now browsing by author
Reproduced from original article:
- According to Dr. Peter McCullough, early treatment could have prevented up to 85% of COVID-19 deaths. Early at-home treatment also minimizes the spread, as the amount of time you’re infectious can be reduced from two weeks to about four days
- Despite being inexpensive and readily available, early treatments have all been censored and suppressed in order to secure a global mass vaccination campaign
- More than 80 colleges and any number of employers are now implementing mandatory COVID vaccination. The only way for them to understand what the implications of that decision might be is to review the VAERS data. They’re not going to get any clues elsewhere, thanks to the universal suppression of information
- An estimated 124 million Americans are now fully vaccinated against COVID-19. As of April 30, 2021, 3,837 died shortly after their COVID shots. That’s more than have died from all available vaccines combined from mid-1997 until the end of 2013 — a period of 15.5 years
- In 1976, the U.S. government vaccinated 45 million people against pandemic swine flu. The entire program was canceled after reports of just 53 deaths
According to Dr. Peter McCullough, vice chief of internal medicine at Baylor University Medical Center and known for being one of the top five most-published medical researchers in the United States, COVID-19 vaccines are killing “huge numbers” of people and the government is simply ignoring it.
In a video interview with investigative journalist and founder of Liberty Sentinel, Alex Newman, McCullough says the U.S. government, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and health agencies around the world have all committed to vaccinating the global population while sitting on data showing the COVID-19 “vaccines” are turning out to be the most lethal vaccines ever created.
Safe Treatments Suppressed in Favor of Dangerous ‘Vaccines’
McCullough, who also has a master’s degree in public health, has provided testimony in three different Senate hearings, sharing the treatments he used to help patients recover from COVID-19 and avoid hospitalization. He summarizes his protocol in the interview.
These strategies are also detailed in “Pathophysiological Basis and Rationale for Early Outpatient Treatment of SARS-CoV-2 Infection,” published in the January 2021 issue of the American Journal of Medicine.1 He was also a consulting editor of “A Guide to Home-Based COVID Treatment.”2
During a recent Texas state Senate Health and Human Services Committee hearing, McCullough noted that, according to available data, early treatment could have prevented up to 85% of COVID-19 deaths.3 Early at-home treatment also minimizes the spread, as the amount of time you’re infectious can be reduced from two weeks to about four days.
Yet, despite being inexpensive and readily available, early treatments have all been censored and suppressed, apparently in order to secure this global mass vaccination campaign. In fact, as McCullough notes, there’s been no clarified guidance on COVID treatment at all, not even hospital protocols.
The entire focus of our health agencies has been on masking, lockdowns and waiting for a gene therapy “vaccine.” The results have been devastating. Five months into the mass vaccination campaign, more than 10,000 in the U.S. and European Union have already died after getting the shots. Any other vaccine would have been pulled from the market by now.
Shocking Stats Show Just How Dangerous COVID ‘Vaccines’ Are
For example, in 1976, the U.S. government vaccinated 45 million people against pandemic swine flu. The entire program was canceled after reports of just 53 deaths, according to Fox News.4 Note: The number of deaths reported after the 1976 inoculation program varies from three to 53, depending on the source.5,6,7
Now, health authorities are shrugging off more than 3,800 deaths8 after COVID-19 vaccination as either coincidental or inconsequential. Think about that. Five months into the COVID-19 vaccination campaign, we’re looking at a death toll that is 7,000% greater than during the swine flu vaccination campaign, which was canceled after the vaccine was deemed too risky.
The COVID-19 “vaccine” is also on a level of magnitude more dangerous than the seasonal flu vaccine. As reported by McCullough, on average, there are 20 to 30 deaths reported following the seasonal flu vaccine, which is given to about 195 million Americans each year.9
Compare that to these novel COVID-19 gene therapies. So far, an estimated 124 million Americans are fully vaccinated against COVID-19 and the death count is already at 3,837, as of April 30, 2021.10
Worse, it appears the vaccine adverse event reporting system (VAERS) is backlogged by about three months,11 so this is likely to be a serious undercount. Even if VAERS was fully caught up, it would be an undercount, as only 1%12,13 to 10%14 of adverse events after vaccination are ever reported. So, in reality, we might be looking at anywhere from 38,370 to 383,700 COVID vaccine-related deaths.
A third comparison can be made against vaccines as a whole. As reported by Tucker Carlson,15 May 6, 2021, the COVID-19 shots have already resulted in more deaths than all available vaccines combined from mid-1997 until the end of 2013 — a period of 15.5 years.
No Other Vaccine Has Harmed This Many
In a recent report, the Israeli People Committee (IPC), a civilian body of health experts, similarly concluded that “there has never been a vaccine that has harmed as many people.” The Committee received 288 reports of death following COVID-19 vaccination, 90% of which occurred within 10 days. According to this report (translated from Hebrew):16
“According to Central Bureau of Statistics data during January-February 2021, at the peak of the Israeli mass vaccination campaign, there was a 22% increase in overall mortality in Israel compared with the previous year.
In fact, January-February 2021 have been the deadliest months in the last decade, with the highest overall mortality rates compared to corresponding months in the last 10 years.
Amongst the 20-29 age group the increase in overall mortality has been most dramatic. In this age group, we detect an increase of 32% in overall mortality in comparison with previous year.
Statistical analysis of information from the Central Bureau of Statistics, combined with information from the Ministry of Health, leads to the conclusion that the mortality rate amongst the vaccinated is estimated at about 1: 5000 (1: 13000 at ages 20-49, 1: 6000 at ages 50-69, 1: 1600 at ages 70+).
According to this estimate, it is possible to estimate the number of deaths in Israel in proximity of the vaccine, as of today, at about 1000-1100 people.”
CDC Denies Lethal Risks
The contrast in the government’s response to COVID-19 vaccine deaths compared to the 1976 swine flu pandemic vaccination campaign is “alarming,” McCullough says.
