. According to Vedmore, the Club of Rome actually inspired the creation of the WEF and its annual symposium that takes place in Davos, Switzerland.

The Club of Rome is a scientific think tank that, like the WEF, promotes “a global governance model led by a technocratic elite.” It was founded only three years before the WEF, during a private meeting between Italian industrialist Aurelio Peccei and Scottish chemist Alexander King at a Rockefeller family residence in Italy. Vedmore writes:12

“Among its first accomplishments was a 1972 book entitled ‘The Limits to Growth’ that largely focused on global overpopulation, warning that ‘if the world’s consumption patterns and population growth continued at the same high rates of the time, the earth would strike its limits within a century’ …

[In 1973], the Club of Rome would publish a report detailing an ‘adaptive’ model for global governance that would divide the world into ten, inter-connected economic/political regions. The Club of Rome was long controversial for its obsession with reducing the global population and many of its earlier policies, which critics described as influenced by eugenics …

However, in the Club’s infamous 1991 Book, ‘The First Global Revolution,’ it was argued that such policies could gain popular support if the masses were able to link them with an existential fight against a common enemy.”

The common enemy the Club came up with was mankind itself. An excerpt from “The First Global Revolution” reads, “In searching for a common enemy against whom we can unite, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like, would fit the bill.”13

It may be quite chilling for some to realize that the climate change threat narrative was cooked up in the late 1980s for the sole purpose of being able to implement a global depopulation agenda without stirring up excessive resistance. As noted by Corbett, depopulation and eugenics are “always at the heart of what they do,” referring to the WEF and any number of other organizations, including the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

As disturbing as all of this might be, it’s important not to stick our heads in the sand and pretend it’s not happening. It is happening. The COVID pandemic was used to roll out a clearly transhumanist, technocratic agenda, and the WEF is driving the rollout.

In closing, the sleuths among you can start tying the threads of this web together by making use of the WEF’s website, Corbett provides the following example in his report. Simply look up any company currently in the news, and see if they have any ties to the WEF.

For example, the world’s largest meat supplier, JBS, claimed it was hit by a cyberattack in June 2021, forcing it to shut down its distribution.14 Looking at the WEF’s partner list, you’ll find JBS is in fact one of its partners. As noted by SilView Media, “JBS, a WEF member, coincidentally fulfills Klaus Schwab’s Cyber Polygon 2020 fantasies, ahead of Cyber Polygon 2021.”15

What has Schwab been predicting? Cyberattacks that threaten global transportation, distribution systems and the food supply. What are we seeing more and more of right now? Cyberattacks on transportation, distribution systems and the food supply. Coincidence? Or predictive programming? You decide.


More Bad News for Masks

Mandating children to wear facemasks for long periods of time while at school and participating in other activities is an unprecedented move, one that was put into place despite no research showing the practice is safe. It’s not simply a case of “something is better than nothing,” because the act of mask wearing comes with a risk of adverse effects.

Now that the pandemic is more than a year behind us, evidence is starting to accumulate showing that the use of face masks in children may cause more harm than good. One of the latest studies noted that the evidence base for making face masks compulsory in schoolchildren is “weak,” and looked into their effects on carbon dioxide in inhaled air.1

Masks Increase Carbon Dioxide Inhalation

Your body produces carbon dioxide (CO2) as a byproduct of cellular function.2 This odorless, colorless gas is then transported via your blood to your lungs, where it is exhaled from your body. Normally, the CO2 then dissipates into the air around you before you take another breath. In the open air, carbon dioxide typically exists at about 400 parts per million (ppm), or 0.04% by volume.

The German Federal Environmental Office set a limit of CO2 for closed rooms of 2,000 ppm, or 0.2% by volume. If you’re wearing a facemask, the CO2 cannot escape as it usually does and instead becomes trapped in the mask. In a study published in JAMA Pediatrics, researchers analyzed the CO2 content of inhaled air among children wearing two types of masks, as well as wearing no mask.3

Children in the study ranged in age from 6 to 17 years, with a mean age of 10.7. While no significant difference in CO2 was found between the two types of masks, there was a significant elevation when wearing masks compared to not wearing them.

