Category: Recommended

A compelling report1 in the journal Gastroenterology offers a radically novel yet logically sound explanation as to why some COVID-19 patients develop life-threatening organ failure. According to the authors, data indicate that COVID-19 mortality rates are heavily influenced by the amount of unsaturated fats you eat.

Simply put, unsaturated fat intake is associated with increased mortality from the infection. On the bright side, they believe early treatment with inexpensive calcium and egg albumin will reduce rates of organ failure and ICU admissions.

While no clinical studies have been done yet on this type of therapy, the authors believe it’s time to do one, as it appears early albumin and calcium supplementation can bind unsaturated fats and reduce injury to vital organs. They also point out that saturated fats are protective.
The Most Dangerous Fat of All
I’m currently writing a book on what I believe might be the primary disease-maker in the Western diet, namely omega-6 linoleic acid (LA). And, since diet-related comorbidities are responsible for 94% of all COVID-19-related deaths,2 taking control of your diet is a simple, common-sense strategy to lower the risks associated with this infection.
LA makes up the bulk — about 90% — of the omega-6 consumed and is the primary contributor to nearly all chronic diseases. While an essential fat, when consumed in excessive amounts, LA acts as a metabolic poison.
The reason for this is because polyunsaturated fats such as LA are highly susceptible to oxidation. As the fat oxidizes, it breaks down into harmful sub-components such as advanced lipid oxidation end products (ALES) and OXLAMS (oxidized LA metabolites). These ALES and OXLAMS are actually what cause the damage.
One type of advanced lipid oxidation end product (ALE) is 4HNE, a mutagen known to cause DNA damage. Studies have shown there’s a definite correlation between elevated levels of 4HNE and heart failure.
LA breaks down into 4HNE even faster when the oil is heated, which is why cardiologists recommend avoiding fried foods. LA intake and the subsequent ALES and OXLAMS produced also play a significant role in cancer. HNE and other ALES are extraordinarily harmful even in exceedingly small quantities.
While excess sugar is certainly bad for your health and should typically be limited to 25 grams per day or less, it doesn’t cause a fraction of the oxidative damage that LA does.
Processed vegetable oils are a primary source of LA, but even food sources hailed for their health benefits contain it, and can be a problem if consumed in excess. Cases in point: olive oil and conventionally raised chicken, which are fed LA-rich grains. To learn more about this hidden source of LA, see “Why Chicken Is Killing You and Saturated Fat Is Your Friend.”
Many now understand that your omega-6 to omega-3 ratio is very important, and should be about 1-to-1 or possibly up to 4-to-1, but simply increasing your omega-3 intake won’t counteract the damage done by excessive LA. You really need to minimize the omega-6 to prevent damage from taking place.
LA Damages Your Mitochondria 

In order to understand how excess LA consumption damages your metabolism and impedes your body’s ability to generate energy in your mitochondria we need to explore some molecular biology. There’s a particular fat only located in your mitochondria — most of it is found in the inner mitochondrial membrane — called cardiolipin.
Cardiolipin is made up of four fatty acids, unlike triglycerides that have three, but the individual fats can vary. Examples include LA, palmitic acid and the fatty acids found in fish oil, DHA and EPA. Each of these have a different effect on mitochondrial function, and depending on the organ, the mitochondria work better with particular kinds of fatty acids.
For example, your heart preferentially builds cardiolipin with LA, while your brain dislikes LA and preferentially builds cardiolipin in the mitochondria with fats like DHA. As mentioned, LA is highly susceptible to oxidation.
The LA within the mitochondria cardiolipin is exposed to cytochromes in the electron transport chain that contain iron, which in turn can catalyze oxidation of the cardiolipin. This is bad news because oxidation of cardiolipin is one of the things that controls autophagy.
In other words, oxidation of cardiolipin is one of the signals your body uses when there’s something wrong with a cell, so it triggers the destruction of that cell, a process called apoptosis. Your cells know that they’re broken when they have too many damaged mitochondria, and the process that controls this is largely the oxidation of omega-6 fats contained within cardiolipin.
So, by altering the composition of cell membranes and stored fatty acids in cells to one that’s richer in omega-6 fats, you make your cardiolipin far more susceptible to oxidative damage. The good news is that by making a few well-chosen tweaks to your diet, you change the composition of fatty acids in both your cell membranes and your cardiolipin to a favorable composition.
Fat Intake Linked to COVID-19 Outcomes

Getting back to the issue of how your fat intake can affect your COVID-19 outcome, the Gastroenterology paper3 points out that unsaturated fats “cause injury [and] organ failure resembling COVID-19.” More specifically, unsaturated fats are known to trigger lipotoxic acute pancreatitis, and the sepsis and multisystem organ failure seen in severe cases of COVID-19 greatly resembles this condition.
The solution they propose, namely early supplementation with egg albumin and calcium, is thought to be helpful because they are known to bind unsaturated fats, thereby reducing injury to organs. The two conditions also share other risk factors. As explained in the paper:4

“Unsaturated fatty acids (UFAs) generated by adipose lipolysis cause multisystem organ failure, including acute lung injury. Severe acute pancreatitis and severe COVID-19 share obesity as a risk factor, along with lipase elevation, hypoalbuminemia, and hypocalcemia.”

The authors further explain that the ACE2 receptor that the SARS-CoV-2 virus uses to gain entry into your cells resides on fat cells, and oleic acid — a monounsaturated omega-9 fat found in olive oil — has been shown to cause multisystem organ failure, including acute lung injury.
PUFAs in general also depolarize mitochondria and increase inflammatory mediators. All of this is what caused the researchers to explore the potential connection between lipotoxicity (toxicity caused by harmful fats such as LA) and severe COVID-19 resulting in organ failure.
Saturated fat intake (kg/capita/y) was negatively associated, and percent unsaturated fatty acid intake was positively associated with [COVID-19] mortality. ~ Gastroenterology September 2020

The paper contains an interesting diagram that summarizes the investigative approach they took to reach the conclusion that unsaturated fat intake correlates to COVID-19 outcomes, which I unfortunately cannot include here. In summary, though, it shows that higher intakes of polyunsaturated fats (PUFAs), primarily LA, resulted in a greater risk of severe COVID-19, while higher intake of saturated fat lowered the risk.
PUFAs Raise COVID-19 Mortality While Saturated Fat Lowers It

The researchers discovered that hypocalcemia (lower-than-average levels of calcium in your blood or plasma) and hypoalbuminemia (low albumin in your blood) are observable early on in patients with severe COVID-19.
When looking at data from COVID-19 patients, the also found that low arterial partial pressure of oxygen and percentage of oxygen ratios were associated with higher levels of unbound fatty acid levels in their blood. They also speculate that UFAs may cause vascular leakage, inflammatory injury and arrhythmia during severe COVID-19.
In tests on mice, animals given LA developed a range of conditions resembling lethal COVID-19, including hypoalbuminemia, leucopenia (low white blood cell count), lymphopenia (low lymphocyte count), lymphocytic injury, thrombocytopenia (low platelet count), hypercytokinemia (cytokine storm), shock and kidney failure.

How to Calculate Your LA Intake With Cronometer
Considering the damage LA imparts, it’s not surprising that it could play a significant role in the outcome of COVID-19. As mentioned, virtually all of the comorbidities associated with COVID-19 are diet related, share many of the same risk factors, and can be triggered or worsened by high LA intake.
Fortunately, you won’t have to spend hundreds of dollars to have your food analyzed for LA. All you need to do is accurately enter your food intake into Cronometer — a free online nutrition tracker — and it will provide you with your total LA intake. The key to accurate entry is to carefully weigh your food with a digital kitchen scale so you can enter the weight of your food to the nearest gram.
cronometer.com is free to use when you use the desktop version. If you feel the need to use your cellphone (which is not recommended) to enter your data, then you will need to purchase a subscription. Personally, I have used the desktop version exclusively for the last five years as it has greater functionality and allows me to avoid electromagnetic fields from my phone.
Ideally, it is best to enter your food for the day before you actually eat it. The reason for this is quite simple: It’s impossible to delete the food once you have already eaten it, but you can easily delete it from your menu if you find something pushes you over the ideal limit.
Once you’ve entered the food for the day, go to the “Lipid” section on the lower left side of the app. The image below is taken from one of my recent data entries and shows you what the section looks like. To find out how much LA is in your diet for that day, you merely need to see how many grams of omega-6 is present. About 90% of the omega-6 you eat is LA.

To find out the percentage of calories the omega-6/LA represents in your diet, go to the “Calories Summary” section shown in the image below. In my case, I consumed 3,887 calories. Since there are nine calories per gram of fat, you will need to multiply the number of omega-6 grams times nine to obtain the total amount of omega-6 calories. In my case, that is 69.3 calories. 
Next, divide the LA calories by your total calories. In this example, that would be 69.3/3887 = .0178. If you multiply that number by 100, or move the decimal point two spaces to the left, you will have the percentage as a whole number. In my example, it is 1.8% of LA. This falls within the ideal LA percentage range, which is between 1% and 2% of your total calorie intake.
Cronometer is in the process of automatically displaying the “Percent of Omega-6” in your diet, but that will not be deployed until early 2021, so use the formula above to calculate it for yourself until then.

Helpful Feature You Might Not Be Aware Of

Most people aren’t aware of an incredibly helpful feature in Cronometer that allows you to easily identify where all your LA is coming from. If you mouse over the percent field next to the omega-6 value, you will see a popup displayed that will rank order the foods based on the quantity of LA they contain. 
In my case, below, you can see that the four eggs I ate are my largest source of LA. Eggs are a very healthy food but, unfortunately, nearly all chickens, including pasture raised, are fed grains that are loaded with LA. Even if the grains are organic, they still contain LA.
I raise my own chickens and am in the middle of an experiment to change this by feeding my chickens a very low-LA, no-grain diet. I will have the eggs analyzed in a research lab and hope to get the LA levels 90% lower, which should hopefully get my LA intake below 5 grams.
It is interesting to note from my analysis that my primary protein, bison, only contributes 0.5 grams of LA even though I had 8 ounces that day. For the most part, fruit is also LA-free, which makes it a better source of healthy carbs than grains. 
I also use rice on my high-carb diet days, in this case about 100 grams of carbs for the day, and the rice has no LA in it. Both rice and millet are two of the best grains to use as they have no gluten. The rice has the additional advantage, though, of being LA-free. It is best to use white rice, as the fiber in brown rice provides little nutritional benefit and may actually cause some problems.

