Lose Them Pounds

While COVID-19 can hardly be called a major public health threat anymore, having now reached endemic status (like the seasonal flu), the fearmongerers who need this crisis to continue in order to complete the implementation of a Great Reset of the global economy and social structure aren’t letting up.
In a mid-March 2021 appearance on MSNBC News, National Institutes of Health director Dr. Francis Collins expressed dismay at the public’s display of independence, saying:

“Oh my God, Florida, stay out of the bars with your masks off! What are you doing? This is exactly the wrong thing to be doing unless you want to end up where Europe is.”

He’s referring to a new variant of SARS-CoV-2 that is, allegedly, now “causing so many problems” in Europe. But is it really? To be clear, there will be many new variants of this virus, just as the seasonal flu changes and evolves from year to year. The thing is, as viruses mutate within a population over time, they tend to become more benign.
Mutations: ‘Much Ado About Nothing’
As reported by Mary Petrone, Ph.D., and Nathan Grubaugh, assistant professor in the department of epidemiology and microbial diseases at Yale, in a March 2020 CNN Health article:1

“A recent scientific article suggested that the novel coronavirus responsible for the Covid-19 epidemic has mutated into a more ‘aggressive’ form. Is this something we need to worry about? No, and here’s why …

The effects of mutation in real life are nuanced and generally innocuous. Using the idea of mutation to incite fear is harmful, especially in the midst of an epidemic like COVID-19 …

The genetic material of the virus is RNA, not DNA like in humans. Unlike with human DNA, when viruses copy their genetic material, it does not proofread its work. Because RNA viruses essentially operate without a spell-check, they often make mistakes.

These ‘mistakes’ are mutations, and viruses mutate rapidly compared to other organisms. While this might sound frightening, mistakes during replication usually produce changes that are neutral or even harmful to the newly generated virus. Neutral mutations, which neither improve nor hinder viruses’ survival, may continue to circulate without any noticeable change in the people they infect.

Mutations that are harmful to the viruses are less likely to survive and are eliminated through natural selection. Fortunately, when mutations occur that help a virus spread or survive better, they are unlikely to make a difference in the course of an outbreak.

Viral traits such as infectiousness and disease severity are controlled by multiple genes, and each of those genes may affect the virus’ ability to spread in multiple ways. For example, a virus that causes severe symptoms may be less likely to be transmitted if infected people are sick enough to stay in bed.

As such, these traits are like blocks in a Rubik’s cube; a change in one characteristic will change another. The chances of a virus navigating these complex series of trade-offs to become more severe during the short timescale of an outbreak are extremely low.”

The Ever-Moving Goal Post

If you’ve paid attention, you’ve likely noticed that the goal post for “public safety” has been moved further and further away as we’ve gone along. At regular intervals, there’s been another Chicken Little warning that the sky is still falling and that we must not let down our guard.
First it was the number of deaths that was cause for alarm. Now we know that many of the so-called COVID-19 deaths were not, in fact, caused by the virus, while erroneous epidemiological models predicted millions of deaths lest drastic measures were taken.
As PCR testing took off, rising “case” loads seemed to confirm such dire predictions, sparking widespread panic. With 20/20 hindsight, we now realize that the cycle thresholds of these tests were set so high that even healthy, uninfected and noninfectious people tested positive.
This, in turn, allowed for the myth of asymptomatic spread to take root, and that then became the fear trigger, with everyone being a potential threat, no matter how healthy they appear.
The solution offered was for everyone to wear a mask at all times. Or two. Or perhaps three. Fortunately, even the experts backed off from suggestions of four layers. Yet, from the start, we knew, based on published science, that masks don’t work against viruses.
As “cases” skyrocketed in tandem with fraudulent PCR testing, we were then told the best thing to do is shut everything down for two weeks to prevent overloading hospitals. Stay home, save a life, let the virus die out.
But even though hospitals remained at functional capacity in most areas, as “cases” (read false positives) continued to rise, two-week lockdowns were turned into three weeks, then four. In some areas, lockdowns dragged on for months, yet it didn’t seem to have the desired effect on the case load. By this time, hospital capacity was entirely forgotten.
As lockdowns continued and people started to grumble, the “experts” in charge of this global organization (or more accurately, reorganization) warned that this was the new normal. Settle in. Get used to it. The virus doesn’t seem to be going anywhere, so our only hope is a vaccine. We just have to keep it together until then, and then we’ll all be safe again.
Alas, flies in the ointment appeared in the form of inexpensive treatments that worked just fine, and scientists and medical doctors sharing concerns about these novel “vaccines” that really aren’t and the public health dangers of lockdowns.
Censorship unlike anything the world has ever seen before was launched, and vaccine-deniers became the new enemy — worse even than those pesky asymptomatic healthy people that refuse to wear a mask.
Something had to be done about free thinkers and question-raisers, and so the goal post was moved again. The whole world, all 7-plus billion people, must get vaccinated, or else we’re all toast. This way, people will turn on each other and force each other to comply and stop with the questioning.
We cannot simply undo the harm caused by flawed policies advocated by our elites, but we can resolve that we never let this happen to our country again. ~ Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis
And so it continues. The sky hasn’t fallen yet, but we’re promised that unless we comply, it surely will. Any day now. Just a matter of time. Obey, and the experts will make sure we survive the inevitable pandemonium. Now, vaccine passports are being rolled out, and both private companies and entire nations are considering restricting any sense of normalcy to vaccinated-only. Aren’t you tired of chasing the goal post yet?
Chicken Little’s Puppet Masters

In a Wall Street Journal essay2 published March 18, 2021, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis urges readers not to trust “the elites,” pointing out that “Influential people in public health, government and the media” have “failed to rise to the moment.” He goes on:

“The COVID-19 pandemic represented a test of elites in the U.S., from public-health experts to the corporate media. The results have been disappointing. Policy makers who bucked the elites and challenged the narrative have been proven right to do so.

To begin with, highly publicized epidemiological models were as consequential as they were wrong … The lockdowns failed to stop the virus but did a great deal of societal damage along the way — damage that a more targeted approach, seeking to reduce total harms, would have been able to avoid (and did, in places like Sweden and Florida) …

Elites sent conflicting messages about the efficacy of cloth masks, the uniformity of risk across age brackets, the danger of outdoor transmission … Perhaps most damaging to public trust was the public-health campaign urging ‘15 Days to Slow the Spread’ … Going from ‘save the hospitals’ to ‘zero COVID’ represents one of the greatest instances in history of moving the goal post …

While it was abundantly clear by May that schools represented low-risk environments for the spread of COVID and that the consequences of prolonged school closures were potentially catastrophic, the corporate media did its best to obscure the data and stoke fear and panic among parents and teachers.

Had the media presented the data on schools in a rational fashion with proper context and perspective … millions of students would be in markedly better shape academically and socially.

For months we were told to ‘trust the experts,’ but far too often over the past year those who were most influential in our society — in public health, government and media — proved incapable of rising to the moment … We cannot simply undo the harm caused by flawed policies advocated by our elites, but we can resolve that we never let this happen to our country again.”

Who’s in Charge, Really?

DeSantis’ definition of “elites” is basically prominent public health and corporate media leaders. That may be appropriate for the critique offered in his article, but even these influential individuals are mere foot soldiers in the bigger scheme of things.
Above them towers a pyramidical power structure populated by globalist entities — nongovernmental organizations, think-tanks, private corporations and billionaire philanthropists — many of which we’ve never even heard of, and who rule without being seen.
In fact, one of the most influential yet universally overlooked global powerhouses, the Swedish Wallenberg family dynasty’s motto is “Esse non videri,” or in Swedish, “Att verka utan att synas,”3 which translates into “To operate without being seen.”
The Wallenbergs’ involvement in banking, and technological and power infrastructure grants them immense power over entire nations, not to mention the global intelligence and surveillance apparatus as a whole.
I suspect that in the final analysis, we will find the little country of Sweden may actually be a most significant power player in the Great Reset. The hope, of course, is that by exposing this nefarious global takeover plan, we can stop it and reverse course.
Fauci Called Out for His Theatrical Performance

More locally we have Dr. Anthony Fauci, who surely qualifies as an elitist pharmaceutical priest whose advice we ought to balance with more rational perspectives. In a recent Senate hearing over the COVID-19 pandemic, Sen. Rand Paul confronted Fauci about his mask recommendations, saying:4,5

“You’re telling everybody to wear a mask, whether they’ve had an infection or a vaccine. What I’m saying is that they have immunity, and everybody agrees they have immunity.

What studies do you have that people that have had the vaccine or have had the infection … are spreading the infection? If we’re not spreading the infection, isn’t it just theater? You’ve had the vaccine and you’re wearing two masks, isn’t that theater?”

When Fauci tries to defend his position by bringing up the issue of new variants that the vaccine may or may not defend against, which he says necessitates the use of a mask even if vaccinated, Paul strikes back saying:

“What studies show significant reinfection, hospitalization and death from the variants? None in our country. Zero. You’re making your policy based on conjecture. You have the conjecture that we’re going to get variants so you want people to wear a mask for another couple of years.

You’ve been vaccinated and you parade around in two masks for show. You can’t get it again … You’re defying everything we know about immunity by telling people to wear masks who have been vaccinated … If you have immunity, [wearing a mask] is theatre. You’re wearing a mask to give comfort to others. You’re not wearing a mask because of any science.”

Masks and Social Distancing Here to Stay?

In related news, BBC News reports mask wearing and social distancing in the U.K. may need to continue for “several years.”6 So says Mary Ramsay, head of immunization at Public Health England. Another extension on the foreign holiday (vacation) ban is also being considered.
The reason, again, is that no one can be free until the whole world has gotten vaccinated. The idea being presented, as DeSantis pointed out, is that we now have to reach a COVID-free state before we can start living life again. Meaning, as long as there’s a single specimen of SARS-CoV-2 anywhere on the planet, the whole world is at risk, as it will spread and grow, so no one can live as they please until the virus has been eradicated.
The goal post is now so far in the future, we can’t even see a glimmer of it in the distance anymore. The old saying, “Give them an inch and they’ll take a mile,” seems apt at this point.
At some stage, you must realize that the more you give in and obey, the more you have to give in and obey. There really is no end to what they can take from you, and holding on to the belief that your government would never [fill in the blank] is becoming more dangerous by the day.
It’s also important to realize that your government isn’t the ultimate power. Our government officials take orders too, believe it or not, from what is now commonly known as the deep state. It’s not a government at all, but a global, hidden power structure that is accountable to no one, while influencing and manipulating everyone to bring about a new world order.
The New World Order

In years past, this shadowy cabal of power brokers were referred to under the term the New World Order. In 2020, the World Economic Forum came out on the public stage and announced the Great Reset, which is nothing but the NWO rebranded. So, it’s a conspiracy no more.
In the video above, investigative journalist Harry Vox talks about disease outbreaks, quarantines and curfews being essential tools in the ruling class’ toolkit, and how these tools were planned to be used to usher in the next phase of control.
The interview, which took place seven years ago, sounds more than a little prophetic today, as these three indispensable tools for totalitarian control have been part of our reality for the past 12 months. In it, Vox also refers to “Scenarios for the Future of Technology and International Development,” a document by the Rockefeller Foundation, in which they lay out their “Lockstep” scenario, which details the global response to a lethal pandemic.
The Lockstep Scenario
While the name and origin of the virus differs, the scenario laid out in this document matches many of the details of our present. A deadly viral pandemic. A deadly effect on economies. International mobility coming to a screeching halt, debilitating industries, tourism and global supply chains. “Even locally, normally bustling shops and office buildings sat empty for months, devoid of both employees and customers,” the document reads.
“In the absence of official containment protocols,” the virus spread like wildfire. In this narrative, the U.S. administration’s failure to place strict travel restrictions on its citizens proved to be a fatal flaw, as it allowed the virus to spread past its borders. China, on the other hand, fared particularly well due to its rapid imposition of universal quarantines of all citizens, which proved effective for curbing the spread of the virus.
Many other nations where leaders “flexed their authority” and imposed severe restrictions on their citizens — “from the mandatory wearing of face masks to body-temperature checks at the entries of communal spaces like train stations and supermarkets” — also fared well.
Listen to the disbelief in the interviewer’s voice when he asks if Vox actually believes that such a thing could happen, that we would have to stand in line to get our temperature checked before entering a building.
Well, every single one of us has now had to do this at least a few times, so we know it’s possible. And if that’s possible, why not the rest of the Lockstep plan, which tells us that: “Even after the pandemic faded, this more authoritarian control and oversight of citizens and their activities stuck, and even intensified.”
We can no longer afford to disbelieve the lengths to which the globalist elites, the unelected deep state, can and will go to seize total control over our global resources and people. They’ve already told us what the ultimate plan is — to use bioterrorism to take control of the world’s resources, wealth and people.
All we need to do is to believe it, and realize that the only thing giving them the power to impose their will is our fear. As long as we choose fear and demand our government keep us safe from pathogens, they have every chance of winning.
To learn more about the hidden power structure running this global reorganization toward authoritarian control, see “Bill Gates Wants to Realize Global Vision in His Lifetime,” “The Great Reset and Build Back Better,” “Technocracy and the Great Reset” and “Who Pressed the Great Reset Button?”
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2021/04/02/covid-19-fear-destroys-freedom.aspx

I’ve discussed why COVID-19 vaccines are in fact gene therapies and not vaccines in several previous articles, including “COVID-19 mRNA Shots Are Legally Not Vaccines,” “COVID-19 ‘Vaccines’ Are Gene Therapy” and “How COVID-19 ‘Vaccines’ May Destroy the Lives of Millions.”

However, despite being a recognized form of gene therapy since its inception, vaccine makers are now frantically trying to deny that this mRNA technology is gene therapy. One reason for this, suggested by David Martin, Ph.D.,1 might be because as long as they’re considered “vaccines,” they will be shielded from liability.

Experimental gene therapies do not have financial liability shielding from the government, but pandemic vaccines do, even in the experimental stage, as long as the emergency use authorization is in effect. Another reason might be because they fear people won’t line up for experimental gene therapy. It has a very different connotation in people’s minds (as it should).

A third possibility is that they know full well that you cannot, ethically, mandate gene therapy in the way you can mandate vaccines. Mandatory public health measure directives are typically based on the idea that it’s acceptable for some individuals to be harmed as long as the measure benefits the collective.

