Plum Island History

http://  Approx. 12 Min

Why New York’s Plum Island is Totally Forbidden

3/24

Plum Island, located off the coast of Long Island, has a rich history spanning centuries. Originally known as “Isle des Plumes” by early French settlers due to its abundant bird population, it later became a haven for pirates and smugglers during the colonial era. In the 19th century, it was used as a quarantine station for diseased livestock, helping prevent the spread of diseases to mainland farms. During World War II, the island was taken over by the U.S. government and used for military purposes. In 1954, the Plum Island Animal Disease Center was established by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, where research on infectious animal diseases, including foot-and-mouth disease, was conducted. Today, the island remains a site of scientific research, though its future is uncertain amidst discussions of potential closure and redevelopment.

The video explains that as of 2023 the island was slated for closure and to be sold at private auction, while the facility itself would move to Kansas City University. As a part of the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021, and the response to the most recent ‘pandemic’ outbreak, the island was offered to federal agencies first. As of Feb. 2024, the facility still operates at Plum Island.

While the author of the video emphasizes the safety of the lab, the book Lab 257 paints quite a different picture with virus outbreaks, infected workers, flushing of contaminated raw sewage into area waters and the insidious connections between the island and Lyme disease and West Nile Virus.

For more:

https://www.treatlyme.net/lyme-disease-treatment-guidelines

About The Ross Lyme & Tick-borne Diseases Protocol—Version 4

New in Version 4

The Ross Lyme & Tick-borne Diseases Protocol–Version 4 update, released 6/17/24, has a number of significant changes.

Name change. In Version 4, I have updated our name to include “tick-borne”. This recognizes that people can have Bartonella, Babesia, or other tick-borne diseases, separate from having Lyme (Borrelia) infection.

But there are more significant updates than our name change. Version 4

  • Emphasizes plant-based foods recommendations in Part 2. Diet;
  • Promotes healthy intestinal microbiome—even on antibiotics with a new Part 3. Healthy Intestinal Microbiome; and
  • Includes an herbal antibiotic only option to treat the three Bs (Borrelia, Bartonella, and Babesia) simultaneously in Part 12. Lyme Infection and Part 13. Bartonella & Babesia Infections.
  • Moves lifestyle, and related areas, of sleep, diet, healthy intestinal microbiome, and exercise to the front of the protocol to emphasize the key role these areas have in recovery.

Introduction

These are support and treatment guidelines to treat chronic Lyme or tick-borne infections. This protocol addresses most problems that keep a person from getting well. It is more comprehensive than the antibiotic focused Infectious Disease Society of America (IDSA)International Lyme and Associated Disease Society (ILADS), and United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidelines. While herbal and prescription antibiotics may decrease the germ load in chronic Lyme and tick-borne infections, they often do not correct the underlying problems that cause ongoing symptoms.

The Ross Lyme Support Protocol includes essential steps for the beginning and throughout a chronic Lyme disease or tick-borne infection treatment. It is designed to:

  • boost the immune system,
  • improve detoxification,
  • speed recovery,
  • kill the infections, and
  • protect and repair from the harmful effects of the infections and the herbal or prescription antibiotics.

While the following Lyme disease and tick-borne infection treatment approach focuses on a limited number of areas, it may correct most of the problems like:

  • low energy,
  • pain,
  • insomnia,
  • brain, neurologic, and thinking problems (brain fog), and
  • immune compromise and suppression.

Herxheimer Reactions. When a person starts a Lyme disease or tick-borne infection treatment or changes herbal and prescription antibiotics, it is common to experience some worsening in symptoms. See Herxheimer Die-off Reaction: Inflammation Run Amok for more information about this and the steps you can take to treat it.

Treatment Length and Persistence. Generally, it takes a minimum of six months to see if these supports and treatments will help. Supplements can speed recovery, but treating Lyme still takes time. Once you have marked improvement, then you can likely stop many of these nutritional supports except for probiotics, curcumin, ashwagandha, and a good multivitamin. See Getting Healthy: Will I? When? How Do I? for more information about Lyme disease and tick-borne infection treatment length and persistence.

About Supplements. Throughout this protocol I include supplements as nutritional supports based on their known functions. Basic research and my clinical experience show they may help the various symptoms and problems in Lyme disease and tick-borne infections.  (See link for article)

_______________

**Comment**

Lots of great info here.

For more:

**UPDATE**

See: The FDA’s War Against America’s Health

Illustrating the fact the FDA is completely and hopelessly bought out, it is now advocating for a 10th COVID gene therapy injection that doesn’t stop transmission, illness, or death.