Carbohydrates — Choose Wisely

I must admit that I have a prejudice in this area as my first book in 2004 (which was a New York Times best seller) was “The No Grain Diet.” The concern about avoiding grains was largely based on consuming excessive carbohydrates that could lead to insulin resistance. At the time, I wasn’t aware that increased LA consumption was likely a far more significant issue than excessive carbs, or that most grains are typically loaded with LA.
However, when you have increased carbs in the form of sugar and processed wheat, and then add seed oils, you have the Devil’s Triad, which collectively contribute to most metabolic diseases.
So even though I wrote the book 17 years ago, I still believe most grains should be avoided, or at the least minimized, because they are typically high in carbs and LA. Many are also loaded with other problems like gluten, oxalates and phytates.
In my more recent book, “Fat for Fuel,” I advocated the cyclical use of balanced and healthy carbs in the form of fruits and healthier grains. For most of us, fruit is a far healthier option than grains as there is virtually no LA in fruit, with exceptions like avocado, which is technically a fruit.
Metabolic Flexibility Is Key for Optimal Health

About 90% of the population is insulin resistant. Ideally, you will first want to become metabolically flexible and improve your ability to burn fat as your primary fuel. I discuss this strategy extensively in “Fat for Fuel.” It typically takes a few weeks to a few months for someone to transition to a metabolically flexible state.
When you are metabolically flexible, you will typically have normal blood pressure, not be overweight, and have a fasting blood glucose below 90, which you can easily measure at home.
While limiting carbs to less than 50 grams per day when you are metabolically inflexible is a powerful strategy, once you regain your ability to burn fat for fuel, most will find that they need to include a healthy source of carbs back into their diet. A simple strategy would be to shoot for around 50 grams on your low-carb days and double or triple that on your high-carb days. 
You can start by simply alternating low and high carb days and monitor your fasting blood glucose. If it starts to rise over time, you will know that it is probably better to decrease the frequency of your high-carb days. Again, the best carbs to use would be fruit or white rice, as they are virtually LA-free. After you have been on a low-LA diet for a year or two, you can integrate other carbs that are higher in LA.
Fats — Be Careful of Cooking Oils

Ideally, it would be best to limit the amount of oil you use for cooking. Typically, it is better to cook using no oils and substitute grass-fed butter, instead. This is because seed oils are the single greatest source of omega-6 LA and the higher you heat food, the more toxic byproducts you create.
You might wonder how you can limit your cooking oils. Let me give you an example. If you were cooking ground beef or bison, you could cook in a frying pan or in a covered pot over low heat using the water in the meat to convert to steam and cook the food at a low 212 degrees Fahrenheit. 
If you choose to use oil for cooking, then you can use the table5 below to help you select the best oils. It is color coded to guide you. The preferred oils are shaded green. Notice that concentrated animal feeding operation (CAFO) beef tallow or butter has three times as much LA as the grass-fed version.6 They still are very low and within an acceptable range, but it is clearly better to choose the higher quality grass fed version when you can.
Lard and palm oil are less preferred options because of their higher LA content. There is a load of confusion around olive oil, though, that needs to be cleared up. And, while avocado oil isn’t widely appreciated, it too has the same concerns as olive oil.
Both olive oil and avocado oil LA content varies widely. Typically, it will average around 10%, although some oils could be twice as high. The reason one needs to be ultra-careful using these oils is because the vast majority (over 80%) are adulterated with cheaper and high LA oils like safflower.
So, if you plan on using either of these oils, you need to have independent objective confirmation that the oil has not been tampered with. These brands are typically more expensive as authentic olive and avocado oils have much higher production costs.
Oils that should be completely avoided at all times are the primary culprits of destroying health in the 20th century: the toxic seed oils that are shaded in red. That said, the dose makes the poison. So, you can theoretically use any of the oils in the table below so long as your total intake of LA for that day is less than 2% of your total calories. The higher up on the table the oil is, the more likely you will exceed your safe limit for the day.

What About Seeds and Nuts?

Seeds and nuts can be used in moderation. The table below indicates approximately how much LA is common seeds7 and nuts.8,9, 10 You can see that most are nearly half LA. For that reason, it is very easy to reach really high levels of LA if you eat lots of seeds and nuts, with the exception of macadamia nuts.

Also keep in mind that even if the nut has a relatively low quantity of LA, like almonds, it could be loaded with other potential problems like oxalates. Oxalates are razor sharp crystals contained in many nuts and seeds. They are water soluble and only found in the unprocessed seed or nut. If you are consuming an oil version of the seed or nut, it will contain virtually no oxalates.
So, the key here is that seeds and nuts are clearly allowed, but large quantities should be avoided. Be sure to enter them into Cronometer so you can see precisely how much LA they contain and how they are influencing your total daily intake.
Please note that the percent of LA indicated for the foods above is the typical average. It is important to understand that the percent of LA in any specific food can be highly variable based on many factors, but the values listed are what are typically found in the literature.
Ideal Sources of Protein

In general, animal foods are typically much lower in LA than vegetable sources. This is especially true for seeds and most all nuts, except macadamia, as you can see in the table above. Additionally, many vegetable sources have oxalates, phytates and gluten, which have been previously well-documented to have adverse health effects.

There are two important exceptions, though. Ideally, you will want to limit your intake of chicken and pork as these animals are universally fed grains that are loaded with LA. It is common for them to have LA levels from 10% to 20%. They will contain lower amounts of LA if they are not raised in a factory farm (CAFO), but most likely will exceed levels in lamb, beef, bison and other game animals like elk, by 10-fold.
For most of us, the ideal source of protein would be from bison, followed by beef and lamb. An 8-ounce serving of these foods typically has less than 1 gram of LA. In addition to eating muscle meat, it would be wise to regularly include sources of organ meats, as they are loaded with important micronutrients not found in muscle meat.
Eggs are another source of LA concern as the yolks are about 16% LA. This is because nearly all chickens, including those that are pasture raised, are given grain as their primary feed. As long as you aren’t allergic to eggs, they are an incredibly healthy nutrient-dense food and one of the finest sources of bioavailable choline available. 
I believe it would be wise to limit eggs to four or less per day, as that would provide about 2.5 grams of LA. As mentioned earlier, I am currently in the middle of an experiment.
I’m feeding my 20 chickens a low-LA carnivore-type diet consisting of 1 gallon of 4-day-old sprouted mung beans with 4 ounces of melted butter mixed in, along with a regular supply of beef liver and mealworms. I will be analyzing the eggs for LA in the next few months as it takes some time for LA to be liberated after it’s consumed.

A 2019 survey of 2,000 people in the U.S. crowned corn the new favorite vegetable, with an approval rating of 91%.1 Onions followed not far behind with an approval rating of 87%, making it among the top five favorite vegetables. The survey found some of the least favorite vegetables included asparagus, mushrooms and eggplant.
Many experts believe that the first onions appeared in Central Asia. Most agree the vegetable has been cultivated for nearly 5,000 years and might be one of the first cultivated crops since they are easy to grow and transport, and have a long shelf life.2
Pliny the Elder catalogued how Romans used onions in Pompeii before being killed by the volcano. His documents showed that onions’ curative powers included the ability to induce sleep, heal toothaches and mouth sores and address vision problems. Others have documented their use in the treatment of headaches and heart disease.3
In the Middle Ages, onions were used to help relieve headaches, hair loss and help to pay the rent. The first pilgrims brought them on the Mayflower to America to cultivate, where they became one of the first products brought to market in New England.
Onions are a member of the allium family, which also includes garlic, leeks, shallots and chives.4 About 125,000 acres produce 6.2 billion pounds of onions each year in the U.S.5 The top producing states are California, Eastern Oregon, Idaho and Washington.
Other countries producing a large number of onions include Turkey, Pakistan, China and India. According to Live Science, the average person in the U.S. eats 20 pounds of onions each year.
Nutrient Value Basis of Onion’s Health Benefits

It’s likely the many health benefits derived from eating onions comes from the nutrient value of the vegetable. One small onion has just 28 calories, 6.5 grams (g) of carbohydrate and 1.1 g of total fiber. It also contains:6

Calcium, 16.1 milligrams (mg)
Magnesium, 7 mg
Potassium, 102 mg
Vitamin C, 5.18 mg
Choline, 4.27 mg

Onions are also surprisingly high in beneficial polyphenols.7 This group of plant compounds plays an important role in the prevention and reduction of diabetes, cancer and cardiovascular diseases. In a comparison of the polyphenol and antioxidant capacity between red and yellow onions researchers found the outer layers of the onions had the highest number of total polyphenols and flavonoids.
The outer layers of both types of onions also had the highest antioxidant activity. However, overall, the red onion had better antioxidant activity, with a higher number of total polyphenols and flavonoids that were associated with antioxidant activity. Onions have over 25 varieties of flavonoids that help prevent cellular damage contributing to chronic diseases such as diabetes and heart disease.
In addition to the calcium content promoting strong bones, onions may also relieve oxidative stress, which in turn decreases bone loss and can help prevent osteoporosis.8 Onions are also good sources of vitamins A and K, which in addition to vitamin C help protect your skin from ultraviolet rays. Vitamin C also helps your body produce collagen, a structural support for your skin and hair.
Prebiotic Compound Has Multiple Benefits

Prebiotics are indigestible fiber that help nourish the beneficial bacteria in your body. In turn, these bacteria help with digestion and absorption of your food, as well as play a significant role in the function of your immune system. One of these prebiotics is inulin, a water-soluble form of dietary fiber that’s found in onions.9
Inulin is found in thousands of species of plants, but most experts agree that chicory root is the richest source with up to 20 g of inulin per 100 g in weight. Jerusalem artichokes, garlic, asparagus and raw onion are also significant sources, with Jerusalem artichokes measuring up to 19 g and raw onion measuring from 5 to 9 g.10
Your gut thrives on adequate amounts of fiber as it helps improve digestive health and relieves constipation. In one study, researchers found those who took inulin had bowel movements with improved stool consistency,11 and another four-week study showed older adults experienced better digestion with less constipation.12
In addition to feeding the beneficial bacteria in your gut microbiome, inulin also demonstrates the ability to promote weight loss and reduce liver fat cells in people who are prediabetic.13
Since inulin is colorless, has a neutral taste and is highly soluble, manufacturers are adding it to food products to help increase the fiber content of processed foods.14 In a review of inulin studies published in U.S. Pharmacist, the data showed inulin also has an effect on mineral absorption and a potential effect on lipid levels.15
Several studies showed it helps improve calcium absorption, which is highly beneficial in the onion since it is also a rich source of calcium. Overall, the data on the effect on lipids were mixed as most studies had a small number of participants. However, past research has shown that soluble fiber does lower lipid levels.16
In one study of women who had Type 2 diabetes, the researchers found those with inulin supplementation had better glycemic control.17 It also appears that flavonoid-rich foods such as onions may help inhibit the growth of H. pylori, a type of bacteria responsible for most ulcers.18
Allium Vegetables Linked to Cancer Prevention

Allium vegetables are popular in different dishes worldwide and some epidemiological studies have found an association between people eating large amounts of allium vegetables and a reduced risk of cancer, particularly in the gastrointestinal tract.19
The majority of these studies have come from mechanistic research, or studies that are “designed to understand a biological or behavioral process, the pathophysiology of a disease, or the mechanism of action of an intervention.”20
Some of these have been clinical trials evaluating the mechanism sulfur compounds in allium vegetables have on bioactivation of carcinogens and antimicrobial activities. In a review of the literature, researchers found:21 “Allium vegetables and their components have effects at each stage of carcinogenesis and affect many biological processes that modify cancer risk.”
In early 2019, a study published in the Asia-Pacific Journal of Clinical Oncology revealed the results of an analysis of 833 patients with colorectal cancer who were matched against an equal number of healthy controls.22 Demographic and dietary data were collected using interviews.
After the analysis, the researchers found that adults who ate high amounts of allium vegetables had a 79% lower risk colorectal cancer. Dr. Zhi Li, of the First Hospital of China Medical University, was the senior author, who commented on the results saying:23

“It is worth noting that in our research, there seems to be a trend: the greater the amount of allium vegetables, the better the protection. In general, the present findings shed light on the primary prevention of colorectal cancer through lifestyle intervention, which deserves further in-depth explorations.”

Angela Lemond, spokesperson for the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, agrees that foods high in antioxidants and which are “one of the richest sources of dietary flavonoids,”24 are important to good health:25

“Foods that are high in antioxidants and amino acids allow your body to function optimally. Antioxidants help prevent damage, and cancer. Amino acids are the basic building block for protein, and protein is used in virtually every vital function in the body.”

