Archive for November, 2020

5G Fund For Rural America Hands Over U.S. Farms to Big Tech, Critics Say

https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/5g-fund-agriculture-big-tech-fcc/

11/04/20 

5G Fund for Rural America Hands Over U.S. Farms to Big Tech, Critics Say

FCC’s new fund includes money for precision agriculture that opponents say is more about commodification and control of information than better farming.

By Jeremy Loffredo 

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) last week established the 5G Fund for Rural America. The fund will hand over billions of dollars worth of taxpayer money to the world’s largest telecom providers. In exchange, the telecom giants will build 5G infrastructure in rural regions of the U.S. — including the infrastructure needed for 5G or wireless farming, also known as “precision agriculture.”

Precision agriculture involves the use of sensors in fields to measure moisture and temperature levels, satellites and drones that provide remote real-time images of crops, and even wireless sensors attached to cattle that monitor their health and track their location.

Proponents of precision agriculture see it as a path towards increased profitability, sustainability and the ability for farmers to determine the exact optimal amount of water, fertilizers or pesticides.

But critics say it’s simply a “marriage between agribusiness and spy technology.” (See link for article)

_____________________

**Comment**

Important Excerpt:

Global Research, in its report, “5G Agriculture – Food from Frankenstein Farming,” described “5G food” as a “GMO look-alike” and concluded that 5G agriculture “is just one more toxic scam within the egregious global roll-out of 5G — and its attempt to monitor, control and irradiate all that lives, breathes and has the expectation of a life worth living.”

“In our lawsuit against the FCC, we cite thousands of studies showing that the FCC’s position is contrary to the clear scientific and human evidence and fails to protect public health.”

For more:  https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2020/05/06/evidence-of-5g-health-effects-mounts/

https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2020/07/01/protect-our-health-environment-from-5g-calamity-eht-submitted-science-on-the-health-effects-of-5g-on-human-body/

https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2020/04/25/coronavirus-science-policy-politics-5g/

https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2019/03/13/despite-lack-of-studies-safety-standards-relaxed-ahead-of-5g-emf-health-effects-survey-shows-health-harm-rat-study-shows-microwaves-cause-brain-permeability/

https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2020/08/03/childrens-health-defense-principal-brief-in-landmark-case-against-fcc-on-5g-and-wireless-harms-submitted/

Nine COVID Facts: A Pandemic of Fearmongering & Ignorance

http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/featured-articles/2020/october/28/nine-covid-facts-a-pandemic-of-fearmongering-and-ignorance/

Nine Covid Facts: A Pandemic of Fearmongering and Ignorance

undefinedEver since the alleged pandemic erupted this past March the mainstream media has spewed a non-stop stream of misinformation that appears to be laser focused on generating maximum fear among the citizenry. But the facts and the science simply don’t support the grave picture painted of a deadly virus sweeping the land.Yes we do have a pandemic, but it’ a pandemic of ginned up pseudo-science masquerading as unbiased fact. Here are nine facts backed up with data, in many cases from the CDC itself that paints a very different picture from the fear and dread being relentlessly drummed into the brains of unsuspecting citizens.

1) The PCR test is practically useless

According to an article in the New York Times August 29th 2020 testing for the Covid-19 virus using the popular PCR method results in up to 90% of those tested showing positive results that are grossly misleading.

Officials in Massachusetts, New York and Nevada compiled testing data that revealed the PCR test can NOT determine the amount of virus in a sample. (viral load) The amount of virus in up to 90% of positive results turned out to be so miniscule that the patient was asymptomatic and posed no threat to others. So the positive Covid-19 tests are virtually meaningless.

2) A positive test is NOT a CASE

For some reason every positive Covid-19 test is immediately designated a CASE. As we saw in #1 above up to 90% of positive Covid-19 tests result in miniscule amounts of virus that do not sicken the subject. Historically only patients who demonstrated actual symptoms of an illness were considered a case. Publishing positive test results as “CASES” is grossly misleading and needlessly alarming.