February 19, 2021, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention issued a statement saying there were “no safety problems” with Pfizer’s and Moderna’s mRNA injections.17 Of the 113 deaths reported at that time, none was deemed to be related to the vaccines.
Then, in May 2021, after reviewing 1,600 deaths reported to VAERS with an unnamed group of U.S. Food and Drug Administration doctors, the CDC declared that none of the deaths was related to the vaccine — this despite 24% of deaths have occurred within 48 hours of injection, and 16% within 24 hours. The problem is that it would take several months to investigate that many deaths, so the likelihood that this was a thorough investigation is slim to none.
“It is impossible for unnamed regulatory doctors without any experience with COVID-19 to opine that none of the deaths were related to the vaccine,” McCullough tells Newman.
“So, I think this was effectively a scrubbing, like we’ve seen elsewhere … We’re sitting on, right now, the biggest number of vaccine deaths [and] there’s been tens of thousands of hospitalizations, all attributable to the vaccine, and [we’re still] going strong.”
The reason you’re not hearing any negative news about these “vaccines” is because major media networks and stakeholders in COVID-19 vaccines have formed a “trusted news credibility coalition” that seeks to prevent any negative information about COVID vaccines to get into the popular media “because they’re concerned about vaccine hesitancy,” McCullough says.
Suppression of Concerning VAERS Data Underway
As of April 30, 2021, 3,837 people have died, and 16,014 people have reported serious injuries and disabilities following COVID-19 injections.18 Among these deaths were two 15-year-olds and one 16-year-old. There were also 235 reports or miscarriage or premature birth as of April 30, 2021.19
You can check the latest statistics yourself using openvaers.com.20 So-called fact checkers are of course working overtime to quell rumors about the trends showing in the VAERS data.
A recent fact-check article21 by The Post and Courier quotes unnamed, obscure experts stating that dying from the COVID-19 vaccine “isn’t an outcome people should worry about,” and that “despite misinformation shared on social media that sources a federal vaccines safety database” — meaning the VAERS database — “there is no proof of any patients having died as a result of taking a COVID-19 vaccine in the United States.”
PolitiFact also recently blew off VAERS as a “breeding ground for misinformation.”22 It warned social media posts reporting VAERS data are not to be trusted, as VAERS “reports are not verified” and “are not enough to determine whether a vaccine causes a particular adverse event.”
While both of those statements are true, PolitiFact fails to address the glaring problem that both the CDC and the FDA, which run VAERS jointly, are ignoring clearly emerging trends of harm. The Defender contacted the CDC March 8, 2021, with a list of questions about the vaccine injury reports, and as of May 11 — 64 days later — had received no reply.23
“[VAERS] is the only place where America, policy makers and others, are going to get a fair shake in understanding safety,” McCullough says. He points out that more than 80 colleges and any number of employers are now implementing mandatory COVID vaccination, and the only way for them to understand what the implications of that decision might be is to review the VAERS data. They’re not going to get any clues elsewhere, thanks to the universal suppression of information.
Overall, it appears the entire mission of VAERS and other such databases is being tossed aside. The system’s primary goal is to “detect new, unusual or rare vaccine adverse events” as a way to monitor the safety of vaccines.
As noted by McCullough, after five reported deaths where a medical product is suspected of being involved, the FDA will issue a black box warning — a notice to consumers warning them that the drug might cause death. At around 50 suspicious deaths, the product is pulled off the market.
The system is clearly failing if every single report of serious injury or death, including all the ones occurring within hours and in people with no underlying health problems, are simply written off as coincidence. It’s simply not believable.
EU Reports More Than 7,700 Deaths
Signs of lethal risks are also evident in data from the European Union, where the EudraVigilance system had received 7,766 reports of death after COVID vaccination as of April 17, 2021.24
Of these, Pfizer’s mRNA injection accounted for the largest number of deaths at 4,293, followed by Moderna with 2,094 deaths, AstraZeneca with 1,360 deaths and Johnson & Johnson with 19 deaths. As noted by McCullough:
“In my professional opinion, the safest vaccine on the market was the J&J vaccine, and that was pulled for very rare blood-clotting events. We had 7 million people vaccinated but the estimates are for the other two vaccines available [Pfizer and Moderna], the blood-clotting rates are probably 30 times that of J&J, and these others are going strong.”
Active Vaccine Surveillance Is Months Away
The FDA has also admitted that its analysis of vaccine safety data will be delayed for weeks, if not months. Right as the pandemic hit, they were in the process of transitioning from its Post-Licensure Rapid Immunization Safety Monitoring (PRISM) network, which was used to track side effects from the pandemic H1N1 vaccine, into a new system called the Biologics Effectiveness and Safety System (BEST).
In the meantime, they’re relying on a patchwork of passive reporting systems, including VAERS, the Vaccine Safety Datalink and a phone-based self-reporting system called v-safe.
Since all of these are based on voluntary self-reporting, they can miss potentially lethal and unanticipated reactions. By the end of March 2021, only 6.4% of all vaccinated individuals had enrolled in v-safe, for example,25 which means a vast majority aren’t being surveilled for side effects.
While BEST will be an active surveillance system capable of examining data from 100 million people and actually compare rates of adverse events between vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals to detect trends, we are months away from this kind of analysis.
In the meantime, people continue to die, and for no good reason, considering the lethality of COVID-19 is on par with seasonal influenza for most age groups.26,27,28,29,30
Signs of Malfeasance Abound
At this point, the list of evidences of malfeasance is exceedingly long. For a rundown of several key issues, see the peer-reviewed paper “COVID-19: Restoring Public Trust During a Global Health Crisis — An Evidence-Based Position Paper to Ensure Ethical Conduct.”31
In it, the author substantiates McCullough’s allegations of rampant, wanton misconduct among public health officials, the active suppression of safe and effective treatments, and pandemic measures being implemented based on incorrect assumptions and outright lies.