Quercetin Linked to Blood Pressure and Immune Function

Quercetin is another compound found in onions that is linked to a large number of health benefits. This single antioxidant flavonoid is found in high concentrations in onions. Researchers have found some onions store quercetin in the outer layers and others have higher concentration in the inner layers.26
Red onions and chartreuse onions have the highest levels in the outer layers, whereas the highest levels of quercetin were detected in the inner layer of the yellow onion. In this study, data showed the yellow onions had more total quercetin than red onions, and chartreuse onions had the highest level overall.
The most common onions are red, yellow and white, whereas chartreuse is a relatively rare genetic genotype.27 There are two main classes of flavonoids in onions — anthocyanins that are responsible for the color of red onions and quercetin that is responsible for the yellow and brown skins of other varieties.28
In one review of the literature researchers evaluated the anti-obesity activity of onions and their effect on related comorbidities.29 Analysis revealed studies that demonstrated “quercetin-rich onion peel extract” could inhibit fat cell generation in the lab and an animal model.
Additionally, they found raw extract could reduce blood sugar in an animal model after 24 hours and had the potential for pancreatic beta cell regeneration. The benefits extended to overweight and obese patients with high blood pressure who used concentrations of quercetin extracted from onion skin.
In this study, a group of participants took three capsules each day and while there was no difference in blood pressure measurements in the total group, blood pressure was significantly reduced in the subgroup of participants who had high blood pressure.
As I’ve written in the past, quercetin in combination with vitamin C has a powerful effect on your immune system and specifically to help prevent COVID-19. Since 1 cup of chopped onions provides 13.11% of your recommended daily amount of vitamin C,30,31 onions are a healthy addition to your daily nutritional intake.32 The benefits to your immune system are extensive and include:33

“Quercetin is known for its antioxidant activity in radical scavenging and anti-allergic properties characterized by stimulation of immune system, antiviral activity, inhibition of histamine release, decrease in pro-inflammatory cytokines, leukotrienes creation, and suppresses interleukin IL-4 production.

It can improve the Th1/Th2 balance, and restrain antigen-specific IgE antibody formation. It is also effective in the inhibition of enzymes such as lipoxygenase, eosinophil and peroxidase and the suppression of inflammatory mediators.”

How to Pick, Peel and Store Your Onions

Whether you’re harvesting from your own garden or selecting onions at the grocery store, use those that are dry and firm. Although they have a long shelf life, once they reach the end the flesh begins to get soft and moist.34 The onion should have little or no scent before you begin cutting.
As you peel the onion, take off the least amount of skin from the outer layer. As with many other vegetables, the outer layers are packed with antioxidants, which are best used in your meal and not in the garbage or compost pile.
The chemical properties of onions that make them savory are the same that trigger your tears as you’re peeling and chopping. These are sulfur compounds the plant uses in chemical warfare against predators. As you slice an onion, it produces a sulfur-based gas. This reacts with your tears and forms the familiar irritation triggered by a sulfenic acid substrate.35
To reduce the effect, try standing farther away so as the gas is released it disperses before reaching your face. You can also try cutting onions in front of a fan that blows the gas away from you. Try refrigerating the onions for 30 minutes and leaving the roots intact as you’re cutting and peeling. According to the National Onion Association, the roots have the highest concentration of sulfur.36
Onions should be stored in a cool, dry and well-ventilated area. Instead of a plastic bag, consider wrapping each in a paper towel before placing in the refrigerator. The sweeter the onion, the higher the water content, which means sweet onions have a shorter shelf life than other types of onions.
If learning about the health benefits of eating onions has inspired you to include them in your meal planning, then you’ll want to check out the National Onion Association Guide to help choose the different types of onions, their flavors and how they are best prepared.37 You’ll also find this and more health information about onions in “Onion Power!” Correction – Article was updated to correct typo of “insulin” to “inulin.”

In his December 24, 2020, video report,1,2 “The Future of Vaccines,” investigative journalist James Corbett reviews how the novel COVID-19 vaccine is paving the way for nonconsensual medical experimentation on the general public.

As noted by Corbett, if the international medical establishment get their way, nothing will get back to “normal” until world health officials have definitively determined there is an effective COVID vaccine in place.

Even then, however, things may not go back to the normal we’re accustomed to or expect. Since the beginning of the pandemic, world leaders have warned that social distancing, mask wearing, travel restrictions and other measures will become part of our “new normal.”3

Be that as it may, the refrain we keep hearing from the likes of Bill Gates, Dr. Anthony Fauci and a long list of other world leaders is that any sense of normalcy will remain elusive until or unless the entire global population gets vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2.
Brave New World of Vaccines
“The public is being prepared for an unprecedented global vaccination campaign,” Corbett says. However, one major problem with this is that the current COVID-19 vaccines are still in the experimental stage. While they’ve been granted emergency use authorization, they still haven’t completed Stage 3 clinical trials. Data for some end points won’t even be collected until 24 months after injection.

Another problem is that the COVID vaccines’ adverse side effects are still relatively unknown due to the “fanatical” warp speed at which they were developed.
Even if there is only one serious event per 1,000 people, cumulatively that would equate to 100,000 people being harmed by the vaccine for every 100 million vaccinated — a steep price for an infection that has an overall noninstitutionalized infection fatality rate of just 0.26%.4 Among those under the age of 40, the infection fatality rate is a mere 0.01%, which is lower than that for seasonal influenza.5

A third issue that Corbett homes in on in his report is the fact that the COVID-19 vaccines are “unlike any vaccines that have ever been used on the human population before,” and “as radically different as these vaccines appear, they represent only the very beginning of a complete transformation of vaccine technology that is currently taking place in research labs across the planet.”6

The threat of forcing or compelling people to become unwilling guinea pigs in an ongoing medical experiment is immoral on its face. But even the prospect of enforcing such mandates would entail the erection of a surveillance and tracking system that further threatens basic rights and liberties. After all, in order to determine who has been vaccinated … there will need to be a system for identifying and tracking each vaccine recipient. ~ James Corbett
Are COVID-19 Vaccines Really as Effective as Advertised?
On an important side note, while Pfizer’s and Moderna’s vaccines have reported very high success rates, their “success” is only measured by their ability to lessen moderate to severe COVID-19 symptoms such as cough and headache. Presumably, this would lower the risk of hospitalization and death for vaccinated individuals.
However, as explained in “How COVID-19 Vaccine Trials Are Rigged,” the vaccines were not evaluated for their ability to actually prevent infection and transmission of the virus. So, since the vaccine cannot reduce infection, hospitalizations or deaths, it cannot create vaccine-acquired herd immunity and end the pandemic, even though this has been the vaccine’s primary selling point. Furthermore, as noted by Corbett:7

“The studies are touted as involving tens of thousands of people, but in Pfizer’s trial, only 170 of them were reported as being ‘diagnosed with COVID-19’ during the trial. Of those, 162 were in the placebo group and eight were in the vaccine group.

From this, it is inferred that the vaccine prevented 154/162 people from developing the disease, or ‘95%.’ But as even the British Medical Journal points out,8 ‘a relative risk reduction is being reported, not absolute risk reduction, which appears to be less than 1%.'”

COVID-19 Ushers in a Whole New Breed of Vaccines 
Getting back to the main point of the Corbett report, the COVID-19 vaccines under development are unlike any other vaccine ever released. They’re mRNA vaccines, and do not work like conventional vaccines. In summary, RNA are molecules that encode certain proteins. The RNA used in COVID-19 vaccines encode for the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein.

The idea is that by injecting this RNA, your own cells will start to produce and secrete the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein. Your immune system will then respond to the presence of that viral protein by producing antibodies. It’s important to realize that this technology is entirely unproven, and there’s no telling how this RNA programming might affect your health in years to come. As explained by Corbett:9

“The term ‘vaccination’ … came to refer to the general process of introducing immunogens or attenuated infectious agents into the body in order to stimulate the immune system to fight infections. But this is not how mRNA vaccines function.

In contrast to vaccination, which involves introducing an immunogen into the body, mRNA vaccines seek to introduce messenger RNA into the body in order to ‘trick’ that body’s cells into producing immunogens, which then stimulate an immune response …

Despite the straw man argument that opposition to the vaccine comes solely from ignorant members of the public who are worried about being ‘injected with mircochips,’ there are genuine concerns about the long-term safety of these vaccines coming from within the scientific community, and even from whistleblowers from within the ranks of the Big Pharma manufacturers themselves.”

December 1, 2020, two such whistleblowers — Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg, former chair of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe Health Committee, and Dr. Michael Yeadon, former vice-president and chief scientific officer at Pfizer Global R&D — filed a petition10 calling on the European Medicine Agency to halt Phase 3 clinical trials of the Pfizer mRNA vaccine until they’ve been restructured to address critical safety concerns.
Key Safety Concerns

The four key safety concerns specified in the petition11 to the European Medicine Agency are:

1. The potential for formation of non-neutralizing antibodies that can trigger an exaggerated immune reaction (referred to as paradoxical immune enhancement or antibody-dependent immune amplification) when the individual is exposed to the real “wild” virus post-vaccination.

Antibody-dependent amplification has been repeatedly demonstrated in coronavirus vaccine trials on animals.12 While the animals initially tolerated the vaccine well and had robust immune responses, they later became severely ill or died when infected with the wild virus. Put plainly, the vaccine increased their susceptibility to the virus and made them more likely to die from the infection.

2. Pfizer’s mRNA vaccine contains polyethylene glycol (PEG), and studies have shown 70% of people develop antibodies against this substance. This suggests PEG may trigger fatal allergic reactions in many who receive the vaccine.

Indeed, within days of the vaccine’s release, reports started coming in of people having life-threatening anaphylactic reactions,13 leading to warnings that people with known allergies should not take the Pfizer vaccine.14 Since then, anaphylactic reactions have been reported by recipients of the Moderna mRNA vaccine as well.15
3. The mRNA vaccine triggers your body to produce antibodies against the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, and spike proteins in turn contain syncytin-homologous proteins that are essential for the formation of placenta. If a woman’s immune system starts reacting against syncytin-1, then there is the possibility she could become infertile.

This is an issue that none of the vaccine studies is looking at specifically. Mass vaccinating women of childbearing age against COVID-19 could potentially have the devastating consequence of causing mass infertility if the vaccine triggers an immune reaction against syncytin-1. The petition states that this possibility must be “absolutely ruled out” before mass vaccination takes place.
4. The studies are far too brief in duration to allow a realistic estimation of side effects. Depending on what those effects end up being, millions of people may be exposed to unacceptable risk in return for a very minor benefit. 

In an interview — a snippet of which is featured in the Corbett Report — Del Bigtree asked Wodarg how we can ensure we don’t end up making the greatest scientific error in history with this vaccine campaign. Wodarg answered:16

“Protect yourself and protect your neighbors and friends so that they don’t get this vaccine … And you have to show up. You have to tell the politicians that you will blame them for what they do with this. I think what’s happening … is a great betrayal. We are betrayed. And people who betray normally are punished, and we won’t forget this if they go on doing this with us.”

Health Freedom Undermined in the Name of ‘Emergency’

As noted by Corbett, even more fundamental than any particular safety concern is the fact that a vaccination campaign of this magnitude, using an entirely novel technology, sets “the most dangerous public health precedent in the history of humanity.” By drumming up unnecessary panic, many are now willing to forgo all manner of freedom in the name of responding to a global health emergency.

“One of these core freedoms is the ability to refuse an experimental medical procedure, a freedom that was acknowledged in the Nuremberg Code of 194717 and enshrined in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which states that ‘no one shall be subjected without his free consent to medical or scientific experimentation,'” Corbett says.18
“Despite the fact that the clinical trials surrounding these experimental vaccines are ongoing and that the FDA itself admits19 that there is ‘currently insufficient data to make conclusions about the safety of the vaccine in subpopulations such as children less than 16 years of age, pregnant and lactating individuals, and immunocompromised individuals’ and ‘risk of vaccine-enhanced disease over time, potentially associated with waning immunity, remains unknown,’ governments around the world are contemplating making these vaccinations mandatory, or compelling people to take them against their will by restricting their access to public life until they subject themselves to this medical experimentation.

