Lose Them Pounds

This article is meant as something simple and logical that you can send to friends who still blindly trust in the American medical establishment. It’s a collection of stories and links that are not conspiratorial at all. All logical, all “respectable,” bland almost — yet demonstrating beyond any reasonable doubt that we need to watch out for ourselves.

Now, are there amazing and brilliant professionals involved in medicine and medical research? You bet, and I tip my hat off to them. But the system is corrupt as hell, and we are all better off dealing with reality versus fantasy. My heart bleeds when I think of those who trusted the American medical establishment and who were effectively murdered in the hospital last year. What an awful way to go.

I think we owe it to ourselves to seek the truth. And it’s important that when we present our facts-based skepticism to others, we do it in an even-headed way.

My own skepticism started when I was a kid because I grew up around medical research. From conversations, I learned that some research was factual and some, well, not so much. I also heard heart-wrenching stories about medical mismanagement and cruelty. Some made my stomach turn. Growing up, I thought that it had to do with how things were done “in Russia.” Corruption and so on.

I realized that things were not much better in America when I had to look after a relative at a good American hospital (before COVID). The chaos blew my mind! One department didn’t know what the other one was doing, nurses broke basic sanitary rules, etc.

I was coming into this with idealistic ideas about American medicine working like a well-tuned machine (maybe mechanical but at least fine-tuned!), and my delusions were crashed. I realized that, existentially, it’s the same everywhere.

Then 2020 showed up, and science in the traditional sense of it went out of the window. The official narrative was getting weirder and weirder, the bullying and the censorship were competing with each other in absurdity — and so to save my sanity, I started really looking into the state of medicine and medical research.

Half of Scientific Literature ‘May Simply Be Untrue’

“Much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue. Afflicted by studies with small sample sizes, tiny effects, invalid exploratory analyses and flagrant conflicts of interest, together with an obsession for pursuing fashionable trends of dubious importance, science has taken a turn towards darkness,” wrote Richard Horton, the editor-in-chief of The Lancet in 2015.1

“It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of The New England Journal of Medicine,” wrote Marcia Angell in 2009.2

Below is her presentation at Harvard Medical School from a few years ago (when it was still OK to be critical of the pharma industry).

Here is a must-watch interview with Leemon McHenry, posted March 9, 2021.

Here are some facts about the state of hospitals in America (pre-2020):3

“Using a weighted average of the 4 studies, a lower limit of 210,000 deaths per year was associated with preventable harm in hospitals.

Given limitations in the search capability of the Global Trigger Tool and the incompleteness of medical records on which the Tool depends, the true number of premature deaths associated with preventable harm to patients was estimated at more than 400,000 per year. Serious harm seems to be 10- to 20-fold more common than lethal harm.”

And here is a list of links to articles in “respectable media” about various unseemly practices, including by the very pharma companies that we are supposed to idolize today. I borrowed much of the list from my earlier article, “Pandemic, Meet Panopticon. Panopticon, Meet Pandemic.”4

The Guardian — Pfizer pays out to Nigerian families of meningitis drug trial victims5

The Atlantic — Did Pfizer Bribe Its Way Out of Criminal Charges in Nigeria?6

The U.S. Department of Justice — Justice Department Announces Largest Health Care Fraud Settlement in Its History7

STAT — Lavishly funded Moderna hits safety problems in bold bid to revolutionize medicine8

The Intercept — Drug Companies Continue to Shed Liability for Rushed Coronavirus Treatments9

Nature Biotechnology — Research not fit to print: Some biotech companies now eschew traditional publication in peer-reviewed journals10

Daily Mail — Merck Knew its Anti-Baldness Drug Propecia Was Linked to Depression and Reports of Suicide11

NPR — Rush to Produce, Sell Vaccine Put Kids in Philippines at Risk12

Medical Xpress — Narcolepsy fiasco spurs COVID vaccine fears in Sweden13

BMJ — Pandemrix vaccine: why was the public not told of early warning signs?14

The Guardian — Revealed: how drug firms ‘hoodwink’ medical journals15

Reuters — AstraZeneca to be exempt from coronavirus vaccine liability claims in most countries16

Forbes — Johnson & Johnson to Pay $100 Million in Baby Powder Settlement17

Wikipedia — List of largest pharmaceutical settlements18

NPR — The Campaign To Wipe Out Polio Was Going Really Well … Until It Wasn’t19

Drugwatch — Pfizer20

The BMJ Opinion — Peter Doshi: Pfizer and Moderna’s “95% effective” vaccines — we need more details and the raw data21

The Guardian — UK firm tried HIV drug on orphans22

Consumer Reports — How Your Hospital Can Make You Sick23

MSN — Killer fungus spread rampantly at US hospital Covid ward: study24

Journal of Patient Safety — A New, Evidence-based Estimate of Patient Harms Associated With Hospital Care25

PLOS Medicine — Editors, Publishers, Impact Factors, and Reprint Income26

The New York Review — Drug Companies & Doctors: A Story of Corruption27

The Lancet — Offline: What is medicine’s 5 sigma?28

I will end this with a story. When I was a kid, my mom’s hospital was giving out a limited number of condominiums to select employees. There was throat-cutting competition. We didn’t get it. Later on, it turned out that the building had asbestos, and people started getting sick. Many of them were doctors. It wasn’t corruption even; they just didn’t know.
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2021/05/29/medical-establishment-corruption.aspx

Many people have a sweet tooth. For some, it can become an addiction,1 fueled by a food industry that continually creates an abundance of highly palatable, inexpensive, ultraprocessed foods. As some companies cash in on a market for lab-created, low-calorie sweeteners, one natural sweetener may help curb your sweet tooth without raising your blood sugar. In fact, it may have the opposite effect.

While manufacturers seek out “perfectly engineered food,”2 the incidence of obesity3 and obesity-related health conditions4 has skyrocketed. Type 2 diabetes is one of the obesity-related conditions that has a significant impact on many of your bodily systems.

People with diabetes have a higher risk of also having heart disease, stroke, glaucoma, kidney disease and high blood pressure.5 It would make sense if the incidence of diabetes and obesity goes down, you could have a positive impact on these conditions that contribute to at least five of the top 10 leading causes of death.6

The obesity epidemic is one of the most important global public health challenges. Obesity was linked with 4.7 million premature deaths worldwide in 20177 and according to the National Diabetes Statistics Report, 34.2 million people, or 10.5% of the U.S. population, has diabetes.8 By using this sweetener you may reduce your risk of insulin resistance, a primary symptom of diabetes.

Not All Sugar Is Created Equally

Sugar is a carbohydrate9 found in fruits and vegetables and added to food products. Added sugars are usually sucrose (table sugar) and high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS). Once digestion has started in the stomach, sugars break down into one of three monosaccharides from which other sugars are formed.

These include glucose, fructose and galactose. Glucose is one of the main compounds found in sucrose, lactose and maltose. These are disaccharide sugar compounds commonly found in foods. Fructose is the main type of sugar found in fruits and vegetables and galactose is found mostly in dairy products.

In the West, the most used plant-based sweeteners are sucrose and HFCS, a sweetener made from corn. Evidence shows us that no matter what type of sugar you are consuming, it has a significant effect on your metabolism, even in the healthiest people.

Sugar hides under as many as 61 different names in 74% of processed food products10 and while there are copious numbers of studies over decades demonstrating the damage it does to your health, the industry has managed to bury the evidence and claim it has little to no effect on your health or your weight.

In one 12-week study,11 researchers demonstrated men who ate 650 calories a day of sugar had higher levels of fat in their blood and liver. Interestingly, the researchers separated the two groups into those who had evidence of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) and those who did not. During the study, each participant followed both diets for 12 weeks.

Lead researcher Bruce Griffin, Ph.D., from the University of Surrey, commented on the results saying,12 “Our findings provide new evidence that consuming high amounts of sugar can alter your fat metabolism in ways that could increase your risk of cardiovascular disease.”

Sugar can also affect your brain, mood and behavior. Several studies have found an association between a rising intake of sugar and an increase in rates of depression.13,14,15

Sugar stimulates the release of dopamine,16 which is a neurotransmitter that plays a role in many important pathways, many of which affect your mood. This is why sugar feels so good and why manufacturers use it to drive your behavior. But, like other addictive drugs, sugar is not healthy.

Allulose Natural Sweetener Has Unique Action on Blood Sugar

One natural sweetener option is Astrea Allulose. Although the market in Japan is significant,17 it is a relatively little-known alternative sweetener in the West. Allulose is found in small quantities in some fruits such as figs, jackfruit and raisins and was given a generally regarded as safe (GRAS) food designation by the FDA.18

Allulose is a monosaccharide sugar that differs from fructose only at one of the carbon atoms.19 This one change makes a world of difference in the way the molecule acts in the body. It is functionally a carbohydrate and mostly absorbed in the small intestines. However, the majority of allulose is excreted by the kidneys before it is metabolized.20

This means that most of the calories you consume from allulose are excreted through your kidneys before being metabolized. It has only been recently that the FDA21 differentiated allulose from sucrose or HFCS on nutrition labels. Before this, anytime it was added to a processed food, it was simply listed as an added sugar.

Therefore, there was little incentive to include allulose in products. Since allulose has 95% fewer calories than sucrose,22 the FDA allowed manufacturers to exclude it from the total and added sugar counts on nutrition labels.23

The percentage of the monosaccharide that is not metabolized does not contribute to energy or caloric intake. In one animal study, researchers found allulose24 contributes a fraction of 1% of the energy of sucrose.25

The researchers called the energy value “effectively zero” and suggested that this “rare sugar providing zero energy … may be useful in sweeteners for obese people as an aid for weight reduction.”26

In addition to contributing little to no calories, allulose elicits a physiological response in the body that may lower your blood glucose27 and reduce abdominal fat28 and fat accumulation around the liver.29,30 This may reduce the rising number of people who have NAFLD. Allulose can also decrease insulin resistance31 and reduce the potential risk for Type 2 diabetes.32

Natural Compound May Reduce Glucose With Few Side Effects

In an analysis of 40 human trials,33 allulose demonstrated the ability to significantly reduce after-meal insulin response, which the researchers believe “lead to modest improvements on postprandial glucose and insulin regulation.”34

Another study35 engaged 30 people who did not have diabetes. They were given a loading dose of sucrose and then randomized to receive 2.5, 5, 7.5 or 10 grams of allulose. Plasma glucose and insulin levels were measured at 30, 60, 90 and 120 minutes after ingestion. The researchers found that in a dose-dependent manner, allulose reduced plasma glucose and insulin levels.

In other words, allulose not only contributes very little to caloric intake or blood glucose, but it also may help to improve insulin regulation. While there are not yet allulose-specific human studies regarding safety, animal studies36 have not found toxicity even at high doses.

In one nonrandomized controlled trial37 using 30 healthy individuals within a normal BMI range, researchers discovered individuals experienced gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms when the dose reached 0.4 grams per kilogram of body weight (g/kg*BW). Gastrointestinal tolerance testing did not indicate severe diarrhea or other symptoms until the dose read 0.5 g/kg*BW.

The researchers suggest that based on their results a maximum single dose should not be over 0.4 g/kg*BW.38 This means a person who weighs 160 pounds could eat 29 grams of allulose in one serving, which is equivalent to 7.25 teaspoons of sugar, without experiencing GI symptoms.

While there is no immediate toxic effect on the body, evidence does suggest that consistent use may affect the weight of your kidneys and liver, the two organs through which the natural sweetener passes. In a study published in 2019,39 researchers noted that using allulose can prevent obesity, but continuous consumption may increase the weight of the liver and kidneys “without apparent pathological and functional abnormalities.”

