Archive for the ‘Activism’ Category

Christmas 2021 Time Warp: The End of The Pandemic Will Not Be Televised & Stigmatizing the Unvaccinated Isn’t Justified

https://www.bmj.com/content/375/bmj-2021-068094

Christmas 2021: Time Warp

The end of the pandemic will not be televised

BMJ 2021; 375 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj-2021-068094 (Published 14 December 2021) Cite this as: BMJ 2021;375:e068094

  1. David Robertson, doctoral candidate1,
  2. Peter Doshi, associate professor2

Dashboards of pandemic statistics have dominated screens and helped to track covid-19, but David Robertson and Peter Doshi explain why they might not be enough to define its end

As the year 2021 started, the covid-19 pandemic seemed to be receding. Discussions and predictions about “opening up,” a return to “normal,” and achieving herd immunity were in the air.1234 But for many, optimism receded as cases and deaths surged in India, Brazil, and elsewhere. Attention turned to SARS-CoV-2 virus variants—most recently, the emergence of omicron. Just as the end seemed to be on the horizon, it was interrupted by a foreboding that the pandemic could be a long way from over.56

Unlike any previous pandemic, covid-19 has been closely tracked through dashboards that aim to show the real time movement and effect of coronavirus; they track laboratory testing metrics, hospital and intensive care admissions, transmission rates, and, most recently, vaccine doses delivered. These dashboards—with their panels of numbers, statistics, epidemic curves, and heat maps—have dominated our televisions, computers, and smartphones. At their core is the allure of objectivity and data to grasp onto in the midst of uncertainty and fear. They have helped populations conceptualise a need for rapid containment and control,7 directing public sentiment, fuelling pressure for countermeasures, and maintaining an aura of emergency.7 They offer a sense of control when cases are coming down following certain countermeasures but can also drive a sense of helplessness and impending catastrophe when cases rise.

Problems defining pandemic endings

There is no universal definition of the epidemiological parameters of the end of a pandemic. By what metric, then, will we know that it is actually over? The World Health Organization declared the covid-19 pandemic, but who will tell us when it’s over?

The ubiquity of dashboards has helped create a sense that the pandemic will be over when the dashboard indicators all reach either zero (infections, cases, deaths) or 100 (percentage vaccinated). However, respiratory pandemics of the past century show that endings are not clear cut, and that pandemic closure is better understood as occurring with the resumption of social life, not the achievement of specific epidemiological targets.89

Respiratory pandemics of the past 130 years have been followed by annual seasonal waves fueled by viral endemicity that typically continues until the next pandemic.10 What goes down comes back up, and the difficulty in dating the end of a pandemic is reflected in the historical and epidemiological literature. Although many scholars describe the “Spanish flu” as occurring across three waves from “1918 to 1919,” references to the “1918 to 1920” pandemic are also abundant, usually capturing what some call a “fourth wave.”11 Similarly, the mid-century “Asian flu” pandemic is generally described as a two wave event from 1957 to 1958, but others include a third wave, placing the pandemic’s end in 1959.12

This variability in dating historical pandemics highlights the imprecise nature of using death rates to determine, even retrospectively, the “end” of a pandemic and the start of the inter-pandemic period. For example, CDC today states that around 100 000 Americans died in each of the 1957 and 1968 influenza pandemics.1314 But these estimates include deaths taking place at times most would consider to be between pandemics (1957-1960 and 1968-1972, respectively).1516

The notion, reinforced by dashboards, that a pandemic ends when cases or deaths drop to zero is at odds with the historical evidence that substantial influenza morbidity and mortality continues to occur, season after season, between pandemics.

In the inter-pandemic season of 1928-29, for example, over 100 000 excess deaths related to influenza A/H1N1 (the 1918 pandemic virus) are estimated to have occurred in the United States in a population one third the size of today’s.17 Furthermore, it can be challenging to discern which deaths can be attributed to the pandemic and which belong in the inter-pandemic period. The distinctions are not trivial, as excess mortality is the classic metric for assessing severity.1618 Inter-pandemic years have sometimes had higher death tolls than the pandemic seasons that followed, such as the 1946-47 season that preceded the 1957-58 pandemic season (fig 1).19 Hence, a pandemic’s end cannot be defined by the absence of excess deaths associated with the pandemic pathogen.

Fig 1
Fig 1

Monthly all cause death rate in the US, with arrows and bold dates indicating the beginning of pandemics, Jan 1900 to Sept 2021. The red line indicates a 12 month moving average. Note that from 1905 to 1909, the US Bureau of the Census provided only annual data (not monthly)

Interruption and resumption of social life

Another way we might declare the end of a pandemic is by considering the imposition and lifting of public health measures or restrictions. Measures used in previous pandemics have been more fleeting and less intrusive than those that have been used in covid-19. Even for the catastrophic Spanish flu—which killed three times more people per population in the US than covid-19, with an average age of death of 28 years20—lives returned to normal in a short time, perhaps only because there was no other option. In an era before the internet, food delivery apps, and video meetings, widespread and prolonged social distancing was simply not possible, a situation that remains the case today for many workers deemed “essential.” Indeed, a brief look at past pandemics in the US shows there is no fixed or deterministic relation between the pathogenicity of a virus and the intensity and longevity of public health interventions.

By comparison with previous pandemics, the covid-19 pandemic has produced unprecedented disruption to social life. People have long experienced the tragedy of sickness and unexpected death in pandemic and non-pandemic years, but the covid-19 pandemic is historically unique in the extent to which the interruption and resumption of social life has been so closely tied to epidemiological metrics (box 1).

Contrasting historical approaches to pandemic respiratory viruses

1918 “Spanish flu”

In 1918, the pandemic’s first wave was mild and “attracted relatively little attention.”11 In response to the second wave, which “scorched its way around the globe,” some cities in the US implemented non-pharmaceutical interventions such as school closures and restrictions on public gatherings. Most countermeasures were relaxed within two to eight weeks, and the disruption of social life was relatively short lived.21

John Barry, a leading historian studying the 1918 pandemic, explained: “the whole thing was very swift.” Unlike covid-19, he said, “the stress was not continuous,” noting that many places experienced “several months of relative normalcy” between waves.22 New York and Chicago, the country’s two largest cities, never officially closed their schools despite Chicago schools reaching an absenteeism rate of nearly 50%. Where schools closed, they stayed shut for a median of four weeks (range 1-10 weeks).23

1957 “Asian flu”

The 1957 “Asian flu” pandemic reached American shores around mid-year. Over the course of the next nine months, which included two waves in late 1957 and early 1958, an estimated “80 million Americans were bedridden with respiratory disease.”24 In the first wave about 60% of schoolchildren were sick, and rates of absenteeism reached 20-30%.25 Yet even when it was estimated that 40% of pupils in some New York schools were absent with influenza, the city’s superintendent of schools advised that there was “no cause for alarm and, on the advice of the Health Department, we have curtailed no activities.”26 By late October, college football matches around the country were being cancelled because many players were ill. Team managers scrambled, lining up last minute replacements, and ultimately no major contests were cancelled.27

As during the Spanish flu, the health effect of the new H2N2 virus did not end when the 1957 pandemic was “over.” In 1960, Newsweek reported that “without the fanfare of two years ago [the] Asian-flu virus was quietly picking off almost everyone it missed the first time around.”28 Early that year it was estimated that 20% of schoolchildren in Los Angeles— around 120 000 children—and over 15% of industrial workers were absent with influenza.28 Despite their size, these epidemiological impacts did not usher in a sense that society had slipped back into a pandemic.