The threat of forcing or compelling people to become unwilling guinea pigs in an ongoing medical experiment is immoral on its face. But even the prospect of enforcing such mandates would entail the erection of a surveillance and tracking system that further threatens basic rights and liberties.

After all, in order to determine who has been vaccinated — and thus who is allowed to board an airplane or access a stadium or enter a store with a vaccine policy — there will need to be a system for identifying and tracking each vaccine recipient.”

Indeed, I’ve written several articles detailing how the tracking of vaccination status will usher in a surveillance apparatus greater than anything we’ve ever experienced before. This initial vaccine surveillance system will ultimately be tied into other digital systems, such as all other medical records, biometric ID and an all-digital banking system.
The implementation of a Google-based social credit system, similar to that implemented in China in 2018, is highly likely as well. Under a social credit system, points are awarded or subtracted for certain types of behavior. When your score falls below a certain point, punishment is meted out in the form of travel restrictions or the inability to obtain a loan, for example.

“There are already apps like IBM’s Digital Health Pass and CLEAR’s Health Pass that envision a world where our biometric ID will be linked via our smartphones to our health data in order to grant or deny access from public spaces and public events,” Corbett says.

“Once the COVID vaccines are widely distributed, it would simply be a question of linking one’s vaccination record to the health pass app to prevent the unvaccinated from accessing any given space …

The COVID vaccine presents governments, intelligence agencies and corporations that have a direct interest in suppressing dissent, monitoring dissidents and controlling their populations with the perfect opportunity to make such systems a permanent fixture of daily life.

After the immediate ‘threat’ of the declared public health crisis subsides, the public is already being warned that these apps will be transitioned seamlessly into general monitoring of the population.”

The precedent being set up right now is one that, in the future, will grant health authorities the “right” to force any number of experimental drugs, vaccines and technologies upon us in the name of public health. If the right to refuse an experimental medical procedure is not upheld now, the entire population of the earth will be available for experimentation without recourse. 
Novel Medical Technologies Under Development

While COVID-19 vaccines do not contain tracking-enabled microchips, we are indeed looking at a future where quantum dot tags and hydrogel biosensors will likely be used in vaccine delivery, and they will allow far more than just identifying or tracking your vaccination status.
They’ll be able to collect and transmit all sorts of information about what’s going on in your body. The ramifications of handing all of this biological data over to some artificial intelligence-driven machine run by a technocratic elite hell-bent on owning all the world’s resources is anyone’s guess.
Already, there’s a study underway to evaluate how an implantable biosensor, which continuously monitors your body chemistry, can be used as an early warning system for disease outbreaks, biological attacks and pandemics by sending a signal when it detects the onset of an infection. Other medical technologies under development include:

Edible vaccines
Remote-controlled vaccine delivery systems — For example, a hydrogel mesh sphere containing a vaccine can be injected under the skin, and when you swallow a particular substance that dissolves the hydrogel, the vaccine is released. Proof of concept for this was demonstrated in 2014
Autonomous DNA nanorobots that can carry molecular payloads into your cells
Shape-changing microdevices called “theragrippers” that, when placed into your gastrointestinal tract, extend drug delivery

As noted by Corbett:

“Nanobots. Shape-changing bioelectronic devices. Remote-controlled vaccines. This is not the stuff of science fiction but of science fact, and the precedent that is being set during the COVID era to rush experimental and unproven medical technologies into use on the back of a declared crisis is the same precedent that could be used to foist these injectable technologies on the public in the future …

These injectables are part of an elaborate system of biological, economic, and political control that is being bankrolled into existence by powerful special interests.”

Indisputable Facts

While the technocratic elite behind the Great Reset insist there’s nothing nefarious about any of these experimental technologies, mRNA vaccines included, the fact that they will lead us into a future that a vast majority of people would never choose, given the chance, seems inevitable. Corbett notes:20

“Despite the protestations of those like Bill Gates who have a financial interest in these experimental vaccines, and the Big Pharma corporations that are selling these vaccines, and the governments that are being bribed21 by the international public health cartel to purchase these vaccines and pressure their public to accept them, and the corporate media who relies on these Big Pharma corporations for their advertising dollars, some facts about these novel coronavirus vaccines are indisputable:

• They are the most rushed vaccines ever developed.
• The manufacturers have been given total immunity from liability if their experimental vaccines cause injury.22
• The clinical trials testing the safety of these injections are not finished, meaning that every member of the public who takes one is now a human guinea pig in an ongoing medical experiment with the population of the planet.
• The Pfizer and Moderna mRNA vaccines are themselves part of an experimental class of injection that has never before been given to the public;
• These vaccines have not been tested for their ability to prevent infection or spread of SARS-CoV-2 and are not intended to do so.
• And there is absolutely no long-term data about these vaccines to determine what their effects may be on fertility, the potential for pathogenic priming,23 or any other serious adverse reaction.

That this represents the most reckless and brazen experiment in the history of the world is undeniable on its face. Never before have billions of people been pressured to submit to a completely experimental, invasive medical procedure on the basis of a disease with a greater than 99% survival rate …

Surely those who wish to be the test subjects in this ongoing experiment should be free to make themselves into guinea pigs for the Big Pharma manufacturers.

But every mandate or compulsion to force the vaccine on an unwilling recipient sets a dangerous precedent, a precedent that will one day lead to a tracked and surveilled population unable to resist the next generation of injectable bioelectronics.

This is not a game, this is not a test. Billions of people are being asked to participate in a gigantic experiment, not just an experiment in medical technology, but an experiment in compliance and blind trust.

The pressure to say yes and to go along with the crowd in this experiment is enormous. But if we lose the freedom to say “no” to this, then we may lose control over our bodily autonomy — and, ultimately, our humanity — forever.”

For years, concerns have been raised that previous flu vaccination seems to increase patients’ risk of contracting more severe pandemic illness. This occurred during the 2008 to 2009 flu season, when prior vaccination with the seasonal flu vaccine was associated with an increased risk of H1N1 “swine flu” during spring/summer 2009 in Canada.1
A January 2020 study published in the journal Vaccine also found people were more likely to get some form of coronavirus infection if they had been vaccinated against influenza during the 2017 to 2018 flu season.2
Compared to unvaccinated individuals, those who had received a seasonal flu shot were 36% more likely to contract unspecified coronavirus infection (it did not specifically mention SARS-CoV-2, the coronavirus that causes COVID-19) and 51% more likely to contract human metapneumovirus (hMPV) infection, which has symptoms similar to COVID-19.3
Again, in October 2020, another positive association was found between COVID-19 deaths and flu vaccination rates in the elderly,4 raising further questions about the potentially serious unintended side effects of annual flu shots.
Flu Vaccination Linked to Increased Risk of COVID-19 Death

Christian Wehenkel, a professor of forest genetics, forest ecosystem analysis, forestry, biometrics, forest growth and biodiversity with the Universidad Juarez del Estado de Durango, and a PeerJ editor, analyzed data sets from 39 countries with more than one-half million inhabitants.5 He expected to find that prior flu vaccination would be linked to lower COVID-19 death risk, but instead the data revealed the opposite.
Among people aged 65 years and older, flu vaccination was positively associated with COVID-19 deaths, meaning those who got a flu vaccine were more likely to die from COVID-19. “Contrary to expectations, the present worldwide analysis and European sub-analysis do not support the previously reported negative association between COVID-19 deaths (DPMI) and IVR [influenza vaccination rate] in elderly people,” Wehenkel wrote.
A May 2020 analysis by online news publication The Gateway Pundit similarly found that European countries with the highest COVID-19 death rates had high rates of flu vaccination — at least 50% —  among the elderly.6 For instance, they wrote, “Denmark and Germany, with lower use of the flu vaccine, had considerably lower Covid-19 mortality.”
They attempted to update their figures for fall 2020, and were able to update COVID-19 mortality rates but did not obtain current vaccination data. Spikes in COVID-19 deaths were noted, which they suggested could be related to a sudden uptick in flu vaccination in countries that had previously lower vaccination rates:7

“This [increase in COVID-19 deaths] could simply be due to the virus reaching endemic level later in east Europe, but another factor could be sudden increase in flu vaccination in counties of hitherto low uptake. Are they unwittingly endangering their seniors?

The World Health Organization is vigorously promoting flu vaccination in Europe, with posters warning ‘don’t bring home an unwanted visitor: protect your family by getting vaccinated.’ The Covid-19 pandemic has terrified the public and many people see a vaccine as the only means of escape.”

Wehenkel’s data, however, picks up where they left off, showing by scatterplot a clear association of COVID-19 deaths per million inhabitants with flu vaccination rate, up to July 25, 2020 (each dot represents a different European country):8,9

The Problem With Pathogenic Priming

Given the PeerJ study’s highly controversial finding, which, if proven to be causative, would call into question annual flu vaccination, a publisher’s note at the top reminds readers that correlation does not necessarily mean causation.
“[T]his article should not be taken to suggest that receiving the influenza vaccination results in an increased risk of death for an individual with COVID-19 as there may be many confounding factors at play (including, for example, socioeconomic factors),” it reads.10 It also doesn’t rule out causation, however, and this is a potential link that must be urgently explored. The Gateway Pundit explained:11

“It is right to ask the question: are patients who die of / with Covid-19 more likely to have received the flu vaccine? Given the clear correlation from Wehenkel’s data, an urgent investigation is needed to ascertain whether the large increase in Covid-19 deaths in eastern Europe in the autumn of 2020 correlates with an increase in flu jabs in autumn 2020 in those same countries.”

They didn’t stop there:12

“This leads on to the further explosive question: are flu jabs not only correlative with Covid-19 mortality, but causative by way of pathogenic priming? If the data from autumn 2020 confirm correlation, causation should be investigated with rigor and urgency.”

What is pathogenic priming? It’s a scenario in which, rather than enhancing your immunity against the infection, exposure to a virus or vaccine enhances the virus’ ability to enter and infect your cells, resulting in more severe disease.13
Research published in the Journal of Translational Autoimmunity confirmed that treatment with a vaccine may increase the risks associated with a wild type virus rather than protect against it, and concluded, as its title suggests, “Pathogenic priming likely contributes to serious and critical illness and mortality in COVID-19 via automimmunity.”14
Coronavirus Vaccines Have Enhanced Disease in the Past

The Journal of Translational Autoimmunity article, written by James Lyons-Weiler with the Institute for Pure and Applied Knowledge, a nonprofit organization that performs scientific research in the public interest, explains how pathogenic priming occurred during previous trials of a SARS coronavirus vaccine:15

“In SARS, a type of ‘priming’ of the immune system was observed during animal studies of SARS spike protein-based vaccines leading to increased morbidity and mortality in vaccinated animals who were subsequently exposed to wild SARS virus.

The problem, highlighted in two studies, became obvious following post-vaccination challenge with the SARS virus … recombinant SARS spike-protein-based vaccines not only failed to provide protection from SARS-CoV infection, but also that the mice experienced increased immunopathology with eosinophilic infiltrates in their lungs.

Similarly … ferrets previously vaccinated against SARS-CoV also developed a strong inflammatory response in liver tissue (hepatitis). Both studies suspected a ‘cellular immune response.’

These types of unfortunate outcomes are sometimes referred to as ‘immune enhancement’; however, this nearly euphemistic phrase fails to convey the increased risk of illness and death due to prior exposure to the SARS spike protein. For this reason, I refer to the concept as ‘pathogen priming’.”

At the time, even long-time pro-vaccine advocate Dr. Peter Hotez, dean of the National School of Tropical Medicine and professor of pediatrics and molecular virology and microbiology at Baylor College of Medicine, was shaken. According to a feature published in PNAS:16

“When SARS, also a coronavirus, appeared in China and spread globally nearly two decades ago, Hotez was among researchers who began investigating a potential vaccine.