The study investigated the potential these parameters could change after the participant no longer consumed allulose. Using an animal model, the researchers fed allulose for four weeks and then a controlled diet without allulose for another 10 weeks. At the end of four weeks the weights of the liver and kidney were higher, but the difference disappeared after the animals were no longer fed allulose.40

High-Fructose Corn Syrup Is Worse Than White Sugar

HFCS, aka corn sugar, is another common form of sugar found in processed foods. While it’s often cited interchangeably with fructose, actually HFCS and fructose are not the same. Fructose is a simple sweetener found naturally in many fruits and vegetables.41 HFCS, on the other hand, is artificially produced from corn, through a process that involves first turning it into corn starch and then back into a mixture of fructose and glucose.42

But whether it’s simple fructose or HFCS, there is evidence to show this type of sugar causes greater damage than simple glucose or table sugar. This is because fructose does not act like glucose in your body.

In one study,43 a group of postmenopausal overweight or obese women consumed fructose beverages with their meals for 10 weeks. The data showed this practice increased fasting glucose and reduced the insulin response. The researchers concluded that the “present results suggest that long-term consumption of diets high in fructose could lead to an increased risk of CVD [cardiovascular disease].”44

Unfortunately, because HFCS is cheaper and 20% sweeter than regular table sugar, it’s used by many food and beverage manufacturers, and it has been shown through numerous studies that it not only can contribute to impaired glucose tolerance,45 cardiovascular disease and diabetes, but also can disrupt your sense of hunger and satiety.46

In regard to diabetes, with one global analysis of 43 countries,47 researchers found in areas where HFCS was highly available, the prevalence of diabetes was 20% higher. The results suggested that increased consumption of HFCS increased the risk of Type 2 diabetes, which was independent of obesity.

In another study,48 men and women were given 24 ounces of either a HFCS- or sucrose-sweetened beverage. Blood and urine samples were collected over six hours and a variety of metabolic biomarkers were measured. The researchers found that HFCS led to significantly different acute metabolic effects than sucrose.

Initially, experts thought fructose would be a better choice because it has a low glycemic index. However, only the liver can metabolize fructose.49 And, as mentioned, consuming fructose also increases your appetite, which ultimately contributes to obesity, diabetes and NAFLD.50

The Toxic Effects of Artificial Sweeteners

Many sweeteners have side effects, and those from artificial sweeteners are more toxic than others. Research in 200851 revealed that sucralose, also known as Splenda, reduces your gut bacteria by 50% and increases the pH level in your intestines. A study52 from 2018 found sucralose is metabolized and accumulates in fat cells.

Research published in 2016 from the Ramazzini Institute linked Splenda to leukemia.53 Not long after this study was published in a peer-reviewed journal, the company engaged public relations firm Ketchum, notorious for its close work with Monsanto and promotional work for genetically engineered crops.

It appears the marketing ploy worked, as the company reduced the impact of the scientific evidence. By 2017, market research showed the market size for Splenda was valued at $697.4 million and was projected to increase 3% through 2025.54 North America and Asia-Pacific accounted for the majority of the market share.

Originally, it was hoped that artificial sweeteners would help curb cravings for sweets in people who have diabetes. Yet, in one study55 using health participants it took only two weeks for the artificial sweetener to trigger adverse effects on blood sugar levels, which lead study author Richard Young from the University of Adelaide commented on in a press release:56

“This highlights the potential for exaggerated post-meal glucose levels in high habitual NAS [noncaloric artificial sweeteners] users, which could predispose them to developing Type 2 diabetes.”

Artificial sweeteners may also increase your risk of weight gain, obesity, metabolic syndrome and other related problems like Type 2 diabetes by inducing “metabolic derangements,” according to a report published in the journal Trends in Endocrinology and Metabolism.57

Further research found aspartame (NutraSweet), another artificial sweetener, is associated with greater glucose intolerance in people with obesity.58 These are only some of the side effects of artificial sweeteners, which increase your risk of challenging health conditions and are not a safe alternative to table sugar.

You can find more information about Splenda in “Beware the Latest ‘Diet’ Fad: Artificial Sweeteners Fortified With Vitamins and Minerals” and “Research Reveals Shocking Information About Sucralose (Splenda) Side Effects.”

The article “Top 8 Tips to Optimize Your Blood Sugar Level” lists some of the top ways you can take control of your health and reduce your risk of diabetes. The following articles offer some dietary suggestions that may help your body regulate glucose:

Garlic Supports Healthy Blood Sugar
These Herbs and Spices Can Help Deter Diabetes
Seven Reasons You Should Drink Moringa Tea

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2021/05/31/allulose.aspx

It turns out researchers have discovered that not only does the SARS-CoV-2 virus infect your cells, but the spike protein shell can also damage your endothelial cells and may be responsible for many of the vascular and long-haul symptoms.1 In a new study, the researchers created a cell surrounded by spike (S) protein without a virus.

Using an animal model, they administered this to the lungs and found the spike protein was enough to cause damage and inflammation. The experiment was replicated in the lab using cell cultures. The data showed that when the S protein attached to the ACE2 receptor it disrupted signaling to the mitochondria and caused damage and fragmentation.

Senior co-author of the study Uri Manor explained that the S protein receptor was enough to damage vascular cells “by virtue of its ability to bind to this ACE2 receptor.” Some of the long-haul symptoms of COVID-19 may be related to vascular damage.

However, in my interview with Dr. Vladimir Zelenko in March 2021, he revealed that none of his patients who received treatment in the first five days went on to develop long-haul symptoms. In his population of 3,000 patients, early treatment for high-risk patients reduced the risk of long-haul symptoms.

It also demonstrated a death rate of 0.1% after three high-risk patients died. But the benefits to the patients who recovered have not ended since recent data show patients who were infected with COVID develop an immune response that could protect them for years.2

Evidence Suggests COVID Antibodies May Last Years

In a study published in the journal Nature, the researchers began with the understanding that protective antibodies are generated by long-lived bone marrow plasma cells.3 They noted that research in 2020 reported people who were infected with SARS-CoV-2 showed a rapid decline in serum antibodies in the first few months after infection. 

The question the researchers sought to answer is whether this reduction in antibodies indicated the bone marrow plasma cells generating immunity against the virus may also have been short-lived. The researchers engaged a group of 77 participants who had a mild COVID-19 infection.4

The group donated blood samples at three-month intervals beginning one month after they had recovered from their initial infection. Eighteen of the participants also donated bone marrow approximately seven or eight months after the infection, and five came back four months later for a second bone marrow extraction.

As the researchers expected, the levels of antibodies in the blood dropped quickly within the first month. However, some of the participants had detectable antibodies even after 11 months.

The testing also showed 78% of the bone marrow samples had antibody-producing cells for SARS-CoV-2. Researchers also tested bone marrow of 11 people who had never had COVID-19. In their bone marrow samples there were no antibody-producing cells. The team concluded:5

“We demonstrate that S-binding BMPCs are quiescent, indicating that they are part of a long-lived compartment. Consistently, circulating resting memory B cells directed against the S protein were detected in the convalescent individuals. Overall, we show that SARS-CoV-2 infection induces a robust antigen-specific, long-lived humoral immune response in humans.”

Senior author of the study Ali Ellebedy, Ph.D., an associate professor of pathology & immunology at Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, pointed out one flaw in assuming natural immunity against COVID-19 had waned by measuring antibodies in the blood, saying:6

“Last fall, there were reports that antibodies waned quickly after infection with the virus that causes COVID-19, and mainstream media interpreted that to mean that immunity was not long-lived. But that’s a misinterpretation of the data. It’s normal for antibody levels to go down after acute infection, but they don’t go down to zero; they plateau.

Here, we found antibody-producing cells in people 11 months after first symptoms. These cells will live and produce antibodies for the rest of people’s lives. That’s strong evidence for long-lasting immunity.

People with mild cases of COVID-19 clear the virus from their bodies two to three weeks after infection, so there would be no virus driving an active immune response seven or 11 months after infection. These cells are not dividing. They are quiescent, just sitting in the bone marrow and secreting antibodies. They have been doing that ever since the infection was resolved, and they will continue doing that indefinitely.”

Humoral and Cellular Immunity: What’s the Difference?

There are two main areas of your immune system. The first is the innate immune response that has physical and cellular responses to pathogens. The purpose is for an immediate reaction to help prevent the spread of foreign bodies throughout the body.7

Innate immunity is nonspecific and uses natural killer cells, macrophages, mass cells and basophils at the cellular level, as well as skin, cough reflex and membranes on a physical level.

Long term immunity is tied to the adaptive immune system. This is specific to the pathogen invading your body. Adaptive immunity is also called acquired immunity and develops when your body is exposed to protein antigens. The immune system then builds specific defense mechanisms against those antigens.

Within the adaptive immune response are humoral and cellular immunity. Antibodies are part of humoral immunity. The humoral system is first on the scene to deal with foreign pathogens that are circulating or outside of infected cells. Cellular immunity is mediated by T lymphocytes and addresses pathogens inside infected cells.

The media reported that natural immunity against SARS-CoV-2 declined after a person recovered from the infection because levels of humoral immunity measured in the bloodstream decline as the person recovered. However, this decline is a natural response to any infection and is expected.

Recent data from the research into bone marrow immune cells demonstrates that while circulating humoral antibodies decline after an active infection, a high percentage of those who had been infected with mild disease continue to produce low levels of immune cells that would recognize the virus if the person was infected again and mount a significant defense against it.

Before COVID-19,8 it was acknowledged that a natural infection nearly always produces a better immune response in the body than a vaccine. The argument for vaccines was that it reduced the risk from diseases that may produce long term disability or death, such as birth defects from rubella or liver cancer from hepatitis B.

But the same cannot be said for SARS-CoV-2. You can only conclude that vaccines against COVID-19 are not a necessary health risk when you consider the following factors:

As Zelenko and others have demonstrated, early treatment reduces death rates and long-haul symptoms
Recent data demonstrate natural immunity is produced following a COVID-19 infection and natural immunity produces a better response than vaccines

Doctor Warns if You Had COVID Don’t Get Vaccinated

Fox news reporter Tucker Carlson spoke to retired cardiac surgeon Dr. Hooman Noorchashm about his concerns regarding the new COVID-19 vaccines.9 Noorchashm is a strong proponent of vaccination programs, but also believes that questions should be asked about specific vaccines and their potential side effects. In this case, he calls the COVID-19 vaccination program an:10

“… absolutely unprecedented vaccine campaign in the history of Western Civilization. And that is that, while in the middle of an outbreak when millions of people in the world are already infected recently or currently, we’re deploying a vaccine.

This is one of the most dramatic differences between this vaccine and any other. You don’t have to go to medical school to understand that is not a standard approach to vaccinate people while they’re infected.”

He goes on to explain that we have hundreds of thousands of people who were mildly infected or those who were asymptomatic, who may experience problems from the vaccine. He calls the program:11

“… a dramatic error on the part of public health officials to try to put this vaccine into a one-size-fits-all paradigm … We’re going to take this problem that we have with the COVID-19 pandemic, which is that 0.5% of the population is susceptible to dying, and we’re going to compound it by causing totally avoidable harm by vaccinating people who are already infected recently.”

His concerns for a hyperinflammatory response after vaccination if you carry antibodies for SARS-CoV-2 is not shared by the CDC. In fact, they encourage those who have recovered to get vaccinated because:12

“… experts do not yet know how long you are protected from getting sick again after recovering from COVID-19. Even if you have already recovered from COVID-19, it is possible — although rare — that you could be infected with the virus that causes COVID-19 again.”