CO2 in inhaled air under surgical and filtering facepiece masks came in between 13,120 ppm and 13,910 ppm, “which is higher than what is already deemed unacceptable by the German Federal Environmental Office by a factor of 6,” the researchers noted.4 Also important, this level was reached after only three minutes, while children wear masks at school for a mean of 270 minutes at a time.

Even the child who had the lowest measured CO2 level had a measurement threefold greater than the closed room CO2 limit of 0.2%. However, younger children appeared to have the highest CO2 values; a level of 25,000 ppm was measured from a 7-year-old wearing a facemask.5

The study attracted criticism and calls for retraction by those questioning mask risks to children, but in a thoughtful synopsis by Dr. Vinay Prasad, a hematologist-oncologist and associate professor of medicine at the University of California San Francisco, it’s noted that there are both benefits and risks to forcing children to wear masks.6

While large, empirical studies could answer the question of whether masks help or harm children, “we did literally zero of them,” Prasad said, and the CO2 study is attempting to add some clarity. He added:7

“Here is the real answer to the question of whether it’s worth it to mask kids: No one has any clue. During the last year and half, the scientific community has failed to answer these questions. Failed entirely.

We have no idea if masks work for 2-year-olds and above, 5 and above, 12 and above. No idea if they only work for some period of time. No idea if this is linked to community rates. No idea if the concerns over language loss offset the gains in reduced viral transmission, and if so, for what ages.”

Children’s Mask Complaints Could Be Caused by Elevated CO2

A German study using data from 25,930 children showed that 68% reported adverse effects from wearing facemasks.8 Among them, 29.7% reported feeling short of breath, 26.4% being dizzy and 17.9% were unwilling to move or play.9

Hundreds more experienced “accelerated respiration, tightness in chest, weakness and short-term impairment of consciousness.” Additional symptoms were also reported among the children, who wore facemasks for an average of 270 minutes a day:10

Irritability (60%)
Headaches (53%)

Difficulty concentrating (50%)
Less happiness (49%)

Reluctance to go to school/kindergarten (44%)
Malaise (42%)

Impaired learning (38%)
Drowsiness or fatigue (37%)

Signs of mild to moderate hypercapnia, which is a buildup of CO2 in your bloodstream, include shortness of breath, daytime sluggishness, headache, daytime sleepiness and anxiety.11

Hypercapnia is often associated with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), which makes it harder for you to breathe, but it can also be caused by activities that limit you from breathing fresh air, such as scuba diving or being on a ventilator.12,13 The researchers of the featured study believe, however, that the use of facemasks could lead to “impairments attributable to hypercapnia,” adding:14

“Most of the complaints reported by children can be understood as consequences of elevated carbon dioxide levels in inhaled air. This is because of the dead-space volume of the masks, which collects exhaled carbon dioxide quickly after a short time.

This carbon dioxide mixes with fresh air and elevates the carbon dioxide content of inhaled air under the mask, and this was more pronounced in this study for younger children … We suggest that decision-makers weigh the hard evidence produced by these experimental measurements accordingly, which suggest that children should not be forced to wear face masks.”

Nanoparticles, Pollutants Detected in Facemasks

Disposable plastic facemasks pose another risk in terms of the pollution they contain. A study by Swansea University researchers noted that 200 million disposable plastic facemasks are produced in China daily, and “improper and unregulated disposals” have led to a significant plastic pollution problem.15

The researchers submerged seven disposable facemask brands in water to simulate what happens with littering, when masks end up in waterways. Micro- and nanoscale fibers and particles and heavy metals, including lead, antimony and copper, were detected, raising significant environmental and public health concerns. According to a university news release:16

“The findings reveal significant levels of pollutants in all the masks tested — with micro/nano particles and heavy metals released into the water during all tests.

Researchers conclude this will have a substantial environmental impact and, in addition, raise the question of the potential damage to public health — warning that repeated exposure could be hazardous as the substances found have known links to cell death, genotoxicity and cancer formation.”

Not only are masks not being recycled, but their materials make them likely to persist and accumulate in the environment. Most disposable face masks contain three layers — a polyester outer layer, a polypropylene or polystyrene middle layer and an inner layer made of absorbent material such as cotton.