When will someone notice the emperor has no clothes on?

https://bailiwicknews.substack.com/p/on-fda-buildings-as-virtual-mailboxes

On FDA buildings as virtual mailboxes to project the public illusion of biological product manufacturing regulation.

Part 9 of series.

 

A Bailiwick reader is doing a deep research dive into pre-1972 statutory and regulatory history of some Public Health Service-Health and Human Services divisions, including National Institutes of Health (NIH) and Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

For context, 1972 is the year that ostensible biologics regulation — which is actually non-regulation — transferred from the NIH Division of Biologics Standards to the FDA Bureau of Biologics.

November 1973 is when FDA published a consolidated set of biological product manufacturing non-regulations in the Federal Register.

Administrative rule-making by FDA since 1973 is relatively easy to locate.

Administrative rule-making by NIH prior to 1973 is more difficult to locate.

One of the questions the reader is trying to answer has to do with whether biological regulation authority was ever statutorily established by Congress, for NIH and its precursor organizations, going back to the late 1800s.

Modern-day NIH and FDA officials present historical accounts of how the biological product and vaccine manufacturing regulatory systems began and developed.

But from her research so far, the reader has concluded that their origin-story claims are not supported by the text of the statutes they cite.  (See link for article)

__________________

Important quote:

Since the advent of electronic filing systems, the application and licensing forms have been filed, transferred and stored electronically, and deleted at regular intervals.

There are no technicians in the buildings, there’s no equipment, no sample testing occurs.

It’s all a front: statutes, regulations, procedures, application forms, buildings, addresses, offices, labs, approved applications and licenses sent by FDA back to the factories, everything.

A handful of people at pharma companies know it.

A handful of people at FDA know it.

Go to top link not only for the full article but for the 8 prior parts.  Watt has done a lot of legwork and it deserves to be shared widely.  Things, once again, are not as they seem.  The FDA like the UN, WHO, and WEF should be disbanded.  These organizations are out of control and do ZERO to protect public health.  They all protect their own vested interests.

For more:

**Comment**

Food is medicine and no amount of supplements or treatment takes its place.  Without the foundational backbone of nourishing foods, we will never achieve health.  

The following article makes it abundantly clear why they are culling chickens, eggs, beef cows, and pushing us to eat bugs.  Further, this article shows how the government is persecuting farm cooperatives by raiding and seizing traditional, healthy foods.

https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/13-enemies-of-food-freedom-gates-who-wef-rockefeller/?

Top 13 Enemies of Food Freedom

Bayer, Cargill, Bill Gates, the Rockefeller Foundation, the WHO and the WEF are among those waging a war on our food supply.
u.s. flag and wheat

By Tracy Thurman

In every war, there is necessarily an enemy force, and the war on our food supply is no exception.

My previous article addressed the ongoing attacks on farmers across the globe. In today’s article, we will look at some of the culprits behind this agenda.

For anyone who delved into the entities behind the tyrannical COVID-19 policies, many names on the list below will seem quite familiar.

Bayer/Monsanto

Bayer merged with Monsanto in 2018, combining the companies responsible for Agent Orange and pioneering chemical warfare.

In 1999, Monsanto’s CEO Robert Shapiro bragged that the company planned to control “three of the largest industries in the world — agriculture, food, and health — that now operate as separate businesses. But there are a set of changes that will lead to their integration.”

Today these chemical manufacturers control a huge percentage of the world’s food supply.

Cargill and the U.S. Department of Agriculture

Cargill is a World Economic Forum (WEF) partner and the largest private company in the U.S. This behemoth monopolizes unimaginably vast swaths of the global food industry, including meat processing in the U.S.

Cargill’s business practices, along with bigger-is-better policies enforced by their cronies at the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), have led to the closures of many local abattoirs which forced farmers to depend on a few corporate mega-slaughterhouses.

This leaves farmers waiting 14 months or longer for butchering slots, for which they often must transport their animals hundreds of miles — indeed, farmers and ranchers must book processing dates up to a year before the animal is even born.

The high fees charged by Cargill’s slaughterhouses contribute to the skyrocketing price of meat — all while the farmers themselves are barely paid enough to cover the cost of raising the livestock.

The USDA, meanwhile, makes sure their policies prevent farmers from processing meat themselves on their own farms.

Wellcome Trust

The Wellcome Trust, the former owner of Glaxo before it merged with SmithKline, played a major role in Britain’s COVID-19 debacle and is unapologetic about its goal of reducing your food sovereignty.

Wellcome Trust funds Livestock, Environment and People, or LEAP, an organization dedicated to developing and testing behavioral modifications to coerce the public into removing meat and dairy from their diets.