1968 “Hong Kong flu”

A decade later another pandemic virus arrived that officials later estimated killed one million globally. But its impact on public health interventions and social life was minimal. Historian John Barry writes that for the US, “the episode was not significantly deadlier than a typical bad flu season,” noting that “few people who lived through it even knew it occurred.”29 Historian Mark Honigsbaum points out that “while at the height of the outbreak in December, 1968, the New York Times described the pandemic as “one of the worst in the nation’s history,” there were few school closures and businesses, for the most part, continued to operate as normal.”30Box 1

Dashboards—fighting or fuelling the pandemic?

While visual depictions of epidemics have existed for centuries,31 covid-19 is the first one in which real time dashboards have saturated and structured the public’s experience.

Some historians have observed that pandemics do not conclude when disease transmission ends “but rather when, in the attention of the general public and in the judgment of certain media and political elites who shape that attention, the disease ceases to be newsworthy.”8 Pandemic dashboards provide endless fuel, ensuring the constant newsworthiness of the covid-19 pandemic, even when the threat is low. In doing so, they might prolong the pandemic by curtailing a sense of closure or a return to pre-pandemic life.

Deactivating or disconnecting ourselves from the dashboards may be the single most powerful action towards ending the pandemic.

This is not burying one’s head in the sand. Rather, it is recognising that no single or joint set of dashboard metrics can tell us when the pandemic is over.

The end of the pandemic will not be brought to you

History suggests that the end of the pandemic will not simply follow the attainment of herd immunity or an official declaration, but rather it will occur gradually and unevenly as societies cease to be all consumed by the pandemic’s shocking metrics. Pandemic ending is more of a question of lived experience, and thus is more of a sociological phenomenon than a biological one. And thus dashboards—which do not measure mental health, educational impact, and the denial of close social bonds—are not the tool that will tell us when the pandemic will end. Indeed, considering how societies have come to use dashboards, they may be a tool that helps prevent a return to normal. Pandemics—at least respiratory viral pandemics—simply do not end in a manner amenable to being displayed on dashboards. Far from a dramatic “end,” pandemics gradually fade as society adjusts to living with the new disease agent and social life returns to normal.

As an extraordinary period in which social life was upturned, the covid-19 pandemic will be over when we turn off our screens and decide that other issues are once again worthy of our attention.

Unlike its beginning, the end of the pandemic will not be televised.

_________________

**Comment**

A voice of reason in an insane world.  Turn off your TV.

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(21)02243-1/fulltext

COVID-19: Stigmatising the Unvaccinated is Not Justified

Published: November 20, 2021DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(21)02243-1
In the USA and Germany, high-level officials have used the term pandemic of the unvaccinated, suggesting that people who have been vaccinated are not relevant in the epidemiology of COVID-19. Officials’ use of this phrase might have encouraged one scientist to claim that “the unvaccinated threaten the vaccinated for COVID-19”.But this view is far too simple.
There is increasing evidence that vaccinated individuals continue to have a relevant role in transmission. In Massachusetts, USA, a total of 469 new COVID-19 cases were detected during various events in July, 2021, and 346 (74%) of these cases were in people who were fully or partly vaccinated, 274 (79%) of whom were symptomatic. Cycle threshold values were similarly low between people who were fully vaccinated (median 22·8) and people who were unvaccinated, not fully vaccinated, or whose vaccination status was unknown (median 21·5), indicating a high viral load even among people who were fully vaccinated.
In the USA, a total of 10,262 COVID-19 cases were reported in vaccinated people by April 30, 2021, of whom 2725 (26·6%) were asymptomatic, 995 (9·7%) were hospitalised, and 160 (1·6%) died.In Germany, 55·4% of symptomatic COVID-19 cases in patients aged 60 years or older were in fully vaccinated individuals,and this proportion is increasing each week. In Münster, Germany, new cases of COVID-19 occurred in at least 85 (22%) of 380 people who were fully vaccinated or who had recovered from COVID-19 and who attended a nightclub.
People who are vaccinated have a lower risk of severe disease but are still a relevant part of the pandemic. It is therefore wrong and dangerous to speak of a pandemic of the unvaccinated.
Historically, both the USA and Germany have engendered negative experiences by stigmatising parts of the population for their skin colour or religion. I call on high-level officials and scientists to stop the inappropriate stigmatisation of unvaccinated people, who include our patients, colleagues, and other fellow citizens, and to put extra effort into bringing society together.  (See link for sources)
__________________
**Comment**
Wouldn’t that make the perfect Christmas present – bringing society together rather than pushing hate?
Meanwhile, our commander in Chief gave a stark prediction of severe illness and death for the unvaccinated.  He must not have gotten the memo that the “vaccinated” can be just as sick, are driving viral mutations, and are even dying from COVID. The only difference is that the unvaccinated aren’t dying from the COVID shots.  The same can not be said for the “vaccinated.”  The unvaccinated also have long-lasting and robust immunity after infection.  The same can not be said for the “vaccinated.”
And the following quote is a pure lie:

“There’s good news; if you’re vaccinated and you have your booster shot, you’re protected from severe illness and death,” he said.  – President Biden

Sadly, a school district in NY sent an email warning parents of sudden cardiac arrests in students grades K-12.  And why might that be?  Could it have anything to do with pushing an unproven, experimental, fast-tracked injection rubber-stamped by the FDA upon children who rarely become seriously ill from COVID, and the fact there have been 1,784 reports of myocarditis or pericarditis among people under the age of 30 after these injections, which only represents approximately 1% of true adverse events.  Or how about the following ad for some additional peer-pressure?

http://

Best Gift – Child

Category:

Activism, Viruses

Lab Leak “Most Likely Source Of COVID. Investigator Funded by Chinese Communist Party Removed From Corrupt WHO Team Now Calling on ‘Justice’

http://  Approx. 6 Min

Gravitas: Lab leak “most likely” source of Covid-19, Researchers Tell British MPs

Dec. 16, 2021

Researcher Dr. Alina Chan told British MPs that a lab leak is “the most likely” source of the Wuhan virus. She also asked the Lancet to share the research it received from Chinese scientists. Palki Sharma tells you how the lab leak theory is back in focus.  Researchers raising COVID the lab leak theory are branded as being “anti-science,” as they are departing from the accepted narrative.