In early tests of his candidate, he witnessed how immune cells of vaccinated animals attacked lung tissue, in much the same way that the RSV vaccine had resulted in immune cells attacking kids’ lungs. ‘I thought, ‘Oh crap,’’ he recalls, noting his initial fear that a safe vaccine may again not be possible.”

Despite years of additional research and alternative development strategies, immune enhancement concerns remain, and, as explained by Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. in our 2020 interview, coronavirus vaccines remain notorious for creating paradoxical immune enhancement.
Healthy 18-Year-Old Who Died of COVID-19 Got Flu Shot

NBC News Chicago reported the death of an 18-year-old girl from Tinley Park, Ill., who died from COVID-19 in December 2020 just three days after being hospitalized.17 It’s the type of tragic story that strikes fear in millions, but it’s important to remember that this type of death is extremely rare.
The COVID-19 survival rate among newborns to age 19 is 99.997%, according to data from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, cited by Dr. Reid Sheftall.18 What this heartbreaking loss should trigger, however, is increased investigation into why a previously healthy teenager died so unexpectedly from a virus that’s rarely dangerous in that age group.
In an interview, her mother stated that she had gotten a flu shot. Could this have been a factor in her body’s severe, and ultimately fatal, response to the virus? It’s impossible to know, but given the increasing research suggesting flu vaccination may worsen viral illness, it’s a connection that must be considered.
Research published in the Journal of Virology in 2011, for instance, found that seasonal flu vaccine may weaken children’s immune systems and increase their chances of getting sick from influenza viruses not included in the vaccine.
“[L]ong-term annual vaccination using inactivated vaccines may hamper the induction of cross-reactive CD8+ T cell responses by natural infections and thus may affect the induction of heterosubtypic immunity. This may render young children who have not previously been infected with an influenza virus more susceptible to infection with a pandemic influenza virus of a novel subtype,” the researchers noted.19
Flu Shots Could Be ‘Potential Contributors’ to Pandemic

Dr. Allan S. Cunningham, a retired pediatrician, reiterated what the data bear out — that flu vaccines should be evaluated as potential causative agents or, at least, contributors to the COVID-19 pandemic. In a rapid response to an article published by The BMJ, he stated:20

“A randomized placebo-controlled trial in children showed that flu shots increased fivefold the risk of acute respiratory infections caused by a group of noninfluenza viruses, including coronaviruses21 …

Such an observation may seem counterintuitive, but it is possible that influenza vaccines alter our immune systems non-specifically to increase susceptibility to other infections; this has been observed with DTP and other vaccines.22 There are other immune mechanisms that might also explain the observation.

To investigate this possibility, a case-control study is in order … Influenza vaccines have become sacred cows in some quarters, but they shouldn’t be.”

Meanwhile, in the U.S. the CDC reported that the percentage of respiratory specimens submitted for influenza testing that test positive decreased from greater than 20% to 2.3% since the start of the pandemic.23 In short, flu has essentially disappeared, for reasons unknown. But even while stating that flu cases are next to nonexistent this season — they still want you to get your flu shot, “especially this season.”24

Los Angeles has started to use digital receipts for people who have gotten a COVID-19 vaccination. Although this may feel like just one more step integrating digital record-keeping, it goes well beyond and ultimately has a much larger goal.
Digital health passports and vaccine verifications are just the beginning of data collection and social engineering designed to change your behavior and control your movements. The maneuver has been called the Great Reset and “the Fourth Industrial Revolution,” referring to the merging of digital, physical and biological systems.
At the center of this data collection and social engineering is artificial intelligence, which is a key component to effective surveillance. You might have thought the current state of artificial intelligence is not prepared to handle the vast amount of data that health passports can collect, but you would be wrong.
Likewise, just one year ago it might have been difficult to imagine widespread acceptance of cellphone apps to collect your vaccination status and convert it into a health passport, yet, under the context of a pandemic, it is suddenly perceived as necessary for public health.
The development and delivery of health passports as the new normal has been part of the plan for the Commons Project, which began developing software that tracks medical data long before the COVID-19 pandemic.1
First Step in Data Collection: Digital Vaccine Verification

The first steps for data collection begin with your health passport, which is not about disease transmission but, rather, surveillance and control. LA is taking this step with their digital vaccine verifications, which on the surface appear innocuous, and maybe even reasonable.
NBC News calls it an “intuitive idea.”2 The Los Angeles digital iPhone receipt is being launched with tech firm Healthvana using an app that can be stored in an Apple wallet or the Android equivalent. The initial aim is ostensibly to document people who get the first shot, so they also get the required booster. However, as Daily Mail writes and quotes Healthvana CEO:3

“But the digital receipt could also be used ‘to prove to airlines, to prove to schools, to prove to whoever needs it,’ that a person has been vaccinated, Healthvana CEO Ramin Bastani told Bloomberg.”

As technology groups hail the emergence of these digital verifications as a hope to streamline the two-step vaccination process, privacy groups continue to warn of the potential future invasions of privacy from government and private companies who can harvest data and medical information from health passports. In a statement, the advocacy group Privacy International warns:4

“This great moment of hope must not be seen opportunistically as yet another data grab. The deployment of vaccines, and in particular any “immunity passport” or certificate linked to the vaccination, must respect human rights.

As we’ve had to remind governments repeatedly over the last 10 months, and 30 years, such stealth opportunism by governments and companies will undermine trust and confidence, particularly at this time when they’re needed more than ever.”

Early in the pandemic in May 2020, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) warned:5

“It is one thing for an employee to voluntarily disclose their COVID-19 status to an employer on a one-off basis. But it is another for that information to be collected and retained, either by the government or by private companies offering immunity certifications, depending on how any immunity passport system in the U.S. is implemented.

The existing legal framework may not be sufficient to prevent this information from being shared, especially if it is held by private entities.

Once an immunity surveillance infrastructure is created for one purpose, there may be mission creep and moves to expand it into other contexts … As a result, immunity status may be stored with other personal details, such as travel, employment, or housing information, heightening the intrusiveness of an immunity passport system.

As tempting as immunity passports may be for policymakers who want a quick fix to restart economic activity in the face of widespread suffering from the COVID-19 pandemic, they present both public health and civil rights concerns that cannot be overlooked.”

No Proof Vaccination Prevents Viral Transmission

Businesses that are desperate to regain financial footing have suggested passports may be a stopgap measure. For instance, Ticketmaster announced it would offer an option to “allow event organizers to require proof of vaccination or a recent negative COVID-19 test.”6
However, the company was forced to reverse its decision after public outcry. They issued a statement clarifying their position, “there is absolutely no requirement from Ticketmaster mandating vaccines/testing for future events.”7
Business Insider reports the World Health Organization is continuing to urge people to self-quarantine when they travel since there isn’t enough evidence that the COVID-19 vaccine can prevent transmission of the virus.8 Their chief scientist Dr. Soumya Swaminathan spoke in a virtual briefing, saying:9

“At the moment I don’t believe we have enough evidence on any of the vaccines to be confident it will prevent people from actually getting the infection and therefore being able to pass it on. I think until we know more we need to assume that people who have been vaccinated need to take the same precautions till there is a certain level of herd immunity.”

The question is whether the vaccine can prevent asymptomatic transmissions, helping to protect more than the people who take the vaccine. One virologist is planning such a study but still needs funding and cooperation from the pharmaceutical companies.
Dr. Larry Corey, virologist at Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, proposes to sign up college students to receive one of two vaccines or a placebo injection.10 Corey pitched the idea to a public-private partnership and received enthusiastic support. However, the plan can’t be finalized until it receives buy-in from the pharmaceutical industry and he finds a funding partner.
Although the study would be expensive, Corey’s top concern is convincing Moderna or Pfizer to participate. Moderna’s chief medical officer believes their vaccine will reduce transmission, absent any scientific proof, saying:11

“Our results show that this vaccine can prevent you from being sick. It can prevent you from being severely sick. They do not show that they prevent you from potentially carrying this virus and transiently infecting others. When we start the deployment of this vaccine we will not have sufficient concrete data to prove that this vaccine reduces transmission.

Do I believe it reduces transmission? Absolutely yes … but, absent proof, I think it’s important that we don’t change behaviors solely on the basis of vaccination.”

Next Step in the Great Reset Is Your Health Passport

In this disturbing short video, the World Economic Forum’s “charismatic German leader” Klaus Schwab describes the Great Reset in terms of finding “social cohesion, fairness, inclusion and equality” through Marxist principles.
In other words, it’s a massive public relations and propaganda campaign to destroy capitalism and move control out of your hands and into the hands of those seeking power and control. November 10, 2016, the World Economic Forum published an article in Forbes titled, “Welcome to 2030: I Own Nothing, Have No Privacy and Life Has Never Been Better.”12
In it they describe living in a world where you will own nothing, have no privacy and be grateful that your humanity has been stripped away. Most telling is a short paragraph near the end of this ominous picture of life under the control of Marxist leaders:

“Once in a while I get annoyed about the fact that I have no real privacy. Nowhere I can go and not be registered. I know that, somewhere, everything I do, think and dream of is recorded. I just hope that nobody will use it against me.”

This is the focus of the “Great Reset,” “Fourth Industrial Revolution” or “Build Back Better,” each of which are terms used to tell the story of how you should want your life to change so that others can control what you think, want, buy and how you live. Only in this way will you experience “social cohesion, fairness, inclusion and equality.”
However, as one commenter wrote, “He says a reset but I can bet you his wealth and position won’t get reset.” And another points out, “The great reset while sounding like a good way to go, a fairer society with equal opportunity for all, but it’ll be run by the same people … how fair do you think it will really be?”13
As with most social change there must be a catalyst, and those pushing for the Great Reset are using the COVID-19 pandemic as a way of encouraging the public to change their behavior and accept control “for the greater good.” The frame of reference is that if you don’t change your behavior then you don’t care about your neighbor, family, friends and relatives.
This means because, if you did care, then you would want everyone to wear masks, get the vaccine and use a health passport so the spread of a ubiquitous virus can be “controlled” and life can be reset to the “new normal.” On the face of it, using digital health verifications may seem harmless and even sensible, but make no mistake, it is the next step in shaping your behavior.
This Is Not About Disease Transmission

As journalist James Corbett illustrates, the Great Reset is “working as some sort of marketing tool for the very old ideas of centralization of control into fewer hands, globalization [and] transformation of society through Orwellian surveillance technologies.”14 It is not about reducing disease transmission, lowering death rates or ensuring public health.
Tied to gaining control of your health and finances is also the desire to read your thoughts to control behavior. At a World Economic Forum meeting in 2016, panelists discussed brain scanning and brain mapping to be used by the legal system, a process that has been used in India where a brain scan was used to criminally convict someone.15 J. Peter Rosenfeld, psychologist and neuroscientist at Northwestern University, calls this “incredible.”16

“Technologies which are neither seriously peer-reviewed nor independently replicated are not, in my opinion, credible. The fact that an advanced and sophisticated democratic society such as India would actually convict persons based on an unproven technology is even more incredible.”

Jack Gallant, head of The Gallant Lab at UC Berkeley, believes it’s just a matter of time before there will be portable brain decoding technology that “decodes language as fast as you can text on your cellphone”: “Everyone will wear them, because people have shown that they’re quite willing to give up privacy for convenience.”17
The process through which this is all being funneled was developed by Robert Cialdini, Ph.D., a psychologist who studied and perfected sales techniques.18 His theory revolves around getting people to say “yes.” The more you say “yes,” the more likely it is you’ll say yes to the next request. He postulated and proved it’s easier to get someone to agree with you if you start small. Colin Shaw, founder and CEO of Beyond Philosophy LLC, describes the process this way:19

“Suppose I want you to give me $100. If I ask you for $100, you are probably going to say no. You likely have a rule about not giving people $100 when they ask for it. However, if I ask for $1, you would probably say yes. I get more than $1 you give me, though; I get you used to the idea of giving me money when I ask for it.