Well, the COVID-19 “vaccines” are only designed to lessen symptoms of COVID-19. They do not prevent infection or spread, and since the vaccinated individual is the only one receiving a potential benefit, “the greater good” argument falls apart.

Who knows, there may be other factors at play that we’ve not realized as of yet, but whatever the reason, they really do not want you to think of these injections as gene therapy. They want you to accept them as any other conventional vaccine.
mRNA-Based Medicines Designed to Not Irreversibly Alter DNA
Try as they might, though, they cannot get rid of mRNA’s gene therapy label. For starters, Moderna describes its product as “gene therapy technology” in its SEC filings. On page 70, they also provide the following specifics:2

“Currently, mRNA is considered a gene therapy product by the FDA. Unlike certain gene therapies that irreversibly alter cell DNA and could act as a source of side effects, mRNA-based medicines are designed to not irreversibly change cell DNA; however, side effects observed in gene therapy could negatively impact the perception of mRNA medicines despite the differences in mechanism.”

In other words, it’s a form of gene therapy, but one that doesn’t enter and permanently alter your actual DNA. Instead, the mRNA stays in the cellular fluid where ribosomes read the code and create the protein per the mRNA’s coding.
The difference between vaccine mRNA and your natural mRNA is that your natural mRNA resides in the nucleus of the cell where your cellular DNA resides — it can be likened to a reverse photocopy of your DNA — and exits the nucleus when a protein needs to be made.
This is in stark contrast to mRNA from vaccines, which is synthetic and enters the cell from the outside and is not designed to enter the nucleus. Additionally, your own mRNA is rapidly degraded by enzymes, but the one from the vaccine is protected in a liposome that will protect it from degradation and keep on producing spike proteins. How long? No one knows because it has never been tested.
Can Vaccine mRNA Reverse-Transcribe Into Genome?

However, some doctors still worry that mRNA injections might be able to reverse-transcribe into your genes and alter your DNA on a permanent basis. One is Dr. Richard Urso, an ophthalmologist, who shared his concerns on a December 2020 episode of The Shepard Ambellas Show.3,4
He claimed the mRNA of retroviruses (which are part of our genome) have been shown to have the ability to transcribe into your DNA, and if it can do that, vaccine mRNA might be able to do this as well. According to Urso, if this turns out to be correct, the result of mRNA vaccination might be lifelong COVID-19.
A new study by MIT and Harvard scientists demonstrates that segments of the RNA from the coronavirus itself are most likely becoming a permanent fixture in human DNA. This was once thought near impossible, for the same reasons which are presented to assure us that an RNA vaccine could accomplish no such feat. ~ Dr. Doug Corrigan
Another skeptic is Dr. Doug Corrigan, who in a March 16, 2021, blog reviewed the findings of recent research5,6 showing SARS-CoV-2 RNA can reverse-transcribe into the human genome:7

“In my previous blog, ‘Will an RNA Vaccine Permanently Alter My DNA?’8 I laid out several molecular pathways that would potentially enable the RNA in an mRNA vaccine to be copied and permanently integrated into your DNA.
I was absolutely not surprised to find that the majority of people claimed that this prospect was impossible … After all, we’ve been told in no uncertain terms that it would be impossible for the mRNA in a vaccine to become integrated into our DNA, simply because ‘RNA doesn’t work that way.’
Well, this current research which was released not too long after my original article demonstrates that yes, indeed, ‘RNA does work that way’… Specifically, a new study9,10 by MIT and Harvard scientists demonstrates that segments of the RNA from the coronavirus itself are most likely becoming a permanent fixture in human DNA.
This was once thought near impossible, for the same reasons which are presented to assure us that an RNA vaccine could accomplish no such feat. Against the tides of current biological dogma, these researchers found that the genetic segments of this RNA virus are more than likely making their way into our genome.
They also found that the exact pathway that I laid out in in my original article is more than likely the pathway being used (retrotransposon, and in particular a LINE-1 element) for this retro-integration to occur.
And, unlike my previous blog where I hypothesize that such an occurrence would be extremely rare (mainly because I was attempting to temper expectations more conservatively due to the lack of empirical evidence), it appears that this integration of viral RNA segments into our DNA is not as rare as I initially hypothesized …
To be fair, this study didn’t show that the RNA from the current vaccines is being integrated into our DNA. However, they did show, quite convincingly, that there exists a viable cellular pathway whereby snippets of SARS-CoV-2 viral RNA could become integrated into our genomic DNA. In my opinion, more research is needed to both corroborate these findings, and to close some gaps.”

A January 2020 Phys.org article,11 “Modified RNA Has a Direct Effect on DNA,” also notes that “it has now been revealed that RNA has a direct effect on DNA stability,” and this too may or may not play a role in mRNA therapy for COVID-19.
Vaccine Makers Fear Negative Perception of Gene Therapy
Getting back to Moderna’s SEC filing, in it, they also admit that public perception of other types of gene therapy may negatively impact perception of mRNA medicines. The problem, they admit, is that irreversible gene therapies have side effects, and knowing this, people might shun mRNA medicines too. The SEC filing goes on to note:12

“Because no product in which mRNA is the primary active ingredient has been approved, the regulatory pathway for approval is uncertain. The number and design of the clinical trials and preclinical studies required for the approval of these types of medicines have not been established, may be different from those required for gene therapy products, or may require safety testing like gene therapy products.”

Well, the pandemic allowed them to sneak mRNA gene therapy under the proverbial radar so that they don’t have to conduct more stringent gene therapy safety testing. Instead, they were handed the global population for the largest testing imaginable, and all without liability when something goes wrong — provided it’s viewed as a “vaccine,” that is.
mRNA Therapies Classified as Gene Therapy in Europe and US

The SEC filing13 for BioNTech (BioNTech’s mRNA technology is used in the Pfizer vaccine) is equally clear, stating on page 21: “Although we expect to submit BLAs for our mRNA-based product candidates in the United States, and in the European Union, mRNA therapies have been classified as gene therapy medicinal products, other jurisdictions may consider our mRNA-based product candidates to be new drugs, not biologics or gene therapy medicinal products, and require different marketing applications.”
So, in the U.S. and Europe, mRNA therapies, as a group, are classified as “gene therapy medicinal products.” The crux here, again, appears to be the idea that mRNA therapy does not cause permanent DNA alterations. On page 35 of the BioNTech SEC filing, they further clarify the alleged difference between other, irreversible, gene therapies and mRNA gene therapy:

“There have been few approvals of gene therapy products in the United States and other jurisdictions, and there have been well-reported significant adverse events associated with their testing and use.
Gene therapy products have the effect of introducing new DNA and potentially irreversibly changing the DNA in a cell. In contrast, mRNA is highly unlikely to localize to the nucleus, integrate into cell DNA, or otherwise make any permanent changes to cell DNA.
Consequently, we expect that our product candidates will have a different potential side effect profile from gene therapies because they lack risks associated with altering cell DNA irreversibly.”

Hacking the Software of Life

Company executives and scientists familiar with mRNA technology have, for years, been referring to this new technology as gene therapy. The video above features a TED Talk by Dr. Tal Zaks, chief medical officer of Moderna, given in 2017, more than two full years before COVID-19.

In it, he points out that they were, at that time, already working on a variety of vaccines, including an mRNA vaccine for influenza and individualized cancer vaccines based on the genetic sequence of the patient’s tumor, stressing that this vaccine would not act like any previous vaccine ever created.

“We’ve been living this phenomenal digital scientific revolution, and I’m here today to tell you that we are actually hacking the software of life, and that it’s changing the way we think about prevention and treatment of disease,” Zaks said.
“In every cell there’s this thing called messenger RNA or mRNA for short, that transmits the critical information from the DNA in our genes to the protein, which is really the stuff we’re all made out of. This is the critical information that determines what the cell will actually do. So, we think of it as an operating system …
So, if you could change that … if you could introduce a line of code, or change a line of code, it turns out that has profound implications for everything, from the flu to cancer …
Imagine if instead of giving [the patient] the protein of a virus, we gave them the instructions on how to make the protein, how the body can make its own vaccine,” he said.

How mRNA Vaccines Work

Zaks further differentiates conventional vaccines and mRNA vaccines by explaining that when using a conventional vaccine, you have viral protein floating around outside the cell, whereas the mRNA approach reprograms the cell to create that viral protein inside of itself.

“What’s more alarming?” he asks. “A stranger prowling the neighborhood, or somebody who just broke into your ground floor and tripped the alarm? That’s what happens with an mRNA vaccine. You’ve tripped the alarm wire and now the cell is dialing 911, it’s calling the police — at the same time that it’s making the protein, saying ‘That’s the bad guy.’ That’s how an mRNA vaccine works.”

Zaks also refers to the company’s mRNA shots as “information therapy,” which is just another way of saying gene therapy because mRNA is a carrier of genetic code. (For clarification, code in your natural mRNA matches your DNA, whereas vaccine mRNA has no equivalence inside your genome since it’s coming from the outside. Vaccine mRNA still carries “genetic code,” though, just not anything found in your body before.) As explained on genome.gov:14

“Messenger RNA (mRNA) is a single-stranded RNA molecule that is complementary to one of the DNA strands of a gene. The mRNA is an RNA version of the gene that leaves the cell nucleus and moves to the cytoplasm where proteins are made.
During protein synthesis, an organelle called a ribosome moves along the mRNA, reads its base sequence, and uses the genetic code to translate each three-base triplet, or codon, into its corresponding amino acid.
mRNA, are one of the types of RNA that are found in the cell. This particular one, like most RNAs, are made in the nucleus and then exported to the cytoplasm where the translation machinery, the machinery that actually makes proteins, binds to these mRNA molecules and reads the code on the mRNA to make a specific protein.
So in general, one gene, the DNA for one gene, can be transcribed into an mRNA molecule that will end up making one specific protein.”

mRNA Technology Ushers in Transhumanism

In true technocratic, transhumanist Fourth Industrial Revolution fashion, Zaks and other mRNA pushers view the body as your hardware, your genetic code as software and these mRNA injections as software updates. As noted by Patrick Wood in a recent Technocracy News article:15

“Pure and simple, this is unvarnished, raw transhumanism … Scientists think they can rewrite the genetic code [his words, not mine, for all you out there who still don’t believe these mRNA vaccines change the genetic code just because some ‘fact checker’ says they don’t], believing they can improve on a person’s God-given genetic makeup is entering dangerous territory …
These scientists truly believe that the human body is nothing more than a machine that can be hacked into and reordered according to some programmer’s instructions … Who’s to say they won’t correct one problem and create something far worse?”

What Is Transhumanism?

What exactly is transhumanism? Technocracy News describes16 it as “a twisted philosophy that believes in the use of high technology to transform humans into immortal beings … Furthermore, they seek to use genetic engineering to create a new master race of sorts, that will shed all of the ‘unseemly’ characteristics of humans.” Britannica defines17 it as a:

“… social and philosophical movement devoted to promoting the research and development of robust human-enhancement technologies. Such technologies would augment or increase human sensory reception, emotive ability, or cognitive capacity as well as radically improve human health and extend human life spans.
Such modifications resulting from the addition of biological or physical technologies would be more or less permanent and integrated into the human body.”

Great Reset Is a Transhumanist Agenda

Miklos Lukacs de Pereny, research professor of science and technology policy at the Peruvian University San Martin de Porres, has given presentations18 and interviews19 in which he warns that transhumanism is part and parcel of the Great Reset and the Fourth Industrial Revolution agendas, which are being rolled out at a furious pace under the auspices of the COVID-19 pandemic. As reported by Life Site News, November 10, 2020:20

“The COVID-19 pandemic was manufactured by the world’s elites as part of a plan to globally advance ‘transhumanism’ — literally, the fusion of human beings with technology in an attempt to alter human nature itself and create a superhuman being and an ‘earthly paradise,’ according to a Peruvian academic and expert in technology.
This dystopian nightmare scenario is no longer the stuff of science fiction, but an integral part of the proposed post-pandemic ‘Great Reset,’ Dr. Miklos Lukacs de Pereny said at a recent summit on COVID-19.
Indeed, to the extent that implementing the transhumanist agenda is possible, it requires the concentration of political and economic power in the hands of a global elite and the dependence of people on the state, said Lukacs.
That’s precisely the aim of the Great Reset, promoted by German economist Klaus Schwab, CEO and founder of World Economic Forum, along with billionaire ‘philanthropists’ George Soros and Bill Gates and other owners, managers, and shareholders of Big Tech, Big Pharma, and Big Finance who meet at the WEF retreats at Davos, Switzerland, contended Lukacs.
Transhumanists … seek to ‘relativize the human being’ and ‘turn it into a putty that can be modified or molded to our taste and our desire and by rejecting those limits nature or God have placed on us’ …
Indeed, WEF’s Schwab has been promoting the Great Reset as a way to ‘harness the Fourth Industrial Revolution’ … which, he declared in January 2016, ‘will affect the very essence of our human experience.’ Schwab described the Fourth Industrial Revolution then as ‘a fusion of technologies that is blurring the lines among the physical, digital and biological spheres’ …
Those technologies include genetic engineering such as CRISPR genetic editing, artificial intelligence (A.I.), robotics, the Internet of Things (IoT), 3D printing, and quantum computing. ‘The Fourth Industrial Revolution is nothing other than the implementation of transhumanism on a global level,’ emphasized Lukacs.”

mRNA Technology Is Still Gene Therapy
In “COVID-19 ‘Vaccines’ Are Gene Therapy” (hyperlinked above), I provide even more background information showing that mRNA “vaccines” are in fact gene therapy, and how this technology has been viewed and presented as gene therapy in the past.

The fact is, everywhere you look, mRNA technology, mRNA therapy and mRNA medicines — anything mRNA — have been, for years, treated as a form of gene therapy. Take the 2015 paper21 “mRNA: Fulfilling the Promise of Gene Therapy” in the journal Molecular Therapy. In this paper, the authors point out that in vitro-transcribed mRNA has the potential to play a role in gene therapy previously only envisioned for DNA.

