Quarantine Killed More Seniors Than COVID & is Harming Children’s Mental Health. WHO Finds no COVID in Breastmilk Yet Pregnant Women Targeted for COVID Vaccine

July 1, 2020

https://www.collective-evolution.com/2020/05/19/new-report-suggests-quarantine-may-have-already-killed-more-seniors-than-the-coronavirus/

New UK Report Suggests Quarantine May Have Already Killed More Seniors Than The Coronavirus

By  CE Staff Writer

IN BRIEF
  • The Facts:A new article published in the British Medical Journal  has suggested that quarantine measures in the United Kingdom as a result of the new coronavirus may have already killed more UK seniors than the coronavirus has during the peak of the virus.
  • Reflect On:Was lockdown really the right thing to do? Why have so many doctors and scientists, from the beginning, saying that it’s not the right thing to do been completely censored and banned by social media platforms? What’s going on here? (See link for article)

https://thehill.com/homenews/news/502894-almost-3-in-10-parents-say-social-distancing-is-harming-childs-mental-health

Almost 3 in 10 parents say social distancing is harming child's mental health: poll
© Getty Images

Almost 3 in 10 parents say social distancing is harming child’s mental health: poll

BY REBECCA KLAR – 06/16/20 09:27
Nearly 3 in 10 parents said their child is experiencing mental or emotional health issues due to social distancing and coronavirus closures, according to a Gallup poll released Tuesday.
In addition to the 29 percent of U.S. parents who said their child is already experiencing emotional or mental harm, 14 percent said they could only follow social distancing guidelines for “a few more weeks” before their child’s emotional or mental health suffers, based on the poll. 
Twenty-three percent said they can follow social distancing for “a few more months” and 33 percent said for “as long as is necessary” before their child’s emotional or mental health suffers, based on the poll.  (See article for link)

Parents in Boston Sue to Get Visitation Rights Back for Their Children

by Brian ShilhavyEditor, Health Impact News

All across the nation parents have been cut off from their children who are in Foster Care, due to the State reactions to the Plandemic.

This is a very serious issue, since study after study has proven throughout the years that children are in far more danger in Foster Care than they are in their homes with their parents, even when that is a “troubled home.”

The Foster Care system is the #1 pipeline for child sex trafficking, for example, and far more child sex abuse happens in Foster Care, than it does anywhere else.

Parents in Boston have decided to take action, and are suing Massachusetts Governor Charlie Baker, Marylou Sudders, the Secretary of the Executive Office of Health and Human Services, and Linda Spears, the Commissioner of the Massachusetts Department of Children and Families, for refusing them to have access to their children and the ability to be reunified with them. (See link for article)

0-24

WHO Recommends Breastfeeding, Says No Live Coronavirus Found in Mothers’ Milk

By Reuters Staff

June 15, 2020

ZURICH/GENEVA (Reuters) – Breastfeeding mothers do not seem to be passing on the new coronavirus to their infants, and based on current evidence the benefits outweigh any potential risks of transmission, the World Health Organization (WHO) said on Friday.

WHO director-general Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said that it had carefully investigated the risks of women transmitting COVID-19 to their babies during breastfeeding.

“We know that children are at relatively low risk of COVID-19, but are at high risk of numerous other diseases and conditions that breastfeeding prevents,” Tedros told a news conference.

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/06/line-forming-covid-19-vaccine-who-should-be-front

Pregnant women might normally be the last to receive a new coronaviurs vaccine, but a new study may push them to the head of the line.
RICARDO CASTELAN CRUZ/EYEPIX/ABACA/SIPA USA

The line is forming for a COVID-19 vaccine. Who should be at the front?

Excerpt (See link for article):

Pregnant women present particularly vexing issues. The new data, reported in CDC’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, compared more than 90,000 women with confirmed cases of COVID-19 who were between 15 and 44. The study has several important limitations, but in an age-adjusted analysis, the 8200 women who were pregnant had a 1.5 times higher risk of being admitted to an intensive care unit and a 1.7 times higher risk of requiring mechanical ventilation. “That is fairly compelling evidence” pregnant women should be prioritized for a vaccine, though their risk isn’t pronounced as the elderly,” says Denise Jamieson, an obstetrician/gynecologist at Emory University who is not an ACIP member.

Category:

Activism, Viruses

Comments Off on Quarantine Killed More Seniors Than COVID & is Harming Children’s Mental Health. WHO Finds no COVID in Breastmilk Yet Pregnant Women Targeted for COVID Vaccine

Protect Our Health & Environment From 5G Calamity! EHT Submitted Science on the Health Effects of 5G on Human Body

https://national-health-federation.rallycongress.net/ctas/protect-our-health-environment-from-5g-calamity?

Protect our Health and Environment From 5G Calamity!

Take Action NOW!

We all see the television commercials championing 5G cellular connections and the vast network of emerging 5G antennas in neighborhoods across America. They make this seem so harmless and wonderful. But what do we really know about 5G besides its supposedly increased transmission and connection speeds as well as the wireless development of the Internet of Things (IoT)?

At present, there are about 15-billion wireless local area network (WLAN) devices ranging from Wi-Fi routers and IoT devices to some 9-billion mobile connections, not to even mention that about 67% of the World population currently uses mobile phones. Are all of these combined a health danger or not?