Then, once we have established that you would give me money, I ask for more the next time, like $20. Since you had already given me $1, you might think, “Well, what’s a little bit more?” Bit by bit, I work my way up to $100, starting with gaining your commitment early at a lower amount.”

Each small step seems reasonable and may be an action you could support. But, ultimately, the goal is greater than getting $1, wearing a mask or downloading a health passport. Ultimately, the goal is to get the public to agree to give up their basic human rights, to live under Marxist rule where you have no control and artificial intelligence knows you better than you know yourself.
Make no mistake, when it comes to vaccinations, this is a likely scenario, which may create legal prejudice and segregation, isolating those who do not choose to vaccinate — a far cry from Schwab’s description of “social cohesion, fairness, inclusion and equality.”
How to Resist the Great Reset

If this seems too much like Star Wars and not possible in your lifetime, you need only listen to Klaus Schwab describe how “we can build a new social contract particularly integrating the next generation”20 or understand that the technology to create such a world already exists and “people have shown that they’re quite willing to give up privacy for convenience.”21
In this short video above, Corbett interviews Howard Lichtman from ThickRedLine.org who succinctly outlines how citizens can engage with the police to exercise their rights. As Lichtman points out, “A right not exercised is a right lost.” It is the responsibility of every citizen to decide for themselves and then act responsibly on that decision.
His focus is on ending police enforcement of victimless crimes, such as mask wearing and lockdowns, while fixing attention on proper policing of crimes involving victims, such as theft, murder and rape.22

“The biggest problem with policing isn’t the police. It’s the politicians and bureaucrats that use legislation and executive orders, forcing the police to raise revenue on their friends and neighbors, to arrest peaceful people for victimless crimes, and steal money, vehicles and property using civil asset forfeiture.”

In his interview with Corbett, Lichtman points out it isn’t the police departments who are responsible for much of the poor relations with the public but, rather, politicians whose social engineering intent is speeding society toward the World Economic Forum’s ideal world of 2030.23

“It really is the politicians that are trying to force the police to use violence and be immoral to either raise revenue, or social engineering or what I would call economic warfare based on disease models that are already proven to be flawed and incorrect.”

I encourage you to also watch one of the most powerful videos I’ve seen with Barbara Loe Fisher, who inspires you to take up the cause and join the fight for vaccine freedom and independence. For more information about how you can participate, see “Global Vaccine Passport Will Be Required for Travel.”

The COVID-19 pandemic has brought us many harsh lessons. Importantly, it has shown us how easy it is to manufacture panic and control entire populations through deceptive means. Topping the list of deceptive strategies is the use of a test that falsely labels healthy individuals as sick and infectious. This allows mass testing to drive the narrative that we’re in a lethal pandemic.
Of course, I’m talking about the now infamous reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test. The fact is, the PCR test is not designed to be used as a diagnostic tool as it cannot distinguish between inactive viruses and “live” or reproductive ones.1
This is a crucial point, since inactive and reproductive viruses are not interchangeable in terms of infectivity. If you have a nonreproductive virus in your body, you will not get sick and you cannot spread it to others. Secondly, many if not most laboratories amplify the RNA collected far too many times, which results in healthy people testing “positive.”
The Crucial Detail That Nullifies Most PCR Test Results

The video above explains how the PCR test works and how we are interpreting results incorrectly. In summary, the PCR swab collects RNA from your nasal cavity. This RNA is then reverse transcribed into DNA. Due to its tiny size, it must be amplified to become discernible. Each round of amplification is called a cycle, and the number of amplification cycles used by any given test or lab is called a cycle threshold (CT).

The higher the CT, the greater the risk that insignificant sequences of viral DNA end up being magnified to the point that the test reads positive even if your viral load is extremely low or the virus is inactive and poses no threat to you or anyone else.
Many scientists have noted that anything over 35 cycles is scientifically indefensible.2,3,4 A September 28, 2020, study5 in Clinical Infectious Diseases revealed that when you run a PCR test at a CT of 35 or higher, the accuracy drops to 3%, resulting in a 97% false positive rate.
Yet, a test known as the Corman-Drosten paper and tests recommended by the World Health Organization are set to 45 cycles,6,7,8 and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommend running PCR tests at a CT of 40.9
The question is why, considering the consensus is that CTs over 35 render the test useless. When labs use these excessive cycle thresholds, you clearly end up with a grossly overestimated number of positive tests, so what we’re really dealing with is a “casedemic”10,11 — an epidemic of false positives.
Many are now questioning whether this was done on purpose to crash the global economy and provide cover for the implementation of what’s known as the Great Reset, which is nothing less than a global totalitarian takeover by unelected technocrats who seek to gobble up all the world’s assets.
Indeed, it seems quite clear we’re not dealing with a lethal pandemic in any real sense. Mortality statistics further prove this is the case, as overall mortality statistics have remained stable in 2020 and in line with previous years.12,13,14
In other words, people are dying from COVID-19, yes, but the illness is not killing an excess number of people. The same number of people would have died anyway, from something. Indeed, CDC data15 released August 26, 2020, showed only 6% of so-called COVID-19 deaths had COVID-19 listed as the sole cause on the death certificate.
“For deaths with conditions or causes in addition to COVID-19, on average, there were 2.6 additional conditions or causes per death,” the CDC stated, and any one of those comorbidities could have killed those people even if COVID-19 was nonexistent.
For Accuracy, Much Lower CTs Must Be Used

Now, if CTs above 35 are scientifically unjustified, just how low of a CT should be used? Quite a few studies have investigated this, so there’s no shortage of data at this point. The fact that the WHO, FDA and CDC still have not changed their CTs downward in light of all these data tells us they’re not interested in getting an accurate picture of the infection rate.

For example, an April 2020 study16 in the European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases showed that to get 100% confirmed real positives, the PCR test must be run at 17 cycles. Above 17 cycles, accuracy drops dramatically.

By the time you get to 33 cycles, the accuracy rate is a mere 20%, meaning 80% are false positives. Beyond 34 cycles, your chance of a positive PCR test being a true positive shrinks to zero.
More recently, a December 3, 2020, systematic review17 published in the journal of Clinical Infectious Diseases assessed the findings of 29 different studies — all of which were published in 2020 — comparing evidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection with the CTs used in testing.
Five of the studies included were unable to identify any live viruses in cases where a positive PCR test had used a CT above 24. What’s more, in order to produce live virus culture, a patient whose PCR test used a CT at or above 35 had to be symptomatic.
As reported by the authors, “12 studies reported that CT values were significantly lower … in specimens producing live virus culture.” In other words, the higher the CT, the lower the chance of a positive test actually being due to the presence of live (and infectious) virus.
“Two studies reported the odds of live virus culture reduced by approximately 33% for every one unit increase in CT,” the authors noted. Importantly, five of the studies included were unable to identify any live viruses in cases where a positive PCR test had used a CT above 24. What’s more, in order to produce live virus culture, a patient whose PCR test used a CT at or above 35 had to be symptomatic.
So, to summarize, if you have symptoms of COVID-19 and test positive using a PCR test that was run at 35 amplification cycles or higher, then you are likely to be infected and infectious.
However, if you do not have symptoms, yet test positive using a PCR test run at 35 CTs or higher, then it is likely a false positive and you pose no risk to others as you’re unlikely to carry any live virus. In fact, provided you’re asymptomatic, you’re unlikely to be infectious even if you test positive with a test run at 24 CTs or higher.
Fearmongering Success Hinges on Incorrect Use of PCR Test

The video above includes several interviews with experts who have openly criticized the use of PCR testing to diagnose infections such as COVID-19. These include:

The inventor of the PCR test, the late Kary Mullis (he has spoken about the test for other infections, such as HIV, but died in August 2019, a few months before the COVID-19 pandemic broke out)

Michael Yeadon, Ph.D., a former vice-president and chief scientific adviser of the drug company Pfizer

Professor Carl Heneghan, director of the Oxford University Center for Evidence-Based Medicine

Emeritus professor of immunology Beda M. Stadler, former head of the Bern Institute of Immunology

Clare Craig, a consultant pathologist

Stephen A. Bustin, professor of molecular medicine and a world-renowned expert on the PCR test

In 1993, Mullis spoke about the use of the PCR test to diagnose HIV. He explained that all the test does is amplify molecules into something you can detect, but it cannot tell you whether those particles actually pose a risk to your health.
He also points out that, using PCR, you can essentially find just about anything in anyone because most of us are walking around with pathogens of all sorts, but the load is either too low to be of concern or the particles are just dead debris that pose no risk.
Bustin points out that when you get a positive result using a CT of 35 or higher, you’re looking at the equivalent of a single copy of viral DNA. The likelihood of that causing a health problem is minuscule. Even Dr. Anthony Fauci has admitted that using a PCR test with a CT above 35 renders it more or less useless because at that point, you’re just detecting dead nucelotides. No live virus can be detected at CTs that high.
Fatal Errors Found in Paper on Which PCR Testing Is Based

November 30, 2020, a team of 22 international scientists published a review18 challenging the scientific paper19 on PCR testing for SARS-CoV-2 written by Christian Drosten, Ph.D., and Victor Corman. The Corman-Drosten paper was quickly accepted by the WHO and the workflow described therein was adopted as the standard across the world.
According to Reiner Fuellmich,20 founding member of the German Corona Extra-Parliamentary Inquiry Committee (Außerparlamentarischer Corona Untersuchungsausschuss,21 or ACU),22,23 Drosten is a key culprit in the COVID-19 pandemic hoax.
The scientists demand the Corman-Drosten paper be retracted due to “fatal errors,”24 one of which is the fact that it was written (and the test itself developed) before any viral isolate was available. All they used was the genetic sequence published online by Chinese scientists in January 2020.
The fact that the paper was published a mere 24 hours after it was submitted also suggests it didn’t even undergo peer review. In an Undercover DC interview, Kevin Corbett, Ph.D., one of the 22 scientists who are now demanding the paper’s retraction, stated:25

“Every scientific rationale for the development of that test has been totally destroyed by this paper. It’s like Hiroshima/Nagasaki to the COVID test.
When Drosten developed the test, China hadn’t given them a viral isolate. They developed the test from a sequence in a gene bank. Do you see? China gave them a genetic sequence with no corresponding viral isolate. They had a code, but no body for the code. No viral morphology.
In the fish market, it’s like giving you a few bones and saying ‘that’s your fish.’ It could be any fish … Listen, the Corman-Drosten paper, there’s nothing from a patient in it. It’s all from gene banks. And the bits of the virus sequence that weren’t there they made up.
They synthetically created them to fill in the blanks. That’s what genetics is; it’s a code. So, its ABBBCCDDD and you’re missing some, what you think is EEE, so you put it in … This is basically a computer virus.
There are 10 fatal errors in this Drosten test paper … But here is the bottom line: There was no viral isolate to validate what they were doing. The PCR products of the amplification didn’t correspond to any viral isolate at that time. I call it ‘donut ring science.’ There is nothing at the center of it. It’s all about code, genetics, nothing to do with reality …
There have since been papers saying they’ve produced viral isolates. But there are no controls for them. The CDC produced a paper in July … where they said: ‘Here’s the viral isolate.’ Do you know what they did? They swabbed one person. One person, who’d been to China and had cold symptoms. One person. And they assumed he had [COVID-19] to begin with. So, it’s all full of holes, the whole thing.”

The conclusion of the review reads, in part:26

“A decision to recognize the errors apparent in the Corman-Drosten paper has the benefit to greatly minimize human cost and suffering going forward. Is it not in the best interest of Eurosurveillance to retract this paper? Our conclusion is clear. In the face of all the tremendous PCR-protocol design flaws and errors described here, we conclude: There is not much of a choice left in the framework of scientific integrity and responsibility.”