“We know now that this virus has a very unique feature, called the furin cleavage site that makes it the pandemic pathogen it is. So, without this feature, there’s no way this would be causing this pandemic.

“Only recently in September did a proposal get leaked showing that scientists from the EcoHealth Alliance were in collaboration with the Wuhan Institute of Virology developing this pipeline for inserting novel furin cleavage sites, these genetic modifications, into SARS-like viruses in the lab.”- Dr. Chan

Chan stressed that the burden was on the scientists in question to show that their work did not result in the creation of SARS-COV2, the virus behind COVID-19, and that an investigation of documents being made available by US-based EcoHealth Alliance could hold the key.  Source

“We also need to know to deter bad actors who are watching this episode and thinking that unleashing a pandemic is something they could get away with.” – Richard Horton, Editor-in-Chief of ‘The Lancet’

The news video states the WHO investigators completely ignored the lab leak angle.  Dr. Chan followed the investigation closely and states that the investigators went into a room and simply asked scientists in front of Chinese officials if they had anything to do with creating this virus and then voted on it. 

https://thenationalpulse.com/news/scalp-koopmans-removed-from-who-team/

SCALP: COVID Investigator Funded By Chinese Communist Party Removed From WHO Team Following National Pulse Exposé.

Marion Koopmans – who served on the World Health Organization’s first COVID-19 origins investigation team – appears to have been removed from the body’s new “effort” to trace the source of the virus following the National Pulse revealing her long-standing ties to the Chinese Communist Party.

Koopmans appears to have suffered a similar fate to fellow World Health Organization (WHO) Peter Daszak – an American researcher whose Wuhan Institute of Virology collaborations were funded by Anthony Fauci.  (See link for article)

________________

Summary:

  • Koopmans was listed as one of 28 members on WHO’s Scientific Advisory Group for the Origins of Novel Pathogens (SAGO)
  • SAGO’s updated member list fails to include Koopmans as a contributor to the effort to allegedly uncover the origins of COVID-19
  • The National Pulse unearthed her role on a scientific advisory board of the Centers for Disease Control of Guangdong China
  • She has also authored scientific research papers and journal articles supported by Chinese Communist Party grants
  • Not surprisingly, Koopmans became incensed when the head of the WHO called the first investigation’s findings “premature”

Hypocritically, Koopmans is calling on “justice” for online threats she is receiving while she apparently has no trouble with the injustice she has allowed by her conflicts of interest which completely thwarted an investigation into a so-called ‘pandemic’ which has shut the world down and caused needless deaths.  Meanwhile, Dr. Evil, the doctor who has no qualms funding research that forced children to ingest harmful and dangerous chemotherapy drugs, did abominable experiments on dogs, experiments torturing monkeys, and putting fetal scalps on rats, and then taking American tax-dollars to fund illegal ‘gain of function’ research to make coronaviruses more virulent in humans, is calling for comrade Koopmans’ protection.  He too has no issue with conflicts of interest and has many.

Did anyone ponder the fact that when injustice is allowed to blatantly flourish, people just might get a wee bit frustrated?

How about these crooks go to jail?  That would probably end all the threats.

https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2021/11/24/who-institution-of-corruption

The WHO Is an Institution of Corruption

Analysis by Dr. Joseph Mercola Fact Checked
Nov. 24, 2021

Video interview of Wolfgang Wodarg

Story at-a-glance 

  • Fundamental corruption at the World Health Organization (WHO) contributed to manufacturing a “test pandemic”
  • Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg, former head of health at the Council of Europe, explains that a pandemic used to be associated with widespread severe illness and death, but by changing the definition, removing the severity and high mortality criteria, WHO can now make a pandemic whenever it wants
  • COVID-19 was a “test” pandemic, not a virus pandemic, because PCR tests may give a positive result when it detects fragments of coronaviruses that have been around for 20 years, a fragment of virus too small to make you ill or a fragment of COVID-19 that was there weeks ago
  • The mass COVID-19 shot campaign is riddled with conflicts of interest at a fundamental level, and these conflicts are putting people’s lives at risk by putting vaccine production ahead of disease prevention
  • As Wodarg noted, if you want to earn money producing vaccines, you need new markets in which to use them, and new diseases so you can sell your vaccine

Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg, an internal medicine doctor and former head of health at the Council of Europe, spoke with Planet Lockdown on the fundamental corruption at the World Health Organization and how it contributed to manufacturing a “test pandemic.”1

The seeds were sown more than a decade ago during the 2009 H1N1 (swine flu) pandemic. In 2010, Wodarg accused pharmaceutical companies of influencing WHO’s pandemic declaration, calling swine flu a “false pandemic” that was driven by Big Pharma, which cashed in on the health scare.2

According to Wodarg, the swine flu pandemic was “one of the greatest medicine scandals of the century.”3 As noted by Planet Lockdown, Wodarg, then a member of the German Parliament, “knew something wasn’t right when 800 cases in Mexico was declared a pandemic”:4

“He dug into the issue and discovered a hornet’s nest of lies and corruption inside the WHO. He floored a bill called Fake Pandemic and did much to deflate that fake scare at the time, to the consternation of the corrupt functionaries of these institutions.”

With a Definition Change, WHO Could Create Pandemic Anytime

Secret agreements were made between Germany, Great Britain, Italy and France with the pharmaceutical industry before the H1N1 pandemic began, which stated that they would purchase H1N1 flu vaccinations — but only if a pandemic level 6 was declared by WHO.

Six weeks before the pandemic was declared, no one at WHO was worried about the virus, but the media was nonetheless exaggerating the dangers.5 Then, in the month leading up to the 2009 H1N1 pandemic, WHO changed the official definition of pandemic, removing the severity and high mortality criteria and leaving the definition of a pandemic as “a worldwide epidemic of a disease.”6

This switch in definition allowed WHO to declare swine flu a pandemic after only 144 people had died from the infection worldwide.7 While the swine flu scare was eventually deflated, this wasn’t so with COVID-19, even though the real signs of a pandemic are absent. As Wodarg explained, it used to be that a pandemic was associated with widespread severe illness and death, but that’s no longer the case:8

“There was an explanation of what a pandemic is and it always was going with many, many people dying from infections. Many severe diseases, hospitals being overcrowded. It was such a catastrophe … and everyone in the street would notice that there is a pandemic because the neighbors would get ill, the people at work would get ill. In the bus, you would see people coughing.

In a pandemic … it’s something each of us would experience. This was a pandemic. And WHO changed it.”