  Here is what we know:

  1. The World Health Organization is allowing new standards set by the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) to raise the “safe” limits of thermal heating of the body from 1 degree centigrade up to 5 degrees centigrade. New 5G cell phones will not be tested for thermal heating of tissue because they far exceed allowable levels.
  2. The USA’s Federal Communications Commission (FCC) human exposure limits are established by the Institute of Electronic and Electrical Engineers (IEEE), which does NOT measure any human biological effects while maintaining it is safe by measuring only the thermal heating of tissue.
  3. However, scientists, medical professionals, and researchers in the U.S. and around the World maintain that harm exists and has been proven by over 12,000 Biological Studies. (No Human Studies are allowed since we already know exposure causes cancer.)
  4. 5G will be made available everywhere with 35,000 or more satellites encircling the Earth, sending out 5 million watts per satellite along with 5G drones the size of football fields flying and hovering over the ocean, along with hundreds of thousands of new surface satellites positioned 200 to 400 feet apart, emitting focused 5G millimeter waves. The antennas will be located everywhere, in almost everything (estimated at over 6 trillion antennas when including the Internet of Things).
  5. We already know that biological studies of 4G show “clear evidence” of cancer, definitive links to neurological and cognitive harm, heart abnormalities, reproductive harm, microwave sickness, psychological harm, and suicide. We know that 5G will be 100 times stronger than the current 4G exposure levels.
  6. Populations especially at risk include pregnant women, children, the elderly, and individuals with implanted medical devices or cardiac or neurological problems, including those having other types of metal implanted in their bodies (e.g., dental work, joints, etc.).
  7. More than 250 medical and public health professionals internationally have signed a joint statement condemning the current deployment of 5G. Neither the FCC nor the wireless industry has done a single study regarding 5G’s impact on health.
  8. Installing 5G antennas in residential areas is not required for public safety or national security. 5G is not a regulated public utility. And, most importantly, there are no provisions available for informed consent or opt out.
  9. 5G is used, and has been used for decades, for surveillance in various forms, commercial data mining, and military purposes such as the Active Denial System (ADS). Soon, this will include medical records.
  10. Switzerland, one of the first countries to roll out 5G, has placed a moratorium on any activation of 5G satellites in the country until it is proven safe. Brussels, Belgium also followed with its own 5G ban. The increased level of exposure to electromagnetic radiation emitted by 5G is emerging now and its harmful effects are already being felt worldwide from Gateshead, England to Wuhan, China.
  11. 5G is the single most important health issue facing all of us today. Its uncontrolled levels of exposure will be fatally disastrous to humanity and the biosphere in a very short period of time. Freedom of choice is a fundamental American value. Tell your Congressperson to enact the Precautionary Principle and to place a moratorium on the installation and use of all 5G antennas. As Dr. Martin Pall says, “5G is absolute insanity.” The FCC and the telecom industry must not be allowed to force American citizens to endure involuntary exposure to powerful pulsed wireless radiation 24/7 in their communities. All Representatives may tell you they can do nothing because of the 1996 Telecommunications Act, Article 25. Be sure to tell them you are a voter and that courts have ruled Article 25 to be in direct conflict with the Environmental Protection Act (EPA) and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). There is no time to wait on this issue. As the Stay in Place orders continue,
  12. Antennas continue to go up throughout our neighborhoods without our informed consent and without any means to opt out.Contact your Representative now! (Go to top link to access your representatives)

https://myemail.constantcontact.com/EHT-to-the-FCC–Halt-the-Deployment-of-5G

Last week EHT submitted extensive testimony to the FCC documenting the scientific evidence that 5G will impact human health and the environment.
EHT put the science on the official record.
In Docket 19-226 , the FCC proposed new allowable limits to the amount of electromagnetic radiation exposure to be absorbed by humans and the atmosphere from the use of frequencies as high as 3 THz and as low as 3 kHz.
The FCC asked what the public thinks. So we told them.
“We recommend a halt to the roll-out of the fifth generation, 5G, for telecommunication and a halt to the expansion of wireless networks until hazards for human health and the environment of these new frequencies and the densification of networks have been fully investigated by scientists independent from industry.
“5G paired with densification of 4G or other antennas will substantially increase environmental exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields. We also recommend federally developed safety limits based on empirical scientific studies that have thoroughly investigated long-term effects to humans, animals, insects, trees, and the environment.
“Federal safety limits should be based on adequate data from animal and human research, not based on assumptions.”
We encourage you to download and share these extensive filings.
There is more.
Environmental Health Trust submitted extensive additional scientific documents found HERE . 
Over 1800 people submitted incredible testimony found HERE.
The FCC  cannot claim it has not seen the science. If the FCC chooses to ignore that science, EHT  will be ready to respond again.

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

Category:

Activism

Comments Off on Protect Our Health & Environment From 5G Calamity! EHT Submitted Science on the Health Effects of 5G on Human Body

Disseminated Lyme Disease More Likely In Those With Weakened Immune System

https://danielcameronmd.com/impaired-immunity-increases-risk-of-disseminated-lyme-disease/

DISSEMINATED LYME DISEASE MORE LIKELY IN THOSE WITH WEAKENED IMMUNE SYSTEM

Sick woman sitting on couch with disseminated Lyme disease

Individuals with a weakened immune system are more susceptible to developing infections, such as COVID-19. A review study has also found that people with compromised immune systems are at a greater risk of developing disseminated Lyme disease. The authors of “Erythema Migrans: Course and Outcome in Patients Treated With Rituximab” investigated patients diagnosed with Lyme disease, who were also taking Rituximab, a medication known to impair immunity. [1]

By

The small study examined the risk of developing disseminated Lyme disease for people with weakened immune systems. Researchers enrolled 7 patients with an EM (erythema migrans) rash who were diagnosed with Lyme disease. All of the patients were receiving Rituximab for another underlying medical condition. Out of the 7 patients, 4 were also being treated with additional immunosuppressant drugs (e.g., corticosteroids, methotrexate, and bortezomid).