One international survey13 of 2,002 people found those who had recovered from a COVID-19 illness and received their first dose of the vaccine experienced “significantly increased incidence and severity of side effects.” These side effects included fever, breathlessness and severe effects that led to hospitalized care.

Noorchashm has written multiple letters warning people should be first screened for the presence of viral proteins before vaccinations. In one letter14 he warned that without screening, “this indiscriminate vaccination is a clear and present danger to a subset of the already infected.”

COVID Vaccine Deaths Exceed All Other Vaccines Over 15 Years

During a recent Texas State Senate Health and Human Services Committee hearing,15 Dr. Peter McCullough, vice chief of internal medicine at Baylor University Medical Center, testified that according to available data, early treatment could have prevented up to 85% of deaths from COVID-19.

Yet, despite being inexpensive and readily available, many of these early treatments have been censured and suppressed as public health officials have encouraged people to wait for a global mass vaccination campaign.

The result of waiting for a gene therapy vaccine has been devastating. Five months into the campaign, the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) shows that more than 4,200 people in the U.S. have died after getting the shot.16 Any other vaccine would have been pulled from the market by now.

For example, in 1976, 45 million people were vaccinated against the swine flu. After over 500 cases of Guillain-Barre were reported with over 25 deaths, the program was canceled.17

Currently, health authorities have decided that more than 4,200 deaths from the COVID vaccine is either coincidental or inconsequential. When you consider the numbers, the death toll is 7,000% greater from the COVID-19 vaccine than during the swine flu vaccination campaign, which was canceled because the vaccine was deemed too risky.

These numbers are likely to be seriously underestimated since VAERS appears to be backlogged by about three months.18

Even if the data were current, only 1%19,20 to 10%21 of adverse events after vaccination are ever reported. This means that while the VAERS records 4,201 deaths as of May 14, 2021,22 this number may instead be much higher.

Death Rate May Rise This Fall and Winter

Although deaths from COVID-19 vaccines have already reached a historic level, I fear this may go even higher during the fall and winter months. One of the greatest wild cards of these vaccines is antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE) or paradoxical immune enhancement (IPE).

I have detailed this issue in several articles including “How COVID-19 Vaccine Can Destroy Your Immune System” and “Will Vaccinated People Be More Vulnerable to Variants” In summary, ADE means the vaccine actually enhances the virus’ ability to enter and infect your cells, rather than enhancing your immunity against the infection. This results in more severe disease.

Fall and winter months are when most coronavirus infections occur, whether those are from SARS-CoV-2 or other coronaviruses responsible for the common cold. If ADE does turn out to be a common problem, then vaccinated individuals may be at higher risk for severe COVID-19 illness and a potentially lethal immune reaction due to pathogenic priming.

There are so many potential avenues for harm and so many uncertainties that I would encourage you to do your homework, keep reading and learning, weigh the potential pros and cons, ignore all pressure tactics and take your time when you decide whether or not to get one of these COVID-19 gene therapies.

If you or someone you love has already received a COVID-19 vaccine and are experiencing side effects, be sure to report it, preferably to all three of these locations:23

If you live in the U.S., file a report on VAERS
Report the injury on VaxxTracker.com, which is a nongovernmental adverse event tracker (you can file anonymously if you like)
Report the injury on the Children’s Health Defense website

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2021/06/01/covid-19-antibodies.aspx

The topic of the National Vaccine Information Center’s (NVIC) Fifth International Public Conference on Vaccination was Protecting Health and Autonomy in the 21st Century. The initially pay-for-view conference was held online with more than 50 speakers presenting information on vaccine science, policy, law and civil liberties.
“Following the conference, NVIC was targeted by political operatives and global non-governmental organizations and corporations that are working with governments to silence criticism of vaccine safety and one-size-fits-all mandatory vaccination policies and laws,” NVIC said in a statement.1
In its “Anti-Vaxx Playbook,”2 the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH) identified six leading online “anti-vaxxers,” which include not only yours truly but also Fisher. In the Playbook, CCDH details the messages shared by me and others during the conference, such as:

Deaths being falsely attributed to COVID-19, thereby artificially inflating mortality statistics

The fact that COVID-19 has a 99%+ survival rate unless you’re very old and have underlying comorbidities

The fact that there are now several effective therapeutics for COVID-19, making a vaccine less relevant

However, the CCDH report presents these messages without any counterarguments. It does not negate or even debate the accuracy of any of them. It just brushes them aside as “misinformation” and “lies” without providing any proof whatsoever, and in doing so, it actually ends up strengthening our messaging.
In fact, the report summarizes our concerns so well that I’d encourage everyone to read it3 — it is, in essence, attempting to accomplish via censorship the opposite of what NVIC is striving for. Where CCDH is fighting to make open vaccine discussion akin to a national security threat or digital hate, NVIC serves a truly crucial public health service centered on transparency and science.
You simply cannot make an informed decision if you’re only allowed to hear one side of the equation — the supposed benefit side — while potential adverse effects, which may be lifelong, are hidden or denied. CCDH called NVIC’s conference “private,”4 but it was and still is very much public and you’re free to view it in its entirety.
Explore Science, Vaccine Choice, Health and Liberty
The first session of NVIC’s free online conference is focused on science, provided by experts in biology, immunology, molecular and cellular physiology, pharmacology and more. According to NVIC:5

“The quality and quantity of the science being used to buttress public health policy and law in the 21st century, particularly vaccine policy and law, has been debated since the mid-20th century when serious adverse reactions to whole-cell pertussis (DPT) vaccine were acknowledged in the medical literature and publicized in Europe and the U.S.”

During the Session 1 presentations, you can learn about vaccine science that is pertinent to helping you make informed health choices, such as:6

Vaccine ingredients
Monitoring vaccine side effects

Epidemiology of SARS-Cov-2
Development of COVID-19 vaccines

Flaws in clinical trial designs
Pharmaceutical product marketing

HPV vaccine risk factors
Use of human fetal cell lines to produce and test vaccines

Research into the reported association between inflammation, epigenetics and autism
How human health is affected by the microbiome

Session 2 is focused on pharmaceutical industry partnerships with Big Tech companies and their lobbying efforts to influence vaccine exemptions in public health laws:7

“The debate about the science and ethics of mandatory vaccination has become more intense in the past decade as citizens of many countries push back against one-size-fits-all vaccine policies that apply increasingly more severe societal sanctions to individuals, who maintain that use of vaccines should be voluntary.”

Indeed, the speakers cover topics that have received renewed importance in 2020 and 2021, including threats to autonomy and freedom of thought, speech and conscience, and defending the legal right to exercise voluntary, informed consent to vaccine risk-taking.
Session 3 is centered on the ongoing paradigm shift toward health and liberty, with health professionals, attorneys, spiritual leaders and human rights activists moving away from the vaccine- and drug-dependent medical model as the only option for wellness. NVIC explains:8

“As the education level of populations is increasing in the U.S. and throughout the world, so is easier access to scientific, medical, legal and other types of information that consumers can use to make informed choices.
Recent public opinion polls demonstrate that more people are asking more questions about the quality and quantity of the science being used to buttress medical policies, which rely almost exclusively on use of prescription drugs and vaccines.”

While health professionals continue to challenge the status quo to provide the best possible care for their patients, attorneys are increasingly challenging Big Pharma and educational systems, and activists are holding institutions accountable for violating civil liberties.
Vaccine Mandates, Liability Shields and Medical Atrocities

The fourth session of NVIC’s conference continues to explore the scientific, medical, legal, ethical and holistic health themes touched on in the other sessions, while adding issues that anyone making informed decisions about vaccination should be aware of, including:9

Animal vaccines
How to access and interpret information contained in the federal vaccine adverse event reporting system

The threat to medical privacy and informed consent rights posed by electronic health care records and vaccine tracking systems
The expansion of vaccine mandates to include adults

Strategies used by mandatory vaccination proponents in state legislatures
COVID-19 vaccines

Propaganda and psychological warfare
Urban community education and organizing

Historical examples of medical atrocities
Vaccine product liability shields

The untold story of why and how the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act was passed and then systematically dismantled

Access NVIC’s Conference for Free

The conference was made available for free viewing online February 2, 2021. You can access the conference website and watch all the presentations by clicking below. This conference was organized to be an educational event and you are encouraged to follow the conference agenda and view presentations in sequential order, so you can experience it as it was originally broadcast.

>>>>> Click Here <<<<< Awarded With NVIC Lifetime Achievement Award As you can see in the video at the top of this page, in 2020 I was the recipient of a Lifetime Achievement Award from NVIC, a nonprofit organization intent on evaluating information relating to vaccines and the science, policies and laws behind their use. NVIC is one of our longtime health partners, offering a clearinghouse for science-backed information on diseases and vaccines. NVIC does not make vaccine use recommendations but, rather, supports the availability of all preventive health care options, and encourages you to make educated decisions when it comes to your health. “Observing his patients’ struggle to heal and stay well, Dr. Mercola refused to accept the status quo,” Barbara Loe Fisher, NVIC’s co-founder said. “Listening to his patients, he dared to think outside the box, and after years of research, moved away from reliance on prescription drugs, vaccines and surgery so he could embrace a less toxic, more natural approach to health and wellness.” In 2009, at NVIC's Fourth International Public Conference on Vaccination, I received their Visionary Award for speaking out about the importance of taking control of your health and communicating the truth about the H1N1 swine flu pandemic.10 The Lifetime Achievement Award was announced at NVIC’s Fifth International Public Conference on Vaccination, which was broadcast online October 16 to 18, 2020, and is now available online, free of charge, for everyone to view.11 ‘Holistic Health Pioneer’ Like Mercola.com, NVIC is one of a handful of sites being targeted by the Centre for Countering Digital Hate. CCDH has been one of the most vocal organizations calling for the deplatforming of anyone who might have the ability to influence public opinion about vaccines — and NVIC is a leading authority in this area, having worked with the U.S. Congress to establish the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act in 1986. Facebook deleted NVIC’s account March 2, 2021,12 but we will continue to support them in their mission to defend the human right to freedom of thought and conscience.13 In regard to the Lifetime Achievement Award, Fisher said: “Dr. Mercola’s advice about how to stay healthy has had an immeasurable positive impact on the lives of millions of people around the world. Often the first to recommend a new way to prevent illness, long before others do, he is a holistic health pioneer who has never stopped searching for ways to help people stay well. Like most pioneers, Dr. Mercola has been criticized by those who are threatened by his refusal to be a prisoner of convention. Yet he has steadfastly refused to bow to pressure from powerful industries and institutions trying to stop him from searching for and speaking the truth about how to maintain health. In 2008, when Dr. Mercola reached out to the National Vaccine Information Center and offered to help us forward our mission to prevent vaccine injuries and deaths through public education, his encouragement and support gave new life to this charity, founded and operated by parents of vaccine injured children since 1982. He has been publicly attacked by media corporations for his support of NVIC’s work, but … has never backed down or waivered in his commitment to educate and defend everyone’s right to make voluntary vaccination decisions. … At this 5th International Public Conference on Vaccination, we honor Dr. Mercola with a lifetime achievement award for his courage and commitment and the brilliant body of work he has created during his career, which has truly changed the way that people all over the world view their right to know and freedom to take control of their health.”
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2021/05/29/nvic-lifetime-achievement-award.aspx

In this interview, Stephanie Seneff, Ph.D., and Judy Mikovits, Ph.D., a dream-team in terms of deep insights into the scientific details, explain the problems they see with gene-based COVID-19 vaccines. There is a load of highly useful technical information that you can use to defend your opposition to these dangerous vaccines.