LEAP’s co-director Susan Jeffs bemoans that motivating people with environmental impact labels on their foods does not seem to work: “People are already settled into very established habits” and suggests instead altering what the industry provides, thereby forcing consumer choice.

Wellcome Trust researchers recommend “availability interventions” that “rely less on individual agency” to reduce access to animal food products.

Researcher Rachel Pechey opines that “meat taxes show a promising evidence for effectiveness but have been less acceptable in survey work … we don’t want to just go for the most acceptable [solutions].”

The World Health Organization

Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, the World Health Organization’s (WHO) director-general, would like you to believe that food production is responsible for almost one-third of the global burden of disease.

He calls for transforming the global food system toward plant-based foods, reducing meat and dairy in our intake, and enforcing policies to save the climate through restricting diet.

WHO 2022 report concluded that “considerable evidence supports shifting populations towards healthful plant-based diets that reduce or eliminate intake of animal products.”

World Economic Forum

You are likely familiar with the WEF and their Great Reset agenda.

Visit their webpage and treat yourself to such morsels as “5 reasons why eating insects could reduce climate change,” “Why we need to give insects the role they deserve in our food systems,” and “Why we might be eating insects soon.”

Suffice it to say that their plans for your dietary future are clear.

EAT Forum, the Lancet, and their Big Tech and Big Chemical partners

The EAT Forum is “dedicated to transforming our global food system through sound science, impatient disruption and novel partnerships.”

It was co-founded by the aforementioned Wellcome Trust, the Strawberry Foundation and the Stockholm Resilience Centre.

Their FReSH initiative — Food Reform for Sustainability and Health — aims to transform the global food system.

Partners in the FReSH initiative include Google, Cargill, Syngenta, Unilever, Pepsico and many chemical processors such as BASFBayer, and DuPont — a rather odd cast of characters for developing a healthy and sustainable dietary plan.

EAT’s Shifting Urban Diets Initiative advocates for cities to adopt the Lancet-endorsed Planetary Health Diet, in which plant-based proteins are set to replace meat and dairy. Red meat is limited to 30 calories per day.

A report drafted by EAT found that the transformation they want to foist upon our diets is “unlikely to be successful if left up to the individual,” and “require(s) reframing at the systemic level with hard policy interventions that include laws, fiscal measures, subsidies and penalties, trade reconfiguration and other economic and structural measures.”

The Rockefeller Foundation

Members of the Rockefeller family may carry more blame than anyone else in history for turning agriculture away from independent family farms towards corporate conglomerates.

In 1947, Nelson Rockefeller founded the International Basic Economy Corporation (IBEC) to modernize and corporatize agriculture in South America, particularly in Brazil and Venezuela.

IBEC transformed farming to depend on expensive machinery and inputs that priced subsistence peasant farmers out of viability.

The American International Association for Economic and Social Development, or AIA, a Rockefeller-funded philanthropic organization, helped build the market through which IBEC could enrich its owners.

While IBEC’s promotional literature claimed that the company was generously assisting the Third World by providing necessary consumer products while turning a profit, on closer examination, it was simply a business enterprise built on the Rockefellers’ old Standard Oil model, in which smaller competitors are forced out using monopolistic practices before prices are raised.

This tactic was taken to a whole new level with the so-called Green Revolution, first in Mexico in the 1940s, then in the Philippines and India in the 1960s, as well as in the U.S.

Traditional farming practices such as the use of manure as fertilizer for heirloom native crops were replaced with a model of mechanized chemical farming, using Rockefeller-funded new seed varieties which had been developed to require petrochemical fertilizers and pesticides to produce significantly increased crop yields compared to the traditional crops grown by peasant farmers in these countries.

It is worth noting that the Rockefellers, as oil oligarchs, stood to profit handsomely from the petroleum-based fertilizers and pesticides that this new method demanded.

The crops grown were almost all cereal crops like rice and replaced more nutrient-dense, traditional crops like millet.

India experienced an increase in food but a decrease in nutrition: with more empty calories but fewer fruits, vegetables and animal proteins, micronutrients disappeared from the diet.

Anemia, blindness, fertility problems, low birth weight and immune impairment increased.

While the Green Revolution was hailed as the solution to world hunger and poverty, it also poisoned local water supplies, depleted the soil and left farmers drowning in debt as they could no longer independently produce the fertilizer and seeds they needed.

Informed readers can see how the later Monsanto genetically modified organism, or GMO, Roundup-Ready seed model followed this playbook established by the Rockefellers.

In 2006, the Rockefeller Foundation, Bill Gates and others pushed the Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa, or AGRA, and they again followed this proven playbook.