“Rituximab is the anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody that influences B cells and consequently impairs secretion of antibodies, antigen presentation, and secretion of cytokines,” writes Maraspin and colleagues.

Rituximab is used for non-Hodgkin lymphoma, rheumatoid arthritis, chronic lymphocytic leukemia, and granulomatosis with polyangiitis (Wegener granulomatosis).

Signs of disseminated Lyme disease

According to the authors, 43% of the patients treated with Rituximab showed unusually high signs of disseminated Lyme disease, compared to 8% of immunocompetent individuals.

The isolation rates of Borrelia from the blood before antibiotic treatment were also unusually high (40%) when compared with immunocompetent patients (<2%).

“Impaired immunity might be an explanation for the complicated course of LB (signs of disseminated LB or unfavorable outcome after antibiotic treatment) present in 57% of our patients, but rarely seen in immunocompetent adult patients with EM, of whom only about 8% have disseminated disease and approximately 10% have treatment failure, most often the presence of LB-associated symptoms,” the authors write.

In their study, 3 of the patients with multiple EM rashes were treated with intravenous antibiotics. The remaining individuals received oral antibiotics.

READ MORE: Lyme disease manifests as autoimmune disorder

One patient, a 65-year-old woman, failed initial treatment. “Her skin lesion persisted for >2 months after the start of treatment with doxycycline,” explains Maraspin. “However, it disappeared after retreatment with amoxicillin and the subsequent clinical course was uneventful.”

At their 1-year follow-up, none of the patients had any objective (or physical) signs of Lyme disease. However, the authors did not mention the presence of other symptoms, such as fatigue, pain, and cognitive problems.

Retreatment for immunocompromised patients 

Meanwhile, a study by Maraspin and colleagues reports that 25% of Lyme disease patients who had received immunosuppressive drugs, such as adalimumab, infliximab, etanercept, golimumab, failed treatment for Lyme disease. Three of the four patients required retreatment.

Patients with weakened immune systems were also more likely (18.8%) to develop signs of disseminated Lyme disease when compared to Lyme disease patients who were immunocompetent.

Editors note: The increased chance of disseminated Lyme disease in patients with impaired immunity needs further study. I would also address the risk of treatment failures on other outcomes including fatigue, pain, and cognitive problems.

Related Articles:

People re-infected with Lyme disease may develop strain-specific immunity 

Can Lyme disease trigger an autoimmune disease?

Persistent Lyme infection or inflammatory immune response?

References:
  1. Maraspin, V., et al. (2019). “Erythema Migrans: Course and Outcome in Patients Treated With Rituximab.” Open Forum Infect Dis 6(7): ofz292.

__________________

**Comment**

The one question that hasn’t been answered fully is what exactly is causing this impaired immunity?  While many would love to solely blame the patient’s immune system, many have yet to consider the interplay between how over time these pathogens directly impact the immune system negatively.  From experience I can state that most Lyme/MSIDS patients, prior to becoming infected, are some of the healthiest people I know.  They eat right, exercise, love the outdoors, and take their health seriously.

Until the answer to impaired immunity is determined (and it may vary from patient to patient), patients will not be treated appropriately.

For more:  https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2020/03/09/the-long-term-persistence-of-borrelia-burgdorferi-antigens-dna-in-the-tissues-of-lyme-disease-patient/

Category:

Lyme, research, Treatment

Comments Off on Disseminated Lyme Disease More Likely In Those With Weakened Immune System

Rocky Mountain Spotted Fever Can Be Deadly: How to Prevent, Diagnose, & Treat it

June 30, 2020

https://rawlsmd.com/health-articles/rocky-mountain-spotted-fever-can-be-deadly-how-to-prevent-diagnose-and-treat-the-tick-borne-disease?

Rocky Mountain Spotted Fever Can Be Deadly: How to Prevent, Diagnose, and Treat the Tick-Borne Disease

Rocky Mountain Spotted Fever Can Be Deadly: How to Prevent, Diagnose, and Treat the Tick-Borne Disease

by Jenny Lelwica Buttaccio
Posted 6/11/20

When it comes to tick-borne diseases (TBD), there are several other infections with the potential to make you sick beyond the best-known Borrelia burgdorferi, the bacteria that causes Lyme disease.

For starters, there are well-known Lyme disease coinfections like Bartonella and Babesia that may compound Lyme symptoms and add insult to injury for many people. Cases of these are on the rise as environmental and climate patterns continue to shift in such a way that supports tick populations, and as housing developments expand into wooded areas, bringing people, animals, and ticks in increasingly close proximity to one another.

Additionally, there’s an emerging threat of lesser-known pathogens that seem to garner media attention each year. One such infectious agent is Rickettsia rickettsii, a bacteria that causes Rocky Mountain spotted fever (RMSF).

“Rickettsia has a preference for infecting cells lining blood vessels, specifically endothelial cells — this makes for a much more virulent bacteria,” says Dr. Bill Rawls, MD, Medical Director of RawlsMD and Vital Plan.

Dermacentor Reticulatus On Green Leaf. Also Known As The Ornate Cow Tick, Ornate Dog Tick, Meadow Tick, And Marsh Tick. Family Ixodidae. Ticks Are Carriers Of Dangerous Diseases.