By removing the severity and high mortality criteria, WHO could make a pandemic whenever they wanted. “The pandemic is just a picture spread by the media, making us afraid. But what the people experience is not what we used to understand when we used the word epidemic or pandemic,” he said.9 Now, the word pandemic has to do with fear, not illnesses. “It’s a brand for fear.”

COVID-19 Is a ‘Test’ Pandemic

If there hasn’t been a true pandemic, in the old definition of the word, then how are the media and government getting all of these high case numbers for COVID-19? This is due to the PCR test.

“It was accepted by WHO, and they said when the test is positive, we have a case of COVID-19. And this is how they started counting the cases,” Wodarg said. “What they counted was the activity of testing. And the more they tested, the more cases they found.”10

Positive reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) tests are not designed to be used as a diagnostic tool as they cannot distinguish between inactive (noninfectious) viruses and “live” or reproductive ones.11

Inactive and reproductive viruses are not interchangeable in terms of infectivity. If you have a nonreproductive virus in your body, you will not get sick from it and you cannot spread it to others. Further, many if not most laboratories amplify the RNA collected far too many times, which results in healthy people testing “positive.”

The higher the cycle threshold (CT) — i.e., the number of amplification cycles used to detect RNA particles — the greater the chance of a false positive. While any CT over 35 is deemed scientifically unjustifiable,12,13 the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommended running PCR tests at a CT of 40.14

A test known as the Corman-Drosten paper and tests recommended by the World Health Organization were set to 45 cycles.15,16,17 When labs use these excessive cycle thresholds, you end up with a grossly overestimated number of positive tests, so what we’re really dealing with is a “casedemic“18,19 — an epidemic of false positives.

Wodarg says COVID-19 “was a ‘test’ pandemic. It was not a virus pandemic,”20 because PCR tests may give a positive result when it detects coronaviruses that have been around for 20 years. He explained:21

“The SARS viruses, they are very long RNA viruses. There are 30,000 letters in this genetic information. The PCR test only takes a very small part of them, or two parts of them. So two words out of a whole book … before you start testing, you can already estimate how often this test will be positive. If you take a sequence which is in many varieties of viruses, you will have many positive tests.”

The PCR test only tests for certain sequences of the RNA. It gives a positive result when it only finds a small fragment; it doesn’t need the whole virus. If the virus was there weeks ago or you have a touch of the virus present, but no infection, it can still test positive and add another COVID-19 “case,” even though you’re not actually sick.

COVID-19 Shot Conflicts of Interest Putting Lives at Risk

The mass COVID-19 shot campaign is riddled with conflicts of interest at a fundamental level, and these conflicts are putting people’s lives at risk by putting vaccine production ahead of disease prevention. As Wodarg noted, if you want to earn money producing vaccines, you need new markets in which to use them, and new diseases so you can sell your vaccine.

“This is a very serious matter,” he said, which has nothing to do with health or hygiene — “it has to do with criminology”:22

“When they want to sell their vaccines, they need people who are ill so they can make clinical studies. So when there is an outbreak, and they want to make clinical studies with their vaccine to protect people against this disease just breaking out … there is a conflict of interest.

If you have normal ways to stop the infection, with hygiene, with distancing, with isolating, with consulting with people, giving advice how to behave … if you stop the disease quickly, you’re not able to have enough cases for your study.”

So we have a “pandemic” that’s based on a test that doesn’t prove infection, but what it did do was make people afraid. And that fear was the basis for saying we need a vaccine. The shots, however, aren’t effective.

In November 2020, Pfizer, in a joint venture with Germany-based BioNTech, announced that their mRNA-based injection was “more than 90% effective” in a Phase 3 trial.23 This does not mean that 90% of people who get injected will be protected from COVID-19, however, as it’s based on relative risk reduction (RRR).

The absolute risk reduction (ARR) for the jab is less than 1%. “Although the RRR considers only participants who could benefit from the jab, the absolute risk reduction (ARR), which is the difference between attack rates with and without a jab, considers the whole population. ARRs tend to be ignored because they give a much less impressive effect size than RRRs,” researchers wrote in The Lancet Microbe in April 2021.24

Nonetheless, the jabs received emergency use authorization, which has paved the way for vaccine mandates and other assaults to your freedom and health.

Will Vaxxed People End Up Sicker?

The lack of effectiveness is one key reason why Wodarg believes most people do not need a COVID-19 jab. The other reasons include serious risks of adverse events from these experimental jabs, and the fact that, Wodarg says, cross-immunity exists due to multiple previous exposures to other coronaviruses in most people.25 “The genetically produced so-called vaccines are not necessary, because we have immunity.”26

As he stated, your immune system is well-equipped to protect you, and new viral exposures each year help to keep this complex system updated. Risk increases when you avoid regular viral exposures to keep your immune system ready:27

“Those new ones that come, this is some work for your immune system to get an update, but it doesn’t make most people very sick, only in a few, rare cases.

When we are not trained, or we didn’t have contact with viruses for a very long time, because we were isolated somewhere alone, not having our grandchildren on our knees, not experiencing any training — it’s the same when you are out of training and you suddenly have to climb a high mountain. Maybe your heart goes into failure and you die — maybe you die when you have contact with something your immune system has forgotten.”

The spike protein that the shots stimulate your cells to produce is also deeply concerning, since it’s toxic:28

“Vaccines are made to stimulate our cells, we don’t know which cells, or where the injection goes, but those cells that get contact with the vaccine, they produce spike proteins, which are very toxic. Normally, those spike proteins don’t come into the blood, this is why we don’t get seriously ill from coronaviruses. When you inject them, you bypass the natural immunity.”

This is a likely reason why there are so many side effects associated with the shots, as injecting these spike proteins is unnatural and very dangerous. It’s since been revealed that the spike protein on its own is enough to cause inflammation and damage to the vascular system, even independent of a virus.29

Further, Wodarg says, once your body has been injected with the spike protein, it may have an overreactive response the next time it comes in contact with a typical coronavirus, potentially leading to a dangerous cytokine storm.

When counting COVID-19 cases this winter, Wodarg believes it is important to ask whether the person received a COVID-19 shot or not.

“I am quite sure,” he said, “that those people vaccinated will be the severe cases and that those who are not vaccinated will just experience a normal flu.”30

What’s more, once you’re vaccinated, they have all your data — the batch of the shot, the date and time. So, you’re essentially part of a clinical trial that you’ve never agreed to, and there’s no transparency about the risks involved. Wodarg believes that the pandemic “emergency” is being prolonged from month to month because it helps their injection studies, even as there are massive conflicts of interest involved.

If you listen to the media, you’ll be brainwashed that the jab is necessary, but don’t fall for the hype, including that getting the shot will earn you your freedom back. Wodarg said:31

“You won’t be free to travel. You will be controlled nevertheless, because the next virus already comes, the next jab is waiting. They want to perpetuate this game with us, with vaccines and with vaccine passports. It’s just the perfect control by this market and it has nothing to do with health. So we have to stop it.”