However, unless you have deeply studied molecular biology and genetics, it would be wise to view the video two or three times, as with each review, you will learn more and understand just how dangerous these vaccines are. I recently interviewed Seneff about the excellent paper1 she published on this topic. That interview was featured in “COVID Vaccines May Bring Avalanche of Neurological Disease.”

In May 2020, I also interviewed Mikovits about the possibility of these vaccines causing reproductive harm and other health problems. At the time, Mikovits warned that fertility rates may drop thanks to the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein creating antibodies that attack syncytium, and indeed, we’re now starting to see that.

Still, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention are recommending pregnant women get these vaccines, as well as children as young as 12, which is unconscionable, considering the potential lifelong risks and impairment of fertility.

The Spike Protein Is the Bioweapon

As noted by Mikovits, we now know that the worst symptoms of COVID-19 are created by the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, and that is the very thing these gene-based vaccines are instructing your body to make. But it’s far worse, as the vaccines do not cause your body to make the same spike protein as SARS-CoV-2 but one that has been genetically modified, making it far more toxic. So, it’s no wonder things are going wrong.

“The SARS-CoV-2 infection never was what they said it was,” Mikovits says. “There was no infection asymptomatically. It’s a monkey virus coming out of a monkey cell line and that’s the problem, but the spike protein is clearly [causing] the disease.

So, you just injected the envelope of HIV … a syncytin gammaretrovirus envelope, and a SARS S2 receptor binding domain. That’s not a vaccine. It is the disease-causing agent. It’s a bioweapon. So now your cells are all producing that bioweapon and you’re going to take out the innate immunity, NK [natural killer] cells and dendritic cells …

You’re going to disrupt your white blood cells, your immune response. You’re going to turn on an anti-inflammatory cytokine signature in every cell of your body. It exhausts your NK cells’ ability to determine infected cells. It’s the nightmare we predicted.”

The Spike Protein Produced in Your Body Is Highly Unnatural

In her paper, “Worse Than The Disease: Reviewing Some Possible Unintended Consequences of mRNA Vaccines Against COVID-19,” published in the International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice and Research in collaboration with Dr. Greg Nigh,2 Seneff explains that a significant part of the problem is that while the natural spike protein is bad, the spike protein your body produces in response to the vaccine is even worse.

The reason for this is because the synthetic RNA has been manipulated in such a way as to create a very unnatural spike protein that result in it not collapsing on itself into the cell once it attaches to the ACE2 receptor, as it normally does. Instead it stays open and attached to the ACE2 receptor, disabling it and causing a host of problems leading to heart, lung, and immune impairment. As explained by Seneff:

“They modified the RNA to make it really sturdy so the enzymes can’t break it down … Normally, enzymes that are in your system would just break down that RNA. RNA is very fragile, but they’ve made it sturdy by putting in PEG [polyethylene glycol], by adding this lipid membrane, and the lipid is positively charged, which causes the cell to be very upset when that goes into the membrane of the cell.

But I think maybe the most disturbing thing is they actually modified the [RNA] code so that it doesn’t produce a normal version of the spike protein. It produces a version that has a couple of prolines in it, side by side at the critical place where this spike protein normally would fuse with the cell that it’s infecting.

So, the spike protein binds to the ACE2 receptor once it’s produced by the human cell … but it’s a modified version of the spike protein. It has these two prolines that make it very stiff so that it can’t reshape. Normally it would bind to the ACE2 receptor and then it would reshape and go straight into the membrane like a spear.

Because of this redesign, it can’t do that, so it sits there on the ACE receptor, exposed … That allows the immune cells to produce antibodies specific to that place where it should be fusing with the cell, the fusion domain. It messes up the fusion domain, keeps the protein open, and prevents the protein from getting in, which means the protein will just stick there on the ACE2 receptor, disabling it.

When you disable ACE2 receptors in the heart, you get heart failure. When you disable them in the lungs, you get pulmonary hypertension. When you do it in the brain, you get stroke. Lots of nasty things happen when you disable ACE2 receptors …

The other thing they’ve done with the RNA is they’ve stuck in a lot of extra Gs (guanine) and Cs (cytosine), which makes it much better at making proteins. It’s turned up the gain on the natural virus 1,000-fold, making the RNA much more willing to make a protein. So, it’ll make a lot more spike protein than you would’ve had from a natural RNA virus.”

Reality Is Exponentially Worse Than Predicted

With the added information provided by Seneff, Mikovits now believes the reality of these vaccines may be exponentially worse than she initially predicted a year ago. Not only is the lipid nanoparticle a serious hazard, as we’ve seen with Gardasil and some of the newer hepatitis B vaccines, but we now also have the added issue of unnatural mRNA, made more robust so as to evade its natural breakdown.

As explained by Mikovits, free RNA acts as a danger signal inside your body, so now your system is on red alert for however long the RNA remains viable. Now, by manipulating the RNA code to be enriched in G and C, and configured as if it’s a human messenger RNA molecule ready to make protein by adding a polyA tail, the spike protein’s RNA sequence in the vaccine looks as if it is part bacteria,3 part human4 and part viral at the same time.

“We use poly(I:C) [a toll-like receptor 3 agonist] to signal the cell to turn on the type I interferon pathway,” Mikovits explains, “and because this is an unnatural synthetic envelope, you’re not seeing poly(I:C), and you’re not [activating] the Type I interferon pathway.

You’ve bypassed the plasmacytoid dendritic cell, which combined with IL-10, by talking to the regulatory B cells, decides what subclasses of antibodies to put out. So, you’ve bypassed the communication between the innate and adaptive immune response. You now miss the signaling of the endocannabinoid receptors …

A large part of Dr. [Francis] Ruscetti’s and my work over the last 30 years has been to show you don’t need an infectious transmissible virus — just pieces and parts of these viruses are worse, because they also turn on danger signals. They act like danger signals and pathogen-associated molecular patterns.

So, it synergistically leaves that inflammatory cytokine signature on that spins your innate immune response out of control. It just cannot keep up with the myelopoiesis [the production of cells in your bone marrow]. Hence you see a skew-away from the mesenchymal stem cell towards TGF-beta regulated hematopoietic stem cells.

This means you could see bleeding disorders on both ends. You can’t make enough firetrucks to send to the fire. Your innate immune response can’t get there, and then you’ve just got a total train wreck of your immune system.”

With respect to Mikovits’ comment that pieces and parts of the virus are actually worse than the whole virus, that is precisely what we have with the COVID vaccines. In last week’s interview with Seneff, she explained how the manufacturing process leaves fragmented genetically modified RNA in the vaccine. They are not filtered out and assumed to be harmless, but as Mikovits states, this is not the case. This is being completely missed as one reason why this vaccine is so dangerous.

Latent Viruses May Flare if You Receive the COVID Vaccine

As noted by Seneff, her and Mikovits’ findings mesh well to explain many of the problems we’re now seeing from these gene-therapies. For example, vaccinated patients are reporting herpes and shingles infection following COVID-19 vaccination, which you’d expect if your Type I interferon pathway is disabled.

“Basically, you’ve got these latent viruses that are not bothering you at all until your immune system gets completely distracted by this crazy thing going on in the spleen with all this messenger RNA and all these spike proteins,” Seneff says.

“Immune cells are distracted from their other job of keeping these viruses in check. So, you get these other conditions showing up, and there are several. There’s Bell’s palsy (facial palsy), for example. There are over 1,200 cases of Bell’s palsy reported after the vaccine in the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS).

And when you look at the research of what causes that, they really point to the herpes virus and the varicella virus as being the source of Bell’s palsy. The Type I interferon system is what you need to keep these guys in check, and so those viruses are getting enabled and they’re causing symptoms.

That is actually a very bad sign. If a woman who’s pregnant has a herpes flare-up during pregnancy, she has a twofold increased risk of producing an autistic son.

Also, in a study on 200 Parkinson’s patients, compared to 200 age- and gender-matched controls, six of those Parkinson’s patients had at least one episode of Bell’s palsy in the past, whereas none of the controls had. So, it looks to me like the Bell’s palsy is an indicator of a future risk of Parkinson’s disease.”

To summarize, it looks as though pregnant women who are getting the COVID-19 vaccine are at increased risk not only for miscarriage but also for future infertility and having an autistic child. So, please, be careful out there and spread the word.

The best way to treat any disease is to prevent it. These vaccines simply are not decreasing COVID-19 but radically decreasing the health of those who receive it, especially pregnant women that the CDC merely a month ago encouraged to get vaccinated without a shred of safety evidence.

The Importance of Type I Interferon

Mikovits has done a great deal of research on interferon for the last 40 years. Innate immune interferon makes up your entire frontline defense. People with HIV/AIDS have dysregulated Type I interferon, which allows parasites to gain a solid foothold. Interestingly enough, antiparasitic drugs such as hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin have been shown to be effective against COVID-19, both prophylactically and in treatment.

COVID-19 vaccines are capable of causing damage in a number of different ways. Disturbingly, all these different mechanisms of harm have synergistic effects when it comes to dysregulating your innate and adaptive immune systems and activating latent viruses.

Mikovits cites a research paper5 titled “War and Peace Between Microbes,” which details how HIV-1 interacts with coinfecting viruses, thereby accelerating the disease. Herpes viruses in particular have been implicated as a cause of AIDS. Human herpesvirus 6 (HHVS-6) has also been implicated in myalgic encephalomyelitis or chronic fatigue syndrome (ME-CFS).

In short, these diseases, AIDS and ME-CFS, don’t appear until viruses from different families partner up and retroviruses take out the Type 1 interferon pathway.

In short, the COVID-19 vaccines are capable of causing damage in a number of different ways. Disturbingly, all these different mechanisms of harm have synergistic effects when it comes to dysregulating your innate and adaptive immune systems and activating latent viruses. “It’s just an explosion of a nightmare of crippling every area of your immune response,” Mikovits says.

SARS-CoV-2 Spike Protein Engineered With HIV

According to Mikovits, there’s evidence showing the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein was engineered by integrating HIV and XMRV proteins. XMRV stands for xenotropic murine leukemia virus-related virus, a human retrovirus that is very similar to endogenous retroviruses also found in other mammals.

XMRV has been linked to ME-CFS. HIV, which can cause AIDS, is another human retrovirus (although as mentioned earlier, HIV does not appear to trigger AIDS all by itself. It needs a coinfection.)

“Our endogenous gammaretrovirus is called human endogenous retrovirus-W (HERV-W). HERVW is all the way back in genesis in our original endogenous genome. It’s a gammaretrovirus that expresses only the envelope, because in retroviruses, the envelope alone is enough to cause the disease. That envelope protein is called syncytin. They’re [now] calling it ‘spike protein’ just to throw us all off,” Mikovits says.

According to Mikovits, the SARS-CoV-2 virus was created by introducing a mutation into a molecular clone. Vero E6 monkey tissues are known to be infected with SIV and other gammaretroviruses, and the SARS-CoV-2 virus has markers suggesting it was grown in a Vero E6 cell line, she says.

“So syncytin is the gammaretrovirus; it cross-reacts with the mouse and monkey gammaretroviruses. Monkeys, mice all have syncytin. Endogenous viruses express, especially during hormonal cycles. When it’s expressed in the wrong place, like in the brain or the spinal cord, it’s long been associated with the inflammatory disease and the destruction of the myelin sheet in multiple sclerosis (MS).