RMSF is spread through the bite of an infected tick. Whereas black-legged ticks are the arachnids responsible for Lyme disease, the Rocky Mountain wood tick, the brown dog tick, and the American dog tick are the chief transmitters of RMSF.

Prompt medical intervention is crucial for a successful recovery from RMSF — the consequence of delaying treatment can be life-threatening. Here, we’ll discuss the broad strokes of RMSF, including signs, symptoms, testing, and treatment.

An Overview of Rocky Mountain Spotted Fever

RMSF is a gram-negative obligate intracellular bacteria — in other words, it’s a parasitic-like microorganism that grows and reproduces inside a host’s cells. As a pathogenic disease, it was first reported in the 1920s.

The disease is part of a larger category called Spotted Fever Rickettsiosis (SFR). In 2010, the name was given to signify a group of related conditions caused by the Rickettsia bacteria for which the available serologic testing can’t discriminate between the different species of the disease-causing bacteria.

Each year, there are approximately 2,000 new cases in the United States, as reported by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). However, in 2017 RMSF cases jumped to 6,248, with marginally fewer cases reported in 2018.

To better understand RMSF, it helps to know some facts about testing methods, times of the year when ticks are most active, and the profile of people who are most at risk of contracting the illness.

1. The Annual Incidences of RMSF Aren’t Precise.

Because the testing doesn’t identify which species of Rickettsia is the culprit, there’s no way to tell how many cases are specific to RMSF versus other Rickettsial diseases that may cause less serious types of spotted fevers. However, the mortality rate for RMSF may be between 5% and 10%, according to a review in The New England Journal of Medicine. By comparison, related Rickettsial bacteria like Ehrlichia and Anaplasmosis have fatality rates of 3% and 1%, respectively.

2. The Transmission of RMSF Varies Depending on Geography and Time of Year.

Ticks carrying RMSF tend to be most active in May through August, but there’s some variability due to geographic location in the U.S. and the type of tick that’s carrying the pathogen. Like Lyme disease, ticks carrying RMSF may be active year-round in parts of the country where temperatures stay above freezing.

Although RMSF can be found throughout the United States, the majority of cases come from these five states:

  1. Arkansas
  2. Missouri
  3. North Carolina
  4. Tennessee
  5. Virginia

3. Certain Individuals May Be More At Risk of Acquiring RMSF.

People who live near wooded areas or in an area of the country known to be hospitable to ticks are at risk of acquiring the infection. Additional information from the CDC indicates:

  • Reported cases of RMSF occur more often in men than women.
  • Most cases occur in individuals over the age of 40. However, the mortality rate of RMSF is highest among children in the 10 and under age group.
  • People with glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G6PD) deficiency, a genetic disorder affecting red blood cells, show a higher propensity for the infection.
  • Immunocompromised individuals are more likely to require hospitalization from RMSF.

Symptoms of Rocky Mountain Spotted Fever

Because RMSF attacks the vascular system, one of the most vulnerable places in your body, severe illness is much more likely than you might encounter with other TBDs. On average, symptoms of RMSF generally start 12 days after a tick bite, but it can range from 5 to 21 days.

black woman with a fever, husband holding hand to her forehead

The telltale signs of infection include high fever, chills, muscle aches, and a rash. “Certainly, a history of a tick bite is a tipoff to infection,” says Dr. Rawls. “But because tick bites are painless and people often are not aware of being bitten, that history is not always helpful.”

Let’s take a closer look at the signs and symptoms of RMSF:

  • Fever
  • Chills
  • Headache
  • Muscle aches
  • Joint pain
  • Rash
  • Confusion
  • Sensitivity to light
  • Feeling unwell (malaise)
  • Thirst
  • Abdominal pain
  • Nausea
  • Vomiting
  • Diarrhea
  • Changes in appetite

An important note about the rash: Typically, the rash associated with RMSF develops two to five days after the onset of fever. However, it can occur later in the course of the illness, even after treatment is started, says Dr. Rawls.

Small, pink, non-itchy spots, with a diameter of 1 to 5 millimeters, first show up on wrists, forearms, and ankles. The spots may spread to the trunk of the body and the soles of the feet as well. As the disease progresses, the spots may become red or purple, which is known as petechiae (puh-TEE-kee-uh).

However, just as some people don’t develop a rash when they contract Lyme disease, not everyone gets a rash with RMSF either.

Diagnosis of Rocky Mountain Spotted Fever

“Diagnosis is a real challenge because Rocky Mountain spotted fever resembles other, more common infectious diseases,” says Dr. Rawls. “But it’s critical to initiate therapy early in the course of the disease, especially if you live in an endemic area.”

Test tube full of blood in lab employees hand

Because time is of the essence, your healthcare provider will likely initiate treatment first, and then test to confirm the diagnosis of RMSF. Testing methods that may be used include:

  1. General labs: Complete blood count (CBC), complete metabolic panel (CMP), liver panel, etc.
  2. Indirect Immunofluorescent Assay (IFA): An antibody test that measures IgG and IgM antibodies for R. rickettsii
  3. Polymerase chain reaction (PCR): This is a DNA test that may be most helpful when used to test a biopsy of the rash or lesion. Concentrations of R. rickettsii in the blood may be low, so a negative PCR doesn’t eliminate the diagnosis of RMSF.
  4. Urinalyses: A test that may be useful to detect blood or protein in the urine

Treatment of Rocky Mountain Spotted Fever

“There are a lot of variables that play into why a person becomes sick with Rocky Mountain spotted fever, but if they become ill, they become very ill,” says Dr. Rawls. “It’s a microbe where, if you develop symptoms, you need antibiotics to try to knock down the infection as quickly as possible.”