As noted by McCullough in the featured interview, advertisements for COVID-19 vaccines were launched in violation of law before FDA licensing was complete. The initial studies had not even been completed. To this day, none of the COVID-19 “vaccines” has been licensed.
They only have emergency use authorization (EUA), and there’s no possible way for anyone to assure their safety. All of these facts are why they’re completely optional, and legally cannot yet be made mandatory, even though many schools and businesses are attempting to do that.
McCullough also stresses that in the COVID-19 vaccine trials, both the vaccinated groups and control groups had a less than 1% infection rate, which is about as low as it gets, in terms of risk. What this means is the overall public health impact of COVID-19 vaccination is also bound to be less than 1% — in other words, meaningless.
He also points out that around the world, we’re now seeing about 60% of active COVID-19 cases being in fully vaccinated individuals. In McCullough’s own practice, the COVID-19 patients he saw in the two weeks before this interview, about 60% were fully vaccinated, and there’s no difference in disease presentation between vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals.
Death Tally May Spike During Fall and Winter
While the death toll from COVID-19 vaccines is already at a historical level, I fear it may shoot far higher as we move through fall and winter. The reason for this is because one of the greatest wild cards of these vaccines is antibody‐dependent enhancement (ADE) or paradoxical immune enhancement (PIE).
I’ve detailed this issue in several articles, including “How COVID-19 Vaccine Can Destroy Your Immune System” and “Will Vaccinated People Be More Vulnerable to Variants?” In summary, ADE means that rather than enhance your immunity against the infection, the vaccine actually enhances the virus’ ability to enter and infect your cells, resulting in more severe disease than had you not been vaccinated.32,33
Fall and winter are the seasons in which most coronavirus infections occur, be it SARS-CoV-2 or other coronaviruses responsible for the common cold. If ADE does turn out to be a common problem with these injections, then vaccinated individuals may in fact turn out to be at significantly higher risk of severe COVID-19 and a potentially lethal immune reaction due to pathogenic priming.
Another potential risk is that of Th2 immunopathology, a form of cell-based enhancement in which a faulty T cell response triggers allergic inflammation. This condition may in some cases overlap with ADE, and can, like ADE, be life-threatening.34
In my view, there are still so many potential avenues of harm and so many uncertainties, I would encourage everyone to do your homework, keep reading and learning, weigh the potential pros and cons, ignore all pressure tactics and take your time when deciding whether to get any of these COVID-19 gene therapies.
If you or someone you love has already received a COVID-19 vaccine and are experiencing side effects, be sure to report it, preferably to all three of these locations:35
- If you live in the U.S., file a report on VAERS
- Report the injury on VaxxTracker.com, which is a nongovernmental adverse event tracker (you can file anonymously if you like)
- Report the injury on the Children’s Health Defense website
- 1 American Journal of Medicine January 2021; 134(1): 16-22
- 2 A Guide to Home-Based COVID Treatment (PDF)
- 3 Lifesitenews.com April 8, 2021
- 4, 15 Fox News May 6, 2021
- 5 Los Angeles Times April 27, 2009
- 6 CDC January 2006
- 7 Time August 25, 2020
- 8, 10, 18, 19 The Defender May 7, 2021
- 9 Leo Hohmann April 30, 2021
- 11 Twitter Alex Berenson April 30, 2021
- 12 AHRQ December 7, 2007
- 13 The Vaccine Reaction January 9, 2020
- 14 BMJ 2005;330:433
- 16 Aletho News April 21, 2021
- 17 NBC News February 19, 2021
- 20 Openvaers.com
- 21 The Post and Courier April 12, 2021
- 22 Politifact May 3, 2021
- 23 The Defender May 11, 2021
- 24 The Defender April 29, 2021
- 25 Yahoo News May 2, 2021
- 26 The Mercury News May 20, 2020 (Archived)
- 27 Annals of Internal Medicine September 2, 2020 DOI: 10.7326/M20-5352
- 28 Breitbart May 7, 2020
- 29 Scott Atlas US Senate Testimony May 6, 2020 (PDF)
- 30 John Ioannidis US Senate Testimony May 6, 2020 (PDF)
- 31 COVID-19: Restoring Public Trust During a Global Health Crisis — An Evidence-Based Position Paper to Ensure Ethical Conduct (PDF)
- 32, 34 PNAS April 14, 2020 117 (15) 8218-8221
- 33 Viral Immunology 2003;16(1):69-86
- 35 The Defender January 25, 2021
© May 18th 2021 GreenMedInfo LLC. This work is reproduced and distributed with the permission of GreenMedInfo LLC.
Want to learn more from GreenMedInfo? Sign up for the newsletter here:
Reproduced from original article:
Posted on: Wednesday, May 12th 2021 at 4:00 pm
Written By: GreenMedInfo Research Group
This article is copyrighted by GreenMedInfo LLC, 2021
Achieving and maintaining a healthy weight may be tough, but these natural aids can help you lose unwanted pounds — and keep them off for good
Mother Nature is all about balance, but the pace of modern life can cause you to feel a bit tilted at times. If you are struggling with maintaining a healthy weight, or even if you have only a few pounds to lose, these six natural antiobesity agents can help you shift the scale into equilibrium.
This warm, reddish-brown spice comes from the inner bark of trees from the genus Cinnamomum and is used to flavor sweet and savory foods and beverages the world over. What you may not know is that cinnamon is also a powerful metabolic catalyst.