____________________

**Comment**

History repeats itself.

You may remember Wodarg’s name from this March 2020 post where he stated that politics are driving the COVID ‘pandemic’ – not science:  https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2020/03/17/stunning-insights-into-the-corona-panic-by-dr-wolfgang-wodarg/

For a review of the Swine Flu Scam that killed 144 people worldwide:

Category:

Activism, Viruses

Narrative Crumbling: Big Pharma Exec Admits Gene Therapy Marketed As “Vaccines.” FOIAs – Fauci’s Illegal Bioweapons Schemes. More Emails Detail Propaganda. Fully “Vaxxed” Getting Omicron

https://www.lifezette.com/2021/12/big-pharma-exec-admits-gene-therapy-marketed-as-vaccines-as-they-push-depopulation-with-gates-klaus

Big Pharma Exec Admits Gene Therapy Marketed As Vaccines As They Push Depopulation With Gates & Klaus

Depopulation fanatics want to force you to inject drugs for your health?

By

Stefan Oelrich, president of Bayer’s Pharmaceuticals Division, admitted to international “experts” this week that the mRNA COVID-19 shots are indeed “cell and gene therapy” marketed as “vaccines” in order to get trust from the public.

Oelrich said this while speaking at the World Health Summit, which took place in Berlin back in October.

“We are really taking that leap [to drive innovation] – us as a company, Bayer – in cell and gene therapies … ultimately, the mRNA vaccines are an example for that cell and gene therapy. I always like to say: if we had surveyed two years ago in the public – ‘would you be willing to take a gene or cell therapy and inject it into your body?’ – we probably would have had a 95% refusal rate,” Oelrich said.  (See link for article)

Category:

Activism, vaccines, Viruses

FDA’s Suspicious Timing on ‘Wanting More Information’ on NAC – Which Helps COVID & Lyme/MSIDS

https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2021/12/15/fda-wants-more-information-on-nac

FDA Wants More Info on NAC

Analysis by Dr. Joseph Mercola Fact Checked

December 15, 2021

n acetylcysteine

Story at-a-glance

  • The Council for Responsible Nutrition (CRN) and the Natural Products Association (NPA) have filed separate citizen petitions with the FDA requesting that the agency reverse their position on NAC; the agency is now asking for more information on the 58-year-old supplement
  • According to some legal experts, the actions taken by the FDA are not legal under U.S. code Title 21. The FDA has used the exclusion provision three other times, all of which financially benefited the pharmaceutical industry
  • While past actions may have opened the door to the most recent attack against NAC, it is not difficult to understand why the FDA chooses now to target NAC, when it has demonstrated effective action against COVID-19
  • Evidence suggests those with a glutathione deficiency have worse outcomes with COVID-19. NAC is a precursor to glutathione and may help lower the risk of severe disease
  • NAC can be part of your early at-home treatment that is crucial to lowering the severity of the illness and reducing the risk of long-haul symptoms

N-acetylcysteine (NAC) is a powerful antioxidant that was approved as a drug in September 1963.1 Since that time it’s been used as a nutritional supplement that is not found in natural sources.2 NAC contains the amino acid cysteine, which is a precursor to glutathione, also called “the master antioxidant.”3

Glutathione is made of three amino acids — glutamic acid, glycine and cysteine.4 However, NAC is only available in supplement form. The precursors to NAC can be found in foods that are high in cysteine, which include pork, beef, chicken, eggs, dates and sunflower seeds.5

NAC is used in prescription form as an antidote for acetaminophen-induced hepatotoxicity.6 It is also a powerful mucolytic agent for use in upper respiratory conditions. Memorial Sloan-Kettering7 also lists uses in the treatment of depression, precancers, HIV and AIDS, and to alleviate cancer treatment side effects.

In 2020, NAC made the news when the FDA decided over-the-counter sales of this compound, which at that time had been available for 57 years, should require a physician’s prescription going forward. The FDA issued warning letters8 to seven companies the agency said were illegally selling hangover products. By May 2021, Amazon, which also owns Whole Foods, decided to remove any supplements containing NAC.9

FDA Requests More Information on NAC

As Natural Products Insider reports, the letters warned that NAC could not be “lawfully marketed in dietary supplements because it was first studied as a drug in 1963.”10 The Council for Responsible Nutrition (CRN) sent a letter in December 2020 to the FDA’s Office of Dietary Supplement Programs describing the position as “legally invalid.”11

The CRN and the Natural Products Association (NPA) filed separate citizen petitions with the FDA. The CRN letter in December 2020 challenged the FDA’s determination that NAC should be precluded from supplementary use.12 They then filed a citizen position petition June 1, 2021, requesting the FDA reverse their position and outlining why this sudden policy change is “legally invalid on multiple grounds.”13

The NPA filed a separate citizen petition with the FDA14 requesting that the agency not exclude NAC as a dietary supplement or, alternatively, that the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) issue a regulation finding NAC is lawful in supplements. While the HHS has the authority, it has not been used in the 27 years since the law giving the HHS such power was enacted in 1994.

November 24, 2021, the FDA announced they were requesting more information about how NAC has been marketed as a dietary supplement.15 Natural Products Insider reports that this was encouraging to some in the industry as it signaled the FDA was open to the idea of issuing the regulation that NAC is a lawful ingredient in supplements.16 The FDA called this:17

“… tentative responses to both citizen petitions, requesting additional information from the petitioners … and noting that the agency needs additional time to carefully and thoroughly review the complex questions posed in these petitions.”

The FDA18 also requested information and data on the date that NAC was first marketed as a dietary supplement, reports of adverse events and details on how the products are marketed and sold. The data are requested by January 25, 2022. Steve Mister, president and CEO of CRN said in a statement:19

“The provisions of the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act of 1994 (DSHEA) may not be interpreted retroactively to remove ingredients that were lawfully marketed in 1994 and have enjoyed a long history of safe use since then. The delay in clearing up the status of NAC by asking for more data and refusing to admit its error disregards the law and disserves consumers who use NAC.

This is not a complicated determination for the FDA to make. DSHEA makes clear that ingredients in use as dietary supplement ingredients prior to its enactment are grandfathered into the supplement marketplace. Thus, pharmaceutical manufacturers could not have had any expectation of exclusivity in the years prior to the creation of this provision of the law.

Given the long history of safe use of NAC, FDA cannot now try to establish a safety concern in order to award this ingredient exclusively to drug makers.”

FDA First Used Legally Questionable Drug Exclusion Provision

U.S. code Title 21,20 specifically defines what a dietary supplement is and is not. According to experts, the actions of the FDA in banning the sale of NAC and finding it a “medication” is illegal under the law. Attorney Stan Soper21 writes that under Title 21 §321 paragraph (ff)(3)(b)10 the actions of the FDA do not meet the Drug Exclusion Provision.