Serious complications, like the loss of extremities (fingers, toes, or limbs), can occur due to a decrease in circulation, especially if treatment is delayed. For acute RMSF, the standard of care is doxycycline. “Herbal therapy shouldn’t be used as the primary therapy, but it can be used as a supportive measure,” advises Dr. Rawls.

The following are treatment recommendations, according to the CDC:

  • Doxycycline dose in an adult: 100 mg twice daily
  • Doxycycline dose in children < 45 kg (100 lbs): 2.2 mg / kg twice daily

Antibiotic therapy should be administered for 30 days, suggests Dr. Rawls, or until three days after the fever subsides. At a minimum, treatment with antibiotics should be no shorter than five to seven days as per CDC guidelines. If a patient doesn’t respond to doxycycline, that’s an indication that acute tick-borne infection isn’t present, and other infections such as a virus or Babesia may be causing symptoms.

If an individual doesn’t tolerate doxycycline, a broad-spectrum antibiotic called chloramphenicol may be used. However, this drug carries with it a high potential for side effects. The dosage for chloramphenicol is12.5 mg per kg of body weight orally every 6 hours. In certain cases, IV antibiotics may be required in some people with acute RMSF.

Incorporating Herbal Therapy

Although treatment for RMSF requires antibiotic therapy, herbs can be used to protect vascular cells, promote healing, and act as a complement to drug therapy. However, remember to consult with your doctor before adding natural remedies to your existing treatment protocol.

Essential oil of hawthorn, selective focus

Here are some of Dr. Rawls’ preferred herbs and natural ingredients of choice:

1. To improve circulation and to enhance blood flow:

  • Hawthorne
  • French maritime pine bark
  • Lutein and zeaxanthin (antioxidants called carotenoids found in brightly-colored vegetables like carrots, squash, kale, and spinach)

2. To increase oxygenation of the tissues in the body and bolster the immune system:

3. To help decrease your microbial load and provide antioxidant support:

Final Thoughts

Ultimately, tick prevention is the key to avoiding RMSF. “We all should be vigilant about ticks,” urges Dr. Rawl. “Pay attention. If you get a tick bite, if you end up with symptoms of fever or a rash, you need to see a healthcare provider for that immediately. The quicker you get treatment, the less likely you are to have long-term ramifications.”

Dr. Rawls is a physician who overcame Lyme disease through natural herbal therapy. You can learn more about Lyme disease in Dr. Rawls’ new best selling book, Unlocking Lyme.
You can also learn about Dr. Rawls’ personal journey in overcoming Lyme disease and fibromyalgia in his popular blog post, My Chronic Lyme Journey.

REFERENCES
1. Dumler JS, Walker DH. Rocky Mountain spotted fever–changing ecology and persisting virulence. N Engl J Med. 2005;353(6):551‐553. doi: 10.1056/NEJMp058138
2. Lyme and Other Tickborne Disease Increasing. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention website. https://www.cdc.gov/media/dpk/diseases-and-conditions/lyme-disease/index.html
3. Rocky Mountain Spotted Fever Epidemiology and Statistics. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention website. https://www.cdc.gov/rmsf/stats/index.html
4. Rocky Mountain Spotted Fever Treatment. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention website. https://www.cdc.gov/rmsf/healthcare-providers/treatment.html
5. Rocky Mountain Spotted Fever. MedlinePlus website. https://medlineplus.gov/ency/article/000654.htm
_____________________
RMSF, normally transmitted by the American dog tick and the closely related Rocky Mountain wood tick, has also been spread by the brown dog tick — a completely different species.  And here, we discover it’s been found in the Asian Longhorned tick and is capable of being transmitted within ticks through ova.  https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2020/05/05/asian-longhorned-tick-able-to-transmit-rmsf-in-lab-setting-also-transmitted-within-ticks-through-ova/
This is a great example of how ticks are spreading things they are not known to spread, as well as the fact they are now being found in new places and it has nothing to do with the weather:  https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2018/11/07/ticks-on-the-move-due-to-migrating-birds-and-photoperiod-not-climate-change/

Category:

Rocky Mountain Spotted Fever, Ticks, Treatment

Comments Off on Rocky Mountain Spotted Fever Can Be Deadly: How to Prevent, Diagnose, & Treat it

Dr. Meryl Nass Discovers Hydroxychloroquine Experiments Were Designed to Kill COVID Patients- How Many Were Murdered?

This is quite a damning article and is a ‘must read.’ In brief, Dr. Nass exposes that the doses used in the HCQ trials were high enough to kill a horse.  Again, “the dose makes the poison.”

https://healthimpactnews.com/2020/dr-meryl-nass-discovers-hydroxychloroquine-experiments-were-designed-to-kill-covid-patients-how-many-were-murdered/

Dr. Meryl Nass Discovers Hydroxychloroquine Experiments Were Designed to Kill COVID Patients – How Many Were Murdered?

June 25, 2020

Covid-19 Has Turned Public Health Into a Lethal, Patient-Killing Experimental Endeavor

by Vera Sharav
Alliance for Human Research Protection

Dr. Meryl Nass has uncovered a hornet’s nest of government sponsored Hydroxychloroquine experiments that were designed to kill severely ill, Covid-19 hospitalized patients. On June 14th Dr. Nass first identified two Covid-19 experiments in which massive, high toxic doses – four times higher than safe of hydroxychloroquine were being given to severely ill hospitalized patients in intensive care units.