A 2019 research paper published the results of a systematic review and meta-analysis of cinnamon’s effect on body weight, body mass index (BMI), waist circumference (WC), waist-hip ratio (WHR) and body fat mass. The review encompassed 1,480 participants from 21 randomized, controlled trials and found that cinnamon consumption significantly reduces BMI, body weight and WHR.[i]
Cinnamon has anti-hyperlipidemic and anti-hyperglycemic effects,[ii] making this common spice a potent ally for individuals with insulin sensitivity who wish to control their weight. Cinnamon may also stimulate the development of brown fat,[iii] a type of fat that is considered essential to healthy metabolism.
High percentages of brown fat are linked to reduced levels of branched chain amino acids (BCAAs), which, although essential for many body functions, are linked with obesity, insulin resistance and Type 2 diabetes at high levels.[iv]
2. Cocoa / Dark Chocolate
Dark chocolate is made from the solids and butter extracted from cacao beans. These prized beans are actually the dried, fermented seeds of the Theobroma cacao tree, a small evergreen native to Central and South America.
Food-grade extracts from the beans include powders, extracts, nibs, butters and solids, all packing enormous health benefits. When used in the making of dark chocolate, cocoa, which is made from cacao beans that have been roasted, may even help you fight obesity and overweight.
A 2018 review and meta-analysis on cocoa supplementation found that dark chocolate reduces body weight, BMI and waist circumference.[v] Dose and duration were important determinants for favorable effects.[vi] When shopping for healthy dark chocolate, it’s best to stick with organic cocoa beans with at least 70% cacao for optimal health effects.
3. Citrus and Citrus Extracts
A ubiquitous dietary trope is replacing a bacon-and-eggs breakfast with half a grapefruit when you’re on a diet. This symbolism was rooted in good sense — citrus fruits have been scientifically linked to fat-burning.[vii] But what is it about citrus that revs up your metabolic engine?
A 12-week study on overweight adults found that supplementation with a citrus extract powder resulted in a significant reduction in body fat compared to placebo.[viii] A 2008 study on a citrus-based dietary supplement saw participants lose weight and reduce their overall body fat.
Researchers opined that the weight loss may be attributable to the extract’s high polyphenol count,[ix] a benefit not available in average grocery store juices. A similar study on healthy women drinking commercial pasteurized orange juice for two months produced no change in body composition.[x]
4. Green Coffee Extract
Green coffee beans are exactly that — coffee beans that haven’t been roasted. These raw, nutty beans are developing a following for numerous health-promoting qualities, including a growing reputation as a weight-loss supplement. Loaded with antioxidant compounds called chlorogenic acids, raw green coffee beans may help rev up your weight loss efforts.
A 2020 review and meta-analysis on studies of green coffee extract (GCE) on anthropometric measures in adults found that the supplement had a beneficial effect on body weight, BMI and waist size. Researchers determined that GCE could provide a safe, cost-effective alternative in the treatment of obesity.[xi]
A separate meta-analysis reviewed 16 randomized controlled trials on GCE and found that the supplement improved obesity indices, including lowering BMI in obese and overweight individuals.[xii] To gain maximum benefit, supplementation periods of at least four weeks are indicated.[xiii]
Soup may be a broad category, but if you are overweight, including soup in your dietary routine can help turn your metabolism into a fat-burning furnace. A 2020 meta-analysis sought to determine the mechanisms behind this association by reviewing 1,873 scientific articles and seven cross-sectional studies on soup consumption and obesity. Incredibly, all studies in the review indicated a significant inverse correlation between soup consumption and obesity.[xiv]
For optimal weight-loss and health benefit, focus on soups with fresh, whole ingredients — not processed, canned varieties. Miso, vegetable stock and pastured chicken or beef broth are all highly nutritious ingredients on which to base a variety of soup recipes. Don’t forget to add vegetables like garlic, onion, carrots and celery to your soup stock. These sulfur-rich vegetables boost the nutritional profile of your stock and enhance flavors, ensuring your soup is a tasty, vitamin and mineral-rich lunch or dinner option.
Spirulina, or blue-green algae, is a nutritional powerhouse that is cultivated in both fresh and salt-water environments. With use that dates to the Aztecs, spirulina has stood the test of time as a nutritional supplement. Modern science has revealed that it may also be a potent ally in the modern fight against obesity.
There have been numerous studies on the use of spirulina as a weight-loss aid, including a 2019 systematic review and meta-analysis that found spirulina supplementation had a significant effect on body fat percentage and anthropometric indices such as waist circumference.[xv] A 2016 study found that three months of regular consumption of spirulina not only improves BMI and weight but also results in improvements in blood pressure and endothelial function.[xvi]
To effect optimal weight loss and keep it off, any supplementation regimen should be combined with dietary adjustments such as fasting or limiting overall caloric consumption and avoiding foods with excess sugar. In addition, including daily intentional movement will provide a boost to metabolism and may even enhance your mood.
When it comes to achieving and sustaining healthy weight, there is no magic pill. But there are helpful allies in the food-based medicine cabinet that can help you stay on course and feel your best while you watch the pounds melt away.