Back in 2009, the paper22 “Current Prospects for mRNA Gene Delivery” in the European Journal of Pharmaceutics and Biopharmaceutics noted that while “replication-deficient viruses have been used most successfully in the field of gene therapy … mRNA has … emerged as an attractive and promising alternative in the nonviral gene delivery field,” and a 2019 paper23 in Frontiers in Oncology discussed the therapeutic prospects of “mRNA-based gene therapy for glioblastoma.”

If they want to call it “temporary gene therapy,” I’m OK with that — provided they can prove that it is in fact temporary, how long the effects last, and that vaccine mRNA cannot reverse-transcribe into the human genome like SARS-CoV-2 RNA apparently can.

But to deny that it’s gene therapy altogether and insist that it’s simply an updated form of vaccine technology is simply impossible, as it does not perform any of the functions of an actual vaccine (i.e., prevent infection and spread).
Do You Want to Update Your Software?
Now, if our genetic makeup is to be viewed as “the software of life,” as Zaks puts it, then should we not have the sole authority to decide for ourselves whether we actually want a “software update,” be it temporary or permanent?

“If we truly live in a free society, wouldn’t it stand to reason that we would want to have an energetic debate over how to answer that question?” Wood asks.24
“Contrary to what some scientists believe, we are not machines. We are human beings with bodies, souls and free wills. Anyone who tries to mandate the acceptance of an experimental gene-altering treatment is going against the international Nuremberg Codes, which require informed consent of any experimental treatment.”

What to Do if You’ve Had a Change of Heart
If you already got the vaccine and now regret it, you may be able to address your symptoms using the same strategies you’d use to treat actual SARS-CoV-2 infection. I review these strategies at the end of “Why COVID Vaccine Testing Is a Farce.”

Last but not least, if you got the vaccine and are having side effects, please help raise public awareness by reporting it. The Children’s Health Defense is calling on all who have suffered a side effect from a COVID-19 vaccine to do these three things:25

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 CHD website

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2021/03/31/covid-vaccine-software-update.aspx

The phrase “better living through chemistry” is a variation on an advertising campaign used by the DuPont Chemical Company1 in the mid-1930s until the early 1980s.

In 2014,2 it became the title of a “comedy” that portrays the life of a man bullied by his father and wife, and his subsequent “rebirth” through chemical use. However, the Hollywood and public relations versions of “better living through chemistry” are not the reality.

For instance, recent data from the University of California San Francisco revealed that 55 chemicals previously not found in humans were found in the bodies of pregnant women and their babies.3

Chemical-laden plastic has become such a ubiquitous part of modern-day life that is hard to imagine a world without it. Yet, in the grand scheme of things, it’s a relatively new invention4 and there’s still a lot we don’t know about how it impacts human and environmental health.

The chemicals in plastic are intergenerational endocrine disruptors5 for which there is not enough evidence to demonstrate plastic is safe for current and future generations. These chemicals have widespread use in plastic products and are similar in nature to natural sex hormones, which earns them the designation of endocrine disruptors.

But the chemicals in plastics are just one of the enormous number of chemicals being released into the environment through human use and disposal in waste products, including human waste. For example, according to the Environmental Working Group,6 every day women in America use an average of 12 personal care products, including cosmetics, that contain up to 168 different chemicals.

And those are just the chemicals the manufacturers have told the public is in those products. Many of these are applied to the skin, which allows ingredients to be absorbed directly into the bloodstream. This is only one of the ways chemicals are absorbed in the body.

For example, food can introduce chemicals in the body, either through its ingredients or through its packaging. The fast-food industry was valued at $647.7 billion in 2019 and is estimated to grow 4.6% by 2027, reaching $931.7 billion.7 Yet, despite the fact that it has been identified as a significant source of hormone-disrupting chemicals, the market continues to grow as consumer demand increases.

Scientists Find 42 ‘Mystery Chemicals’ in Pregnant Women

In the featured study, researchers8 found 109 chemicals using high-resolution mass spectrometry on blood samples from pregnant women and their babies. The study was done to develop a screening workflow for the identification and prioritization of chemical exposure in maternal and cord blood samples as a development for the future evaluation of health risks.

In a small sample of 30 women and their babies’ cord serum samples, they discovered 55 previously unreported chemicals in human blood. In addition to this, they also found 42 “mystery chemicals” with sources and uses that were unidentified by the researchers.9 The scientists wrote that the majority of the 55 compounds had “limited to no information about their sources or uses.”10

However, the source of the chemicals is believed to be from consumer products and other industrial sources, as written in a press release from the University of California.11 Since they were found in both the pregnant woman and their newborn children, evidence suggests the chemicals are able to pass across the placenta.

Tracey Woodruff, Ph.D., is a professor of obstetrics, gynecology and reproductive sciences at the University of California San Francisco and senior researcher on the study. She commented in the press release:12

“These chemicals have probably been in people for quite some time, but our technology is now helping us to identify more of them. It is alarming that we keep seeing certain chemicals travel from pregnant women to their children, which means these chemicals can be with us for generations. It’s very concerning that we are unable to identify the uses or sources of so many of these chemicals.”

Woodruff spoke to a journalist from Live Science,13 expressing her concerns that exposure during pregnancy is dangerous since it’s at a vulnerable time of development, potentially leading to lifelong consequences. Two of the newly detected chemicals in the human body were polyfluoroalkyl or perfluoroalkyl chemicals (PFASs), used in products such as pizza boxes and nonstick cookware.

Ten were plasticizers, such as phthalates, but the majority of the newly detected chemicals the researchers had no information about. Another author, Dimitri Abrahamsson, told Live Science that the number of chemicals discovered should signal a sense of “alarm,” continuing:14

“We’re being exposed to chemicals that we have very little information about. And these chemicals could potentially have harmful health effects that we don’t know and can’t predict.”

Phthalates and Plasticizers Pose Health Dangers

Data from the Norwegian Institute of Public Health discovered 90% of the people tested from 2016 to 2017 had eight different plasticizers in their urine.15 These colorless, odorless chemicals, composed mostly of phthalates, are used to change the elasticity of materials during the manufacturing process.16

Although you can probably name shower curtains, takeout containers and storage bags as plastic products, did you know clothing, paper coffee cups, tea bags and chewing gum are also made with plastic?17 Because the chemicals are not tightly bound to the products, they can dissipate into the surrounding environment, including the food you eat and the water you drink.

While the National Toxicology Program18 believes phthalates are “reasonably considered to be a human carcinogen,” politics and regulations have allowed plastics to remain in many of the products you use today.

In addition to the passage of chemicals from mother to child, ingestion of plastic particles can start in infancy. Globally, the baby bottle industry was valued at $2.6 billion in 2018, and the plastic segment accounted for 44.1% of the overall share.19 Researchers20 found that microplastics are released from plastic baby bottles into the contents, sometimes up to 16 million plastic particles per liter.

In this study, researchers tested only the number of particles released by the bottle as they use purified water and not standard drinking water. Since standard drinking water also contains microplastics,21 this means the number may have been significantly underestimated when the bottles are used at home.

Phthalates are powerful hormone disruptors that can cause males in many species to develop feminine characteristics.22 By disrupting the endocrine system they can also increase the risk of testicular cancer, low sperm count and infertility, which researchers have found in animal species including whales, deer, otters and bears.

A peer-reviewed article published in the American Journal of Public Health23 used data from longitudinal birth cohort studies to show associations between exposure to phthalates in utero and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, lower IQ, impaired social communication, poor psychomotor development and adverse cognitive development.

EPA and FDA Responsible for Your Toxic Exposure

Woodruff and her team were able to tentatively identify some of the chemicals used in chemical libraries. However, confirmation is made by comparing them to the pure chemicals known as “analytical standards,” provided by the manufacturer. Manufacturers do not always provide the samples. Woodruff continued her statement in the press release from the University of California, saying:24

“EPA must do a better job of requiring the chemical industry to standardize its reporting of chemical compounds and uses. And they need to use their authority to ensure that we have adequate information to evaluate potential health harms and remove chemicals from the market that pose a risk.”

During the UCSF study, researchers found chemical manufacturer Solvay halted access to a chemical standard for one of their perfluorooctanoic acid compounds they have used as a replacement for those that have been phased out. The researchers had been applying this chemical standard as a comparison, looking for the presence and toxicity of the replacement chemical.25

It may seem odd that a regulated industry would have the option of withdrawing its chemical composition, but as Sharyl Attkisson from Full Measure26 revealed in an investigative report, the industry is self-regulated. When the law was passed in 1938, it was missing a section that would have given the FDA the authority to impose sanctions.

Melanie Benesh of the Environmental Working Group told Attkisson that the FDA does not have jurisdiction to recall products or “to do a systematic look at their ingredients and what their long-term effects are.”

While the FDA has no teeth, the EPA is not using its regulatory prerogative in many cases. According to their website, the EPA “gathers health, safety and exposure data; requires necessary testing; and controls human and environmental exposures for numerous chemical substances and mixtures. EPA regulates the production and distribution of commercial and industrial chemicals …”27

Yet, as I have covered in the past, the EPA has been sued for its mercury policy, allowing dental offices to continue to discharge nearly 5.1 tons of mercury each year into publicly owned water treatment plants, most of which are subsequently released into the environment.28

The EPA has also been accused of colluding with Monsanto, which you can read more about in “Evidence EPA Colluded With Monsanto to Dismiss Cancer Concerns Grows Stronger.” They have blocked warning labels about glyphosate, and they promote the use of sewage sludge, which they dubbed “biosolids.”

This sludge is spread as fertilizer on U.S. agricultural lands, golf courses, parklands and cemeteries. As described in “BioSludged,”29 biosolids can contain dioxins, pharmaceuticals, surfactants, hormones and heavy metals, as well as disease-causing pathogens.

The persistence of these toxins in the treated soil means they may be absorbed by food crops that end up on your plate. Yet, high-profile PR companies, some funded by the EPA, spin biosolids as environmentally friendly and a form of recycling.

The EPA’s Environmental Dumping Ground

According to the World Wildlife Federation,30 between 1930 and 2000, there was a 400-fold increase in the production of man-made chemicals across the world, rising from 1 million to 400 million tons each year. These man-made chemicals produce widespread environmental contamination during their manufacture, use and disposal.

Chemicals can travel vast distances through the air or water and have been found to contaminate nearly every environment and type of wildlife, including birds, alligators, polar bears and panthers. There has been a widespread decline of mink in the Great Lakes, otters in Canada and other species across North America and Western Europe.31

Experts believe it is the environmental contamination of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and dioxins, which is supported by studies using laboratory mink. Perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) is classified by the U.S. EPA as a cancer-causing agent. It has been found in the Mediterranean to the Baltic Sea.

In 1979, it was tested on monkeys and they all died within weeks. Scientists have found caimans, an alligator species native to South America, with sex reversals caused by environmental contamination from bisphenol A. The chemical was also responsible for reproductive malformations in quail and chicken embryos.

Consider Your Daily Choices

It doesn’t appear that the EPA or FDA has plans to take broad steps to warn the public about dangerous environmental chemicals now or in the near future. On the contrary, in some cases, they’re working with the companies to remove warning labels that could have alerted consumers to their risks, such as the incident in California where the EPA stepped in to remove warning labels about glyphosate.32

Despite scientific evidence to the contrary,33,34,35 to date the EPA continues to insist that there is “No evidence that glyphosate causes cancer in humans.”36 Governmental regulatory agencies do not appear willing to go against large manufacturers in order to protect the health of their citizens.

Instead, it’s up to you to vote with your pocketbook and keep an eye on the products and services that you use. For example, one way to promote change in the cosmetic industry is to participate in tracking adverse events37 from any chemical or product you use.

Instead of buying the newest celebrity-endorsed personal care product or cosmetic, consider making your own bath and handwashing products without preservatives. Seek out safe products that are free of potentially dangerous chemicals by using the Environmental Working Group’s Skin Deep Database.38

The easiest way to steer clear of glyphosate is to buy locally and organically grown food from a trusted source. For a list of ways to help reduce your exposure to endocrine-disrupting chemicals, see “Why Your Hormones Have Been Hijacked.”
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2021/03/31/chemicals-found-pregnant-women.aspx

As of March 16, 2021, 19 European countries plus Thailand1 had suspended the use of AstraZeneca’s vaccine, either in full or in part, following reports of deadly blood clots.2,3 March 2, 2021, The Defender reported4 U.K. data showing the AstraZeneca vaccine was responsible for 77% more adverse events and 25% more deaths than the Pfizer vaccine, which in the U.S. has been connected with a majority of death reports in the Vaccine Adverse Reporting System (VAERS).
AstraZeneca’s vaccine has received emergency use authorization in Europe but not in the U.S., where the Pfizer, Moderna and Johnson & Johnson vaccines are available. Contrary to the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines, the AstraZeneca and Johnson & Johnson vaccines use a viral vector to deliver double-stranded DNA for the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein into your cells.5
Business Insider has created a comparison chart6 of the four vaccines — Moderna, Pfizer, AstraZeneca and Johnson & Johnson — currently available in the U.S. and Europe.
Norway Links Lethal Blood Clots to AstraZeneca Vaccine
While virtually all post-vaccination deaths so far have been shrugged off as coincidence, even when occurring in healthy individuals in their 20s and 30s, doctors at Oslo University Hospital have now announced the blood clotting disorders experienced by some recipients of the AstraZeneca vaccine are in fact caused by the vaccine.7
We have the reason. Nothing but the vaccine can explain why these individuals had this immune response. ~ Professor Pål Andre Holme, Oslo University Hospital
A March 18, 2021, article in Science Norway reads, in part:8

“’Our theory that this is a powerful immune response most likely triggered by the vaccine, has been confirmed,’ says professor and chief physician Pål Andre Holme. Three Norwegian health workers under the age of 50 have been hospitalized. One is dead …

‘In collaboration with experts in the field from the University Hospital of North Norway HF, we have found specific antibodies against blood platelets that can cause these reactions, and which we know from other fields of medicine, but then with medical drugs as the cause of the reaction,’ the chief physician explains …

When asked to clarify why he says ‘most likely’ in the quote, Holme confidently responds that the reason for these rare cases of blood clots has been found.

‘We have the reason. Nothing but the vaccine can explain why these individuals had this immune response,’ he states. [Norwegian national newspaper] VG also asks how Holme can know that the immune response is not caused by something other than the vaccine.