So, syncytin expressed it in the wrong place gives you the paralytics diseases. We know Parkinson’s is associated with Type I interferon responses. We’re now starting to appreciate that there is low-level expression of our endogenous virome all the time, and that in our innate immune response it’s trying to shape and educate our Type I interferon pathways …

The final and biggest problem is these exosomes, because your body’s exosomes are like your cells’ response to express its regulatory RNAs, small inhibitory RNAs, long-chain non-coding RNA — which Ritchie Shoemaker has long associated with chronic Lyme and ME/CFS — and the TGF-beta I pathway.

TGF-beta I, that’s the master switch to turn on which Type I interferon, which [is needed for] myelopoiesis. But these exosomes are packaging not only RNA that you’re making, but now you’ve dysregulated the methylation so you’ve woken up your endogenous virome, and then syncytin is going to be expressed.”

How mRNA Can Alter Your DNA

In her paper, Seneff also describes how mRNA can, in fact, alter your DNA, essentially integrating the instructions to make spike proteins into your genome. Typically, mRNA cannot be integrated directly into your genes because you need reverse transcriptase.

Reverse transcriptase converts RNA back into DNA (reverse transcription). However, there’s a wide variety of reverse transcriptase systems already embedded in our DNA, which makes this possible. This is an area that Mikovits has studied for decades, so, commenting on Seneff’s findings, she says:

“When you activate latent and defective viruses, you turn on reverse transcriptase; you turn on the virome. But you also need an integrase gene. So how are retroviruses silenced? [Through] DNA methylation. [When] you throw in a lot of GC-rich regions — you’ve got that synthetic viral particle [i.e., the vaccine-induced spike protein RNA] — now you’ve woken up your herpes viruses.

[Latent viruses] are silenced [through] DNA methylation, but as our soil is depleted in minerals, we have people with methylation defects. This is why I said the first people who are going to die are people with inflammatory conditions and cancer.”

SARS-CoV-2 Spike Protein May Be a Prion

In her paper, Seneff also discusses evidence suggesting the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein may be a prion, which is yet another piece of really bad news. “It’s absolutely terrifying to me,” she says, adding:

“I’m now thinking that may be the worst aspect of these mRNA vaccines, because they’re producing this abnormal spike protein that doesn’t want to go into the membrane. Prion proteins are known to be membrane proteins. They’re alpha-helices in the membrane and then they misfold, becoming beta-sheets in the cytoplasm, and that’s what leads to the prion problem.

They form a crystal that draws in other proteins and makes this big mess and builds fibrils and Alzheimer’s plaque. The main prion protein is PrP, which is in Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease, the human form of mad cow disease. It’s a sort of protein-source infection. It’s quite wild because there’s no DNA involved, no RNA involved, just protein.

But the thing is, when you have produced a version of mRNA that knows how to spew out tons of a prion protein, the prion proteins become problematic when there’s too many of them and the concentration is too high in the cytoplasm.

And the spike proteins that these mRNA vaccines are producing … isn’t able to go into the membrane, which I think is going to encourage it to become a problematic prion protein. Then, when you have inflammation, it upregulates alpha-synuclein [a neuronal protein that regulates synaptic traffic and neurotransmitter release].

So, you’re going to get alpha-synuclein drawn into misfolded spike proteins, turning into a mess inside the dendritic cells in the germinal centers in the spleen. And they’re going to package up all this crud into exosomes and release them. They’re then going to travel along the vagus nerve to the brainstem and cause things like Parkinson’s disease.

So, I think this is a complete setup for Parkinson’s disease. What may happen is that because they got this vaccine, they get Parkinson’s disease five years earlier than they would have gotten it otherwise. It’s going to push forward the date at which someone who has a propensity towards Parkinson’s is going to get it.

And it’s probably going to cause people to get Parkinson’s who never would have gotten it in the first place — especially if they keep getting the vaccine every year. Every year you do a booster, you bring the date that you’re going to get Parkinson’s ever closer.”

Are Viral Vector Vaccines Better or Worse?

Two of the four COVID-19 vaccines on the market in Europe and the U.S., AstraZeneca and Johnson & Johnson, are using viral vectors and DNA rather than using nanolipid-coated mRNA. Unfortunately, while potentially slightly less dangerous than Moderna’s and Pfizer’s mRNA versions, they can still cause significant problems through mechanisms of their own. As explained by Mikovits:

“As mentioned, it’s an adenovirus vector expressing the protein. So, the HIV, the XMRV envelope, the syncytin, the HERV-W envelope and the ACE2 are already being expressed in the vector.

With respect to the RNA component, it’s less dangerous because you’re not going to see much of the mechanisms we’ve been talking about. But these adenovirus vector protein-producing vaccines are grown in an aborted fetal tissue cell line, so now you’ve got human syncytin [in there]. You’ve got 8% of the human genome of another human.

So, again, looking at the communication that has to regulate your Type I interferon response, it’s going to give you autoimmunity. In immunocompromised people, it’s going to continue to express and that will give you a live infection, and you already have your firetrucks fighting another [infection]. You can’t fight a war on three fronts.

I say, ‘You only need one shot because it’s the most toxic.’ It’s the most toxic in that sense. We have many mechanisms to degrade RNA, and we can restore methylation machinery. It’s a nightmare, but I believe our immune system can break it [the synthetic vaccine mRNA) down.”

Can COVID Vaccines ‘Shed’ or Transmit Infection?

Disturbingly, it appears the COVID-19 vaccines may also cause trouble for those who decide not to get the shots but spend time in close proximity to people who did. While it cannot be viral shedding, as none of the vaccines use live or even attenuated virus, there appears to be some sort of spike protein transmission going on.

While the spike protein cannot replicate or multiply like a virus, it is toxic in and of itself. In her paper, Seneff details how the spike protein acts as a metabolic poison, capable of triggering pathological damage leading to lung damage and heart and brain diseases:6

“In a series of papers, Yuichiro Suzuki in collaboration with other authors presented a strong argument that the spike protein by itself can cause a signaling response in the vasculature with potentially widespread consequences.

These authors observed that, in severe cases of COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2 causes significant morphological changes to the pulmonary vasculature … Furthermore, they showed that exposure of cultured human pulmonary artery smooth muscle cells to the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein S1 subunit was sufficient to promote cell signaling without the rest of the virus components.

Follow-up papers showed that the spike protein S1 subunit suppresses ACE2, causing a condition resembling pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH), a severe lung disease with very high mortality …

Suzuki et al. (2021) went on to demonstrate experimentally that the S1 component of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, at a low concentration … activated the MEK/ERK/MAPK signaling pathway to promote cell growth. They speculated that these effects would not be restricted to the lung vasculature.

The signaling cascade triggered in the heart vasculature would cause coronary artery disease, and activation in the brain could lead to stroke. Systemic hypertension would also be predicted. They hypothesized that this ability of the spike protein to promote pulmonary arterial hypertension could predispose patients who recover from SARS-CoV-2 to later develop right ventricular heart failure.

Furthermore, they suggested that a similar effect could happen in response to the mRNA vaccines, and they warned of potential long-term consequences to both children and adults who received COVID-19 vaccines based on the spike protein.

An interesting study by Lei et. al. (2021) found that pseudovirus — spheres decorated with the SARS-CoV-2 S1 protein but lacking any viral DNA in their core — caused inflammation and damage in both the arteries and lungs of mice exposed intratracheally.

They then exposed healthy human endothelial cells to the same pseudovirus particles. Binding of these particles to endothelial ACE2 receptors led to mitochondrial damage and fragmentation in those endothelial cells, leading to the characteristic pathological changes in the associated tissue.

This study makes it clear that spike protein alone, unassociated with the rest of the viral genome, is sufficient to cause the endothelial damage associated with COVID-19. The implications for vaccines intended to cause cells to manufacture the spike protein are clear and are an obvious cause for concern.”

As explained by Mikovits, the transmission that appears to be occurring from vaccinated individuals to unvaccinated ones is the transmission of exosomes, basically, the spike protein. The problem is these exosomes look like a virus to your immune system, and “If that synthetic nanoparticle is a virus-like particle and they’re literally self-assembling, then you’ve got yourself a synthetic nightmare,” she says.

Which Vaccine Is Most Dangerous?

As for which vaccine might be the most dangerous, Mikovits believes the vector-based DNA vaccines (AstraZeneca and Johnson & Johnson) are the most dangerous for those with chronic Lyme disease or any inflammatory disease associated with an abnormal host immune response, such as shingles, viral infections or cancer, women who have already received the Gardasil vaccine (as this may predispose them to problems with the lipid nanoparticle), and those with Parkinson’s or Huntington-like diseases.

Seneff, meanwhile, worries that children may be susceptible to either type of COVID vaccine, simply because they’ve already received so many different vaccines. Mikovits agrees, but believes the mRNA vaccines may be more harmful in this age group:

“The most dangerous to the children are the mRNA vaccines because their immune systems are growing, growing, growing, growing. You introduce or you turn on a fire, what happens? All the stem cells that are important for growing that say, ‘OK, all is calm in the immune system, go build bone, go build brain cells, go do the pruning with the macrophages.’ You can’t have your macrophages clearing all the viruses.

And yes, reverse transcriptase is ‘on,’ it’s expressed in telomeres. You’re growing. That’s the whole idea of everything. All the brakes are off. Same thing in pregnancy. That’s why we don’t do anything in pregnancy because you’ve got to stay unmethylated in order to respond to your environment, that endogenous genome of the virome. That’s your Type I interferon responses.

You don’t want myelopoiesis, you want embryonic development. We’re going to see things like Down syndrome … Rett syndrome. Rett syndrome, that’s inappropriate DNA methylation in little girls. So, for the kids, the worst thing in the world is the RNA vaccines.”

What Can We Expect to See More Of?

While the variety of diseases we may see a rise in as a result of this vaccination campaign are myriad, some general predictions can be made. Seneff believes we’ll see a significant rise in cancer, accelerated Parkinson’s-like diseases, Huntington’s disease, and all types of autoimmune diseases and neurodegenerative disorders.

Mikovits suspects many will die rather rapidly. “We have evidence in the HTLV-1 associated myelopathy that these things go from long latency periods to [putting] you in a wheelchair in six months,” she says. “So, with all these other toxins combined hitting you, it’s not going to be ‘live and suffer forever.’ It’s going to be suffer five years and die.”

She likens the COVID-19 vaccines to a “kill switch” for all who have been previously injured by vaccines, whether they actually realize it or not. As noted by Mikovits, it’s been shown that 6% of the American population are asymptomatically infected with XMRVs and gammaretroviruses from contaminated vaccines. The COVID shot will effectively accelerate their death by crippling their immune function. “The kids that are highly vaccinated, they’re ticking time bombs,” she says.

What Are the Solutions?

While all of this is highly problematic, there is help. As noted by Mikovits, remedies to the maladies that might develop post-vaccination include:

Hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin treatments

Low-dose antiretroviral therapy to reeducate your immune system

Low-dose interferons such as Paximune, developed by interferon researcher Dr. Joe Cummins, to stimulate your immune system

Peptide T (an HIV entry inhibitor derived from the HIV envelope protein gp120; it blocks binding and infection of viruses that use the CCR5 receptor to infect cells)

Cannabis, to strengthen Type I interferon pathways

Dimethylglycine or betaine (trimethylglycine) to enhance methylation, thereby suppressing latent viruses

Silymarin or milk thistle to help cleanse your liver

From my perspective, I believe the best thing you can do is to build your innate immune system. To do that, you need to become metabolically flexible and optimize your diet. You’ll also want to make sure your vitamin D level is optimized to between 60 ng/mL and 80 ng/mL (100 nmol/L to 150 nmol/L), ideally through sensible sun exposure. Sunlight also has other benefits besides making vitamin D.