[i] Zeinab Yazdanpanah, Maryam Azadi-Yazdi, Hadis Hooshmandi, Nahid Ramezani-Jolfaie, Amin Salehi-Abargouei. Effects of cinnamon supplementation on body weight and composition in adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis of controlled clinical trials. Phytother Res. 2019 Dec 4. Epub 2019 Dec 4. PMID: 31800140
[ii] Zeinab Yazdanpanah, Maryam Azadi-Yazdi, Hadis Hooshmandi, Nahid Ramezani-Jolfaie, Amin Salehi-Abargouei. Effects of cinnamon supplementation on body weight and composition in adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis of controlled clinical trials. Phytother Res. 2019 Dec 4. Epub 2019 Dec 4. PMID: 31800140
[iii] Zeinab Yazdanpanah, Maryam Azadi-Yazdi, Hadis Hooshmandi, Nahid Ramezani-Jolfaie, Amin Salehi-Abargouei. Effects of cinnamon supplementation on body weight and composition in adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis of controlled clinical trials. Phytother Res. 2019 Dec 4. Epub 2019 Dec 4. PMID: 31800140
[iv] NIH.gov, Research Matters, How brown fat improves metabolism, https://www.nih.gov/news-events/nih-research-matters/how-brown-fat-improves-metabolism
[v] Hamed Kord-Varkaneh, Ehsan Ghaedi, Ali Nazary-Vanani, Hamed Mohammadi, Sakineh Shab-Bidar. Does_cocoa/dark_chocolate_supplementation_have_favorable_effect_on_body_weight,_body_mass_index_and_waist_circumference? A systematic review, meta-analysis and dose-response of randomized clinical trials. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr. 2018 Mar 19:0. Epub 2018 Mar 19. PMID: 29553824
[vi] Hamed Kord-Varkaneh, Ehsan Ghaedi, Ali Nazary-Vanani, Hamed Mohammadi, Sakineh Shab-Bidar. Does_cocoa/dark_chocolate_supplementation_have_favorable_effect_on_body_weight,_body_mass_index_and_waist_circumference? A systematic review, meta-analysis and dose-response of randomized clinical trials. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr. 2018 Mar 19:0. Epub 2018 Mar 19. PMID: 29553824
[vii] Xinjing Wang, Deming Li, Fang Liu, Yuan Cui, Xinli Li. Dietary citrus and/or its extracts intake contributed to weight control: Evidence from a systematic review and meta-analysis of 13 randomized clinical trials. Phytother Res. 2020 Mar 17. Epub 2020 Mar 17. PMID: 32182635
[viii] Xinjing Wang, Deming Li, Fang Liu, Yuan Cui, Xinli Li. Dietary citrus and/or its extracts intake contributed to weight control: Evidence from a systematic review and meta-analysis of 13 randomized clinical trials. Phytother Res. 2020 Mar 17. Epub 2020 Mar 17. PMID: 32182635
[ix] Xinjing Wang, Deming Li, Fang Liu, Yuan Cui, Xinli Li. Dietary citrus and/or its extracts intake contributed to weight control: Evidence from a systematic review and meta-analysis of 13 randomized clinical trials. Phytother Res. 2020 Mar 17. Epub 2020 Mar 17. PMID: 32182635
[x] Xinjing Wang, Deming Li, Fang Liu, Yuan Cui, Xinli Li. Dietary citrus and/or its extracts intake contributed to weight control: Evidence from a systematic review and meta-analysis of 13 randomized clinical trials. Phytother Res. 2020 Mar 17. Epub 2020 Mar 17. PMID: 32182635
[xi] Omid Asbaghi, Mehdi Sadeghian, Sepideh Rahmani, Mahnaz Mardani, Mahmoud Khodadost, Vahid Maleki, Aliyar Pirouzi, Sepide Talebi, Omid Sadeghi. The effect of green coffee extract supplementation on anthropometric measures in adults: A comprehensive systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. Complement Ther Med. 2020 Jun ;51:102424. Epub 2020 May 5. PMID: 32507437
[xii] Zahra Gorji, Hamed Kord Varkaneh, Sam Talaei, Ali Nazary-Vannani, Cain C T Clark, Somaye Fatahi, Jamal Rahmani, Shekoufeh Salamat, Yong Zhang. The effect of green-coffee extract supplementation on obesity: A systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Phytomedicine. 2019 Jul 5 ;63:153018. Epub 2019 Jul 5. PMID: 31398662
[xiii] Zahra Gorji, Hamed Kord Varkaneh, Sam Talaei, Ali Nazary-Vannani, Cain C T Clark, Somaye Fatahi, Jamal Rahmani, Shekoufeh Salamat, Yong Zhang. The effect of green-coffee extract supplementation on obesity: A systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Phytomedicine. 2019 Jul 5 ;63:153018. Epub 2019 Jul 5. PMID: 31398662
[xiv] Motonaka Kuroda, Kumiko Ninomiya. Association between soup consumption and obesity: A systematic review with meta-analysis. Physiol Behav. 2020 10 15 ;225:113103. Epub 2020 Jul 24. PMID: 32712209
[xv] Sajjad Moradi, Rahele Ziaei, Sahar Foshati, Hamed Mohammadi, Seyed Mostafa Nachvak, Mohammad Hossein Rouhani. Effects of Spirulina supplementation on obesity: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. Complement Ther Med. 2019 Dec ;47:102211. Epub 2019 Oct 17. PMID: 31780031
[xvi] A Miczke, M Szulińska, R Hansdorfer-Korzon, M Kręgielska-Narożna, J Suliburska, J Walkowiak, P Bogdański. Effects of spirulina consumption on body weight, blood pressure, and endothelial function in overweight hypertensive Caucasians: a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized trial. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci. 2016 Jan ;20(1):150-6. PMID: 26813468
Reproduced from original article:
- Researchers found people with prediabetes who ate two cans of sardines a week significantly lowered their risk of developing Type 2 diabetes; they lowered their insulin resistance and blood pressure and increased adiponectin
- Sardines are a fatty cold-water fish that are high in omega-3 fatty acids. Seek out cold water fatty fish low in toxins and contaminants such as herring, sardines, anchovies and wild-caught Alaskan salmon
- Omega-3 fats have a protective effect on your lungs and mitochondria, and may reduce inflammation, optimize muscle growth and improve metabolic syndrome
- The best way to know your level of omega-3 is through an omega-3 index test. Maintaining an optimal level of 8% or more can reduce your risk of heart disease and all-cause mortality
Type 2 diabetes is a metabolic condition that is affected by several factors, including the foods you eat and the amount of exercise you get. There are several significant consequences of Type 2 diabetes, including neuropathy, loss of sight, kidney disease and heart disease.1 Recent data2 show people who eat sardines may lower their risk of Type 2 diabetes.