3) The Centers for Disease Control dramatically lowered the Covid-19 Death Count

On August 30th the CDC released new data that showed only 6% of the deaths previously attributed to Covid-19 were due exclusively to the virus. The vast majority, 94%, may have had exposure to Covid-19 but also had preexisting illnesses like heart disease, obesity, hypertension, cancer and various respiratory illnesses. While they died with Covid-19 they did NOT die exclusively from Covid-19.

4) CDC reports Covid-19 Survival Rate over 99% 

The CDC updated their “Current Best Estimate” for Covid-19 survival on September 10th showing that over 99% of people exposed to the virus survived. Another way to say this is that less than 1% of the exposures are potentially life threatening. According to the CDC the vast majority of deaths attributed to Covid-19 were concentrated in the population over age 70, close to normal life expectancy.

5) CDC reveals 85% of Positive Covid cases wore face masks Always or Often 

In September of 2020 the CDC released the results of a study conducted in July where they discovered that 85% of the positive Covid test subjects reported wearing a cloth face mask always or often for two weeks prior to testing positive. The majority, 71% of the test subjects reported always wearing a cloth face mask and 14% reported often wearing a cloth face mask. The only rational conclusion from this study is that cloth face masks offer little if any protection from Covid-19 infection.

6) There are inexpensive, proven therapies for Covid-19

Harvey Risch, MD, PhD heads the Yale University School of Epidemiology. He authored “The Key to Defeating Covid-19 Already Exists. We Need to Start Using It”which was published in Newsweek Magazine July 23rd, 2020. Dr. Risch documents the proven effectiveness of treating patients diagnosed with Covid-19 using a combination of Hydroxychloroquine, an antibiotic like azithromycin and the nutritional supplement zinc. Medical Doctors across the globe have reported very positive results using this protocol particularly for early stage Covid patients.

7) The US Death Rate is NOT spiking

If Covid-19 was the lethal killer it’s made out to be one would reasonably expect to see a significant spike in the number of deaths reported. But that hasn’t happened. According to the CDC as of early May 2020 the total number of deaths in the US was 944,251 from January 1 – April 30th. This is actually slightly lower than the number of deaths during the same period in 2017 when 946,067 total deaths were reported.

8) Most Covid-19 Deaths Occur at the End of a normal Lifespan

According to the CDC as of 2017 US males can expect a normal lifespan of 76.1 years and females 81.1 years. A little over 80% of the suspected Covid-19 deaths have occurred in people over age 65. According to a June 28th New York Post article almost half of all Covid suspected deaths have occurred in Nursing Homes which predominately house people with preexisting health conditions and close to or past their normal life expectancy.

9) CDC Data Shows Minimal Covid Risk to Children and Young Adults

The CDC reported in their September 10th update that it’s estimated Infection Mortality Rate (IFR) for children age 0-19 was so low that 99.97% of those infected with the virus survived. For 20-49 year-olds the survival rate was almost as good at 99.98%. Even those 70 years-old and older had a survival rate of 94.6%. To put this in perspective the CDC data suggest that a child or young adult up to age 19 has a greater chance of death from some type of accident than they do from Covid-19.

Taken together it should be obvious that Covid-19 is pretty similar to typical flu viruses that sicken some people annually. The vast majority are able to successfully fight off the virus with their body’s natural immune system. Common sense precautions should be taken, particularly by those over age 65 that suffer from preexisting medical conditions.

The gross over reaction by government leaders to this illness is causing much more distress, physical, emotional and financial, than the virus ever could on its own. The bottom line is there is NO pandemic, just a typical flu season that has been wildly blown out of proportion by 24/7 media propaganda and enabled by the masses paralyzed by irrational fear.

State and local governments in particular have ignored the rights of the people and have instituted outrageous attacks on freedom and liberty that was bought and paid for by the blood and sacrifice of our forefathers.

Slowly the people are recognizing the great fraud perpetrated on them by bureaucrats and elected officials who have sworn to uphold rights and freedoms as spelled out in the US Constitution. The time has come to hold these criminals accountable by utilizing the legal system to bring them to justice.

Either we act now to preserve freedom and liberty for our children and future generations yet unborn, or we meekly submit to tyrants who crave more power and control. I will not comply!