Use time-restricted eating and eat all your meals for the day within a six- to eight-hour window. Avoid all vegetable oils and processed foods. Focus on certified-organic foods to minimize your glyphosate exposure, and include plenty of sulfur-rich foods to keep your mitochondria and lysosomes healthy. Both are important for the clearing of cellular debris, including these spike proteins. You can also boost your sulfate by taking Epsom salt baths.

To combat the toxicity of the spike protein, Seneff suggests optimizing autophagy, which may help digest and remove the spike proteins. Time-restricted eating will upregulate autophagy, while sauna therapy, which upregulates heat shock proteins, will help refold misfolded proteins. They also tag damaged proteins and target them for removal.

It is important that your sauna is hot enough (around 170 degrees Fahrenheit) and does not have high magnetic or electric fields. Last but not least, Mikovits recommends never getting another vaccination.

“We knew the flu shot would drive the disease,” she says. “It’s the combinations. That’s a ticking time bomb sitting there in every cell. So never get another vaccine and be very careful about drugs that compromise your immune system.

The answer is, don’t hyper-immune activate. Don’t eat GMO. Don’t ingest it and don’t inject it. And don’t put it on your skin. Don’t use toxins on your hair. Use essential oils, use antimicrobials … ozonated balms and creams break apart the lipid particles, cannabis balms and creams normalize skin, [which is part of] your immune system …

Remember, immune dysfunction accelerates every time you add an immune activation event. So, if the entire world never again took another shot, even the most susceptible populations, they could stay well … We really have to say no more shots because they’re the single biggest toxin to anyone, and an immune dysregulator.”
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2021/05/30/covid-19-vaccines-causing-damage.aspx

Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), has been a staunch defender of the natural-origin theory for SARS-CoV-2 since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic. Back in May 2020, CNN used Fauci’s statements on the issue as proof that then-President Donald Trump was spouting a ridiculous conspiracy theory:1

“For weeks now, President Donald Trump has been making the case that the coronavirus originated not in nature but in a lab in Wuhan, China,” CNN wrote.2

“Enter Anthony Fauci, the head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease and perhaps the single most prominent doctor in the world at the moment. In an interview with National Geographic … Fauci was definitive about the origins of the virus …

‘If you look at the evolution of the virus in bats and what’s out there now, [the scientific evidence] is very, very strongly leaning toward this could not have been artificially or deliberately manipulated … Everything about the stepwise evolution over time strongly indicates that [this virus] evolved in nature and then jumped species,’ [Fauci said].

Now, before we play the game of ‘he said, he said’ remember this: Only one of these two people is a world-renowned infectious disease expert. And it’s not Donald Trump.”

Oh, the difference a year can make. Mainstream media is finally forced to face the fact that Fauci and a number of other so-called “experts” they’ve paraded before their viewers and readers have been no more reliable than your average armchair scientist.

Fauci Pulls Biggest 180 Yet

Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, Fauci has been front and center, spouting recommendations, over time changing his mind again and again.

A virtuoso of contradiction, he’s flip-flopped on the usefulness and need for masks multiple times, from “Americans shouldn’t be wearing masks because they don’t work,” to masks definitely work and should be worn by everyone, to you should wear not just one but two, for safe measure.

He’s gone from promising a mask-free existence once the vaccine rolls out, to insisting mask-wearing is still necessary after vaccination because vaccine-resistant variants might pop up, to proposing we might need to wear masks every flu season in perpetuity.

His biggest flip-flop to date, however, has to be his stance on the origin of SARS-CoV-2. As reported by Krystal Ball and Saagar Enjeti in a May 24, 2021 “Rising with Krystal & Saagar” episode (see video above), Fauci is now claiming he’s “not convinced” the virus had a natural origin after all, and that we must continue to investigate “what went on in China until we find out, to the best of our ability, what happened.”

Considering Fauci’s opinion has been used by mainstream media pundits and fact checkers to censor any and all other experts — including people with far more impressive credentials than Fauci, who at the end of the day is an administrator, a paper-pusher, not a working scientist — this very public 180-degree turn is no doubt causing embarrassment among many mainstream reporters.

Krystal and Saagar both look uncomfortable having to explain how the media, en masse, ended up being so wrong for so long.

Mainstream Media Scramble to Justify Their Errors

According to Krystal and Saagar, new information indicating workers at the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) fell ill with COVID-like symptoms in November 2020 now make the lab leak theory the most plausible.

What’s so ironic about that statement is that this isn’t new information that would definitively tip the scale. It’s just that now, all of a sudden, it’s not being dismissed off-hand. The weight of the evidence has, for over a year now, strongly leaned in the direction of SARS-CoV-2 being a lab creation that somehow escaped.

Now, mainstream media are scrambling to save face, and it’s rather hilarious to watch them trying to justify their previous refusal to do what journalists and reporters are expected to do: Report the facts without interjecting their own personal opinions and biases.

Of course, you’d be hard-pressed to find an unbiased news outlet these days — it’s all tightly and centrally controlled, as detailed in “Reuters and BBC Caught Taking Money for Propaganda Campaign” — so in all likelihood, the only reason mainstream media are now starting to report on the lab leak theory is because of the success of alternative media.

Their viewers simply aren’t buying what they’re selling anymore, so they have no choice but to acknowledge what a majority of people already know, or lose what little credibility they have left.

The Case for the Lab-Leak Theory

In the video above, Freddie Sayers interviews3 Nicholas Wade, a former New York Times science writer, about the two primary origin theories. Wade recently published a widely-read article4 detailing the evidence supporting the lab-leak and natural-origin theories.

As reported by Wade in “Origin of COVID — Following the Clues: Did People or Nature Open Pandora’s Box at Wuhan?”5 if we are ever to solve the mystery of where this novel virus came from, we must be willing to actually follow the science, as “it offers the only sure thread through the maze.”

“It’s important to note that so far there is no direct evidence for either theory,” Wade writes.6 “Each depends on a set of reasonable conjectures but so far lacks proof. So I have only clues, not conclusions, to offer. But those clues point in a specific direction.”

In summary, the preponderance of clues leans toward SARS-CoV-2 originating in a lab, most likely the WIV, and having undergone some sort of manipulation to encourage infectiousness and pathology in humans.

As just one example, there’s research dating as far back as 1992 detailing how inserting a furin cleavage site right where we find it in SARS-CoV-2 is a “sure way to make a virus deadlier.” One of 11 such studies was written by Dr. Zhengli Shi, head of coronavirus research at the WIV.

The arguments laid out in support of natural origin theories, meanwhile, are grounded in inconclusive speculations that require you to throw out scientifically possible scenarios. From a scientific standpoint, doing so is ill advised.

“It seems to me that proponents of lab escape can explain all the available facts about SARS2 considerably more easily than can those who favor natural emergence,” Wade writes.7

Fauci Pulls 180 Turnabout on Gain-of-Function Backing Too

Getting back to Fauci, he’s also now denying ever having funded gain-of-function research, even though there’s irrefutable evidence that he did. As reported by the National Review:8

“Dr. Roger Ebright, a professor of chemistry and chemical biology at Rutgers University and biosafety expert, is contesting … Fauci’s testimony before the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee on [May 11, 2021].

Dr. Fauci’s claim — made during an exchange with Senator Rand Paul9 — that ‘the NIH has not ever and does not now fund gain of function research in the Wuhan Institute of Virology’ is ‘demonstrably false,’ according to Ebright …

A research article written by WIV scientists, ‘Discovery of a rich gene pool of bat SARS-related coronaviruses provides new insights into the origin of SARS coronavirus,’10 for example, qualifies as gain-of-function and was clearly a product of NIH-funding.

Ebright insists that the research can be classified as gain-of-function under a number of different definitions, including those found in two pieces of Department of Health and Human Services guidance on the subject.

The first details the Obama administration’s 2014 decision to halt domestic gain-of-function research, which it defines as that which ‘may be reasonably anticipated to confer attributes to influenza, MERS, or SARS viruses such that the virus would have enhanced pathogenicity and/or transmissibility in mammals via the respiratory route.’11

The second — drafted in 2017 as Fauci was pushing to renew government funding for gain-of-function research — provides a definition of what are called ‘enhanced potential pandemic pathogen (PPP)’ or those pathogens ‘resulting from the enhancement of the transmissibility and/or virulence of a pathogen.’12

Ebright claims that the work being conducted at the WIV, using NIH funds originally granted to Peter Daszak of EcoHealth Alliance, ‘epitomizes’ gain-of-function research under the definition HHS provided in its guidance, and is the exact kind of research that led the Obama administration to conclude that gain-of-function was too dangerous to continue domestically.”

Fauci and NIH Try to Redefine ‘Gain-of-Function’

Essentially, Fauci is now trying to redefine what “gain-of-function” actually is. However, as explained above, the type of research Fauci has been funding at the WIV has always and repeatedly been referred to as gain-of-function.

Fauci appears to have been, at best, mistaken while sparring with Senator Paul … At worst, he was playing tenuous word games meant to deceive. ~ The National Review

It appears as though Fauci and National Institutes of Health director Dr. Francis Collins are preemptively trying to position themselves in such a way as to distance themselves from future blame, should the lab leak theory be proven true. In a May 19, 2021, statement, Collins backed Fauci’s convoluted word-wrangling and attempts at rewriting the definition of gain-of-function research, stating:13

“Based on outbreaks of coronaviruses caused by animal to human transmissions such as … SARS and … MERS, NIH and the NIAID have for many years supported grants to learn more about viruses lurking in bats and other mammals that have the potential to spill over to humans and cause widespread disease.

However, neither NIH nor NIAID have ever approved any grant that would have supported ‘gain-of-function’ research on coronaviruses that would have increased their transmissibility or lethality for humans.”

In other words, both admit they funded research at the WIV and other places, but they insist none of it was gain-of-function specifically, so even if the COVID-19 pandemic turns out to have been the result of a lab leak at the WIV, Fauci and Collins had no part in the creation of that particular virus — or any other virus capable of causing a deadly pandemic — and should not be on the list of people to be held accountable.

Wordplay Won’t Save Fauci

Considering what the NIH has stated previously, and what we already know about the coronavirus research the NIAID/NIH funded, Collins’ statement appears to be a desperate lie, issued to prop up Fauci’s indefensible stance that no gain-of-function research was ever funded.

For example, as reported by the National Review,14 we know that the WIV received NIAID/NIH funding to create novel chimeric SARS-related coronaviruses capable of infecting both human cells and lab animals. “Chimeric viruses” refers to artificial man-made viruses, hybrid organisms created through the joining of two or more different organisms. This is precisely what gain-of-function research is all about. So, as noted by the National Review:15

“Fauci appears to have been, at best, mistaken while sparring with Senator Paul … At worst, he was playing tenuous word games meant to deceive.”

Of course, Fauci and Collins have good reason to develop sudden amnesia when it comes to the definition of complicated words like “gain-of-function.” While statistics have been massively manipulated to overcount COVID-19 deaths, there’s no doubt that this pandemic has been one of the most destructive in modern history.

Sure, we can blame global and regional leaders for playing along with the globalist game to use a hyped-up pandemic to justify a Great Reset of our global economic and societal systems, but without doubt, the creators of this virus will not get off scot-free, and neither will those who enabled its creation. And those people may well include Fauci and Collins at the NIAID and NIH.