According to Soper,22 the exclusion provision has only been invoked a few times, specifically when used to keep red yeast rice, vitamin B6 and cannabidiol (CBD) from being sold as supplements. In each of these cases there was a potential pharmaceutical financial loss that triggered the assertion the supplement was illegal.

In the case of red yeast rice, it contains a naturally occurring substance that acts in a similar manner to Lovastatin, a statin medication.23 In 2005, drug manufacturer Biostratum filed an investigational new drug (IND) application with the FDA to use vitamin B6 in the treatment of diabetic kidney disease.

Their argument was there was “no evidence that it was marketed as a dietary supplement or food prior to its IND and Phase II investigations.”24 In 2009 the FDA declared vitamin B6 was not a dietary supplement despite documentation that it had been sold as such before the IND application.

The FDA has also invoked the Drug Exclusion Provision against CBD, warning that it is not a legal dietary supplement since there was no meaningful evidence it was marketed as such before drug investigations were approved for Sativex and Epidiolex, which are drugs that contain CBD.

After the 2018 Farm Bill was signed legalizing hemp, then-FDA secretary Dr. Scott Gottlieb made the statement that it was illegal to introduce CBD into the food supply or market it as a supplement.25 Soper postulates26 that the use of the Drug Exclusion Provision against CBD may have opened the door for the FDA to use it against NAC.

Why Take Aim at NAC?

In the citizen petition27 sent to the FDA June 1, 2021, CRN argued that the FDA failed to sufficiently explain this sudden change in policy on NAC, thus “rendering it arbitrary and capricious.” According to CRN, before the seven warning letters in July 2020, “it was FDA’s longstanding policy to permit the marketing of dietary supplements containing NAC.”

Even though the agency had reviewed more than 100 notification structure/function claims for NAC-containing supplements over the years, they never raised the drug exclusion clause. In one response to a petition for a qualified health claim, the FDA had even stated that NAC was considered a dietary supplement.

While the Drug Exclusion Provision on CBD may have opened the door, it still raises the question of why the FDA chose now to target NAC. Historically the provision was used inappropriately to protect the finances of pharmaceutical companies. That is also likely the root of the motivation to ban NAC as a supplement.

As pulmonologist Dr. Roger Seheult succinctly explains in the MedCram video below, NAC is a crucial chemical compound necessary to reduce the oxidative stress associated with severe COVID-19 infections and thus may significantly impact the sales of antiviral drugs. And, as I and other health experts have pointed out in the past, without severe disease, is there truly a need for a vaccine?

Glutathione Depletion Worsens COVID-19 Outcomes

Researchers have been studying NAC since it was discovered. In 2010,28 researchers found that it could inhibit the expression of proinflammatory cytokines in cells that were infected with highly pathogenic H5N1 influenza virus. These same proinflammatory cytokines play a crucial role in severe COVID-19.

Researchers have confirmed that in severe cases, cytokine levels are elevated and once they reach excessive levels it triggers a cytokine storm.29 This causes significant tissue damage that NAC may be able to inhibit. In one 2020 paper,30 the authors describe a case of COVID-19 in a patient with glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G6PD) deficiency.

This is a genetic disorder that can lead to hemolytic anemia31 and depletes glutathione,32 increasing the risk for human coronavirus infections such as the common cold. NAC was given to the G6PD-deficient patient and nine other COVID patients on ventilators. The NAC “elicited clinical improvement and markedly reduced CRP in all patients.”33

Other published papers have since demonstrated there is a potential use of NAC in the treatment of COVID-19.34,35,36 One 2021 study37 compared consecutive patients hospitalized with moderate or severe COVID-19 pneumonia.

One group received only standard care and the other group received 600 mg of NAC twice daily for 14 days. There were 42 in the NAC group and 40 in the control group. Treatment with NAC led to lower rates of severe respiratory failure and significantly lower mortality rates.

Early at Home Treatment Is Crucial

NAC is only one in a line of treatment modalities that have proven to be successful but have been vilified by governmental agencies. Since the start of this pandemic, it seems global and national health authorities have done everything in their power to discourage and prevent people from accessing treatments, such as ivermectin38,39,40 and hydroxychloroquine,41,42,43,44 that compete with the COVID jab.

The actions around NAC appear to be yet another shameful attempt to prevent patients from helping themselves. By limiting access to nutritional supplements that have demonstrated the capability of reducing severity of the infection, agencies are essentially boosting the risk that infections progress into more serious cases.

Should you come down with symptoms of COVID-19, early treatment is crucial. Not only can it significantly reduce the length of time that you’re sick, but early treatment will also minimize your risk of long-hauler syndrome,45 which can include symptoms that last much longer than the original infection.46 This can include cough, body aches, difficulty sleeping, headaches and brain fog.

There is also scientific evidence that NAC can improve a variety of lung problems, including pneumonia and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), common characteristics of COVID-19. For example:

  • Research47 published in 2018 found NAC reduces oxidative and inflammatory damage in patients with community-acquired pneumonia.
  • Another 2018 study48 found NAC improves postoperative lung function in patients undergoing liver transplantation.
  • A 2017 meta-analysis49 found a significant reduction in ICU stays among ARDS patients treated with NAC.
  • NAC is also a well-known mucolytic used to help clear mucus out of the airways of cystic fibrosis patients.50 Some studies also suggest NAC can help reduce symptoms of COPD and prevent exacerbation of the condition.51
– Sources and References

____________________

**UPDATE**

Dr. José Luis Sevillano proposes a preventive treatment for Panamanian colleagues who at a conference were very interested in treating patients with zinc, glutathione, and N-acetylcysteine (NAC).  These antioxidants have been found to help the body detoxify graphene, which experts have discovered in the PCR swabs, face masks, and the COVID injections.  

**Comment**

On a personal note: my husband, infected with Lyme/MSIDS since 2010 or so has struggled with bizarre blood issues including low ferritin, small and too many red blood cells, hypercoagulation, and anemia at one point requiring iron sucrose infusions.  We were both infected with Babesia as well, which is known blood to affect and change blood cells.

Eventually the iron came up and leveled, the hypercoagulation went away (after years of heparin) but the cell count has always been strange, and he has always struggled with fatigue since becoming infected, whereas I have not.  I suspect a glutathione issue and wonder if glutathione IV wouldn’t have helped his severe COVID case as well.  Where IV C, blood ozone, and 4 doses of only 12 mg of ivermectin completely turned me around, he continued to languish while on much higher doses and even HCQ in the mix, and had many symptoms I did not have (severe headaches, skin eruptions, and horrific cough without end).   While I take NAC daily, he does not (which is going to change today!).