Risk factors for Type 2 diabetes3 include being overweight, having a family member with Type 2 diabetes, being physically inactive and having been diagnosed with gestational diabetes (diabetes during pregnancy).
People with metabolic syndrome also have a higher risk of being diagnosed with diabetes. You may be diagnosed with metabolic syndrome if you have three of the five health conditions associated with the syndrome.4 These include high blood sugar, high blood pressure, high triglycerides, low levels of high-density lipoproteins (HDL) or a large waist circumference.
Prediabetes is a condition in which your blood sugar level is too high, but not high enough for Type 2 diabetes.5 Nearly 88 million adults in the U.S. have prediabetes, and a vast majority of those do not know they have it. Prediabetes also increases your risk of heart disease and stroke.
According to the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases,6 there are an estimated 34.2 million people in the U.S. with diabetes. This is 10.5% of the population. Nearly 7.3 million of those do not know they have diabetes. You may help reduce your potential risk of developing this condition by making dietary and exercise changes.
Two Sardines a Day May Keep Diabetes at Bay
One simple dietary change that may have a positive impact on your risk for diabetes may be adding sardines to your daily regimen. According to a 2021 study published in Clinical Nutrition,7 eating sardines consistently may have a protective effect against developing Type 2 diabetes.
The researchers enrolled 152 people who had a diagnosis of prediabetes and were at least 65 years old.8 In this study, they defined pre-diabetes as glucose levels between 100 and 124 milligrams per deciliter (mg/dL). The whole group was placed on a nutritional program to help reduce the risk of developing Type 2 diabetes.
They were then randomized into a control group and an intervention group, members of which consumed approximately two cans of sardines in olive oil each week. The participants were given instructions to eat the entire sardine without removing the bones and were given a list of recipes.
At the end of the year-long intervention, the researchers compared the risk of developing diabetes from the beginning of the study and the end of the study. In the control group, 27% were at high risk of developing Type 2 diabetes at the start of the study, which dropped to 22% at the end of one year with nutritional changes.9
However, in the sardine group, 37% were at high risk of developing Type 2 diabetes before the intervention began. At the end of one year, this dropped to 8%. The researchers also found there were other measurable parameters that improved in the group that consumed sardines each week.
These included a reduction in insulin resistance, a rise in HDL cholesterol and an increase in adiponectin, a hormone that accelerates the breakdown of glucose. They also measured a decrease in blood pressure and triglycerides.10
The study’s lead researcher believes sardines should be recommended as a food as opposed to separating the nutritional benefits from the fatty fish, which are rich in omega-3 fatty acids, calcium, vitamin D and taurine. She said:11
“Not only are sardines reasonably priced and easy to find, but they are safe and help to prevent the onset of Type 2 diabetes. It is easy to recommend this food during medical check-ups, and it is widely accepted by the population.
As we get older, restrictive diets (in terms of calories for food groups) can help to prevent the onset of diabetes … the results lead us to believe that we could obtain an equally significant preventive effect in the younger population.”
Sardines Are High in Omega-3 Fat
Sardines are a fatty fish, high in omega-3 fatty acids. After the data analysis, researchers stated they plan to study how sardines may affect the gut microbiome.12 Eating a diet high in omega-3 fats has demonstrated a protective effect on other health markers as well.
The rise in chronic inflammatory diseases in the past decades is likely associated with the introduction and current ubiquitous use of vegetable oils and processed foods high in omega-6 fatty acids.13 Although omega-3 and omega-6 fatty acids are essential for good health, a correct balance is required to be your healthiest.14
Many people consume far too many omega-6 fatty acids found in everything from french fries to frozen meals and salad dressings. Ideally, you want to maintain a ratio of 4-to-1 of omega-6 and omega-3 fats or less.15 Yet, this can be nearly impossible if you are regularly eating processed foods or restaurant fare.
In my view, one of the most hazardous fats in the human diet is omega-6 linoleic acid (LA). Processed vegetable oils are a primary source of LA, but animal foods such as chicken from concentrated animal feeding operations and farmed salmon also have a high amount thanks to the food they are fed, which is high in LA-rich grains.
As I discuss in “Why You Need More Omega-3,” there is evidence to suggest that an excessive amount of LA plays a role in many chronic diseases. Omega-3 fats are found in both plants and marine animals. However, they are different types of omega-3 and they are not interchangeable.16
Plant-based omega-3 fats are found in walnuts, leafy green vegetables, flaxseed and chia seeds.17 They contain short-chain alpha linoleic acid (ALA) and do not have the long chain docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) and eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) found in marine animal-based omega-3.
Although ALA is a precursor to EPA and DHA, it requires an enzyme to convert. In most people, the conversion rate is exceptionally small, typically less than 1%.18 While the small amount of ALA you may eat is converted into the long-chain omega-3 fats your body requires, the process is highly inefficient and cannot supply nearly as much as consuming marine-based omega-3 fats high in DHA and EPA.
It is also important to carefully select your fish since only cold-water fatty fish have high levels of omega-3. Some examples include wild-caught Alaskan salmon, sardines, anchovies, mackerel and herring. It’s best to avoid farmed fish altogether for three reasons: first, because there’s an exaggerated potential for contamination;19 second, most farms feed the fish genetically engineered corn and soy;20 and third, the omega-6 fats fed to these fish are about 90% dangerous LA fat.
In other words, consuming these fish does not correct a high omega-6 to omega-3 ratio. In fact it contributes to it, since farmed salmon have only half the omega-3 of wild salmon21,22 and more than 5.5 times the amount of omega-6.23,24
Omega-3 Protects Your Lungs and Mitochondria
In addition to a protective effect against diabetes, omega-3 fatty acids help to protect your lungs and mitochondria. Researchers followed first responders after the September 11, 2001, attack on the Twin Towers in New York25 during which firefighters and paramedics were exposed to 10 million tons of caustic material released as the towers were reduced to rubble.26
Researchers from New York University School of Medicine undertook an analysis to determine if there were indications that some first responders may have had a greater risk than others of respiratory problems that occurred after exposure.