‘There is nothing in the patient history of these individuals that can give such a powerful immune response. I am confident that the antibodies that we have found are the cause, and I see no other explanation than it being the vaccine which triggers it,’ he responds.”

The three health workers reported acute pain, bleeding, low platelet counts and were found to have blood clots in “unusual places,” such as their stomachs and brains. Later that same day, March 18, 2021, the European Medicines Agency ruled the AstraZeneca vaccine is “safe and effective, despite some concerns over possible side effects,” CNBC reported,9 and that benefits of the vaccine outweigh the risks.
Meanwhile, March 22, 2021, Norway Today reported the Norwegian Medicines Agency had received two new reports of blood clots with deadly consequences following vaccination with the AstraZeneca vaccine. In a press release, the agency stated that “The Norwegian Medicines Agency cannot rule out that these cases may have a connection with the AstraZeneca vaccine.”10 One of the two victims was a health care worker.
German Experts Weigh In
A March 19, 2021, German Spektrum article11 reviews preliminary findings by German investigators, which add further weight to Holme’s findings in Norway. It reads, in part (translation from German using translate.com):

“The effects of the suspended vaccinations with the AstraZeneca vaccine are believed to have been due to a particular immune response that activates platelets and thus triggers thrombosis. This preliminary conclusion is being made by a working group made up of Andreas Greinacher from the University Hospital Greifswald.

The effect corresponds in many details to a heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) type 2,12 in which antibodies against a protein complex are formed in connection with heparin, which in turn respond to a receptor on the platelets …

The team demonstrated the similarity of thrombosis with HIT in the blood of four patients with sinus vein thrombosis. Antibodies appear to form against a complex of heparin and the signaling molecule PF4, which in turn interact with the receptor CD32 of the platelets and thus activate them.

This triggers the clotting cascade, which leads to the thrombosis. The antibodies produced in the vaccinated individuals were very similar to those found in HIT, Greinacher said at a news conference. So far, however, it is still unclear where these antibodies come from, whether they form against the vaccine virus or the spike antigen or perhaps against a factor only involved in the immune response.”

According to Greinacher, people with a history of thrombosis probably do not have a higher risk of complications from the vaccine due to the mechanism of harm. He also points out that there is treatment against HIT, which the team believes “should also work in the case of the suspected vaccination side effect.”
Spektrum reports that, based on these findings, the Society for Thrombosis and Hemostasis Research suggests vaccinated individuals who experience thrombosis or neurological symptoms such as dizziness, headache or visual impairment on the fifth day post-vaccination and onward should be tested for HIT type 2.
The HIT type 2 test will detect antibodies against the heparin complex and, if positive, the Society recommends administering intravenous immunoglobulin G to prevent the activation of CD32 and interrupt the mechanism that results in thrombosis.
AstraZeneca Efficacy Data Being Questioned
March 22, 2021, AstraZeneca13 announced its Phase 3 U.S.-based trial showed the vaccine was 79% effective at preventing symptomatic cases of COVID-19 and 100% effective against severe or critical disease and hospitalization, with no increased risk for adverse effects compared to placebo.
According to The Associated Press,14 partial results from trials in the U.K, Brazil and South Africa — where a “manufacturing mistake” had led to some participants receiving only half of their first dose — suggested the vaccine was 70% effective.
The AP goes on to cite a number of individuals saying the U.S. results should allay concerns about the AstraZeneca vaccine.
That narrative broke apart the very next day, March 23, 2021, when the U.S. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) issued a statement15,16,17 first thing in the morning, saying the Data and Safety Monitoring board (DSMB) had notified them that AstraZeneca’s data may include “outdated information” that cast doubt on its effectiveness. As reported by The Defender:18

“Notably, in its most recent data, AstraZeneca neglected to include key information, such as the number of trial participants who developed ‘severe COVID.’ AstraZeneca President Ruud Dobber, during an interview on CNBC’s Squawk Box, said the number was ‘5,’ shortly after the data were released.”

“We urge the company to work with the DSMB to review the efficacy data and ensure the most accurate, up-to-date efficacy data be made public as quickly as possible,” the NIAID said in its statement.19
Dr. Anthony Fauci, who heads the NIAID and was one of the people quoted by the AP as saying the U.S. trial ought to put concerns to rest, went on the defensive, saying “This is really what you call an unforced error because the fact is, this is very likely a very good vaccine. If you look at it the data, they really are quite good, but when they put it into the press release, it wasn’t completely accurate.”20

AstraZeneca responded21 saying the data were based on a “pre-specified interim analysis with a data cut-off” of February 17, 2021, and promised to share more data with the independent review board.
In a Tweet,22 Francois Balloux, professor and director of the UCL Genetics Institute, called the NIAID’s statement “highly unusual,” noting it “comes close to accusing Oxford/AZ of having willfully misrepresented” some of its trial results.
Stephen Evans, professor of pharmacoepidemiology at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, called the NIAID’s statement “unprecedented,” as while the DSMB will “sometimes disagree with investigators over vaccine trial results,” they typically do so “in private,” not publicly.23
This isn’t the first time AstraZeneca has been challenged over its data handling, though. As reported by The Defender:24

“‘The way they handled their data early on, AstraZeneca basically shot themselves in the foot,’ Julian Tang, a virologist at the University of Leicester, said even before the latest issue arose.

AstraZeneca has received criticism over its studies since the first data released in the UK, which purported to show the vaccine was 70% effective, yet failed to account for a manufacturing mistake and didn’t include enough participants over 65 to determine efficacy among older patients …”

Full Throttle Forward Despite Risks

Despite concerns about data mishandling and two independent investigations finding a mechanism of harm, the World Health Organization and the European Medicines Agency are saying the AstraZeneca vaccine is good to go and urge countries to keep using it.
March 18, 2021, the EMA issued a press release25 giving the AstraZeneca the green-light, despite admitting it is associated with “very rare cases of blood clots associated with thrombocytopenia, i.e., low levels of blood platelets.” The justification, as usual, is that the benefits outweigh the risks.26,27,28
But do they? What exactly are the benefits? You can still contract the virus. You can still spread the virus. All it promises to do is lessen your symptoms when you get infected. Sure, the idea is that by lessening symptoms, you’ll reduce your risk of hospitalization and death, but lessening symptoms is not what a vaccine is supposed to do. A vaccine is supposed to make you immune to the disease in question, and none of the COVID-19 vaccines does that.
I’ve discussed this in previous articles, including “COVID-19 mRNA Shots Are Legally Not Vaccines,” “COVID-19 ‘Vaccines’ Are Gene Therapy” and “How COVID-19 ‘Vaccines’ May Destroy the Lives of Millions.”

What’s more, COVID-19 is really only a serious risk to the very old and people with two or more comorbidities. For the rest, its lethality is on par with the common flu.29,30,31,32,33 It may be different in terms of symptoms and complications, but the actual lethality is about the same.
Data34 have shown the overall noninstitutionalized infection fatality ratio for all age groups is 0.26%. If you’re under the age of 40, your risk of dying from COVID-19 if you get infected is just 0.01%.
Meanwhile, as reviewed in “COVID-19 Vaccine Tested on Babies Even as Death Toll Mounts,” the lethality rate of COVID-19 vaccines is somewhere between 0.0024% and 0.0028%, and that’s assuming all deaths are being reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), which is doubtful.
The key difference between being harmed or killed by COVID-19 and being harmed or killed by the vaccine is that the illness kills those who are old, sick and frail, while reports show the vaccine is killing young and healthy people. From my perspective, the argument that the vaccine benefits outweigh the risks simply does not hold water.
Side Effects 3X More Common in Those Previously Infected

In related news, according to researchers at King’s College, people who have already had COVID are three times more likely to experience vaccine side effects than those who have not been exposed to the virus, and this appears true for both mRNA and DNA versions of the vaccine.35
They gleaned this information from the college’s ZOE app, which has logged more than 700,000 vaccinations. According to that data, 35.7% of those given the Pfizer vaccine who had previously been infected reported side effects, compared to just 12.2% of those not previously infected.
Looking at the AstraZeneca vaccine specifically, 52.7% of previously infected had side effects, compared to 31.9% of those who had not been previously infected.
While The Telegraph reports this as being a beneficial thing, saying “More severe side effects are often a sign of better immunity, and emerging research suggests just one dose of vaccine gives a similar protective effect to two doses in people who have had a previous infection,” some experts vehemently disagree.
Proper Timing May Eliminate Some Vaccine Risks

In January 2021, Dr. Hooman Noorchashm, a cardiac surgeon and patient advocate, sent a public letter36 to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration commissioner detailing the risks of vaccinating individuals who have previously been infected with SARS-CoV-2, or who have an active SARS-CoV-2 infection.
He urged the FDA to require prescreening for SARS-CoV-2 viral proteins to reduce the risk of injuries and deaths following vaccination, as the vaccine may trigger an adverse immune response in those who have already been infected with the virus.

Fox TV host Tucker Carlson recently interviewed him about these risks as well. In that interview, Noorchashm said:37

“I think it’s a dramatic error on 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 we have with the COVID-19 pandemic, where a half-percent of the population is susceptible to dying, and compound it by causing totally avoidable harm by vaccinating people who are already infected …

The signal is deafening, the people who are having complications or adverse events are the people who have recently or are currently or previously infected [with COVID]. I don’t think we can ignore this.”

In an emailed response to The Defender, Noorchashm fleshed out his concerns, saying:38

“Viral antigens persist in the tissues of the naturally infected for months. When the vaccine is used too early after a natural infection, or worse during an active infection, the vaccine force activates a powerful immune response that attacks the tissues where the natural viral antigens are persisting. This, I suggest, is the cause of the high level of adverse events and, likely deaths, we are seeing in the recently infected following vaccination.”

Noorchashm is now pushing for the implementation of a prevaccine screening campaign (#ScreenB4Vaccine), using PCR or rapid antigen testing to determine whether the individual has an active infection, and an IgG antibody test to determine past infection.
If either test is positive, he recommends delaying vaccination for a minimum of three to six months to allow your IgG levels to wane. At that point, he recommends testing your blood IgG level and use that as a guide to decide the timing of your vaccination. As reported by The Defender:39

“Noorchashm told Carlson that he’s been wrongly accused of stoking vaccine hesitancy, when just the opposite is true — if public health officials want people to trust the vaccines, they need to do everything possible to avoid creating situations where the vaccines can actually cause harm.

‘People aren’t stupid,’ Noorchashm said. ‘If you explain how the vaccine works, and give them the information on how to keep themselves safe,’ that is how you build trust.”

What to Do if You Regret Getting the COVID-19 Vaccine
If you already got the vaccine and now regret it, you may be able to address your symptoms using the same strategies you’d use to treat actual SARS-CoV-2 infection. I review these strategies at the end of “Why COVID Vaccine Testing Is a Farce.”
Additionally, if you’re experiencing side effects, please help raise public awareness by reporting it. The Children’s Health Defense is calling on all who have suffered a side effect from a COVID-19 vaccine to do these three things:40

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 CHD website

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2021/03/30/deadly-blood-clots-caused-by-covid19-vaccine.aspx

In 2000, everything about Bill Gates’ public persona changed. He morphed from a hardnosed and ruthless technology monopolizer into a soft, fuzzy and incredibly generous philanthropist when he and his wife launched the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.1

It was a public relations coup. May 18, 1998, the U.S. Justice Department, in collaboration with 20 state attorneys, filed an antitrust lawsuit against Microsoft.2 At that time, the company was 23 years old and was ruling the personal computer market. The Seattle Times described the fallout from the antitrust lawsuit:3

“The company barely escaped being split up after it was ruled an unlawful monopolist in 2000 for using its stranglehold on the PC market with its Windows operating system to cripple competitors, such as Netscape’s Navigator Web browser.”

How would the world be different today if the company had been split? Yale law professor George Priest described the antitrust lawsuit as “one of the most important antitrust cases of its generation.”4 In 2002, a court settlement placed restrictions on Microsoft to curb some of its practices for five years.

It was later extended twice and then expired May 12, 2011. The lawsuit had a dramatic effect on “the emergence of an entirely new field called IP (intellectual property) antitrust,” Iowa law professor Herbert Hovenkamp told the Seattle Times.5

Later, large sums donated from the foundation made the news multiple times, including $9.5 million to GAVI (Global Alliance for Vaccines), a second $7.5 million to GAVI and $6.8 million to the World Health Organization in 2017.6

By June 2020, in the middle of a global pandemic, the Gates Foundation’s donations totaled 45% of WHO’s funding from nongovernmental sources.7 Once mainstream media’s attention was no longer on Gates’ antitrust activities and focused on the philanthropist actions of the foundation, Gates publicly turned his attention to vaccinating the world, long before COVID-19.8

Event 201: A Preplanned Pandemic

In a deep dive into the Gates Foundation’s charitable donations, The Nation found there were $250 million in grants to companies where the foundation held corporate stocks, including Novartis, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Sanofi and Medtronic. The money was directed at supporting projects “like developing new drugs and health monitoring systems and creating mobile banking services.”9

What Gates had discovered was an easy path to political power, allowing him to shape public policy without being elected to office. In other words, favorable headlines could be bought with charitable contributions.10 One event that Gates has personally supported and participated in was Event 201.11

Writing in The Defender, Robert Kennedy Jr. describes the exercise that Gates organized in October 2019. Many high-ranking men and women with governmental authority participated in Event 201, which coincidentally simulated a worldwide pandemic triggered by a novel coronavirus, just months before SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, changed the world.12

They included representatives from the World Economic Forum, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Johns Hopkins University Population Center, the World Bank, the Chinese government and vaccine maker Johnson & Johnson. During the event, the group developed strategies to control a pandemic, the population and the narrative surrounding the event.

At no time did they investigate using current therapeutic drugs and vitamins or communicating information about building immune systems. Instead, the aim was to develop and distribute patentable antiviral medications and a new wave of vaccines.

As Kennedy reports, Gates spoke to the BBC13 April 12, 2020, and claimed these types of simulations had not occurred, saying “Now here we are. You know we didn’t simulate this; we didn’t practice, so both the health policies and economic policies … we find ourselves in uncharted territories.”