NAC and Lyme/MSIDS

This article shows that glutathione metabolism is the most important target of B. burgdorferi infection and is essential for cytokine production, likely through glutathionylation.

This article discusses how Dr. Horowitz, a well-known Lyme literate doctor, published the first study of two COVID patients treated with three natural supplements, hydroxychloroquine, and an antibiotic. At 9 and 11 days into treatment, with both patients seeing gradual but incomplete improvement, a corner turned.  **Horowitz has now substituted ivermectin for HCQ**

The breakthrough came after he increased the dose of glutathione.  Within an hour, both patients were breathing better. “I definitely felt like the edge was taken off my symptoms,” said one of them, David Roth, 53. “I felt it fairly quickly.”

Although anecdotal,” Horowitz said, “I have heard from patients who were on NAC and glutathione when they were exposed to COVID-19, that they did not get sick or test positive for the virus, when others around them did.”  Source

Horowitz protocol for prevention

Top tier:
Glutathione, 250 to 500 mg twice a day
N-acetylcysteine (NAC), 600 mg twice a day
Second tier but makes above even better:
Alpha lipoic acid, 600 mg once to twice a day
Zinc, 40 to 50 mg a day
Icing on the cake:
Curcumin, 1000 mg twice a day
Sulforaphane glucosinolate (broccoli seed extract), 100 mg twice a day
3, 6 Beta glucan, 500 mg to 1000 mg once a day

To treat the infection, Horowitz uses the same supplements as in the prevention protocol but in higher doses. He further adds high-dose Vitamin C and ivermectin, which shows promise for COVID and would have to be prescribed by a physician. (Please read article in full as there are many great suggestions)

I have spoken with other COVID patients, some infected with tick-borne illness and some not, and ALL have responded a bit differently to ivermectin.  I now wonder if the IV C and blood ozone didn’t help me more than I first believed as those things were not used by the other patients.  While I still believe ivermectin to be effective, results will vary from person to person and sometimes it’s a combination of things that support your individual Achilles heel that work best. Once again, independent Lyme literate doctors are going to be a better choice (or independent functional medicine practitioners and the like who actually think for themselves) as mainstream medicine doesn’t have time and doesn’t care about these issues.  They treat everyone with an archaic “one size fits all” approach that hasn’t worked since the beginning of allopathic medicine.

This goes to show that cases will very considerably, just like with Lyme/MSIDS.

Category:

Activism, Inflammation, research, Supplements, Viruses

German Chemist Dr. Andreas Noack Found Dead After Exposing Presence of Graphene Hydroxide in COVID “Vaccines” – Not the First Time a Doctor Has Been Persecuted or Eliminated. Also FREE Resources

**UPDATE April, 2022**
In this important Q & A video, a highly credentialed scientist from a top 10 science testing facility states that recent testing has now confirmed that the highly toxic element graphene is in our precipitation, along with an already long list of toxins including aluminum nanoparticles. Surfactants have also been confirmed in recent precipitation testing. Climate intervention operations are ubiquitously contaminating the entire planet and every breath we take. While the ‘authorities’ blame ‘climate change,’ they in fact are behind the true damage.

I posted this information previously here but the following article offers new insights.

https://www.newstarget.com/2021-12-08-andreas-noack-dead-graphene-hydroxide-covid-vaccines

German chemist Dr. Andreas Noack found DEAD after exposing presence of graphene hydroxide in covid “vaccines”

12/08/2021 / By Ethan Huff
German chemist Dr. Andreas Noack found DEAD after exposing presence of graphene hydroxide in covid “vaccines”

On Nov. 23, a world-renowned German chemist by the name of Dr. Andreas Noack put out a video (you can watch it at the Daily Exposé) exposing the presence of graphene hydroxide in Wuhan coronavirus (Covid-19) “vaccines.” Three days later, Noack mysteriously died.

While the specific circumstances surrounding Noack’s death remain unknown, it is being reported that he was “attacked,” which resulted in his passing. This is according to Noack’s pregnant wife, who published her own video after his death to sound the alarm.

“On the day of his graphene hydroxide video, he developed breathing difficulty and died in the early morning on Nov. 26, 2021,” Noack’s wife revealed in the video.

Noack’s wife further made the suggestion that perhaps Noack was targeted with a directed energy weapon, or DEW, since he was not attacked in an obvious sense with a blunt object. Instead, Noack developed some kind of strange respiratory ailment on the very same day that he exposed one of the contents of Fauci Flu shots.  (See link for article)

__________________

**Comment**

I posted this previously on Dec. 1, 2021, but was unaware that the electricity went off precisely 20-30 min. after his interview.  The immediate reaction, paralysis, and difficulty breathing which occurred is indeed strange.  The timing even stranger.

Directed energy weapons use concentrated electromagnetic energy, rather than kinetic energy, to combat enemy forces. Although the United States has been researching directed energy since the 1960s, some experts have observed that the Department of Defense (DOD)has invested billions of dollars in DE programs that failed to reach maturity and were ultimately cancelled. In recent years, however, DOD has made progress on DE weapons development, deploying the first operational U.S. DE weapon in 2014 aboard the USS Ponce.  Since then, DE weapons development has continued, with DOD issuing a Directed Energy Roadmap to coordinate the department’s efforts.DOD has also introduced a High Energy Laser Scaling Initiative, which seeks to strengthen the defense industrial base for DE weapons and improve laser beam quality and efficiency.  Source

This is not imagined weaponry.  According to this, laser directed energy weapons are likely to receive the most investment in future.

Physicians for Human Rights state:

There is little medical research about the health effects of directed energy weapons because of limited publicly available data about their military testing. However, the little data that is available points to some serious concerns. Testing on military volunteers identified several cases of skin burns, blisters, or prolonged pain. Capable of penetrating about 0.5 mm into the body, the electromagnetic waves could potentially access skin past the dermal layer, which contains blood vessels, nerves, and glands. The skin on eyelids, for instance, is 0.2 mm deep. Increased exposure times can produce skin burns and dermal damage. Areas of thin and delicate skin, such as on the face and eyes, could be more at risk for injury. Although the electromagnetic waves produced by studies of cellular directed energy weapons are touted as a non-ionizing type of radiation, long-term-level impacts have not yet been conducted and there may be a risk of this kind of damage.