At the end of it all, should SARS-CoV-2 be deemed a man-made bioweapon, even if its release was a total accident, which appears to be the case, a number of individuals stand to lose their careers, and perhaps their freedom, as the punishment for having anything to do with the creation of biological weapons includes both potentially hefty fines and lengthy jail sentences. The Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act of 1989 states:16

“Whoever knowingly develops, produces, stockpiles, transfers, acquires, retains, or possesses any biological agent, toxin, or delivery system for use as a weapon, or knowingly assists a foreign state or any organization to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for life or any term of years, or both.”

Gain-of-Function Research Is the Real Threat

I believe research cooperation and sharing between nations is such that blame will ultimately be shared by multiple parties. The key issue, really, if SARS-CoV-2 did in fact come from a lab, is how do we prevent another lab escape? And, if it turns out to have been a genetically manipulated virus, do we allow gain-of-function research — based on the conventionally accepted definition — to continue?

I believe the answer is to ban research that involves making pathogens more dangerous to humans. As it stands, the same establishment that is drumming up panic by warning of the emergence of new, more infectious and dangerous variants is also busy creating them.

World leaders need to realize that funding gain-of-function research is the real threat here, and take action accordingly to forestall another pandemic. As long as researchers are allowed to mutate and create synthetic pathogens, they’re creating the very risk they claim they’re trying to prevent. We got off easy this time, all things considered. The next time, we may not be as lucky.
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2021/06/02/covid-origin.aspx

The widespread masking of schoolchildren during the pandemic represents an unprecedented experiment, which experts believe may have lasting physical and psychological consequences.1

In the U.S., the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s operational strategy for K-to-12 schools continues to recommend the “consistent use of prevention strategies, including universal and correct use of masks and physical distancing.”2

Any intervention, including mask usage, which may cause adverse effects, must have benefits that outweigh the risks. But what benefits are children receiving in exchange for the many side effects of wearing masks, which include irritability, less happiness, impaired learning and feeling short of breath?3

Very little, if any, according to a CDC report, yet the numbers are being used in a misleading way,4 making it sound like masking works, when in reality opening a window worked even better.5

Improved Ventilation Worked Better Than Masks

The CDC study6 compared the incidence of COVID-19 in Georgia kindergarten through grade 5 schools that were open for in-person learning in fall 2020 with various recommended prevention strategies, such as mandatory masks and improvements to ventilation. The first important statistic is the COVID-19 incidence, which was extremely low.

At the 169 schools that participated in the survey, there were only 3.08 COVID-19 cases among students and staff members per 500 enrolled students, from November 16, 2020, to December 11, 2020. After adjusting for county-level incidence, the study revealed that COVID-19 incidence was 37% lower in schools that required teachers and staff members to use masks and 39% lower in schools that improved ventilation, compared to schools that did not use these strategies.

Let’s use a school with 500 students as an example, which would have an incidence of just over three cases. Even with a 37% reduction in incidence from staff members wearing masks, that only reduced incidence by about one case in the entire school. Further, ventilation led to better outcomes, reducing incidence by 39%.

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

Mask Use by Students Didn’t Make a Difference

You may have noticed that so far this only mentions mask use by the teachers and staff. What happened if students were masked? It made virtually no difference. According to the study:7

“The 21% lower incidence in schools that required mask use among students was not statistically significant compared with schools where mask use was optional. This finding might be attributed to higher effectiveness of masks among adults, who are at higher risk for SARS-CoV-2 infection but might also result from differences in mask-wearing behavior among students in schools with optional requirements.”

Despite the fact that masking students did not make a significant difference in COVID cases at the schools, and opening a window worked slightly better than masking staff and teachers, the CDC still recommends “universal” mask use for children and adults — even if they’ve been vaccinated — in schools, stating, “Universal and correct mask use is still recommended by CDC for adults and children in schools regardless of vaccination status.”8

Increasingly, States Ban Mask Mandates in Schools

The issue is growing increasingly controversial, however, with some states, such as Texas, defying the CDC’s nonsensical advice and proceeding to ban mask mandates in public schools.9 In a statement announcing the executive order prohibiting government entities from mandating masks in Texas, which takes effect June 4, 2021, it’s stated:10

“Texans, not government, should decide their best health practices, which is why masks will not be mandated by public school districts or government entities. We can continue to mitigate COVID-19 while defending Texans’ liberty to choose whether or not they mask up.”

A similar bill was enacted in Iowa in May 2021, which also bans school mask mandates. In a statement, Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds stated, “The state of Iowa is putting parents back in control of their child’s education and taking greater steps to protect the rights of all Iowans to make their own health care decisions.”11

In similar moves, Arkansas plans to ban mask requirements for schools by the end of summer 2021,12 and South Carolina issued an executive order that allows parents to opt their children out of mask requirements at school.

“We have known for months that our schools are some of the safest places when it comes to COVID-19,” said Gov. Henry McMaster. “… Whether a child wears a mask in school is a decision that should be left only to a student’s parents.”13

Indeed, in a CDC study of kindergarten through grade 12 schools in Florida, it was found that fewer than 1% of students had school-related COVID-19, and fewer than 11% of the schools reported COVID-19 outbreaks from August 10, 2020, to December 21, 2020.14 Confirming the lack of significant COVID-19 transmission in schools, the CDC report noted:15

“These findings add to a growing body of evidence suggesting that COVID-19 transmission does not appear to be demonstrably more frequent in schools than in noneducational settings.

Temporal trends in the United States also indicate that among school-aged children, school-based transmission might be no higher than transmission outside the school setting; the limited in-school transmission observed in Florida has also been observed in other states and countries.”

Students Share Thoughts About Mask Hypocrisy

A fourth grader in the Martin County, Florida, school district spoke out against mask hypocrisy in schools at a school board meeting in May 2021. School districts in Florida are divided, with some abandoning mask mandates after parents and students increasingly voice opposition.

The rules don’t make sense, the student told the board, such as not being allowed to face each other at lunch or to sip drinks while they wait in line for their parents to pick them up after school. It’s especially confusing because while the students aren’t allowed to take their masks off at all, they see teachers taking their masks down to drink their own drinks and to “yell” at students.

Even when they’re outside having PE or on the track, they’re required to wear masks, which the student said makes him tired and sometimes gives him “a really bad headache.” In another example below, Sarah Cook, a student in Collier County, Florida, told the school board off for continuing mask mandates in their schools.

“Great job! You’re creating public schools with fearful children! Wow! I’m so proud of you guys! Wow!” Cook said, feigning applause and getting approval from the audience. In Santa Rosa County, Florida, parents also shouted at the board against the restrictive mandates, and in response, the board voted to make masks optional effective immediately.16

‘Children Should Not Wear Face Masks’

In an American Institute for Economic Research (AIER) video removed from YouTube, which featured a scientific roundtable on COVID, Harvard professor Martin Kulldorff commented, “Children should not wear face masks. They don’t need it for their own protection and they don’t need it for protecting other people either.”17

Kulldorff isn’t the only one who’s calling for children to not be masked. Lucy Johnston, health and social affairs editor with the Sunday Express, asked on Twitter, [sic] “Why did Govt not trial use of masks in schools to assess benefits vs risks? Two legal cases now show masks causing both mental & physical harm.”18

One such case was launched in the U.K., with two expert reports speaking out against the use of masks for children. The first, a psychology report,19 states that masks are likely causing psychological harm to children and interfering with development.20

“The extent of psychological harm to young people is unknown,” the report states, “due to the unique nature of the ‘social experiment’ currently underway in schools, and in wider society.”21 The second report focused on health, safety and well-being. “Figures illustrate that the risk of death from this disease for this age group is negligible,” the report states, continuing:22

“Hence the introduction of compulsory face covering measures for extended periods of each day in the school, which have potential for a range of long-term health, safety and other harms of as yet unknown quantum, is disproportionate. To introduce these without detailed, thorough and meticulous risk assessment, is potentially reckless.

… The precautionary principle applies especially to children who have little power to oppose decisions made by the adults who hold authority over them and responsibility for them. Those same children will carry the health burden of any errors or omissions for the rest of their lives.

The face covering measure imposed on these secondary schoolchildren are intended to reduce the risk of them contracting an infectious disease Sars-CoV-2, but the risk to this age group of death or serious illness from contracting the same pathogen is almost nil. Most don’t have any symptoms at all or experience a sniffle, a cold or mild influenza like illness.”

A German registry recording the experience of children wearing masks23 also revealed 24 physical, psychological and behavioral health issues that were associated with wearing masks.24 Among them, 29.7% reported feeling short of breath; 26.4% being dizzy; and 17.9% were unwilling to move or play.25 Hundreds more experienced “accelerated respiration, tightness in chest, weakness and short-term impairment of consciousness.”

Masks Nothing More Than Talismans?

In May 2020, a group of doctors and researchers wrote in a perspective piece published in the New England Journal of Medicine that masks offer little protection outside of health care facilities, except to calm people’s nerves.

“We know that wearing a mask outside health care facilities offers little, if any, protection from infection,” they wrote, and went on to describe masks as playing a “symbolic role” as “talismans” to increase the perception of safety, even though “such reactions may not be strictly logical.”26

Health officials continue to defy logic with their mask recommendations, including for children — a population at risk from long-term mask wearing. The potential for adverse events is especially tragic since children and teens have a 99.997% survival rate from COVID-19.27

Further, now that the CDC has stated that vaccinated individuals can remove their masks outdoors and in most spaces indoors,28 it moves the playing field to another agenda, one in which only the “impure” unvaccinated individuals must be masked, creating a new form of segregation and second-class citizens.
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2021/06/02/mask-use-and-ventilation-in-schools.aspx

By Dr. Mercola

Dr. Stephanie Seneff is a senior scientist at MIT where she’s conducted research for over three decades, and has published hundreds of papers in the peer-reviewed scientific literature.
She also has an undergraduate degree in biology from MIT, and a minor in food and nutrition.
I’ve previously published two articles detailing Dr. Seneff’s groundbreaking views on sulfur and cholesterol—both of which are important in relation to the discussion in this segment about statin drugs.
If you missed the previous two segments, I highly recommend reviewing them now in order to get a more complete picture of how vitamin D, dietary cholesterol, and statin drugs work in tandem to affect your health, for better or worse.
What makes Dr. Seneff uniquely qualified to talk about statins is not clinical experience but rather her expertise in mining and evaluating the available research to reach conclusions about health.

Why it’s So Difficult to Learn the Truth about Statin Drugs…
One of the papers Dr. Seneff wrote was on the detrimental impact of low cholesterol and statin drugs on Alzheimer’s disease.

“I was very interested in the connection between Alzheimer’s and low cholesterol… and statins in particular because they lower cholesterol, [which is] going to make that problem worse,” she says.

Her paper was summarily rejected.

“Part of the grounds of rejection had to do with the mention of statins,” Dr. Seneff explains. “So we took out all the mentions of statins and resubmitted the paper to a different journal, and then it got accepted. You can read this paper in the European Journal of Internal Medicine.”

This is a classic example of what’s wrong with the current paradigm. The pharmaceutical industry effectively controls the entire health care system, from research to publication to education.

“I think many people are aware that they cannot get their paper published in one of the high end journals if it mentions something negative about statins,” Dr. Seneff says. “It’s extremely difficult to get such papers accepted by these journals because of the influence of the statin industry on the journal. I think that’s a very serious problem.”