  • Solidarity was being conducted by the World Health Organization, on 3500 Covid-19 patients at 400 hospitals, across 35 countries. The trial was suspended following the fraudulent Surgisphere report in The Lancet that claimed 35% higher death rates in patients receiving Hydroxychloroquine. But when The Lancet retracted the report, the WHO resumed the Solidarity trial. More than 100 countries expressed interest in participating in the trial.
  • Recovery experiment used very similar doses. It was sponsored by the Wellcome Trust (GlaxoSmithKline) and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the UK government. The experiment was conducted at Oxford University, on 1,542 patients of these 396 patients (25.7%) who were in the high dose Hydroxychloroquine arm, died.
Update: After Dr. Nass’ discovery was publicly disseminated, the WHO suspended the trial on Wednesday June 17th.

On Friday, June 19th, Dr. Nass uncovered a third, “Even Worse” hydroxychloroquine experiment. REMAP targets patients who are on a ventilator, or in shock – i.e., near death. Such patients are hardly capable of giving consent. Rather than attempting to save their lives, they are being used given multiple high doses of hydroxychloroquine and other drugs whose combination is contraindicated.

Of note: All the online protocols have been stamped “Not for IRB (Institutional Review Board) submission.”

This is an ongoing medical atrocity being perpetrated by medical doctors at 200 sites in 14 countries: include: Australia, Belgium, Canada, Croatia, Germany, Hungary, Ireland, Netherlands, New Zealand, Portugal, Romania, Spain, United Kingdom, and the United States of America.

Since all medicines are potential poison at high doses, why one wonders, are influential academic physicians and international public health institutions designing and conducting experiments that expose extremely vulnerable patients to poisonous levels of the drug Hydroxychloroquin?

As recognized by the Swiss physician Paracelsus, “the Hippocrates of the Renaissance”:

“What is there that is not poison? All things are poison and nothing is without poison. Solely the dose determines that a thing is not a poison.”

His insight is as relevant today as it was in the 16th century.

Dr. Meryl Nass is a physician practicing individualized medicine in Maine, in accordance with the Hippocratic Oath. She is a longtime member of the board of the Alliance for Human Research Protection.

*******************

Friday, June 19, 2020
Even worse than ‘Recovery,’ potentially lethal hydroxychloroquine study in patients near death

What could be worse than giving potentially lethal doses of hydroxychloroquine to Hospitalized Covid-19 patients?

The REMAP-Covid study is using the same HCQ dose as the Recovery trial for 6 days.  But it is even worse for the following reasons:

  1. You have to be close to death, either on a ventilator or in shock, on pressor medications, to be included in the trial, according to the trial documents.  However, in a talk by Professor Anthony Gordon, HFNO, CPAP and NIV are additionally said to be inclusion criteria.
  2. You may receive HCQ alone, or HCQ in combination with 2 more drugs, lopinavir/ritonavir.  Yet lopinavir/ritonavir predisposes to QT prolongation, as does HCQ, and the drug label states, “Avoid use in combination with QTc- or PR-interval prolonging drugs.”
  3. Patients who are in shock or on a ventilator may be unable to give their consent to enroll in a clinical trial. But the trial investigators have deemed that consent may not be required:  “For patients who are not competent to consent, either prospective agreement or entry via waiver of consent or some form of deferred consent can be applied, as required by an appropriate ethical review body.”
  4. For patients too sick to swallow a pill, the drug will be administered via a feeding tube. This could entail an extra procedure for patients.

From the Covid protocol page 23:

“Dosing will be hydroxychloroquine administered by the enteral route. A loading dose is important because of the large volume of distribution. The loading dose will be 800 mg, administered 6-hourly, until 2 doses have been administered. Subsequently, starting 12 hours after the first loading dose, the dose will be 400 mg administered 12-hourly for 12 doses. The preferred method of administration is tablets swallowed whole but, if a patient is unable to swallow, crushed tablets dispersed in water can be administered via an enteral tube (a large bore gastric tube is preferred). No dose adjustment is required when hydroxychloroquine is administered via a gastric tube. No dose adjustment is necessary for renal dysfunction or concomitant use of renal replacement therapy. Clinicians should consider a dose adjustment in the presence of liver failure, however no dose adjustment is necessary for abnormal liver function tests in the absence of liver failure.

This is 2400 mg hydroxychloroquine in the first 24 hrs, over 1.86 g of the “base,” then 800 mg/day for 5 more days or until discharge from the ICU, or 6.4 g total. Dosing fails to take into account weight, renal and hepatic function.

The ignorant doctors who justified toxic doses by invoking ‘volume of distribution’ (which is 40,000 liters) failed to notice that the high ‘volume of distribution’ is an artifact related to the drug accumulating in tissue as opposed to plasma.  Drug levels in lung are 200-700 times higher than in plasma. Furthermore,

“renal and hepatic insufficiency lead to higher plasma concentrations for a given daily dose and raise the risk of toxicity.”

WHO’s consultant Weniger reported in 1979 that a single dose of 1.5-2 g of chloroquine “base” “may be fatal.” A detailed discussion of therapeutic and toxic doses of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine can be found in my article of June 14. I acknowledge that hydroxychloroquine is a bit less toxic than chloroquine.  But this trial studies the most fragile human beings, and if the trial investigators were unsure of the right dose, they should have “started low and gone slow” as clinicians are advised to do.

The REMAP study protocol acknowledges that the combination of lopinavir/ritonavir and hydroxychloroquine increases the risk of ventricular arrhythmia, but states that the risk is mitigated because patients this sick will be on cardiac monitors, with QTc monitoring.  However, it fails to say that the most likely arrhythmia in this setting is torsade de points, which is very difficult to treat.  Patients who are already critically ill are unlikely to survive if it occurs.  So why use such an excessive hydroxychloroquine dose on these, or any, patients, and risk it?  That is not explained.