Copyright © 2020 by RonPaul Institute. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit and a live link are given.
Please donate to the Ron Paul Institute

com/2020/07/10/coronavirus-why-everyone-was-wrong/  Beda M Stadler is the former director of the Institute for Immunology at the University of Bern, a biologist and professor emeritus.

Excerpt:

  1. Firstly, it was wrong to claim that this virus was novel.
  2. Secondly, It was even more wrong to claim that the population would not already have some immunity against this virus.
  3. Thirdly, it was the crowning of stupidity to claim that someone could have Covid-19 without any symptoms at all or even to pass the disease along without showing any symptoms whatsoever.

Robust SARS-CoV-2-Specific T-Cell Immunity is Maintained at 6 Months Following Primary Infection

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.11.01.362319v1

Robust SARS-CoV-2-specific T-cell immunity is maintained at 6 months following primary infection

Jianmin Zuo, Alex Dowell, Hayden Pearce, Kriti Verma, Heather Long, Jusnara Begum, Felicity Aiano, Zahin Amin-Chowdhury, Bassam Hallis, Lorrain Stapley, Ray Borrow, Ezra Linley, Shazaad Ahmad, Ben Parker, Alex Horsley, Gayatri Amirthalingam, Kevin Brown, Mary E Ramsay, Shamez Ladhani, Paul Moss

Abstract

The immune response to SARS-CoV-2 is critical in both controlling primary infection and preventing re-infection. However, there is concern that immune responses following natural infection may not be sustained and that this may predispose to recurrent infection. We analysed the magnitude and phenotype of the SARS-CoV-2 cellular immune response in 100 donors at six months following primary infection and related this to the profile of antibody level against spike, nucleoprotein and RBD over the previous six months. T-cell immune responses to SARS-CoV-2 were present by ELISPOT or ICS analysis in all donors and are characterised by predominant CD4+ T cell responses with strong IL-2 cytokine expression. Median T-cell responses were 50% higher in donors who had experienced an initial symptomatic infection indicating that the severity of primary infection establishes a set-point for cellular immunity that lasts for at least 6 months. The T-cell responses to both spike and nucleoprotein/membrane proteins were strongly correlated with the peak antibody level against each protein. The rate of decline in antibody level varied between individuals and higher levels of nucleoprotein-specific T cells were associated with preservation of NP-specific antibody level although no such correlation was observed in relation to spike-specific responses. In conclusion, our data are reassuring that functional SARS-CoV-2-specific T-cell responses are retained at six months following infection although the magnitude of this response is related to the clinical features of primary infection.

_________________

For more:  https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2020/08/17/robust-t-cell-immunity-in-convalescent-individuals-with-asymptomatic-or-mild-covid-19/

lymphocytes from 20–50% of unexposed donors display significant reactivity to SARS-CoV-2 antigen peptide pools1,2,3,4.

In conclusion, it is now established that SARS-CoV-2 pre-existing immune reactivity exists to some degree in the general population.

https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2020/07/10/coronavirus-why-everyone-was-wrong/  Excerpt:

  1. Firstly, it was wrong to claim that this virus was novel.

  2. Secondly, It was even more wrong to claim that the population would not already have some immunity against this virus.

  3. Thirdly, it was the crowning of stupidity to claim that someone could have Covid-19 without any symptoms at all or even to pass the disease along without showing any symptoms whatsoever.

https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2020/11/02/what-sage-has-got-wrong/  Excerpt:

SAGE made – and continues to make – two fatal errors in its assessment of the SAR-CoV-2 pandemic, rendering its predictions wildly inaccurate, with disastrous results. These errors led SAGE to conclude that the pandemic is still in its early stages, with the vast majority (93%) of the UK population remaining susceptible to infection and that, in the absence of more action, a very high number of deaths will occur.