Polypropylene is already one of the most problematic plastics, as it’s widely produced and responsible for large waste accumulation in the environment. Leading researchers from the University of Southern Denmark and Princeton University also warned that masks could quickly become “the next plastic problem.”17

A performance study published in the June 2021 issue of Journal of Hazardous Materials18 also highlighted the little talked about fact that wearing masks poses a risk of microplastic inhalation, and reusing masks increases the risk.

The Link Between Masks and Advanced Stage Lung Cancer

A National Institutes of Health study19 published in February 2021 confirmed that when you wear a mask, most of the water vapor you would normally exhale remains in the mask, becomes condensed and is re-inhaled.20 They went so far as to suggest that wearing a moist mask and inhaling the humid air of your own breath was a good thing, because it would hydrate your respiratory tract.

But researchers from New York University (NYU) Grossman School of Medicine revealed that when oral commensals — microbes that live in your mouth — are “enriched” in the lungs, it’s associated with cancer.21

Specifically, in a study of 83 adults with lung cancer, those with advanced-stage cancer had more oral commensals in their lungs than those with early-stage cancer. Those with an enrichment of oral commensals in their lungs also had decreased survival and worsened tumor progression.

While the study didn’t look into how mask usage could affect oral commensals in your lungs, they did note, “The lower airway microbiota, whether in health or disease state, are mostly affected by aspiration of oral secretions, and the lower airway microbial products are in constant interaction with the host immune system.”22

It seems highly likely that wearing a mask would accelerate the accumulation of oral microbes in your lungs, thereby raising the question of whether mask usage could be linked to advanced stage lung cancer.

Masks Developed That Test for COVID-19

Adding further support that masking leads to an accumulation of breath droplets, which you can then re-inhale, engineers from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Harvard University developed a face mask that tests such droplets for the presence of COVID-19.23

The facemasks contain tiny, freeze-dried sensors surrounded by water. When the wearer pushes a button, the water is released, hydrating the sensor, which then begins the test.

Reportedly, the mask can diagnose COVID-19 within 90 minutes and is “as sensitive as the gold standard, highly sensitive PCR tests,”24 which have been fraught with trouble since the beginning of the pandemic.

CDC Study Finds Masks in Schools Had Little Effect on COVID

If children are risking inhalation of excessive levels of CO2 to wear masks at school, what benefit are they receiving in exchange? Very little, if any, according to a CDC study that compared the incidence of COVID-19 in Georgia kindergarten through grade 5 schools that were open for in-person learning in fall 2020 with various recommended prevention strategies, such as mandatory masks and improvements to ventilation.25

The study revealed that COVID-19 incidence was 37% lower in schools that required teachers and staff members to use masks and 39% lower in schools that improved ventilation, compared to schools that did not use these strategies.26

Because the COVID-19 incidence at the schools was extremely low to begin with, even with a 37% reduction in incidence from staff members wearing masks, that only reduced COVID-19 incidence by about one case in the entire school. When students were masked, it also made virtually no difference. Further, ventilation led to better outcomes, reducing incidence by 39%.

Dilution methods, which work by diluting the number of airborne particles, include opening windows and doors or using fans. This led to a 35% lower incidence of COVID-19, while methods to filter airborne particles, such as using HEPA filtration systems with or without ultraviolet germicidal irradiation, led to a 48% lower incidence.

More States Ban Mask Mandates in Schools

While the CDC continues to recommend “universal and correct use of masks and physical distancing” in kindergarten through grade 12 schools,27 a number of states, including Texas, Iowa, South Carolina and Arkansas, are defying the CDC’s nonsensical advice and proceeding to ban mask mandates in public schools or at least make mask usage optional.28

In addition to the physical risks, experts have warned that masks are likely to be causing psychological harm to children and interfering with their development.29 All of these risks come at little benefit to children, as, one expert report noted, “Figures illustrate that the risk of death from this disease for this age group is negligible … To introduce these [compulsory face covering measures] without detailed, thorough and meticulous risk assessment, is potentially reckless.”30

Mass, peaceful protests are often effective at compelling change, so if you’re unhappy with the facemask policies at your child’s school, contact your local district and let them know.

Exit mobile version