Yet, videos of the event are available14 and Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security released a statement naming the Gates Foundation as a partner in sponsoring the pandemic simulation.15 It seems strange and alarming that a man with the responsibility of running the Gates Foundation and the powerful influence he has over global public policy decisions had forgotten an exercise he organized only six months before the interview.16 Or was it deception?

Uncanny Prediction or Planned Event?

During the pandemic exercise, the global experts “modeled a fictional coronavirus pandemic.”17 After questions arose about whether the exercise had “predicted the outbreak in China,” Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security released a thinly supported statement, saying:18

“… the exercise served to highlight preparedness and response challenges that would likely arise in a very severe pandemic … Although our tabletop exercise included a mock novel coronavirus, the inputs we use for modeling the potential impact of that fictional virus are not similar to nCoV-2019.”

Kennedy characterizes the fourth simulation in Event 201, writing that “the participants primarily focused on planning industry-centric, fear-mongering, police-state strategies for managing an imaginary global coronavirus contagion culminating in mass censorship of social media.”19

The transcript of the fourth simulation shows that the participants discussed communication strategies using dissemination of information and censorship on social media.20,21 Communication strategist Hasti Taghi, who works for a major media company and leads strategic initiatives with the World Economic Forum,22 said:

“So, I think a couple of things we have to consider are even before this began, the anti-vaccine movement was very strong and this is something specifically through social media that has spread.

So, as we do the research to come up with the right vaccines to help prevent the continuation of this, how do we get the right information out there? How do we communicate the right information to ensure that the public has trust in these vaccines that we’re creating?”

The question the group undertook wasn’t how to communicate the truth about the vaccine development, manufacture and distribution, but rather how to “communicate the right information to ensure the public has trust in these vaccines that we’re creating?”

The issue of gaining public trust to take a vaccine was significant in this simulation, even though the U.S. population is well indoctrinated in the perceived value of annual flu shots and childhood vaccinations. In fact, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has a list of 26 different types of vaccines currently in use in the U.S.

In addition to the long list of recommended childhood vaccinations, there are adult vaccines against shingles, tetanus and pneumococcal pneumonia that are routinely given. Why, then, did the global experts in communication and control believe communicating the “right information” would be necessary to “ensure the public trust”?

Group Calls for Social Media Censorship

This was only one of the highly predictive conversations during Event 201 that played out in 2020 as the global COVID-19 pandemic unfolded. George Gao, director-general, Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention,23 predicted:24

“By and long, we have more cases in China and also death cases reported. And also, my staff told me that before there’s misinformation and there’s some belief. People believe, ‘This is a manmade … some pharmaceutical company made the virus,’ so there’s some violations of human … That is because of this misinformation.”

Others agreed with the need for social media censorship as it may pertain to the spread of “disinformation” about the pandemic or vaccines and vaccine injury, without regard to the source. The idea was to remove any information that did not align with the government’s mandates and ideas. Kevin McAleese, who is a communications officer with a Gates-funded agricultural project, said:25

“To me, it is clear countries need to make strong efforts to manage both mis- and disinformation … If the solution means controlling and reducing access to information, I think it’s the right choice.”

During the ensuing conversation, Tom Inglesby, director of the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security,26 replied, “In this case, do you think governments are at the point where they need to require social media companies to operate in a certain way?”27

At each step of the simulation, the global “experts” agreed that information censorship through media platforms would be necessary to control the flow of the “right information” in order for people to willingly follow the leader.

What is interesting about the transcript from Event 201 is that what was planned and shared was frighteningly close to what has happened since January 2020. It may have been a coincidence to predict one or two major public health decisions, but it appears that the group was either phenomenally prophetic or they shaped the decisions and events of 2020 from behind the scenes.

Framing the Vaccine Message to Trigger Action

From the outside, the driving force behind economically devastating lockdowns, warp speed vaccine development and population control and surveillance strategies has been to “flatten the curve” and lower the death rate of SARS-CoV-2. Yet, as I and others have exposed, when these strategies are analyzed, it’s apparent there is more than what meets the eye.

In July 2020, Yale University28 announced a study of the trigger words and phrases that would have a higher likelihood of promoting an otherwise individualistic society to quietly follow mandates (not laws) to control behavior. The phrases tested were believed to be most successful at conveying feelings about health, helping others and fear.

The hope was to manipulate behavior in such a way that it lowered the governmental risk for riots and dissidence. The study was conducted by Yale University using 4,000 participants who were randomized to receive one of 12 different messages. After the message, they were then evaluated to “compare the reported willingness to get a COVID-19 vaccine at three and six months of it becoming available.”29

The primary outcome of the study was to find the right combination of phrases and messaging that would increase the number of people who got the vaccine. The study began July 3, 2020, and the last participant underwent testing by July 8, 2020.30 To date, the results of the study have not been published.

The president of the U.S. announced in July 2020 that there would be an “overwhelming” vaccine campaign launched by November 2020.31 In December 2020, the National Institutes of Health released a COVID-19 vaccination communication recommending behavioral and social science actions that might address vaccine hesitancy and increase the number who take the vaccine, including:32

Framing accepting a vaccine as a social norm including “promotional materials that induced peer pressure to vaccinate.”
Encouraging those who vaccinate to share their positive experience on social media.
Nudging a person into accepting the vaccine by making it convenient and easy, leveraging electronic portals to send messages and using competition, gamification and incentives to encourage behavioral changes.
Assessing the values of the target audience and then embedding those values into messages about vaccinations. Examples might include being a protector of the community, building on desires to go back to normal activities or as a way of enacting equality and social justice by protecting vulnerable people.

In other words, many of the messages that you’ve been seeing in the media and your doctor’s office have been designed to trigger emotions that would lead you to take the vaccine. These same pressure tactics are not routinely used in the media for some of the more common adult vaccinations including pneumococcal, tetanus, hepatitis or shingles vaccines.

It’s Time to Speak With One Voice and Fight for Freedom

As I’ve written before, what we lose as a society when we acquiesce to these mandates and controls will be exponentially harder to get back. One of the freedoms we give away is allowing our thoughts and beliefs to be censored on social media without fighting back.

It is essential to safeguard your constitutional rights and civil liberties against unlawful overreach, and yet many appear to be willing to give up easily. Although the government has a duty to protect the health and welfare of its citizens, this must be balanced against the loss of civil rights and liberties.

We’re currently facing a battle of freedom versus tyranny. For example, multiple studies have demonstrated that long-term lockdowns are clearly not in the public’s best interest.33,34 Instead, it’s tantamount to abuse. And yet many have gone along with these mandates, which were not laws.

It’s vital to understand that the vast majority of information you consume in mainstream media is carefully designed propaganda that has been crafted from nearly two decades of personal data collected from you.

Although Yale University undertook a study with 4,000 participants for a COVID-19 messaging campaign, that data had been gathered and collated through your use of social media.

As I have carefully identified in many previous articles, this plan will result in a progressive loss of your freedom and liberty that eventually results in tyranny and slavery. It is crucial to be vigilant and seek the truth so that you can understand how to distinguish between fact and a fictional narrative that promises you liberation but eventually enslaves you.

My newest book, “The Truth About COVID-19,” will be available April 29, 2021, on Amazon. In it, I investigate the origins of the virus and how the elite has used it to slowly erode your personal liberty and freedom. In addition, I’ll also show you how to protect yourself against the disease and what you can do to fight back against the technocratic overlords.

>>>>> Click Here <<<<< The book goes into detail about pandemic profiteers. While I'm not thrilled about associating with Amazon, by pushing the book ranking up on their platform — one of the biggest tech companies who are benefiting from this global pandemic — we are actually using it to get the word out about them.
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2021/03/30/bill-gates-event-201.aspx

The New Orleans Archdiocese has warned Catholics that the Johnson & Johnson COVID-19 vaccine is “morally compromised” as the production of the vaccine uses aborted fetal cell lines.1
This is the latest concern in a rising number of challenges linked to the COVID-19 vaccines that were developed under Operation Warp Speed2 to accelerate the development and distribution of a “vaccine.” In less than one year, several drug companies reportedly accomplished what often takes up to 15 years.3
Yet the term “vaccine” associated with the COVID-19 shot is a misnomer as it doesn’t meet the medical or legal definition of a vaccine, as detailed in “COVID-19 mRNA Shots Are Legally Not Vaccines.”
Rather, it is genetic therapy that comes with a considerable list of potential long-term health concerns, not the least of which is the troubling evidence suggesting some of the mRNA shots may cause prion diseases such as Alzheimer’s and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS). Immunologist Dr. Bart Classen writes:4

“Development of new vaccine technology has been plagued with problems in the past. The current RNA-based SARS-CoV-2 vaccines were approved in the US using an emergency order without extensive long-term safety testing. The results indicate that the vaccine RNA has specific sequences that may induce TDP-43 and FUS to fold into their pathologic prion confirmations.
The enclosed finding as well as additional potential risks lead the author to believe that regulatory approval of the RNA-based vaccines for SARS-CoV-2 was premature and that the vaccine may cause much more harm than benefit.”

Amid the challenges of physical adverse effects from the vaccines, the lack of adequate testing and the underhanded methods in which vaccination may ultimately be made mandatory, many are now faced with the moral dilemma of being injected with genetic material that was grown in aborted fetal cell cultures.5
Aborted Fetal Cell Cultures Used in Vaccine Production

February 27, 2021, the Food and Drug Administration6 announced the authorization of emergency use for the Johnson & Johnson single-dose COVID-19 vaccine. At the same time, the Archdiocese of New Orleans announced that the vaccine is “morally compromised as it uses the abortion-derived cell line in development and production of the vaccine as well as the testing.”7
In addition to their warning that Catholics avoid the Johnson & Johnson vaccine because of its “extensive use of abortion-derived cell lines,”8 the Archdiocese acknowledged that while there:9

“ … was some lab testing that utilized the abortion-derived cell line, the two vaccines currently available from Pfizer and Moderna do not rely on cell lines from abortions in the manufacturing process and therefore can be morally acceptable for Catholics as the connection to abortion is extremely remote.”

There are other clergy members that disagree with using any of the vaccines available for COVID-19 since, as the statement above indicates, abortion-derived cell lines were used in the lab testing.10 However, the Vatican has been aggressively pro-vaccine and approved the use, writing:11

“In this sense, when ethically irreproachable Covid-19 vaccines are not available … it is morally acceptable to receive Covid-19 vaccines that have used cell lines from aborted fetuses in their research and production process.”

The debate within the Catholic Church has a long history, which centers on using HEK293 cells that were harvested from an aborted fetus in the early 1970s.12 The disagreement leaves many within the church without clear guidance from religious leaders.
Semantics and Technicalities Used to ‘Debunk’ the Truth

Much of the confusion about using aborted fetal tissue in testing and production can be summed up in the statement from The Washington Post, which said in an archived version of a March 2, 2021, article, “The cells used now, such as those used in the Johnson & Johnson vaccine, are not from the original fetal tissue.”13 It should also be noted that an updated version14 of the same article deletes this quote without mentioning that the article has been changed.
This is a common mistake that has been perpetuated in the media using general language to describe the process, which is precisely what self-declared fact-checkers use when they rate something false or misleading. As detailed in ”Several COVID-19 Vaccines Are Made Using Aborted Fetal Cells,” the answer lies in the technicalities and not in the general terms.
There have been several cell lines commonly used in vaccine development that originated from aborted fetuses.15 Six vaccine makers are using at least one of these cell lines in the development of COVID-19 vaccines, including AstraZeneca and Johnson & Johnson.
Fact-checkers label “false” the claims that cell lines from an aborted fetus have been used in the testing and development of the vaccine for several reasons. Some critics of abortion-derived cell lines have claimed that the vaccines contain the cells, and since the vaccines literally do not contain abortion-derived cells, the entire claim is labeled as false.
In other instances, fact-checkers claim the cell lines are not original, as in the statement from The Washington Post, but rather a clone. While there may indeed be some who are concerned that the cells could be in the vaccine, typically, the moral objection is to the use of aborted fetal cells in medical research and development.
Whatever the concern, it has become apparent that fact-checkers are trying to dissuade people from having a public conversation about the ethics of using abortion-derived cell lines to produce and test vaccines.
In fact, fetal cell lines are used during the production of certain vaccines and the claim that the cells are clones of the original is like saying your 20-year-old or 40-year-old body is no longer your body since all the cells are copies of those when you were a baby.
They are, in essence, a clone of the original. However, there is virtually no difference between cells that grow and multiply in a petri dish and those that grow and multiply in your body during your lifetime. If the cells in your body are still you, then the cells in the petri dish are still those of the original aborted fetus.
Reports of Side Effects Are Rising Rapidly

Side effects from the mRNA genetic therapies used to create novel “vaccines” are inevitable. The genetic material effectively turns your cells into bioreactors16 that turn out viral proteins to incite an immune response. Historical and preliminary evidence shows there are short and long-term side effects.
As Judy Mikovits, Ph.D., explains in her interview featured in “How COVID-19 ‘Vaccines’ May Destroy the Lives of Millions,” the mRNA is synthetic, which the body sees as “non-self.” This can trigger the production of autoantibodies to attack your own tissues.
Commonly reported side effects in those who have received the Pfizer and Moderna mRNA vaccines have included symptoms that are suggestive of neurological damage.
Since the vaccines began being distributed some of the side effects have included severe allergic reactions including anaphylaxis,17,18,19 seizures and convulsions,20,21 persistent headache and migraine,22 paralysis23 and sudden death within hours or days.24,25,26,27
As detailed in “Why COVID Vaccine Testing Is a Farce,” Mikovits predicts a long-term significant uptick in neurological and neurodegenerative diseases, such as psychosis, Parkinson’s, migraines, ALS and sleep disorders. She also believes there will also be a rise in pain syndromes like fibromyalgia, as well as cancers, kidney disease and rheumatoid arthritis, to name a few.
Additionally, Dr. J. Patrick Whelan, a pediatric rheumatologist specializing in multisystem inflammatory syndrome, submitted a public comment28 to the FDA in December 2020, in which he expressed concern that mRNA vaccines have “the potential to cause microvascular injury to the brain, heart, liver and kidneys in ways that were not assessed in safety trials.”
He cited research showing that “the spike protein in brain endothelial cells is associated with formation of microthrombi (clots).” It seems that since no viral RNA has been found in brain endothelium, “viral proteins appear to cause tissue damage without actively replicating virus.”
Governments ‘Held to Ransom’ to Secure Vaccine Deals

Within the U.S., vaccine makers enjoy full indemnity against injuries that happen from the COVID-19 vaccine, or any other pandemic vaccine, under the PREP Act. If you’re injured, you must file a compensation claim with the Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program (CICP).29 This is funded by taxpayers through the Congressional appropriation to the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS).
Although similar to the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (NVICP), the CICP is even less generous than the NVICP when it comes to compensation. You will be responsible for any attorney fees and expert witness fees.
Another problem is that, like the NVICP, the CICP is administered within the DHHS, which also operates and promotes the COVID-19 vaccination program. This is a significant conflict of interest that makes it less likely the CICP will acknowledge that a COVID-19 vaccine harmed someone.30
However, in many countries outside the U.S., drug manufacturers are not afforded such liability protection. While most governments are offering indemnity to the vaccine manufacturers, there are a fair few who have not. According to The Bureau of Investigative Journalism,31 Pfizer has asked for sovereign assets in Argentina and Brazil to be put up against any future legal costs.