Since AGRA’s launch, African biodiversity has been lost, and the number of severely undernourished people in sub-Saharan Africa has increased by nearly 50%, even by the United Nations’ own reports.

Just as in India, farmers are being tricked into abandoning nutrient-dense, drought-resistant crops like heirloom millet in exchange for the empty calories of GMO corn.

Hundreds of African organizations have demanded that this neocolonial project end, leaving the future of African agriculture in the hands of the native farmers who know the land best.

Now the Rockefeller Foundation has set its sights on the U.S. food system with its Reset the Table agenda, handily launched in 2020 just weeks after the Great Reset was announced.

Under rosy language calling for inclusivity and equity, the report states that “success will require numerous changes to policies, practices, and norms.”

This includes a major focus on data collection and objectives that align closely with the One Health Agenda — more on that in a future article.

Bill Gates and the Gates Foundation

Gates has followed the Rockefeller playbook for fumigating his fortune and transforming his image — while building more wealth — through the cynical ploy of philanthrocapitalism.

His fingers are deep in every public health pie, and his influence is nearly equal in the food wars.

Besides financing the development of fake meats, he is behind the aforementioned AGRA program, is investing in geoengineering programs to dim the sun, and as of January 2021, owned 242,000 acres of prime U.S. farmland, making him the largest private owner of farmland in the U.S.

It is disconcerting to think that a man who believes we should phase out real meat controls so much of the method of production.

USAID and BIFAD

Another organization pushing you to eat bugs is the U.S. Agency for International Development or USAID. This may surprise some of you who think of USAID as an organization dedicated to helping third-world countries, rather than as a longtime Trojan horse for CIA operations.

(Skeptical of that claim? Go down the rabbit hole here and here and here and here.)

The Board for International Food and Agricultural Development, known as BIFAD, released a report titled, “Systemic Solutions for Climate Change Adaptation and Mitigation.”

This report calls for a complete transformation of the food supply and global agriculture. They propose to do this through environmental, social and governance, or ESG scores, carbon tracking and eating insects.

So how do these organizations manage to push their agenda on the global population?

We will cover that in a future article.

Originally published by Brownstone Institute

Tracy Thurman is an advocate for regenerative farming, food sovereignty, decentralized food systems and medical freedom.






https://www.lymedisease.org/canlyme-book-review-kinsella/

A candid and moving account of one family’s Lyme story

The following book review first appeared on the CanLyme website.

By Catherine Kinsella

6/6/24

Finding Resilience: A Teen’s Journey Through Lyme Disease is a candid and moving account of Rachel Leland’s journey through Lyme disease from the perspectives of Rachel and her mother, Dorothy. [Note: Dorothy Leland is President of LymeDisease.org.]

Rachel’s Lyme disease symptoms began after a soccer injury when she was 13. She rapidly went from being a healthy teenager to having multiple symptoms including severe pain, requiring her to use a wheelchair to get around.

From the onset, this book describes the uncertainties, complexities and confusion that many people with Lyme disease experience. Rachel’s symptoms were life-altering, yet there were people around her that thought she was making them up. Others thought Rachel and Dorothy were trying to “get away with” something, when all they really wanted was for Rachel to get better.

The writing in this book is captivating, moving back and forth between Rachel’s perspective and what Dorothy recalled about those same events. Rachel loved to journal, and those notes, along with photos and videos taken during that time were the backbone of her story, which happened almost two decades ago. Dorothy adds perspective to the story from a parent’s point of view, describing what was going on medically and within their daily lives.

Mental and emotional challenges

Rachel is very open about what she was going through, including the mental and emotional challenges she faced when she was sick. What stands out as the story progresses is that these issues resolved with treatment, along with her other symptoms. Although this aspect of Rachel’s story may be difficult to read for some people, these insights may give hope or solace to those who can relate, and open the door to discussions about the impact of pain and the mental health manifestations of Lyme disease and other tick-borne infections.

Some of the treatments that Rachel tried are touched on in the book, including a few that were turning points in her recovery. Their search for answers almost two decades ago is still relevant today, and reflects the experiences of so many patients who struggle to receive a diagnosis and effective treatment for Lyme and other tick-borne diseases.

Finding Resilience: A Teen’s Journey Through Lyme Disease articulates these issues in a very engaging and personal way.

Thank you Rachel and Dorothy for bravely sharing your story, and for shining a light on the challenges that many people with Lyme disease are still facing today.

Learn more about Dorothy and Rachel’s journey in this episode of the Looking at Lyme Podcast.

Catherine Kinsella is a retired RN, content creator, writer and coordinator of the Education Grant Program for the Canadian Lyme Disease Foundation.

For more:

The stories grow but nothing changes.