They measured metabolites,27 which are a natural byproduct of the breakdown of fat, protein and carbohydrates, and found there were 30 specific metabolites in first responders who had a lower incidence of obstructive airway disease. They also found those with lower levels of the metabolites had a higher risk of developing pulmonary disease.
One group of metabolites associated with a lower risk of lung injury were lipids.28 The researchers found that EPA in particular acts as a precursor for reducing inflammatory response and immune response to any injury and may have helped reduce the damage in first responders triggered by exposure to toxins.29
Another study in children living in Baltimore City30 also found evidence those who ate more foods with omega-3 had a lower asthmatic response to particulate matter pollution than children with lower levels of omega-3s. Conversely, children with higher levels of omega-6 had a higher percentage of neutrophils in response to pollution, which is a white blood cell marker of inflammation.
Your omega-3 levels may also affect mitochondrial function.31 Some of the more profound effects of mitochondrial disease are evident in the brain and muscle, including the heart. Your mitochondria are important in energy production and calcium signaling, as well as apoptosis and autophagy.
One animal study demonstrated there was a positive effect on mitochondrial function and neuroprotection with the administration of omega-3 fats.32 Another lab study showed omega-3 fat exposure to cells induced metabolic rate, thus increasing mitochondrial content in comparison to control cells.33
One of the signs of advancing age is remodeling of the cell membranes in the heart.34 An impact from this remodeling is mitochondrial function, which plays a role in sustaining energy production. Changes in the mitochondrial membrane are exacerbated by the presence of omega-6, but increasing omega-3 fat can help affect aging and facilitate mitochondrial energy production.
Your Omega-3 Index May Predict Mortality
A deficiency in EPA and DHA can leave you vulnerable to chronic disease. Optimizing your omega-3 levels is a foundational component to good health. However, there is no good way to know your omega-3 level without getting an Omega-3 Index test.
Your target Omega-3 Index is 8%.35 This is the typical level of people living in Japan where you’ll find the lowest rate of sudden heart death in the world. The highest risk is in people whose Index is 4% or lower. At this point there is no evidence to suggest the measurement is different for men, women or for different ages.
One study,36 published in January 2021, evaluated 100 individuals’ Omega-3 Index and compared them against their COVID-19 outcomes. The primary outcome measurement was death. When the overall data were analyzed, the researchers found only one death in the group with the highest quartile of Omega-3 Index.
The research data also confirmed past results that demonstrated the average person in the U.S. has an Omega-3 Index near 5%,37 which is well below the measurement that has demonstrated protective effects on overall mortality.38 The data from this group showed an average index of 5.09% and a median of 4.75%.39
One study40 published in 2018 confirmed omega-3 fat can reduce your risk of cardiovascular disease, coronary heart disease and all-cause mortality. The researchers measured Omega-3 Index in 2,500 participants and found those in the highest quintile had a total mortality 34% lower than those in the lowest quintile.
The Many Benefits of Omega-3 Fats
In addition to protecting your heart, lungs and mitochondria, omega-3 fats have more health benefits, including:
|Reducing inflammation — This can be helpful for those with rheumatoid arthritis by reducing stiffness and pain.41 Women who suffer from menstrual pain may also experience milder pain.42,43|
|Optimizing muscle growth and bone strength — Omega-3 fats help your body build healthy muscle mass, including in people suffering from cancer who may experience cachexia.44 They can also help improve your bone strength by improving the utilization of calcium in your body. This may lead to a reduction in the development of osteoporosis.45|
|Improving metabolic syndrome46 and insulin resistance.47|
|Improving mental health and behavior — Evidence shows benefits for children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), including reduced aggression, hyperactivity,48 impulsivity,49 oppositional behavior50 and restlessness.51
Omega-3 is associated with lowered risk for other neurological/cognitive dysfunction as well, including memory loss, brain aging, learning disorders and ADHD,52 autism and dyslexia.53
|Protecting your vision — DHA is a major structural element in your eyes and brain.54 Low levels of DHA may increase your risk for age-related macular degeneration.55|
|Reducing your risk of kidney disease56 and colon cancer.57|
- 1 American Diabetes Association, Complications
- 2, 7 Clinical Nutrition, 2021; doi.org/10.1016/j.clnu.2021.03.014
- 3 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Diabetes Risk Factors
- 4 American Heart Association, What Is Metabolic Syndrome?