Officials from Argentina and an unnamed Latin American country, which cannot be revealed as it signed a confidentiality agreement with Pfizer, told a journalist from The Bureau of Investigative Journalism they felt:32

“Pfizer’s demands went beyond those of other vaccine companies, and beyond those of Covax, an organization created to ensure low-income countries can access vaccines, which is also requiring its members to indemnify manufacturers.”

Do Your Own Risk-Benefit Analysis Before Deciding

Before taking the vaccine it’s important to do your own risk-benefit analysis based on your moral beliefs and science. It is crucial to be careful about making up your mind before using experimental gene therapy.
It is also important to remember that the lethality of COVID-19 is surprisingly low, lower than the flu for those under the age of 60.33 If you’re under the age of 40, your risk of dying is just 0.01%. This means you have a 99.99% chance of surviving the infection, which can improve to 99.999% if you’re metabolically flexible, insulin sensitive and vitamin D replete.
The mRNA vaccines are not designed to prevent infection and transmission of SARS-CoV-2, only to reduce the severity of the symptoms of COVID-19 disease. In the meantime, you also have the potential of becoming sicker once exposed to the virus, or it may trigger persistent serious side effects such as those reviewed above.
I urge you to take the time to weigh the potential risks and benefits based on your situation before making a decision you could regret for the rest of your life. Undoubtedly, Pfizer and other vaccine makers suspect this as well, which is why they are asking for indemnification from all governments and are working hard to quash any public debate about the morality or science behind the vaccine.
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2021/03/25/covid-vaccine-morally-compromised.aspx

In my latest book, “The Truth About COVID-19,” I investigate the origins of the SARS-CoV-2 virus and how the technocratic elite use this pandemic to erode your personal liberty and freedom. I also review strategies that can help protect you against this infection, and what you can do to fight back against the technocratic takeover.

My book won’t be available until April 29, 2021, but is available right now for preorder on Amazon. Not surprisingly, Amazon is now being pressured to ban this book, under the auspice that it might make people rethink their decision to get vaccinated.While it is less than ideal to ask you to purchase this book from Amazon, the reality is the high rankings you help us achieve creates massive visibility that will help others become familiar with this controversial information.

>>>>> Click Here <<<<< Australian Sky News1 found Amazon, Waterstones and Foyles all sell what it calls “anti-vaccine” and “COVID conspiracy” books, and vendors are now being urged to pull, block or add some sort of warning label to them.2 As noted by Sky News:3 “In the UK, more than 20 million vaccine doses have been administered as part of efforts to defeat COVID-19, but worries continue that misinformation is stopping some people from having the jab. Shadow health minister Alex Norris told Sky News: ‘Getting our population vaccinated is a massive priority and it is very sad to see these things so freely available. We would hope that retailers would act responsibly and have a look at whether they want to be associated with such products and whether they want to be seen to be profiting off such products.’" Modern-Day Book Burning Interestingly, Sky News discovered that a majority of “anti-vaccine” books were published after March 2020, suggesting interest in and sales of these books have increased since the pandemic began. Sky News points out that many of “anti-vaccine” books — most of which, by the way, are written by licensed and educated health experts — have five-star reviews, and as a category, they are frequently among the Top 10 best sellers in the children’s vaccination category. But public evaluation of the material matters not in this case. A free-thinking public simply cannot be tolerated; freedom of speech must be stopped or labeled with black boxes. The question that is never answered is, who decides what is “legitimate text,” to use Sky News’ term, and what is “misinformation”? Is there a person alive who is always 100% correct and can make that determination? Or does getting to the truth involve the ability to sift through and balance pros and cons; shades of gray; levels of uncertainty? As Toby Young, general secretary for the Australian Free Speech Union told Sky News:4 "The problem with placing a limit on free speech and saying 'we're going to ban people who say or write things that are potentially harmful' is that that word potentially is quite vague. If you grant yourself that right, you're granting yourself the right to ban almost anything. The second [issue] is, who defines what is harmful? We think that there is a scientific consensus around things like the COVID vaccines but actually science is constantly developing and evolving new information is coming to light." Sadly, that kind of common sense is not to be tolerated anymore. It’s all about “burning the evidence” at this point, to prevent people from learning anything that might break the one-sided control narrative. As Sky News admits, only 10% of Amazon search results lead to anti-narrative content, thanks to hidden algorithms that suppress certain categories of books.5 It’s hard to imagine that book burning would be accepted in this modern era, but here we are. History repeats itself, and censorship has been a go-to strategy for all authoritarian regimes. The fact that the press goes along with it, and actually encourages it, tells you just how controlled the world has become. The dictatorial power structure we’re currently facing off against is not a national one; it’s a global phenomenon, centered primarily within nongovernmental organizations and private “philanthropic” foundations that have a stranglehold on mainstream media. FDA Wants Me to Stop Giving COVID Nutrition Advice At present, it looks as though efforts to eradicate my book will fail, as preorders are rolling in at a steady pace, but that doesn’t mean they won’t continue trying. Earlier this month, Dr. Peter Lurie6 — a former U.S. Food and Drug Administration associate commissioner7 and current president of the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) — bragged8 about his ability to influence the FDA into sending me a warning letter9 for “unapproved and misbranded products related to COVID-19.” According to the FDA, my vitamin C, vitamin D3 and quercetin products are “unapproved new drugs sold in violation of section 505(a) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.” As support for this claim of wrongdoing, the FDA highlights statements in articles on my website that are fully referenced and supported by published science. None of these articles have any commercial advertising linking the information to my products, and none of my product pages makes claims about preventing, curing or treating COVID-19. Even this seemingly benign tweet stating practical adoption of vitamin c and vitamin d in mainstream medicine was listed as an offensive, illegal message. Vitamins C and D are finally being adopted in the conventional treatment of novel coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2. This fortunate turn of events is likely to save thousands of lives, while keeping health care costs down. pic.twitter.com/Rc19Zlp0Q8— Dr. Joseph Mercola (@mercola) April 7, 2020 The fully referenced article, “Vitamins C and D Finally Adopted as Coronavirus Treatment,” provides proof that this statement is completely truthful. But, the truth becomes treason in an empire of lies. I co-wrote a scientific publication with William Grant, Ph.D.,10 and Dr. Carol Wagner,11 both of whom are on the GrassrootsHealth vitamin D expert panel. In it, we demonstrate the clear link between vitamin D deficiency and severe cases of COVID-19. This paper was published in the peer-reviewed medical journal Nutrients.12 I am committed to providing truthful information, for free, to anyone that wants it, and I am not going to allow people to die from COVID-19 and other respiratory infections due to vitamin D deficiency or any other easily remedied cause. Gates-Backed CSPI-Allied Group Wants Me Gone The agrochemical front group Cornell Alliance for Science (CAS),13 the primary funding for which comes from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation,14 was quick to jump on CSPI’s bandwagon, falsely stating15 that “pages advertising vitamin C and quercetin as having ‘synergistic effects that make them useful in the prevention and early at-home treatment of COVID-19’ were still online” nearly a month after the FDA’s warning letter. The false statement there is “pages advertising.” There are a) advertisement/marketing pages for products in my online shop, and b) fully referenced scientific news articles, which are not, in fact, “advertising,” as they are not linked to any of my products, nor do they refer to or recommend any specific brands, mine or otherwise. Such coordinated attacks are to be expected, though, considering Gates’ influence over the operation, and seeing how CAS and CSPI work closely together — a fact CAS admits in its attempted hit piece.16 Shady ‘Anti-Hate’ Outfit Publishes Hit List Then there’s the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH), a shady U.K.-based organization with anonymous funding led by Imran Ahmed. Ironically, while CCDH is supposed to be an “anti-hate” group focused on combating online hate speech, Ahmed pursues his enemies with unbridled extremist rhetoric aimed at riling up public outrage against them. In short, what Ahmed is really engaged in is digital hate coaching. He’s even gone so far as to publish an actual hit list17 of the “Top 10 anti-vaxxers” it wants permanently silenced and eradicated from public forums. The list shows, by way of crossing out names, which have already been successfully deplatformed, and from which social media. CCDH Is a Tool for Global Technocracy Ahmed is the CEO and founder of CCDH, and was appointed to the steering committee of the U.K. government’s Commission on Countering Extremism Pilot Task Force in April 2020, just as fearmongering about the COVID-19 pandemic was ramping up. Aside from Ahmed, the CCDH consists of a single “Patron,” British TV personality and Countdown host Rachael Riley,19 and a seven-person board of directors that “supports and scrutinizes” Ahmed’s work. According to Influence Watch,20 Riley worked with Ahmed to get commentator Katie Hopkins and MP George Galloway banned from Twitter back in January 2020, actually meeting in person with Twitter executives in London. Hopkins’ account was permanently suspended21 while Galloway’s was not. The CCDH’s funding comes primarily from “philanthropic trusts,” according to this not-readily-accessible web page, but no specific trusts are listed. However, through the connection of co-founder Morgan McSweeney — who left the CCDH for a chief of staff position with Labour Leader Keir Starmer — we can deduce that the CCDH is connected with the technocratic hub that is the Trilateral Commission, where Starmer is a serving member.22 The group can also be linked to other technocratic centers within the globalist network through its board chairman Simon Clark and board member Kirsty McNeill.23 Clark is a senior fellow for the policy think-tank Center for American Progress and chairman of Foreign Policy for America, members of which include Stephen Grand, who is a senior fellow of the Atlantic Council, and Avril Haines, former deputy director of the CIA. Simon also served as the first director of web services for Reuters, one of the three global news agencies responsible for curating a vast majority of the world’s news. You can learn more about the structure of global news in “Reuters and BBC Caught Taking Money for Propaganda Campaign.” McNeill, meanwhile, is a member of the European Council of Foreign Relations — another key player behind the Great Reset — and director of policy for Save the Children Fund, which is funded by the Gates Foundation and a partner of Gates’ GAVI Vaccine Alliance. Another board member is Damian Collins, a member of the British Parliament and former chair of the House of Commons Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Select Committee. So much for being a nongovernmental organization. Collins also founded Infotagion, which “seeks to fight the disinformation contagion about COVID-19.”24 Ahmed Invents Easily Disproven Lie to Create ‘Buzz’ While Ahmed riles against people who publish truthful, fully referenced information about COVID-19 and related vaccines, he fails at the very basics of information-sharing himself. In “Dismantling the Anti-Vaxx Industry,”25 a short article that somehow made its way into the journal Nature Medicine, Ahmed provides five references, two of which are CCDH material that he himself created. Another two are mainstream media articles that coach hate against “anti-vaxxers.” He also lies by saying he “recorded a private, three-day meeting of the world’s most prominent anti-vaxxers,” when in fact it was a public, international conference given online, attended by thousands around the world, all of whom had access to the recordings. When people bother creating unnecessary and easily exposed lies, it really doesn’t bode well for their honesty and forthrightness in more serious matters — such as vaccine safety, for example. He could have done the normal, ethical, truly journalistic thing and admitted he simply attended a public virtual conference, but he chose not to. Instead, he twisted it into some undercover agent mission where he secretly recorded private discussions that revealed the inner workings of “the opposition.” It’s laughable, really. The thing is, when people bother creating such unnecessary and easily exposed lies, it really doesn’t bode well for their honesty and forthrightness in more serious matters — such as vaccine safety, for example. Getting banned by technocrats and billionaire front groups is a badge of honor, and will only make people more interested to see what the elitists are trying to hide.
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2021/03/26/dr-mercola-coronavirus-book-ban.aspx

Traditionally, fermented foods are a simple strategy to affect and optimize the health of your gut. Fermented foods are teeming with beneficial microbes that are sadly lacking in many Americans’ diets. Nearly every culture has a recipe for fermented food that has been passed down through the generations.

Kimchi has a long tradition in Korea where it’s served as a side dish with most meals.1 Cabbage and radish are the two most popular vegetables used in the preparation of kimchi, but some family recipes also use cucumber, onion and carrot as the primary vegetable.

The flavor and microflora of kimchi are impacted by additional ingredients such as garlic, salt and fermented fish sauce. Most Korean families have their own recipes, which are closely guarded secrets.2 Yet, the nature of the process of fermenting means that no two batches ever taste exactly the same. In addition to the ingredients, the temperature and length of fermentation contribute to the flavor of the finished product.

Originally, fermenting cabbage and other common vegetables to make kimchi was a way of preserving fresh vegetables for the winter months.3 Although it is available commercially, you can easily experiment at home with your own vegetables to develop a flavor and nutritional profile you enjoy.

While the flavor will vary depending upon the ingredients you use, most kimchi is sour and spicy. If you use garlic during fermentation, the flavor and taste of the vegetable will intensify.

As it has become more popular, it can be found in the refrigerated section of many grocery stores or purchased at Asian markets and sushi bars. Because it’s made with vegetables and fermented it contains an ample amount of fiber and is rich in microbes that help feed a healthy gut.

Importance of Probiotic Foods to Your Health

Foods rich in beneficial bacteria act as probiotics. Using a probiotic supplement or eating fermented foods has become increasingly popular as evidence mounts that probiotics have a beneficial effect on the bacterial communities residing in your gut.4

The most common bacteria found in probiotics are from the lactobacillus and bifidobacterium groups.5 Information from the 2012 National Health Interview Survey showed approximately 4 million adults in the U.S. had used probiotics or prebiotics in the 30 days leading up to the survey.6

Recent information published in 20197 also recorded approximately 3.9 million people regularly take probiotic supplements with the expectation that they will help improve digestion and immune function, prevent heart disease and improve mental health.