The REMAP clinical trial is ongoing in 200 sites in 14 countries. They include: Australia, Belgium, Canada, Croatia, Germany, Hungary, Ireland, Netherlands, New Zealand, Portugal, Romania, Spain, United Kingdom, USA.

All their online protocols have been stamped “Not for IRB (Institutional Review Board) submission,” which makes one wonder what was changed when the trial arms were put before IRBs for approval.

Five UK chief medical officers wrote a “Dear Colleague” letter, begging physicians to enroll their Covid patients in clinical trials, including ‘Recovery’ and REMAP, and discouraging “off-label” treatments for Covid outside of trials.  Did they know they were asking treating physicians to significantly up the risk of death for their patients?  Are they aware that as of today, June 19, the UK has had more deaths from Covid-19 than any country in the world outside the US and Brazil, with 5 and 3 times the UK population, respectively.

Why is public health being turned on its head?  This is the third major, multicenter clinical trial of hydroxychloroquine testing toxic doses on Covid patients.  The Recovery and Solidarity trials (with almost identical toxic HCQ doses as REMAP) abruptly ended their hydroxychloroquine studies in the past two weeks, coincidentally as people began noticing the excessive doses, especially on Twitter.

Who or what is willing to maim and kill patients in order to to kill hydroxychloroquine’s use in Covid-19?

*******************

WHO and UK trials using potentially lethal hydroxychloroquine dose–according to WHO consultant, posted June 14, 2020

The Solidarity Trial is a WHO-led conglomeration of many national trials of treatments for Covid-19. Per the WHO:

As of 3 June 2020, more than 3500 patients have been recruited in 35 countries, with over 400 hospitals actively recruiting patients. Overall, over 100 countries have joined or expressed an interest in joining the trial, and WHO is actively supporting 60 of them…

The hydroxychloroquine arm of the Solidarity trials restarted enrolling patients June 3, after being halted  May 25 by WHO Director-General Dr. Tedros Ghebreyesus and the Executive Group of the Solidarity Trial. (The hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) arm of the trials was stopped after publication of the Lancet Surgisphere study, which claimed 35% higher death rates in patients who received hydroxychloroquine, but the study was retracted when no one could verify that the Surgisphere database existed).

Below are the drugs being tested in Solidarity:

  • Remdesivir
  • Hydroxychloroquine
  • Lopinavir with Ritonavir
  • Lopinavir with Ritonavir plus Interferon beta-1a.

However, the doses were not specified on WHO’s list of the drugs to be trialed, nor were the actual doses specified, surprisingly, in WHO’s consultation on chloroquine (CQ) dosing, dated April 8. Instead, the introduction of the report of that meeting notes,

“The chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine schedule selected for the trial includes two oral loading doses (250 mg per tablet CQ or 200 mg per tablet HCQ), then oral twice-daily maintenance doses for ten days. This meeting convened to discuss the appropriateness of the selected doses for the trial.”

Last week, I was alerted to the fact that India’s ICMR, its official medical research agency, had written to the WHO, telling WHO that the hydroxychloroquine doses being used in the Solidarity trial were 4 times higher than the doses being used in India.  Then I learned that Singapore has been hesitant to participate in the WHO trial, due to the hydroxychloroquine dose.

The UK “Recovery” trial was one part of the international Solidarity conglomeration of clinical trials.  The trial ended its HCQ arm on June 4, reporting no benefit. In-hospital mortality of the 1542 patients receiving hydroxychloroquine was 25.7%, or 396 people.

The Recovery trial Study Protocol notes it is funded in part by the Wellcome Trust and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, and by UK government agencies.  The Protocol provides the doses of hydroxychloroquine used, on page 22.  Twitter users began to notice a dosing issue, with hashtag #Recoverygate.

The quote from the WHO report on dosing, 4 paragraphs ago, seems to be deliberately vague or even misleading, as the actual dose used in the Solidarity and Recovery trials is

  • 12 tablets during the first 24 hours (800mg initial dose, 800 mg six hours later, 400 mg 6 hrs later, 400 mg 6 hours later),
  • then 400 mg every 12 hours for 9 more days.
  • This is 2,400 mg during the first 24 hours, and a cumulative dose of 9.2 grams over 10 days.

While I could not find the WHO HCQ dosing on the WHO website, co-Principal Investigators of the Recovery trial, Drs. Peter Horby and Martin Landray, claimed they followed the WHO dosing.  Landray also told the periodical Paris Soir he was using the same hydroxychloroquine dose used for amebiasis.  However, the accepted use for HCQ in amebiasis is only for a liver abscess and only then in pregnancy, when other drugs cannot be used.  That dose is 600 mg per day for 2 days, then 300 mg per day, less than half the Recovery dose.  Professor Horby said that Paris Soir misinterpreted Landray’s comments, but Paris Soir said Landray had confirmed what he told them in an email.

We also know, from an official Belgian guideline document issued June 8, that high doses were used not only by Recovery in the UK, but also by the Discovery trial in the EU and by the WHO.

We also know that in Brazil, both a high dose and a low dose were trialed, and by April 17 the high dose arm was stopped prematurely due to an excess of deaths.  The low dose trial continues in Brazil.

How is the drug hydroxychloroquine normally used?  For chronic daily use in systemic lupus erythematosus or rheumatoid arthritis, patients usually receive between 200 and 400 mg daily.  In acute Q fever, 600 mg daily may be given at the start of treatment.