Doctors have revealed details of neuro-weapon attacks in Havanna (known as Havanna syndrome) which singled out U.S. personnel assigned to the U.S. Embassy in Cuba in 2017.  The patients complained of suddenly hearing noises, pressure in their ears, followed by symptoms such as headaches, vertigo, dizziness and loss of cognitive functions.  The effects can be latent, durable, highly disruptive and attribution is difficult. They are not “weapons of mass destruction,” but they have the potential to disrupt individual cells in the body.  The attacks occurred at the victims’ homes, with the exception of two cases that took place in a hotel known to accommodate diplomats.  Thirty-five potential victims — the 25 who reported symptoms plus the 10 who were in the residences at the same time — were flown to Miami where an interdisciplinary team of experts from the University of Miami’s Miller School of Medicine carried out a battery of more detailed tests.  The doctors postulate that the attackers used a combination of a drug that was activated by the directed energy weapon.  Another possibility is pulsed lasers. “Near infrared lasers penetrate pretty far into the head,” he said. “All of these weapons can produce cavitation in fluids and can produce these effects,” he added. The three team members agreed that “saying [the Cuba attacks] are one thing or another is foolhardy,” Balaban said.  Source

In other words, DEWs are nearly impossible to detect.

President Biden has signed a bill for these victims but a State Department employee has reportedly sued US secretary of state Anthony Blinken and the department for alleged disability discrimination.  CNN reported the employee said he and his wife and children all began experiencing “sudden and unexplained mental and physical symptoms” in November 2017, but were not evacuated.

If attacks on innocent citizens is new for you, I highly recommend the book “Project Daylily” by Dr. Nicolson.

He discovered that high numbers of inmates and guards of a Texas prison came down with strange neurodegenerative conditions. After testing them, he discovered they were positive for Mycoplasma fermentans, and a weaponized version at that, that caused more severe symptoms, was more virulent and persistent. He believed biological experiments had been conducted on these inmates. In time, the guards became ill, then their families, and then the greater Huntsville, Texas area.

What Nicolson discovered next would make for a great thriller. When the prisoners with Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS) died, they should have been sent to the University of Texas at Galveston for an autopsy, but that’s not what happened. He discovered that private autopsies were being performed on these inmates at a US Army base, and were then were sent to a private crematory at a secret location in Central Texas where all prisoner records were destroyed against state law.

Genes part of the HIV-1 envelope were found in these Mycoplasmas, which in a nutshell means that a person may not get HIV but they may get some of the symptoms. It is also important to note that while military personnel were likely exposed to the Mycoplasmas from weapons in the Gulf War, they were also exposed through vaccinations. For more information, please refer to the article I wrote on vaccines and understand that there are many who are now stating that contamination with various pathogens through vaccines is almost certain:  https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.wordpress.com/2015/06/19/a-word-on-vaccines/

Also, this is an excerpt from the Snowshoe Documentary film: Mycoplasma – Dr. Garth Nicolson-microbiologist,  https://youtu.be/7W4tu5qgaWA  (Approx 11 min)  This film is available in it’s entirety at the You Tube link below:

Biological Warfare – Experiments on the American People
https:  //www.youtube.com/watch?v=1QJo3…

More information on this subject in further in-depth detail is available and at:

HIDDEN PANDEMIC
https://sites.google.com/site/conflagration2100/hidden-pandemic

See also:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sT25HhAVhhU&app=desktop  This is much longer – approx. 1 hour, but much more in depth.

“Cancer, AIDS, Weaponized Mycoplasmas & Gulf War Illness. Prof. Garth Nicolson’s hypothesis is straightforward: “The emergence of new illnesses and an increase in the incidence rate of previously described signs & symptoms are due to our toxic environment & the purposeful development & testing of Weapons of Mass Destruction.” Dr. Nicolson heads the Institute for Molecular Medicine. He spoke at the 9th Common Cause Medical Research Foundation Conference, Sudbury, Ontario, Canada on Aug. 29-31, 2008.”

And this all happened in the early 2,000.  Imagine what they can do now.

UK doctor Released from Prison For Curing Cancer

Just today, Health Impact News reported that a UK doctor, Dr. David Noakes, was finally released from a French prison where he was confined for 18 months in a 9 square meter prison cell 22 hours a day for curing 10,000 people from cancer with GcMAF.

Article excerpt:

American Doctor Jeffrey Bradstreet was the primary researcher using GcMAF to cure children who were labeled as “autistic,” until his death on June 19, 2015, which the corporate media labeled as a “suicide,” but his family and others believe he was murdered to squelch his research which was a threat to Big Pharma. See:  Is The U.S. Medical Mafia Murdering Alternative Health Doctors Who Have Real Cures Not Approved by the FDA?

I’ve posted previously on the mysterious deaths of holistic doctors.  There’s been plenty of bizarre deaths of those working with Dr. Fauci as well. These researchers were involved in HIV, AIDS, Ebola, herpes, DNA sequencing and influenza.  And recently, with a reemergence of HIV/AIDS, which many state is being caused by the COVID injections, AIDS researchers are suddenly and mysteriously dying. Ironically, Pfizer’s HIV drug cuts risk of COVID death bu 89%.  Is this an admission or a coincidence?

Many are unaware of the controversy which exists in virology. This controversy is perhaps easier to understand in Lymeland where a group of researchers called The Cabal have dominated and led virtually all research. They also own the patents on the organisms, the tests, and work on the vaccines which have literally maimed people for life. Most of these researchers have a history with bioweapons research and they are the ones controlling the narrative that Lyme/MSIDS is not a persistent/chronic infection(s), despite all evidence to the contrary. These same folks then turn around and create treatment “guidelines” which have become literal mandates which have ruled as an iron curtain for decades. Any doctor foolish enough to treat differently will be hunted down and persecuted.  Doctors attempting to treat COVID are facing the same persecution, and similarly to Lyme literate doctors, have split off and formed their own group.  Unfortunately, most Lyme advocates just will not accept that there is NO MIDDLE GROUND here.  There is no playing nice with these people.  Stop funding them!

Since Cabal members have numerous letters after their names and have been around since before Jesus was born, doctors simply believe them and ignore global research.  These same doctors are currently ignoring global research on the COVID injections which are also maiming people for life or killing them outright. They can’t read the injection inserts if they wanted to because they are blank.  They simply trust the manufacturer’s news-flyer that states they are “safe and effective.” Unfortunately, even some Lyme literate doctors have fallen into this well-set trap.

In other words, ‘the powers that be’ have a lot of money invested in these endeavors and they simply won’t allow dissidents to get in the way. From a historical perspective it is not strange that Dr. Noack died an untimely death, and a doctor curing cancer was thrown in jail for a good chunk of time.  They simply got in the way of a good thing.  It’s all for the ‘greater good,’ don’t ya know?

The Health Impact article also is offering a FREE eBook originally published in 2017 on a “Guide to Healing From Vaccine Injury.”

Also, for those of you working on criminal charges and court cases regarding the COVID-19 scam, or just want COVID science collected in once place, The National Health Federation has put together an amazing 274-page document titled:

COVID-19: The Science We Should Know

Grab it now before it disappears online.

This informative book goes through lockdowns, mask mandates, statistics, “vaccines”, and COVID treatments.  It is a gem of a document.

Category:

Activism, vaccines, Viruses