Food manufacturers have recognized the benefits of eating probiotic foods and have incorporated this in their advertising, especially for fermented dairy foods like yogurt. However, store-bought yogurt brands are also high in sugar, which feeds harmful bacteria in the gut. In this case, the disadvantages far outweigh the advantages of consuming probiotics from store-bought yogurt.

The production of kimchi is accomplished by fermenting vegetables with lactic acid bacteria (LAB), the same bacteria used in fermenting yogurt.8 This group of bacteria is one of the most significant groups of probiotics, demonstrating a high survival rate in test conditions and resistance to low pH indicating reasonable tolerance to bile.9

Probiotics Benefit Leaky Gut and Inflammation

Although some bacteria can cause disease, there are nearly 100 trillion of them living in your gut, which are collectively called the gut microbiota.10 What exists in your gut is a balance of harmful and beneficial bacteria that contribute to your body’s control of the inflammatory response.11

When the bacteria in your gut are out of balance it increases the permeability of the membrane lining your intestinal wall. This is referred to as leaky gut. The tiny gaps allow undigested food, bacteria and metabolic waste to enter your bloodstream, which sets up an inflammatory response in your body.

This inflammation also confuses the immune system and increases the risk for an autoimmune attack.12 Leaky gut syndrome has been associated with inflammatory bowel diseases like Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis. However, even healthy people can have varying degrees of intestinal permeability that can lead to a variety of health symptoms.

Kimchi plays two roles in protecting your gut health. In the first place, it is a rich source of probiotics helping to reseed your gut microbiota with healthy, beneficial bacteria. Kimchi is also high in insoluble fiber, which is the preferred source of nutrition for beneficial microbes.

Research from the University of California13 has shown the microbial balance in the gut microbiota is driven in part by the intestinal tract’s ability to limit resources to harmful microbes when beneficial microbes are given adequate nutrition. In addition to helping to close intestinal permeability, beneficial bacteria produce short-chain fatty acids as a byproduct of metabolism.14

These fatty acids signal the cells in the large bowel to limit the amount of oxygen within the large intestines. Beneficial bacteria are anaerobic and don’t survive well in an environment high in oxygen. This is another pathway in which the microbiota and your intestinal cells collaborate to promote a cycle that maintains gut health.

The signaling pathway can malfunction when beneficial bacteria are not provided adequate nutrition. If you eat a diet high in sugar and carbohydrates, it feeds the harmful bacteria. This both increases the oxygen level and intestinal permeability and makes your body more susceptible to aerobic enteric pathogens, such as E. coli and salmonella.

Animal studies have also indicated that probiotics can help reduce inflammation and improved the physical functioning of the intestinal tract in older mice.15 The researchers found a probiotic cocktail “could ameliorate age-related leaky gut and inflammation, hence opening up novel avenues to explore and exploit the clinical utilities of such therapeutic regimens.”16

Your Gut Health Impacts Disease Risk

Protecting your gut health can also reduce your disease risk. Scientific evidence has demonstrated that many conditions and diseases, such as learning disabilities, diabetes, obesity and Parkinson’s disease, are influenced by your gut microbiome. One review published in 2020 goes so far as to say that most inflammatory diseases begin in the gut.17

Dr. Alessio Fasano,18 a pediatric gastroenterologist, researcher and director of the Center for Celiac Research and Treatment, points out that there are simply not enough genes to account for the high number of chronic diseases that affect humans.

Genetics also cannot explain the timing of the disease onset. Instead, he suggests that it’s important to look at the gut microbiome as “it is the interplay between us as individuals and the environment in which we live that dictates our clinical destiny.”19

Evidence has shown that exposure to bacterial overgrowth and gluten are the two most powerful triggers to stimulate the production of zonulin by intestinal epithelial cells.20 Zonulin is a family of proteins that are a biomarker for gut permeability. Activation of the pathway may be a defense mechanism to remove bacterial overgrowth or changes in composition (dysbiosis) or both.

Kimchi can help protect against bacterial overgrowth and thus limit the activation of the zonulin pathway. Chronic inflammatory diseases that have been associated with dysregulation of this pathway include autoimmune and metabolic disorders, intestinal diseases and neuroinflammatory diseases.21

In other words, you can affect the potential risk and reduce the symptoms of health conditions far outside your gut when you take care of your gut microbiome by providing a diet rich in probiotics and nutrition to feed your beneficial bacteria.

Gut Health May Improve Sleep and Support Your Immune System

Researchers have discovered there is a curious bidirectional link between your gut and your sleep habits. Two studies shed light on this connection. The first was published in Frontiers in Psychiatry22 and focused on the role that your gut microbiome plays in insomnia and depression. The authors wrote:23

“There is considerable evidence showing that the gut microbiome not only affects the digestive, metabolic, and immune functions of the host but also regulates host sleep and mental states through the microbiome-gut-brain axis.

Preliminary evidence indicates that microorganisms and circadian genes can interact with each other. The characteristics of the gastrointestinal microbiome and metabolism are related to the host’s sleep and circadian rhythm.”

As noted in the paper, there is mounting research that suggests your gut microbiome affects your sleep cycle through what’s known as the gut-brain axis. According to the authors, this happens through three different pathways, all of which use a bidirectional flow.

In a second study,24 researchers investigated how your sleep affects the microbes in the gut, which we already know have far-reaching effects on your general health and the strength of your immune system.25 Using advanced sleep measuring devices, the quality of a participant’s sleep was measured and then compared to the composition of their gut microbiome to see if a correlation could be made.

The researchers found that diversity was positively correlated with sleep efficiency and total sleep time. They also found several bacterial groups that were negatively correlated with sleep quality indicating there is a link between the composition of your gut microbiome, sleep physiology and your immune system.

In addition to supporting your sleep hygiene, a healthy gut may also protect against viral infections, such as severe COVID-19 disease.26 In a review27 of more than 1,000 patient records, researchers found that those who presented on admission to the hospital with GI symptoms and suspected COVID-19 infection had worse outcomes than those who did not have GI symptoms.

Even after adjusting for comorbidities, demographics and other clinical symptoms, the results held. You can read more about the links between COVID-19 and your gut microbiome in “A Healthy Gut to Help Combat COVID.” One of the researchers from Rush University spoke with a journalist from MedPageToday, saying:28

“We knew that GI symptoms could be part of the infection but we did not know if they made a difference and conferred higher risk. So we wanted to look into the impact of initial GI symptoms to see if they might coincide with more serious disease and we found that those with GI symptoms also had established risk factors for severity, such as older age, diabetes, obesity, and hypertension.”

More Kimchi Benefits

In addition to the probiotic benefits from kimchi, the nutritive content has also been extensively studied. Researchers have found the dish is high in vitamins A and C along with 34 amino acids.29 The major carotenoids reported are lutein and beta-carotene in a variety of concentrations that are related to the agricultural practice, harvesting and fermentation methods used.

Depending on the raw materials, kimchi may also be high in calcium, magnesium, potassium and sodium. The most important bioactive compounds are phytochemicals that have been prized for their medicinal potential with antiobesity, anticancer and anti-atherosclerotic properties.

Researchers have focused on the polyphenolic contents of kimchi as it relates to health claims that include protective effects against a variety of different types of cancer, neurodegenerative diseases and cardiovascular disease. Many of the raw materials are important sources of dietary phytochemicals, including onions, which are a source of flavonoids, including quercetin.

Animal studies have demonstrated antiobesity actions as it relates to the animal size, weight and inflammatory response from fat tissue. Other studies have shown kimchi can help balance cholesterol, triglycerides and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels.

Regular consumption may help to reduce the potential for metabolic syndrome and balance high blood pressure. Fermentation appears to boost the benefits of the raw materials used in kimchi to improve metabolic parameters with antiaging effects.30

The LAB bacteria, dominant in the fermentation of kimchi,31 appears to reduce or eradicate putrefactive and pathogenic bacteria that may be present in the process. This helps to increase the functionality of the food and contributes to the large number of health benefits found in research, including the effects on obesity, cancer and colorectal health.

Control Quality by Making Your Own Fermented Vegetables

Some people start out making fermented foods for health benefits and then get hooked on the flavor or vice versa. Kimchi has a high level of beneficial bacteria that are ideal for optimizing your gut flora, and it is high in fiber to help nourish those bacteria. Eating one-quarter to one-half cup of fermented veggies with one to three meals each day can have a dramatic impact on your health.

If you’re new to fermented foods, introduce them gradually, beginning with as little as 1 teaspoon of kimchi with a meal. Observe your reactions for a couple of days before adding another small portion and increase your dose gradually as your body can tolerate.

While cabbage is the main ingredient in traditional kimchi, other common elements include mustard greens, garlic, ginger root, Asian radish and Korean chili powder.

It is surprisingly easy to make your own kimchi at home, which allows you to tweak the recipe to suit your taste and to control the quality of the ingredients. You can find recipes for homemade kimchi in “The Tangy Tasty Superfood Korean Families Eat with Every Meal” and “Join the Kinetic Culture and Make Your Own Fermented Vegetables.”
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2021/03/29/what-is-kimchi-good-for.aspx

Health care is becoming increasingly digitalized, starting with online medical records and now moving toward replacing human health care providers with robots. Writing in JAMA Network Open, a team of doctors and researchers from MIT and Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, cited the COVID-19 pandemic as being instrumental in the expansion of telehealth offerings at many health care systems.1

The goal of telehealth is to limit human contact to lower the risk of infectious disease transmission, but removing the human element of care dramatically changes the doctor-patient relationship. While most existing telehealth systems involve the patient controlling a tablet or smartphone, the researchers suggested that a mobile robotic telehealth system controlled by clinicians would offer a more dynamic experience.

However, before implementing robots to engage with patients in emergency rooms across the U.S., they wanted to find out if robots would be accepted — and they were surprisingly well received.

Americans Open to Robotic Care

In the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic, the researchers began to look for ways to minimize interactions between patients coming into emergency rooms and health care providers. In cooperation with Boston Dynamics, they created mobile robots that can measure vital signs like temperature, breathing rate, pulse rate and blood oxygen saturation.

The dog-like robots have four legs and carry an iPad that allows for video communication with a health care provider.2

“Often as engineers, we think about different solutions, but sometimes they may not be adopted because people are not fully accepting of them,” study author Giovanni Traverso said in a news release. “So, in this study we were trying to tease that out and understand if the population is receptive to a solution like this one.”3

First, they conducted a U.S. survey of 1,000 people to gauge attitudes about using robotic systems in hospital settings. In addition to questions about their usefulness in carrying out specific health care tasks, the participants were asked to consider their usefulness “with an emphasis on using robotic systems to limit direct human contact and conserve personal protective equipment” during the pandemic.4

The results revealed that most people were open to robotic health care services, including not only initial interviews and reading of vital signs but also somewhat more complex procedures, like testing for COVID-19 using a nasal or oral swab, placing an intravenous catheter, drawing blood and moving critically ill patients into a prone position.5

“Surprisingly, people were pretty accepting of the idea of having a robot do a nasal swab, which suggests that potential engineering efforts could go into thinking about building some of these systems,” the study’s lead author, Peter Chai, said.6

Most Said Robot Care Was Similar to In-Person Care

The next phase of the study took place in Brigham and Women’s Hospital’s emergency department. Fifty-one patients were approached about taking part in the robot study, and 41 agreed to participate (one did not get to complete the experiment because of a signaling malfunction with the robot).

The robot, controlled by a clinician, was then navigated to the patient and a video triage interview was conducted via the robot’s tablet computer.

Patients were then asked to evaluate the experience. Out of the 40 patients, 37 (92.5%) said the experience was satisfactory, and 33 (82.5%) said that being interviewed by the robotic system was as satisfactory as being interviewed in-person by a clinician. “For the purposes of gathering quick triage information, the patients found the experience to be similar to what they would have experienced talking to a person,” Chai said.7

The team is now working on smaller robots that would be able to interact with patients outside of a typical hospital setting, such as in an ambulance or field hospital, as well as developing sensors that could take vital signs remotely.8

Another piece of the puzzle, however, before the widespread rollout of robotic health care can take place, is ensuring that people will accept this impersonal technology. As such, they stress, “Future work may consider approaches to maximize acceptance of robotic systems among patients, especially those who declined to participate in the present study.”9

Health Passports: Another Form of Digital Health Care

It’s likely only a matter of time before you’ll be asked to prove your vaccination status in order to carry on with your daily life. “The government seems to be developing vaccine passports by stealth, making sure the technology is in place for anyone who needs it,” wrote Lara Prendergast, The Spectator’s assistant editor.10

She’s referring to the U.K. government, which has given sizable grants to a number of private companies developing such technology, however vaccine passports are also being implemented around the world. Denmark, Sweden, Spain, Italy, Cyprus and Malta are among the countries that have expressed positivity toward vaccine passports to revive tourism, while in the U.S., plans for vaccine IDs are under evaluation.11

The Commons Project and the World Economic Forum created the Common Trust Network, which developed the CommonPass app that’s intended to act as a health passport in the near future.

The app allows users to upload medical data such as a COVID-19 test result or proof of vaccination, which then generates a QR code that you will show to authorities as your health passport.12 The proposed common framework “for safe border reopening” around the world involves the following:13

Every nation must publish their health screening criteria for entry into the country using a standard format on a common framework
Each country must register trusted facilities that conduct COVID-19 lab testing for foreign travel and administer vaccines listed in the CommonPass registry
Each country will accept health screening status from foreign visitors through apps and services built on the CommonPass framework
Patient identification is to be collected at the time of sample collection and/or vaccination using an international standard
The CommonPass framework will be integrated into flight and hotel reservation check-in processes

Eventually, the CommonPass framework will be integrated with already existing personal health apps such as Apple Health and CommonHealth. If you want to travel, your personal health record will be evaluated and compared to a country’s entry requirements, and if you don’t meet them, you’ll be directed to an approved testing and vaccination location.