Many Doctors are Shockingly Ill- or Misinformed about Statin Risks
Shockingly, one in four Americans over the age of 45 is now taking these drugs, and few are properly warned about the related health risks. Part of the problem is that many doctors are not even aware of all the risks. Needless to say, this is not entirely surprising when you consider how difficult it is for any researcher to publish negative findings about this class of drugs!
A study published last spring highlighted this dilemma.
Most disturbingly, the researchers found that physicians were lacking in awareness of the teratogenic risks1 (ability to cause fetal malformations) of statins and other cardiovascular drugs they prescribed for their pregnant patients. The study followed an earlier report2, which had concluded statins should be avoided in early pregnancy due to their teratogenic capability. An even earlier 2003 study3 had already established that cholesterol plays an essential role in embryonic development, and that statins could play a part in embryonic mutations or even death…
Indeed, it’s difficult to look at these facts and not reach the conclusion that the pharmaceutical industry is quite willing to sacrifice human lives for profit. Statins are in fact classified as a “pregnancy Category X medication”4; meaning, it causes serious birth defects, and should NEVER be used by a woman who is pregnant or planning a pregnancy.

“It disturbs me greatly that they are prescribing statins to women in their reproductive years and the doctor doesn’t even bother to tell the woman that statins are class X for pregnancy, just like thalidomide,” Dr. Seneff says. “[Statin drugs] cause severe damage to the neural tube in the embryo—likely leading to a miscarriage if you’re lucky, because otherwise you’ll have an extremely disabled child. I don’t understand why they’re not making this clear to women!”

Cholesterol is Essential for a Healthy Pregnancy
Besides the direct harm caused by the drug, it’s also important to understand that cholesterol sulfate is essential for babies in utero, and this is one of the reasons Dr. Seneff states that you do not want your cholesterol levels to be too low.
A woman has about 1.5 units of cholesterol sulfate normally in her blood. When she gets pregnant, her blood levels of cholesterol sulfate steadily rise, and it also begins to accumulate in the villi in the placenta—which is where nutrients are transferred from the placenta to the baby. At the end of pregnancy the cholesterol sulfate in the villi rises to levels of about 24 units—a dramatic rise! This is also why it’s especially important to get plenty of sun exposure before and during pregnancy, to make sure you’re optimizing not only your vitamin D levels, but also your sulfur levels, as the two are connected.

Did You Know? Statins Can Also Cause Diabetes and Heart Failure…
Another discovery is that statins can cause diabetes. One of the most recent pieces of evidence for this came from a meta-analysis published in September last year.5 The analysis looked at 72 trials which together involved close to 160,000 patients. It found that statin treatments significantly increased the rate of diabetes and liver damage.
But that’s not all. Dr. Seneff also points out that statins make you age faster in general, causing muscle weakness, arthritis, mental decline, and even heart failure. It’s worth noting that “heart failure” is a different disease category from “cardiovascular disease,” despite the fact that both involve your heart.

“That’s why I think they keep talking about cardiovascular disease,” Dr. Seneff says. “They’re careful to use that term… which is very convenient because then people don’t realize it’s the statins that are causing the heart failure!”

Indeed. Few would assume that a drug taken to prevent cardiovascular disease would be a major cause of heart failure, but that’s exactly what appears to be happening. Considering the fact that conventional medicine has been telling us that heart disease is due to elevated cholesterol and recommends lowering cholesterol levels as much as possible, Dr. Seneff’s claims may come as a complete shock:

“Heart disease, I think, is a cholesterol deficiency problem, and in particular a cholesterol sulfate deficiency problem,” she says.

Heart Disease More Likely Caused by Cholesterol Deficiency Rather than Excess!
Through her research, Dr. Seneff has developed a theory in which the mechanism we call “cardiovascular disease” (of which arterial plaque is a hallmark) is actually your body’s way to compensate for not having enough cholesterol sulfate. To understand how this works, you have to understand the interrelated workings of cholesterol, sulfur, and vitamin D from sun exposure.
Cholesterol sulfate is produced in large amounts in your skin when it is exposed to sunshine. When you are deficient in cholesterol sulfate from lack of sun exposure, your body employs another mechanism to increase it, as it is essential for optimal heart- and brain function. It does this by taking damaged LDL and turning it into plaque. Within the plaque, your blood platelets separate out the beneficial HDL cholesterol, and through a process involving homocysteine as a source of sulfate, the platelets go on to produce the cholesterol sulfate your heart and brain needs. However, this plaque also causes the unfortunate side effect of increasing your risk of cardiovascular disease.
So how do you get out of this detrimental cycle?
Dr. Seneff believes that high serum cholesterol and low serum cholesterol sulfate go hand-in-hand, and that the ideal way to bring down your LDL (so-called “bad” cholesterol, which is associated with cardiovascular disease) is to get appropriate amounts of sunlight exposure on your skin.
She explains:

“In this way, your skin will produce cholesterol sulfate, which will then flow freely through the blood—not packaged up inside LDL—and therefore your liver doesn’t have to make so much LDL. So the LDL goes down. In fact… there is a complete inverse relationship between sunlight and cardiovascular disease – the more sunlight, the less cardiovascular disease.”

What this also means is that when you artificially lower your cholesterol with a statin drug, which effectively reduces the bioavailability of cholesterol to that plaque but doesn’t address the root problem, your body is not able to create the cholesterol sulfate your heart needs anymore, and as a result you end up with acute heart failure…Backing up this theory is the fact that in the first decade statin drugs were on the market, from 1980 to 1990, the incidence of heart failure doubled. And heart failure keeps going up right along with the increased use of statins…

“It is very clear to me that statins are causing heart failure,” Dr. Seneff says.

Statins Impair Numerous Biological Functions
Statin drugs also interfere with other biological functions, including an early step in the mevalonate pathway, which is the central pathway for the steroid management in your body. Products of this pathway that are negatively affected by statins include:

All sterols, including cholesterol and vitamin D (which is similar to cholesterol and is produced from cholesterol in your skin)
All your sex hormones
Cortisone
The dolichols, which are involved in keeping the membranes inside your cells healthy
Coenzyme Q10 (CoQ10), which is critical to the energy generation in the Krebs cycle in the cell

Why You MUST Take a CoQ10 Supplement if You’re on Statin Therapy
The depletion of CoQ10 is particularly troublesome, and may be one of the primary driving mechanisms behind many of the more horrific side effects of statins. CoQ10 is used by every cell in your body, but especially your heart cells. Cardiac muscle cells have up to 200 times more mitochondria, and hence 200 times higher CoQ10 requirements, than skeletal muscle. So if you take a statin drug, taking a CoQ10 or ubiquinol (the reduced version) supplement is absolutely imperative in order to limit the damage. As mentioned by Dr. Seneff, premature aging is a side effect of statin drugs, and it’s also a primary side effect of having too little CoQ10. Deficiency in this nutrient also accelerates DNA damage, and because CoQ10 is beneficial to heart health and muscle function this depletion leads to fatigue, muscle weakness, soreness and, again, heart failure.
As for dosage, Dr. Graveline, a family doctor and former astronaut, made the following recommendation in a previous interview on statins and CoQ10:

If you have symptoms of statin damage such as muscle pain, take anywhere from 200 to 500 mg
If you just want to use it preventively, 200 mg or less should be sufficient

In my view it is medical malpractice to prescribe a statin drug without recommending one take CoQ10, or better yet ubiquinol. Unfortunately, many doctors fail to inform their patients of this fact.

If You’re Over 25, the Reduced Form of CoQ10 May be Better
If you’re under 25 years old your body is capable of converting CoQ10 from the oxidized to the reduced form. However, as you age, your body becomes more and more challenged to convert the oxidized CoQ10 to ubiquinol. Aside from aging, numerous other factors can also impact this conversion process, including:

? Increased metabolic demand
? Oxidative stress
? Insufficient dietary CoQ10 intake

? Deficiency of factors required for biosynthesis and ubiquinol conversion
? Potential effects from illness and disease
? Age-related changes in your genes

If you’re over 40, I would highly recommend taking the reduced form of coenzyme Q10 because it’s far more effectively absorbed by your body. Some reports say your CoQ10 level decline becomes apparent as early as your 20’s, however, so I generally recommend it from age 25 and beyond. If you’re younger than 25, your body should absorb regular CoQ10 just fine.
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2012/02/11/dr-stephanie-seneff-interview-on-statins.aspx

Dr. Shiv Chopra was a drug company insider, and also worked for what is now Health Canada — the Canadian equivalent of the FDA. He’s acquired an enormous amount of expertise about vaccines, which you can hear in the first part of our interview, and also about the food supply.
In this second interview, Dr. Chopra shares his knowledge about food issues that affect every single one of us.
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2010/01/23/looming-before-us-corporate-threats-to-your-food-supply.aspx

1 Which of the following PR firms was recently sued over its role in creating deceptive opioid marketing that led to the deaths of tens of thousands of Americans?

Publicis Health

The Massachusetts attorney general is suing Purdue’s PR firm, Publicis Health, for its role in creating Purdue’s deceptive marketing. Learn more.

Next PR Services

Crisis PR Consulting

Axia PR

2 Early at-home treatment of COVID-19 will:

Have no impact on outcome

Lower risk of death by 85% and reduce time of infectiousness from two weeks to about four days

According to Dr. Peter McCullough, early treatment could have prevented up to 85% of COVID-19 deaths. Early at-home treatment also minimizes the spread, as the amount of time you’re infectious can be reduced from two weeks to about four days. Learn more.

Guarantee survival

Increase your risk of spreading the infection to others

3 Which of the following U.S. institutions funded gain-of-function research on bat coronaviruses at the Wuhan Institute of Virology?

Integrated Research Facility at Fort Detrick

Military and Health Research Foundation

National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID)

NIAID is known to have funded gain-of-function research on bat coronaviruses at the WIV. Learn more.

Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation

4 Bill Gates’ marriage and reputation took a hit when reports emerged he’d had several meetings with:

Former California mayor Robert E. Jacob, arrested for child sex crimes

Judge Brett Blomme, arrested for child pornography

Stanford University researcher Chen Song, indicted on charges relating to her relationship with the Chinese military

Jeffrey Epstein, a notorious child sex trafficker who died in prison in 2019

After 27 years of marriage, Melinda and Bill Gates are getting divorced. Melinda reportedly contacted divorce attorneys in 2019, shortly after reports of Bill’s repeated meetings with notorious child sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein emerged. Learn more.

5 In addition to hydroxychloroquine, which of the following medications has been shown to reduce the risk of COVID-19 when taken as a prophylactic and to improve outcomes when used in treatment of COVID-19, yet is being actively suppressed by the WHO, NIH and U.S. FDA?

Ivermectin

Ivermectin is an antiparasitic drug that may be even more useful against COVID-19 than hydroxychloroquine. However, like HCQ, use of ivermectin has been globally suppressed, discouraged and even warned against, despite decades of safe use for other ailments. Learn more.

Aspirin

Remdesivir

Permethrin

6 Which of the following vaccines has the highest number of reported deaths of any vaccine in U.S. history?

Hepatitis B vaccine

COVID-19 vaccines

In just four months, the COVID-19 vaccines have killed more people than all available vaccines combined from mid-1997 until the end of 2013 — a period of 15.5 years. Learn more.

Seasonal influenza vaccines

Meningitis vaccine

7 Based on what we know about COVID-19 vaccines, in the next 10 to 15 years, we are likely to see spikes in which of the following?

IQ

Fertility

Prion diseases

In the next 10 to 15 years, we are likely to see spikes in prion diseases, autoimmune diseases, neurodegenerative diseases at younger ages, and blood disorders such as blood clots, hemorrhaging, stroke and heart failure. Learn more.

Gray hair

 
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2021/05/24/week-183-health-quiz.aspx