The critique against PCR testing is further strengthened by a November 20, 2020, study27 in Nature Communications, which found no viable virus in PCR-positive cases at all. The study evaluated data from 9,865,404 residents of Wuhan, China, who had undergone PCR testing between May 14 and June 1, 2020.

A total of 300 tested positive but had no symptoms. Of the 34,424 people with a history of COVID-19, 107 tested positive a second time. Yet, when they did virus cultures on these 407 individuals who had tested positive (either for the first or second time), no live virus was found in any of them!

Antibody Tests Are Equally Unreliable
Antibody tests are also turning out to have their share of quality problems. If you have antibodies against SARS-CoV-2, that would be evidence that your immune system successfully overcame the virus at some point in the past. However, the COVID-19 antibody test may also turn out positive if you have antibodies against common cold viruses.

June 30, 2020, the CDC admitted that prior exposure to coronaviruses responsible for the common cold can result in a positive COVID-19 antibody test, even if you’ve never been exposed to SARS-CoV-2 specifically.28

The saving grace is that studies29,30,31 suggest antibodies produced following exposure to coronaviruses that cause the common cold also appear to provide some general and long-lasting resistance against SARS-CoV-2.
One such study,32,33 published May 14, 2020, in the journal Cell, found 70% of samples from patients who had recovered from mild cases of COVID-19 had resistance to SARS-CoV-2 on the T-cell level, as did 40% to 60% of people who had not been exposed to SARS-CoV-2.
According to the authors, this suggests there’s “cross-reactive T cell recognition between circulating ‘common cold’ coronaviruses and SARS-CoV-2.” In other words, if you’ve recovered from a common cold caused by a particular coronavirus, your humoral immune system may activate when you encounter SARS-CoV-2, thus rendering you resistant to COVID-19.
Another study34 discovered SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies are only found in the most severe cases — about 1 in 5. So, a negative antibody test doesn’t necessarily rule out the possibility that you’ve been infected and didn’t get sick. In fact, this finding suggests COVID-19 may actually be five times more prevalent than suspected — and five times less deadly than predicted.

In a letter to the editor35 published in the July 1, 2020, issue of American Family Physician, Drs. Mark Ebell, deputy editor for evidence-based medicine for the journal, and Henry Barry, reviewed some of the available data, noting that:

“When assessing whether patients had a previous infection and may be immune, it is important to avoid false-positives so that patients do not think they are immune when they are not.
Table 1 summarizes the false-positive rates at various population prevalence for the Cellex test and for a hypothetical test that is 90% sensitive and 99% specific. At relatively low population prevalences, which likely reflect current conditions in the United States and elsewhere, we would argue that false-positive rates are unacceptably high with the Cellex test.”

Ebell and Barry pointed out that many of the antibody tests that have provisional approval from the FDA still have not even been evaluated for accuracy. They also recommended that labs report test results “in a way that reflects the local population prevalence based on widespread testing and include the false-positive rate,” as this information “is needed to help family physicians better inform shared decision-making regarding previous infection and return to work or school.”
At present, you’d be hard-pressed to find anyone including that data in their reporting, and the way things are going, I wouldn’t hold my breath in anticipation of such helpful numbers being included in the future either.
High Time to End Mass Testing Scam
If the vast majority of people who test positive for COVID-19 infection have no symptoms, don’t feel sick and don’t look sick, is COVID-19 really a “deadly” disease? Or, is it more like HPV — a viral infection that most people have without knowing it, and which 90% are able to eliminate without treatment?

The primary justification for the tyrannical governmental interventions of COVID-19 was to slow the spread of the infection so that hospital resources would not be overwhelmed, causing people to die due to lack of medical care.
These interventions were not about stopping the spread altogether or even reducing the number of people that would eventually get infected. They certainly were never meant to prevent all death. Any rational analysis would rapidly conclude that this simply isn’t possible, under any circumstance.
Short-term stay-at-home orders and business closings were only intended to slow down the spread so that, eventually, naturally-acquired herd immunity — the best kind — would prevent it from reemerging. Yet the goal posts keep shifting as we go along.
Two-week lockdowns turned into months in some areas. Eventually, we were told everything would go back to normal as soon as a vaccine became available. But once the vaccines started rolling out, the narrative changed again, and we were told we’d still need masks, social distancing and lockdowns well into 2021 or even 2022 even with a vaccine. What, exactly, is going on?
The only rational reason for why government interventions continue is because they’re meant to erode our personal freedoms and civil liberties and transfer wealth to unelected technocrats who are controlling the pandemic narrative. It’s all fearmongering based on a combination of wildly manipulated data and flawed tests.
Aside from PCR testing data, there’s no evidence of a lethal pandemic at all. As mentioned, while there is such a thing as COVID-19, and people have and do die from it, there are no excess deaths due to it.36,37,38 The total mortality for 2020 is normal.
So, unless we think we should shut down the world and stop living because people die from heart disease, diabetes, cancer, the flu or anything else, then there’s no reason to shut down the world because some people happen to die from COVID-19.
What You Can Do

The good news is the hoax is starting to be exposed. In November 2020, a Portuguese appeals court ruled39,40 that the PCR test is “not a reliable test for SARS-CoV-2” and that “a single positive PCR test cannot be used as an effective diagnosis of infection.” Therefore, “any enforced quarantine based on the results is unlawful.”41 The court also noted that forcing healthy people to self-isolate could be a violation of their fundamental right to liberty.
As detailed in “Coronavirus Fraud Scandal — The Biggest Fight Has Just Begun” and “German Lawyers Initiate Class-Action Coronavirus Litigation,” additional legal cases are also to be expected, all of which will help expose the fraud perpetrated. As for what you can do in the meantime, consider:

Turning off mainstream media news and turning to independent experts — do the research. Read through the science.
Continue to counter the censorship by asking questions — arm yourself with mortality statistics and the facts on PCR testing, so you can explain how and why this pandemic simply isn’t a pandemic anymore.
If you are a medical professional, especially if you’re a member of a professional society, write an open letter to your government, urging them to speak to and heed recommendations from independent experts.
Sign The Great Barrington Declaration,42 which calls for an end to lockdowns.
Join a group so that you can have support — Examples of groups formed to fight against government overreach include Us for Them, a group campaigning for reopening schools and protecting children’s rights in the U.K., and the Freedom to Breathe Agency, a U.S. team of attorneys, doctors, business owners and parents who are fighting to protect freedom and liberty.

By Ron Rosedale, M.D.

It is amazing how the little twists and turns of researchers can have such a profound impact on what we generally come to realize as “scientific truth.” Let me share a recent fascinating example of how this impacted one of the most powerful hormones in your body.
The Ob mouse is a strain of mouse that has a genetic mutation that makes it obese and unhealthy. It has been used for many years as a model of obesity to do research on, though the reason that it was obese had eluded scientists.
This changed when, in 1994, Jeffrey Friedman discovered that this mouse lacked a previously unknown hormone called leptin, and when it was injected with leptin it became thin, vibrant, and very healthy within weeks. This made headlines around the world, “the cure for obesity found” and pharmaceutical companies started tripping over themselves with trillion dollar signs in their eyes to be the first to genetically manufacture leptin on a large-scale.
This did not last long. When people were tested for leptin, it was found that, unlike the Ob mouse, they did not lack leptin; on the contrary almost all overweight and obese people have excess leptin.
These people were “leptin resistant” and giving extra leptin did little good.
The financial disappointment was extreme and scientists working for pharmaceutical companies said that leptin wasn’t important anymore since they could not find a drug to control it, and therefore the industry couldn’t make money on it. To make big money in medicine one needs a patent and this generally means remedies which are not commonly or easily available — that are not natural.
This illustrates two extremely unfortunate principles in modern medicine; only those therapies that will make lots of money (generally for the pharmaceutical industry or hospitals), ever get pursued and then taught to physicians (since most of medical education after medical school takes place by drug reps), and these therapies, almost by definition, will be unnatural.
This inhibition of extremely important knowledge is not only unfortunate, it is deadly, and is exemplified by how few people, including doctors, know anything about leptin, though I would consider it to be the most important chemical in your body that will determine your health and lifespan.

Two Hormones that are Vital for Optimal Health

Each and every one of us is a combination of lives within lives. We are made up of trillions of individual living cells that each must maintain itself. Even more significantly, the cells must communicate and interact with each other to form a republic of cells that we call our individual self.
Our health and life depends on how accurately instructions are conveyed to our cells so that they can act in harmony. It is the communication among the individual cells that will determine our health and our life.
The communication takes place by hormones. Arguably therefore, the most important molecules in your body that ultimately will decide your health and life are hormones.
Many would say that genes and chromosomes are the most important molecules, however once born your genes pretty much just sit there; hormones tell them what to do. Certainly, the most important message that our cells receive is how and what to do with energy, and therefore life cannot take place without that.
The two most important hormones that deliver messages about energy and metabolism are insulin and leptin.
Metabolism can roughly be defined as the chemistry that turns food into life, and therefore insulin and leptin are critical to health and disease. Both insulin and leptin work together to control the quality of your metabolism (and, to a significant extent, the rate of metabolism).
Insulin works mostly at the individual cell level, telling the vast majority of cells whether to burn or store fat or sugar and whether to utilize that energy for maintenance and repair or reproduction. This is extremely important as we shall see, for on an individual cell level turning on maintenance and repair equates to increased longevity, and turning up cellular reproduction can increase your risk of cancer.
Leptin, on the other hand, controls the energy storage and utilization of the entire republic of cells allowing the body to communicate with the brain about how much energy (fat) the republic has stored, and whether it needs more, or should burn some off, and whether it is an advantageous time nutritionally-speaking for the republic –you– to reproduce or not.

What Exactly is Leptin?

Leptin is a very powerful and influential hormone produced by fat cells that has totally changed the way that science (real science, outside of medicine) looks at fat, nutrition, and metabolism in general.
Prior to leptin’s discovery, fat was viewed as strictly an ugly energy storage depot that most everyone was trying to get rid of. After it was discovered that fat produced the hormone leptin (and subsequently it was discovered that fat produced other very significant hormones), fat became an endocrine organ like the ovaries, pancreas and pituitary, influencing the rest of the body and, in particular, the brain.
Leptin, as far  as science currently knows, is the most powerful regulator that tells your brain what to do about life’s two main biological goals: eating and reproduction. Your fat, by way of leptin, tells your brain whether you should be hungry, eat and make more fat, whether you should reproduce and make babies, or (partly by controlling insulin) whether to “hunker down” and work overtime to maintain and repair yourself.
I believe I could now make a very convincing and scientifically accurate statement that that rather than your brain being in control of the rest of your body, your brain is, in fact, subservient to your fat — and leptin.
In short, leptin is the way that your fat stores speak to your brain to let your brain know how much energy is available and, very importantly, what to do with it. Therefore, leptin may be “on top of the food chain” in metabolic importance and relevance to disease.

How Leptin Regulates Your Weight

It has been known for many years that fat stores are highly regulated. It appeared that when one tried to lose weight the body would try to gain it back. This commonly results in “yo-yo” dieting and in scientific circles one talks about the “set point” of weight. It has long been theorized that there must be a hormone that determines this.
Science points now to leptin as being that hormone.
In our ancestral history, it was advantageous to store some fat to call upon during times of famine. However, it was equally disadvantageous to be too fat. For most of our evolutionary history, it was necessary to run, to obtain prey and perhaps most importantly, to avoid being prey. If a lion was chasing a group of people it would most likely catch and eliminate from the gene pool the slowest runner and the one who could not make it up the tree — the fattest one.
Thus, fat storage had to be highly regulated and this is done, as is any regulation, through hormones, the most significant being leptin.
If a person is getting too fat, the extra fat produces more leptin which is supposed to tell the brain that there is too much fat stored, more should not be stored, and the excess should be burned.
Signals are therefore sent to an area of the brain in the hypothalamus (the arcuate nucleus) to stop being hungry, to stop eating, to stop storing fat and to start burning some extra fat off.
Controlling hunger is a major (though not the only) way that leptin controls energy storage. Hunger is a very powerful, ancient, and deep-seated drive that, if stimulated long enough, will make you eat and store more energy. Asking somebody to not eat, to voluntarily restrict calories even though they are hungry, is asking the near impossible. The only way to eat less in the long-term is to not be hungry, and the only way to do this is to control the hormones that regulate hunger, the primary one being leptin.