Significant Human Rights Concerns

Airline JetBlue announced that passengers flying to Aruba from Boston’s Logan International Airport could use the CommonPass digital health pass to enter the country.14 The plan is to quickly expand the program to other cities in JetBlue’s network — and this is only the beginning.

But, while being positioned as a way to regain a sense of normalcy and travel with ease, it’s actually a restriction of freedom — one in which you must “present your papers” before you can cross a border. The “easy” steps to enter Aruba, which prior to the pandemic would have consisted of showing your passport, now include:

Download the CommonPass app
Get tested for COVID-19 by COVID testing companies Vault and XpresCheck, either at home or at the airport
Prior to your flight, enter your “invitation code” into the CommonPass app and upload your COVID-19 test results into CommonPass
Fill out an online embarkation-disembarkation card, which includes your negative PCR molecular COVID-19 test; you can add your CommonPass ID in order to pre-verify with Aruba that you are “cleared to travel”
Upon arrival in Aruba, proceed through the “dedicated CommonPass immigration lanes to start … vacation sooner”

Already, this is creating two “classes” of people — those who have the CommonPass and those who don’t. This is just one of the significant human rights and civil liberty concerns being created by the implementation of digital health passports.

As noted by Rosalind Comyn, policy and campaigns manager at the National Council for Civil Liberties in the U.K., “In essence, what vaccine passports are trying to do is create a system whereby some people can access freedoms, services or other kind of spaces and places and other people are excluded from them.”15

Big Tech Striving To Be a Digital Health Power Player

From robotics to artificial intelligence (AI), the future of health care is digital, and technology companies like Google are investing heavily in this area. In November 2018, for instance, Google hired the former CEO of Geisinger Health, David Feinberg, to run its Google Health initiative and soon after acquired DeepMind Health, which is part of an AI company creating AI assistances for health care providers.16

Google is working on developing voice recognition technologies to support doctors in their paperwork along with an image library that trains AI models to detect diseases. It’s also involved in electronic health records, developing a model that uses machine learning to make predictions about patient outcomes, like the likelihood of readmission or death.17

It’s a concerning trend, considering the “frightening”18 amount of data Google and other technology companies collect. WebMD dominates health searches done through Google and shares user information with Google’s advertising arm and other third-party firms — a practice that is illegal in Europe.

Google, Amazon and Microsoft collect data entered into health and diagnostic sites, which is then shared with hundreds of third parties — and this data is not anonymized, meaning it’s tied to specifically to you, without your knowledge or consent.19

What this means is DoubleClick, Google’s ad service, knows which prescriptions you’ve searched for on the site, thus providing you with personalized drug ads, and Facebook knows what you’ve searched for in WebMD’s symptom checker, as well as any medical diagnoses you received.

This, along with many other behind-the-scenes partnerships, adds up to large-scale generation of health-related data points that could be used for targeted advertising, insurance premium decisions and much more.

Protecting Your Privacy From Technology

I’ve been talking about the privacy risks associated with online health records since 2008. The risks, and privacy-encroaching technologies, have only increased since then. The use of robots to replace in-person meetings with your doctor are only the beginning, as are the health passports starting out with the COVID-19 vaccine or a negative COVID test for international travel.

It’s setting a precedent for expansion that can be extended to other vaccines and medical information, and then to domestic travel and even leaving your house, as the passports will be carried on your phone that has location-tracking abilities. The creation of a decentralized web is part of the answer to protecting your freedom but you can also consider safeguarding your own online privacy if you haven’t done so already.

To encrypt your text messages and keep them from becoming data mining fodder, download the Signal or Telegram app and/or use a virtual private network (VPN) on your desktop, laptop and mobile devices. As far as robotic doctors go, you’re likely going to see more of them, to the point that one day they may play a larger role in health care than people.20
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2021/03/27/robotics-in-health-care.aspx

Manganese is an essential trace element you must get from your food as your body cannot make it. However, evidence demonstrates that genetically engineered glyphosate-resistant plants are deficient in manganese, which translates to a manganese-deficient food supply.

Manganese is used as a cofactor for many enzymatic activities involved in carbohydrate metabolism, scavenging reactive oxygen species, reproduction, immune system response and bone formation.1

Your body absorbs manganese in the small intestines, after which some is stored in the tissue. Approximately 25% to 40% of the manganese in your body is stored in bone tissue. Your body uses regulatory control through absorption and excretion to maintain stable concentrations.

Up to 90% of the manganese absorbed in your intestinal tract may be excreted in bile through your intestinal tract. Manganese levels are difficult to measure and not routinely evaluated in clinical practice. Yet, since more of the food supply is manganese-deficient, it stands to reason that many more people are or are becoming manganese-deficient.

Glyphosate Creates Manganese Deficiency in Food Supply

Glyphosate was first approved in the U.S. in 1974 and subsequently introduced into crops. To date, the Environmental Protection Agency lists “no risks of concern to human health from current uses of glyphosate” on their website.2 Contrary to independent researchers and statements by the World Health Organization, they also say there is “no indication that glyphosate is an endocrine disruptor”3 and “no evidence that glyphosate causes cancer in humans.”4,5

What agricultural experts have discovered is that glyphosate does limit plant absorption of micronutrients like manganese.6 Soybean growers are familiar with yellowing of glyphosate-tolerant beans after application, also known as “yellow flash.” Glyphosate chelates with manganese, causing a deficiency within the plant and the resulting yellow leaves.

Researchers used field experiments from 1999 to 2001 to evaluate ways of reducing the impact on plant growth using liquid formulations of manganese.7 What they found in the early studies was that adding manganese into the herbicide solution reduced the effect of the herbicide on weed control. To overcome the reduced control, they experimented with larger applications.

The primary endpoint in the study was weed control and not the effect additional herbicide might have on plant growth or the safety of the soybean yield. In these field studies, the addition of manganese reduced weed control but did not influence soybean yield.8

Another study published in 20079 evaluated the different methods of manganese application to crops that might maintain weed control in glyphosate-resistant plants and improve yield. During the study, they found manganese application improved yield. Interestingly, the conventionally grown soybeans without glyphosate application did not increase yield with manganese fertilization.

This indicated the plants were not deficient without the application of glyphosate. The researchers also found the yield in the conventionally grown soybeans was greater than the yield of the glyphosate-resistant plants without manganese fertilizer. In other words, conventionally grown soybeans had a greater yield than glyphosate-resistant plants.

Manganese-Rich Foods Are Commonly Glyphosate Treated

According to the National Institutes of Health,10 manganese can be found in a wide variety of food types, including seafood such as clams, oysters and mussels. Agricultural crops that may be rich in manganese include soybeans, leafy green vegetables, coffee, tea and whole grains. Unfortunately, the list of agricultural crops is also commonly sprayed with the popular herbicide glyphosate.

The Environmental Working Group’s (EWG) Dirty Dozen for 202111 — a list of foods that contain higher levels of pesticides than others — includes spinach, kale, collard and mustard greens. They reported that more than 90% of the samples of leafy greens tested positive for two or more pesticides.

One sample of kale, collard and mustard greens tested positive for up to 20 different pesticides and spinach had 1.8 times more pesticide residue by weight than the other crops that were tested.

According to the University of Tennessee Extension,12 glyphosate, which is found in Roundup and other herbicides, is allowed in most vegetable plants. A greenhouse experiment from Sabanci University, Turkey,13 found applications of glyphosate reduced the concentration of calcium, magnesium and manganese, particularly in young leaves.

At plant maturation, the seed concentrations of calcium, magnesium, iron and manganese were significantly reduced by glyphosate, suggesting the herbicide interferes with the uptake and translocation of the minerals. Ultimately this affects seed quality and future crops.

Even your coffee and tea likely test positive for glyphosate. The herbicide is commonly used on coffee plantations to control weeds14 and testing has also found it in tea leaves.15

According to the National Wheat Foundation,16 33% of wheat fields in the U.S. have had glyphosate application. Yet, a study17 commissioned by EWG found glyphosate in over 95% of oat-based food samples and in all of the wheat-based foods that were tested, including dried pasta and cereals.

A study from Canada18 listed food items with the highest percentage of glyphosate in the samples tested, including 90% of pizza, 84% of crackers, 73% of couscous and 67% of lentils.19

Manganese Deficiency and Health

Since agricultural use of glyphosate is popular, it is difficult to avoid consuming foods contaminated with the herbicide unless you are seeking out organically grown and locally sourced produce, as well as steering clear of processed foods. As I said, manganese is required in small amounts but is essential for multiple functions.

One paper reported on an animal study in which cows were fed Roundup Ready feed. The animals developed a severe deficiency in serum manganese.20 Signs of manganese deficiency in animals can include impaired growth and reproductive function, altered carbohydrate and lipid metabolism, impaired glucose tolerance and skeletal abnormalities.21

In humans, manganese has a significant impact on physiology and gut dysbiosis. Since it is integral to many physiological processes it also influences neuropathologies such as Alzheimer’s disease, anxiety, Parkinson’s disease, depression and prion diseases.22

In some neuropathology, such as autism and Alzheimer’s disease, glutamate overexpression within the central nervous system can be explained by a manganese deficiency. Oxidative damage and mitochondrial dysfunction may result in a reduction of manganese superoxide dismutase, which functions to protect mitochondria from oxidative damage.

A deficiency in manganese may also lead to osteoporosis and osteomalacia since the synthesis of chondroitin sulfate is dependent on the presence of manganese. Lactobacillus, a beneficial bacterium in the gut microbiome, is dependent on manganese for antioxidant protection. A reduction in Lactobacillus in the gut is associated with anxiety,23 autism24 and chronic fatigue syndrome.25,26

Infertility rates and birth defects may also be affected by manganese deficiency since sperm motility is dependent on the essential element.27 However, even when there are optimal levels of manganese in the body, some researchers believe that glyphosate can promote toxic accumulation in the brainstem that ultimately leads to Parkinson’s disease and other prion diseases.28

Can You Get Too Much Manganese?

As stated, manganese is an essential element, but the body requires a specific balance for optimal health. In other words, you can have too little, but you can also get too much. In one study29 from a population-based sample of healthy Chinese men in six provinces in China, researchers found those who had a high serum manganese level appeared to have harmful effects on their sperm motility and morphology.

In several regions throughout Canada, the groundwater had naturally high levels of manganese, which triggered the question of whether this potentially neurotoxic element could affect the cognition of children living in the area. A research team from the University of Quebec, Montreal, Canada,30 studied children who had been exposed to high concentrations of manganese in their drinking water.

They evaluated the intellectual functioning of the children and compared them against those who had lower exposure to manganese.31 The results revealed that children who were drinking tap water that was in the upper 20% of concentrations had IQ tests that were six points below those who were drinking water that had little to no manganese.

One of the researchers explained, “We found significant deficits in the intelligence quotient (IQ) of children exposed to a higher concentration of manganese in drinking water. Yet, manganese concentrations were well below current guidelines.”32

Until this study in 2010, manganese was not on a list of inorganic substances that were being tested in drinking water. More recently, a paper published in the Journal of Biological Chemistry33 demonstrated that alterations in manganese homeostasis could alter neurological physiology and cognition, either through overexposure or insufficiency.

It is unlikely you would be overexposed to manganese unless, like the children in Quebec, your drinking water is contaminated. Other overexposures can come from working in mines and welding environments,34 having iron deficiency anemia35 or chronic liver disease,36,37 since the liver is responsible for filtering excess manganese in the body.

Glyphosate Damages Health in Many Ways

If there has been one thing that the events of 2020 have taught us, it is that we must fully evaluate the information being communicated to us over mainstream media. Each health and wellness decision may have an impact on your ability to withstand severe COVID-19 or the new iterations being considered in laboratories around the world. Exposure to glyphosate is one of those decisions.

Scientific evidence has demonstrated the highly damaging effects of endocrine disruption38,39,40 this ubiquitous chemical has on humans and other mammals, as well as the impact it has on plant health, food supply and your future.

In my interview with senior research scientist Stephanie Seneff, which you can watch at “The Troubling Role of Glyphosate in COVID-19,” we discuss the critical part glyphosate has played in the past years in overall health and during the current global pandemic. One of the issues has been the way in which your body may sometimes substitute glyphosate for glycine in the construction of proteins.

This leads to proteins that don’t function. Monsanto’s own research dating to the late 1980s showed that glyphosate accumulates in a variety of tissues, even though they claim it does not.41 Instead, the researcher proposes that “A significant portion of total sample radioactivity was found to be incorporated into proteins.” The result is a distorted protein that can’t work the way it’s supposed to.

Another compound in the body that is like manganese in the way it is essential in the right amount and toxic in excess amounts, is deuterium. In normal physiology, your mitochondrial cells help remove deuterium, which is a naturally occurring isotope of hydrogen.

But, when your mitochondria are damaged by glyphosate, they are unable to eliminate deuterium properly. When your body doesn’t have enough structured water to trap the deuterium and your mitochondria are damaged, the deuterium can impair energy production, cause mitochondrial dysfunction and contribute to the development of chronic diseases.

Tips to Reduce Your Glyphosate Exposure

Seneff and I discussed several ways in which glyphosate can affect your health and the overall function of your body. To reduce your potential risk of a manganese deficiency and the resulting neurological damage, the answer is to eat certified organic or biodynamically grown foods whenever possible.

Seneff is committed to buying only certified organic foods and related in the interview that she has seen health improvements since she and her family began doing that. Other dietary recommendations to help mitigate the risk of glyphosate toxicity including eating or drinking more:

Sulfur-containing foods such as organic eggs and wild-caught seafood
Organic grass fed milk and butter. Butter is one of the lowest deuterium foods available

Glacier water, which is naturally low in deuterium
Animal fats, which are also low in deuterium

Molecular hydrogen
Probiotic-rich fermented foods such as sauerkraut and apple cider vinegar

To help “push” glyphosate out of your body and mitigate its toxicity, you can take an inexpensive glycine supplement. I take between 5 and 10 grams a day. It has a light, sweet taste, so you can use it as a sweetener. Seneff agreed in our interview, saying:

“It makes sense because it’s basically going to outnumber the glyphosate molecules. Remember, glyphosate’s going to compete with glycine in building the protein. If there’s a lot of glycine around, then it’s much less likely that glyphosate will get in there.”
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2021/03/26/manganese-deficiency.aspx