  • Error 1: Assuming that 100% of the population was susceptible to the virus and that no pre-existing immunity existed.
  • Error 2: The belief that the percentage of the population that has been infected can be determined by surveying what fraction of the population has antibodies.
Both of these points run entirely counter to known science regarding viruses

http://

Sunetra Gupta Takes on Deepti Gurdasanti Regarding Herd Immunity

Although mainstream media have been terming Deepti Gurdasani an “epidemiologist” and “peer” of Sunetra Gupta, (who is a Professor of Theoretical Epidemiology at the University of Oxford), her LinkedIn profile [1] and academic page [2] indicate this may be a weak claim. Her present role is “Senior Lecturer Machine Learning”. In any case, her publications to date [2] appear irrelevant to SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19.   For more on viruses and herd immunity:  https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2020/10/31/covid-19-exposed/

Your Lyme Disease Test Results Are Negative, But Your Symptoms Say Otherwise

https://igenex.com/tick-talk/your-lyme-disease-test-results-are-negative-but-your-symptoms-say-otherwise/

Your Lyme Disease Test Results Are Negative, But Your Symptoms Say Otherwise 

What happens when everything adds up to a likely diagnosis of Lyme disease except the lab test results? It’s a question doctors face more often than many people realize.

Even if a patient has potentially been exposed to ticks and demonstrates symptoms that could be caused by Lyme disease, many doctors will still rely on laboratory tests to definitively determine whether a patient does or does not have the disease. And that can have serious, even deadly consequences for patients who have Lyme disease yet don’t start treatment because of negative lab test results.

So why would an infected patient test negative for Lyme disease? It turns out there are a number of reasons that could trigger false negative test results. The following article highlights some of the issues that may be at fault.

Be sure to share these potential concerns and considerations with your doctor when discussing diagnostic testing options for Lyme disease.

Why Your Lyme Disease Test Results May Be Negative Despite Persistent Symptoms
1. The test isn’t designed to detect the exact disease-causing bacteria you have.

A number of Lyme disease lab tests are designed to identify only a few species of the Borrelia bacteria that can cause Lyme disease. In the United States, for example, many tests are only designed to detect Borrelia burgdorferi, leaving out many other species that are less common yet still known to cause the disease in humans, including the recently discovered B. mayonii.

In fact, a recent internal study showed exactly how easily tests can miss infections from species other than B. burgdorferi. IGeneX researchers tested 43 samples – all positive on IGeneX Lyme ImmunoBlot tests – using the more limited Western blots prepared from the following species of Borrelia:

  • burgdorferi B31
  • burgdorferi B297
  • mayonii
  • californiensis
  • afzelii
  • garinii
  • spielmanii
  • valensiana

When only a B. burgdorferi B31 Western Blot was performed, only 14 of the 43 Lyme ImmunoBlot-positive samples were Western-Blot-positive. In other words, the B. burgdoferi Western Blot missed 29 of the 43 infections. However, when all eight Western Blots were performed, the remaining twenty-nine samples were detected.

This inability of many lab tests to cast a wide enough net of detection could result in false negative results for patients infected with different strains of disease-causing Borrelia.

2. Your test was not sensitive enough.

Many doctors and labs adhere diligently to the two-step tests – for Lyme disease that are approved by the FDA and recommended by the CDC, which involves an initial enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) followed by a Western blot test. Both tests are designed to detect antibodies in the patient’s blood to the B. burgdorferi bacteria and, according the CDC, both must be positive for a patient to be diagnosed with Lyme disease.

However, recent studies have raised concerns about the accuracy of these tests, particularly the ELISA, which has been found to have a poor sensitivity rate, or ability to detect antibodies in the blood. Recent studies, in fact, report that the ELISA and Western blot can miss up to 60 percent of well-defined Lyme disease cases.

3. Indirect testing can be more limited than direct testing.

Both tests used in the CDC recommended two-step process are indirect methods of diagnosis—meaning they do not detect the actual Lyme disease bacteria itself but, instead, measure the body’s immune-system response to the presence of disease-causing bacteria. However, a number of factors can prevent the body from producing antibodies, including the following:

  • Timing: If conducted in the early stages of Lyme disease, a patient’s body may not have developed a sufficient enough number of antibodies to detect. This issue can be compounded by the lack of sensitivity of the ELISA test.
  • Immunity Suppression: The saliva of infected ticks contains specific immune-suppressing components that can delay or prevent the activation of a person’s immune response. These components are designed to prevent the body from effectively “fighting off” the Lyme disease-causing bacteria so it has a chance to take hold.
  • Antibiotics: If patients are taking antibiotics at the time of the Lyme disease test, they may not produce enough antibodies to be detected by the test.
  • Modified Form of Borrelia: In some patients, the Borreliabacteria will transform into a cyst, which will prevent the body’s immune system from producing antibodies.
  • Weakened Immune System: False negatives can also result in patients in whom the immune system is weakened or compromised due to coinfection with another illness.
  • Seronegative patients: These patients do not produce antibodies.