We also know from WHO’s March 13 Informal consultation on the potential role of chloroquine that the Gates Foundation had been studying the drug’s pharmacokinetics, and of the 25 participants at this meeting, 5 were from the Gates Foundation.

The only treatment dose mentioned in their report was in a paragraph about preventive doses.  It said,

“Higher doses would be considered for treatment, i.e., 10mg/kg base, followed by 5mg/kg twice daily for seven days.”

What is the “base”?  A 200 mg dose of chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine contains 155 mg “base” drug.

The typical 70 kg person would, if this suggestion had been followed, receive 700 mg base, or  900 mg of hydroxychloroquine, as a loading dose. Generally, a loading dose refers only to a first dose, not to several additional doses within 24 hours, but it can potentially refer to more.

What is a toxic dose?  All experts agree. “… chloroquine has a small toxic to therapeutic margin,” according to Goldfrank’s Toxicologic Emergencies.  It is very safe when used correctly in the right patients, but a bit more can potentially kill.  Prof. Nicholas White, who attended both WHO consultations on the chloroquines, has mentioned this.

The WHO hired a consultant to explore the toxicity of hydroxychloroquine in 1979. The consultant, H. Weniger, looked at 335 episodes of adult poisoning by chloroquine drugs.  Weniger on page 5 notes that a single dose of 1.5-2 grams of hydroxychloroquine base “may be fatal.”

The Recovery trial used 1.860 grams hydroxychloroquine base (equal to 2400 mg of hydroxychloroquine) in the first 24 hours for treatment of already very ill, hospitalized Covid-19 patients, a potentially lethal dose.

The dose used in the Recovery trial is not recommended for therapy of any medical condition, which I confirmed with Goodman and Gilman’s Pharmacology textbook, the drug’s label, and the online medical encyclopedia UptoDate.

This excessive dose apparently continues to be used in WHO Solidarity trials in countries around the world.

It appears that the Solidarity trials are not testing the benefits of HCQ on Covid-19, but rather testing whether patients tolerate toxic, nontherapeutic doses.

The WHO Solidarity trials, in order to rapidly enroll patients and spare clinicians a lot of paperwork, collect only limited information on side effects.  No information has yet been provided regarding causes of death in the completed hydroxychloroquine arm of the Recovery trial, in which 396 patients died.

The Solidarity trial design being employed by WHO may help obscure whether mortality is due to drug toxicity (in which case, one would expect cause of death to be arrhythmias such as torsade de points, neuropsychiatric effects, or hypoglycemia) versus Covid-19.

The WHO report of its meeting on chloroquine dosing states,

“Although the preponderance of opinion tilted towards a reasonable benefit risk profile for the intervention, there was some scepticism about what was considered a ‘minimalistic safety data collection’ currently included in the protocol.”

The high dose regimen being used in the Solidarity trials has no medical justification.  The trial design, with its limited collection of safety data, may make it more difficult to identify toxic drug effects, compared to standard drug trials.  This is entirely unethical.

Excessive dosing makes it impossible to assess therapeutic benefit, if any, of HCQ.

Giving the drug only to hospitalized patients means that the window of time during which HCQ would be expected to provide the most benefit, when viral titers are rising, has passed.

To sum up:

  1. HCQ is being given in non-therapeutic, toxic dose
  2. HCQ is being given too late in the disease course to determine its value against SAR-CoV-2.
  3. Limited safety data in the Solidarity trials serves to protect trial investigators and sponsors from disclosure of adverse drug effects, including death
  4. I suspect WHO has been deliberately misleading regarding the doses chosen.
  5. The conclusions to be drawn are frightening:
    a)  WHO and other national health agencies, and charities, have designed huge clinical trials to assure that hydroxychloroquine will fail to show benefit, presumably to advantage its much more expensive competitor(s) and vaccines in development.
    b)  In so doing, these agencies and charities have conspired to increase the number of deaths in these trials.
    c)   In so doing, they have conspired to deprive billions of people from potentially benefiting from a safe and inexpensive drug during a major pandemic.  This could lead to prolongation of the pandemic and many increased cases and deaths.

My recommendation is for WHO to immediately stop using this dosing schedule, give trial subjects clinically appropriate doses, and collect more complete safety data.  I would remind WHO that if the consent forms fail to inform patients that the dose of HCQ they may receive is much higher than for any other indication, that WHO may be subject to legal action for injuries incurred in its sham of a clinical trial.

*******************

Read the full article at AHRP.org

_____________________

**Comment**

Excellent article pointing out the flaws in government sponsored HCQ research.  It’s definitely looking like they really didn’t want to help COVID patients – but discover HCQ toxicity.  Notice once again, that these unethical researchers didn’t change their ways until people pointed this out and started spreading the world.

Is this the end of science? Will we only get the truth if every single study is watch-dogged by unaffiliated 3rd parties?

For more:  https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2020/06/06/fraudulent-hcq-covid-19-study-in-lancet-exposed/

https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2020/06/24/influence-of-conflicts-of-interest-on-public-positions-in-the-covid-19-era-the-case-of-gilead-sciences/

https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2020/06/16/aaps-sues-fda-for-irrational-interference-of-access-to-life-saving-hydroxychloroquine/

 

 

 

 

Category:

Activism, Treatment, Viruses

Comments Off on Dr. Meryl Nass Discovers Hydroxychloroquine Experiments Were Designed to Kill COVID Patients- How Many Were Murdered?