How Leptin Resistance Leads to Disease

More recently, it has been found that leptin not only changes brain chemistry, but can also “rewire” the very important areas of the brain that control hunger and metabolism. I’m not aware of any other chemical in the body that has been shown to accomplish this “mind bending” event.
This has really caught the attention of the scientific community. Further studies have now shown that leptin, or more correctly the inability of the body to properly hear leptin’s signals, in other words leptin resistance, plays significant if not primary roles in heart disease, obesity, diabetes, osteoporosis, autoimmune diseases, reproductive disorders, and perhaps the rate of aging itself.
It helps to control the brain areas that regulate thyroid levels and the sympathetic nervous system which also has huge impacts on blood pressure, heart disease, diabetes, osteoporosis and aging. Leptin’s stimulatory effect on the sympathetic nervous system also helps determine the adrenal stress response including cortisol levels.

Leptin May Be Even More Critical Than Insulin

The importance of insulin in health and disease is becoming well-known. Aside from its obvious role in diabetes, it plays a very significant role in hypertension, cardiovascular disease, and cancer.
I was one of the first to speak publicly to doctors about insulin’s critical role in health well over a decade ago (see the transcribed talk Insulin and its Metabolic Effects) and I am even more convinced now.
However leptin may even supersede insulin in importance, for new research is revealing that in the long run glucose and therefore insulin levels may be largely determined by leptin.
It had been previously believed that the insulin sensitivity of muscle and fat tissues were the most important factor in determining whether one would become diabetic or not. Elegant new studies are showing that the brain and liver are most important in regulating a person’s blood sugar levels especially in type 2 or insulin resistant diabetes.
It should be noted again that leptin plays a vital role in regulating your brain’s hypothalamic activity which in turn regulates much of a person’s “autonomic” functions; those functions that you don’t necessarily think about but which determines much of your life (and health) such as body temperature, heart rate, hunger, the stress response, fat burning or storage, reproductive behavior, and newly discovered roles in bone growth and blood sugar levels.
Another very recent study reveals leptin’s importance in directly regulating how much sugar that the liver manufactures via gluconeogenesis.
Many chronic diseases are now linked to excess inflammation such as heart disease and diabetes. High leptin levels are very pro-inflammatory, and leptin also helps to mediate the manufacture of other very potent inflammatory chemicals from fat cells that also play a significant role in the progression of heart disease and diabetes. It has long been known that obesity greatly increased risk for many chronic diseases including heart disease and diabetes, but no one really knew why.

Leptin appears to be the missing link.

Could Leptin Also Affect  How Fast You Age?

Leptin will not only determine how much fat you have, but also where that fat is put. When you are leptin resistant you put that fat mostly in your belly, your viscera, causing the so-called “apple shape” that is linked to much disease. Some of that fat permeates the liver, impeding the liver’s ability to listen to insulin, and further hastening diabetes.
 
Leptin plays a far more important role in your health than, for instance, cholesterol, yet how many doctors measure leptin levels in their patients, know their own level, even know that it can be easily measured, or even what it would mean?
Leptin appears to play a significant role in obesity, heart disease, osteoporosis, autoimmune diseases, inflammatory diseases and cancer. These are the so-called “chronic diseases of aging”.
Could it perhaps affect the rate of aging itself?

The Biology of Aging

Scientists who study the biology of aging are beginning to look at that question. There are two endeavors, two drives that life has been programmed, since its inception, to succeed at and to succumb to. These are to eat and to reproduce.
If every one of our ancestors had not succeeded in eating and reproducing we would not be here, and this paper would be moot. All of your morphological characteristics from your hair to your toenails are designed to help you succeed at those two activities. That is what nature wants us to do. Nature’s purpose is not necessarily to have you live a long and healthy life, but to perpetuate the instructions, the genes that tell how to perpetuate life.
Even so-called “paleolithic” diets, though undoubtedly far better than what is generally eaten today, were not necessarily designed by nature to help us live a long and healthy life but, at best, to maximize reproduction. Nature appears to not care much about what happens to us after we have had a sufficient chance to reproduce. That is why we die.
But there are clues as to how to live a long and healthy life. And that brings us once again to fat–and leptin.
It takes energy to make babies; lots of it. Energy was and always will be a coveted commodity. Nature, and evolution, hates wasting it. It makes no sense to try and make babies when it appears that there’s not enough energy available to successfully accomplish that goal.
Instead, it seems that virtually all living forms can “switch gears” and direct energy away from reproduction and towards mechanism that will allow it to “hunker down” for the long haul and thus be able to reproduce at a future more nutritionally opportune time. In other words nature will then let you live longer to accomplish its primary directive of reproduction.
It does this by up regulating maintenance and repair genes that increase production of intracellular antioxidant systems, heat shock proteins (that help maintain protein shape), and DNA repair enzymes. This is what happens when you restrict calories (without starvation) in animals, and that has been shown convincingly for 70 years to greatly extend the life span of many dozens of species. Thus, there is a powerful link between reproduction, energy stores, and longevity.
Genetic studies in simple organisms have shown that that link is at least partially mediated by insulin (which in simple organisms also functions as a growth hormone), and that when insulin signals are kept low, indicating scarce energy availability, maximal lifespan can be extended— a lot; several hundred percent in worms and flies.
Glucose is an ancient fuel used even before there was oxygen in the atmosphere, for life can burn glucose without oxygen; it is an anaerobic fuel. The use of fat as fuel came later, after life in the form of plants soaked the earth in oxygen, for you cannot burn fat without oxygen.
The primary source of energy stores in people by far is fat, as many unfortunately are all too aware of. The primary signal that indicates how much fat is stored is leptin, and it is also leptin that allows for reproduction, or not.
It has long been known that women with very little body fat, such as marathon runners, stop ovulating. There is not enough leptin being produced to permit it. Paradoxically, the first pharmaceutical use of leptin was recently approved to give to skinny women to allow them to reproduce.

Leptin’s Role in Improving Your Metabolism

Leptin also is instrumental in regulating body temperature, partly by controlling the rate of metabolism via its regulation of the thyroid.
 
Metabolic rate and temperature has long been connected with longevity. Almost all mechanisms that extend lifespan in many different organisms result in lower temperature. Flowers are refrigerated at the florist to extend their lifespan. Restricting calories in animals also results in lower temperature, reduced thyroid levels, and longer life.
 
It should be noted that reduced thyroid levels in this case are not synonymous with hypothyroidism. Here, the body is choosing to lower thyroid hormones because the increased efficiency of energy use and hormonal signaling (including perhaps thyroid) is allowing this to happen.
Anything will dissolve faster in hot water than cold water. Extra heat will dissolve, disrupt and disorganize. This is not what I try to do to make someone healthy. It is commonly advised to “increase metabolism” and increase “thermogenesis” for health and weight loss.
Yet how many of you would put a brand of gasoline in your car that advertised that it would make your engine run hotter? What would that do to the life of your car? It is not an increase in metabolism that I am after; it is improved metabolic quality.
That will be determined at the quality of your leptin signaling.
If it is poor, if you are insulin and leptin resistant, your metabolism is unhealthy and high in what I call “metabolic friction”. If you then increase its rate you will likely accelerate your demise. To increase the quality of your metabolism you must be able to properly listen to insulin and especially to leptin.
If your fasting blood serum level of leptin is elevated you are likely leptin resistant and you will not be healthy unless you correct it.

How Do You Become Leptin Resistant?

This is the subject of much research. I believe people become leptin-resistant by the same general mechanism that people become insulin-resistant; by overexposure to high levels of the hormone.
High blood glucose levels cause repeated surges in insulin, and this causes one’s cells to become “insulin-resistant” which leads to further high levels of insulin and diabetes. It is much the same as being in a smelly room for a period of time. Soon, you stop being able to smell it, because the signal no longer gets through.
I believe the same happens with leptin. It has been shown that as sugar gets metabolized in fat cells, fat releases surges in leptin, and I believe that those surges result in leptin-resistance just as it results in insulin-resistance.
The only known way to reestablish proper leptin (and insulin) signaling is to prevent those surges, and the only known way to do that is via diet and supplements.
As such, these can have a more profound effect on your health than any other known modality of medical treatment.
When leptin signaling is restored, your brain can finally hear the message that perhaps should have been delivered decades ago; high leptin levels can now scream to your brain that you have too much fat and that you better start burning some off for your life is in danger.
Your brain will finally allow you access into your pantry that you have been storing your fat in. Your cells will be fed the food from that fat and they will be satisfied. They will not know whether that food came from your belly fat or from your mouth; nor will they care. They will be receiving energy that they need and will not have to ask for more. You will not be hungry.
This also makes counting calories irrelevant, for the calories that you put into your mouth today are not necessarily what your cells will be eating; that will be determined primarily by leptin. Whether or not you put food into your mouth, your cells will be eating, and if they cannot eat fat they must eat sugar.
Since little sugar is stored, that sugar will be had by making you crave it, or by turning the protein in your muscle and bone into sugar. This contributes in a major way to weakness and osteoporosis. Whether or not this lean tissue wasting happens is determined by your capacity, or incapacity, to burn fat, and that is determined by your ability to listen to leptin.
A strategic diet that emphasizes good fats and avoids blood sugar spikes coupled with targeted supplements (as recommended in my Rosedale Diet and Dr. Mercola’s Take Control of Your Health), will enhance insulin and leptin sensitivity so that you can once again hear their music, allowing your life to be the symphony it was meant to be.

A new study helps to explain how leptin, a hormone produced by fat tissue, influences your motivation to eat.
The researchers described for the first time a collection of leptin-responsive neurons in the brain’s lateral hypothalamic area (LHA). Those LHA neurons feed directly into the mesolimbic dopamine system, which controls the rewarding properties assigned to things.
The study therefore adds to growing evidence that leptin doesn’t turn your appetite on and off just by controlling whether you feel hungry or full. It can also make you want food more or less regardless of hunger.

Melatonin is best known as a sleep hormone because of its action controlling the circadian cycle. But melatonin also has antioxidant properties, and may have an important anti-aging role.
A recent study looked at artificially aged mice to determine the effects of melatonin on aging.  Such mice are used as a model to study the fundamental mechanisms of aging because they develop markers also found in neurodegenerative diseases like Alzheimer’s.
According to the study, as reported by Green Med Info:

“… [T]reatment with melatonin … was able to reduce oxidative stress and the neurodegenerative calpain/Cdk5 pathway … and … markers of cerebral aging and neurodegeneration … indicating the neuroprotective and anti-aging effect of melatonin.”

Soy supplements are reputed to stave off hot flashes, night sweats, and other uncomfortable menopausal symptoms.  But the latest in a series of disappointing studies finds that soy supplements do not actually have any such effect, they do not reduce the aging-related bone loss that can lead to osteoporosis.
During menopause, a woman’s body produces less estrogen and progesterone. Soy protein has been considered a possible treatment ever since researchers observed that women in Asia tend to have lower rates of bone loss and osteoporosis.
According to CNN:

“So if soy isn’t beneficial, what options are women left with? To prevent bone loss, women should stick with the basics … That means getting enough calcium and vitamin D, [and] exercising regularly”.