Direct testing methods can eliminate some of these variables because they don’t rely on the body’s response to a pathogen but rather look for the presence of the disease-causing bacteria directly. Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assays, for example, are used to identify Lyme bacteria in the patient’s blood or urine.

4. Different labs can produce different results.

When it comes to testing for Lyme disease, the quality of the lab conducting the test can also affect the reliability of the results. That’s because different labs use different protocols and techniques to perform each test. Those with more advanced procedures and capabilities provide higher levels of accuracy and precision across various types of tests.

By improving diagnostic precision, clinicians are not only able to more accurately detect Lyme infection but, in some cases, the specific stage of a patient’s Lyme disease infection.

5. Co-infections cause complexities.

Common Lyme disease co-infections include Babesiosis, Powassan, Bartonellosis, Ehrlichiosis, Anaplasmosis, and Rickettsiosis.

In some cases, they may not have Lyme disease at all, but one of these other illnesses instead. Depending on a patient’s symptoms, doctors should consider the potential of a co-infection as a factor when all symptoms point to Lyme disease but test results are negative.

6. TBRF can cause a negative result.

The disease Tick-Borne Relapsing Fever is caused by a similar but totally separate species of Borrelia to the bacterium that causes Lyme disease, and also causes Lyme-like symptoms. However, if a patient with TBRF takes a Lyme disease test, the TBRF will not show up, causing the Lyme test to be negative even though the patient is still sick with an infection.

An early and accurate diagnosis is key

For patients and doctors, being aware of the many factors that can influence Lyme disease lab tests can better inform your perspective and reliance on the results. Doctors should consider multiple types of tests, a panel approach, to increase the chances of detecting the disease.

Additionally, they should always consider the patient’s  Lyme disease test results in conjunction with their current or previously reported symptoms. Remember, Lyme disease causes symptoms such as fever, chills, headache, fatigue, muscle and joint aches, and swollen lymph nodes. (An erythema migrans or “EM” rash may also appear, but note – at least 20% of patients don’t experience this rash at all.)

Finally, doctors should also consider risk factors that heighten someone’s probability of exposure to ticks or regions where Lyme disease and other tick-borne diseases are prevalent.

For more information on getting the proper diagnosis and treatment for your tick-borne disease, read the IGeneX blogs The Importance of Getting the Right Diagnosis and How to Find Doctors Who Can Help with Your Tick-Borne Disease.


Additional Resources

_______________________

**Comment**

More great information here on why serology testing doesn’t work:  https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2020/12/15/lyme-disease-is-a-small-vessel-disease-dr-klemann/

The problems of Lyme/MSIDS testing have been the bane of patients for over 40 years and other studies have shown an even poorer outcome of current testing than what was mentioned in this article:  https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2020/03/01/study-cdcs-2-tier-lyme-testing-inaccurate-in-more-than-70-of-cases/

There is also a law-suit on current testing listed in the comment section of this article:  https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2020/05/27/letter-to-cdc-dr-beard-why-isnt-direct-detection-of-lyme-disease-a-priority/

There has been wide-spread suppression of direct testing for Lyme disease putting patients in a juggernaut of unbelievable proportions.

For more:  https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2020/05/06/more-cdc-lip-service-on-lyme-testing/

https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2019/03/07/yet-another-worthless-study-showing-2-tiered-lyme-testing-can-not-rule-infection-out/

Lyme Disease Awareness Survey

https://s.surveyplanet.com/vpzrV4DuE  Go here for survey

Lexy Zazvrskey, college student and public policy intern, has created a survey to receive anonymous feedback about Lyme disease awareness for a college course. For the most beneficial results, please take the survey without looking up any information to answer the questions and use your prior knowledge, if any, to answer.

All responses are anonymous.

Thank you in advance!