- 5 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Prediabetes
- 6 National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, Diabetes Statistics
- 8, 12 NutraIngredients, May 7, 2021
- 9 Study Finds, May 8, 2021
- 10 Open Access Government May 7, 2021
- 11 Food Navigator, May 7, 2021
- 13 Advances in Nutrition, 2020;11(6)
- 14 BMJ, 2018;5:e000946
- 15 Biomedicine and Pharmacotherapy, 2002;56(8)
- 16 Forbes, September 11, 2017
- 17 Today’s Dietitian, 2010;12(2)
- 18 Progress in Lipid Research, 2015;59:54
- 19 Environmental Health News, February 4, 2021
- 20 Living Non GMO, Hidden GMOs in the Seafood Aisle, Farm raised fish
- 21 Scientific Reports, 2016;6(21892)
- 22 EcoWatch, October 8, 2016
- 23 Nutrition Data, Fish Salmon Atlantic Wild
- 24 Nutrition Data, Fish, Salmon Farmed
- 25 NBC News, September 11, 2018
- 26 NYU Langone Health, Predicting Lung Injury and Gastroesophageal Reflux in 9/11 Firefighters
- 27, 29 EurekAlert!, September 3, 2019
- 28 Scientific Reports, 2019; 9(11939), Table 1
- 30 Johns Hopkins Medicine, March 29, 2019
- 31 Journal of Physiology, 2014; 592(6)
- 32 Prostaglandins Leukotrienes and Essential Fatty Acids, 2015; 92:23
- 33 Lipids in Health and Disease, 2012;11(142)
- 34 Experimental Gerontology, 2005;40(5):369
- 35 OmegaQuant, June 15, 2020
- 36 Prostaglandins, Leukotrienes and Essential Fatty Acids, 2021; doi.org/10.1016/j.plefa.2021.102250
- 37 OmegaQuant, March 25, 2020
- 38 GrassrootsHealth Nutrient Research Institute, Higher Omega-3 Index Associated with Lower Mortality, Cardiovascular events and mortality
- 39 Prostaglandins, Leukotrienes and Essential Fatty Acids, 2021; doi.org/10.1016/j.plefa.2021.102250 3
- 40 Journal of Clinical Lipidology, 2018; doi.org/10.1016/j.jacl.2018.02.010
- 41 Arthritis Foundation, Fish Oil
- 42 European Journal of Clinical Nutrition 1995; 49(7):508-516
- 43 American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 1996;17(4):1335-1338
- 44 Cancer 2004; 101(2): 370-378
- 45 Progress in Lipid Research, 1997;36(2-3):131
- 46 Journal of Pediatrics, 2010;157(3):395
- 47 Acta Cardiologica 2009;64(3):321
- 48 Lipids, 2003; 38(10):1007-1021
- 49 Journal of Child Neurology 2012; 27(6):747-753
- 50 Acta Paediatrics 2010; 99(10):1540-1549
- 51 Nutrition 2012; 28(6):670-677
- 52 Nordic Journal of Psychiatry 2014; doi.org/10.3109/08039488.2014.921933
- 53 Alternative Medicine Review 2007 Sep;12(3):207-27
- 54 Pediatric Research, 1990; 27(1):89-97
- 55 Survey of Ophthalmology, 2014; 59(5): 532-539
- 56 Urological Research 2011 Feb;39(1):59-67
- 57 Lipids in Health and Disease 2008 Aug 29;7(1):30
Reproduced from original article:
Analysis by Dr. Joseph Mercola Fact Checked May 17, 2021
- Between September 2019 and September 2020 alone, opioid overdoses killed 87,000 Americans — a new record-high
- Various court cases have demonstrated how Purdue Pharma, maker of OxyContin, systematically misled doctors about the drug’s addictiveness to drive up sales, resulting in an avalanche of opioid addiction and subsequent deaths
- The Massachusetts attorney general is now suing Purdue’s PR firm, Publicis Health, for its role in creating Purdue’s deceptive marketing
- Publicis is accused of placing illegal advertisements for OxyContin in the electronic medical records of patients and creating training materials for Purdue sales reps on how to combat doctor’s objections to the drugs
- Publicis also developed strategies to counter opioid guidelines issued by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and created “patient stories” to “humanize” the OxyContin brand and counter negative press about addiction risks
In previous articles, I’ve discussed the central role false advertising played in the creation of the opioid crisis.1
To recap, a single paragraph in a 1980 letter to the editor2,3 (not a study) in The New England Journal of Medicine — which stated that narcotic addiction in patients with no history of addiction was very rare — became the basis of a drug marketing campaign that has since led to the death of hundreds of thousands of people, or four times the number of Americans killed in Vietnam.
Between September 2019 and September 2020 alone, opioid overdoses killed a staggering 87,000 Americans — a new record-high.4
Purdue Pharma, the maker of OxyContin, used this letter to the editor as the basis for its claim that opioid addiction affects fewer than 1% of patients treated with the drugs. In reality, opioids have a very high rate of addiction, have not been proven effective for long-term use5 and, in fact, fail to control moderate to severe pain any better than over-the-counter pain relievers.6
Various court cases have demonstrated how Purdue systematically misled doctors about OxyContin’s addictiveness to drive up sales, resulting in an avalanche of opioid addiction and subsequent deaths.7
Unethical to the core, Purdue also cashed in on the addiction trend it manufactured by secretly founding Rhodes Pharma to manufacture generic opioids,8 and getting into the business of creating overdose treatments.9,10
Facing an estimated 2,600 lawsuits11,12 relating to its role in the opioid epidemic, Purdue filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in September 2019,13 as a way to avoid litigation losses. Just over a year later they pleaded guilty to three federal criminal charges, including violating a federal anti-kickback law, conspiracy to defraud the U.S. government and violating the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act.14,15
The company agreed to pay $8.3 billion in fines, forfeiture of past profits and civil liability payments to settle the charges,16 but short on cash — having transferred more than $10 billion of the company’s funds into family trusts and offshore accounts17 — the company was dissolved and its remaining assets used to erect a “public benefit company” owned and controlled by the U.S. government.18 Future earnings will supposedly be used to combat the opioid crisis.
Purdue’s PR Company Sued for Deceptive Marketing
While Purdue’s owners, the Sackler family, got off scot-free, states struggling with the exorbitant cost of opioid addiction aren’t ready to bury the hatchet just yet. Instead, some are going after the PR firm Purdue hired to run their deceptive marketing campaigns.
As it turns out, that PR firm is none other than Publicis, a partner of the World Economic Forum, which is leading the call for a Great Reset. As detailed in “The Web of Players Trying to Silence Truth,” Publicis appears to be coordinating the global effort to suppress information that runs counter to the technocratic narrative about COVID-19, its origin, prevention and treatment — suppression and censorship that has been repeatedly aimed at this website specifically.
At the beginning of May 2021, the Massachusetts attorney general filed a lawsuit19 against Publicis Health, accusing the Publicis subsidiary of helping Purdue create the deceptive marketing materials used to mislead doctors into prescribing OxyContin.20,21,22,23 As reported by Yahoo! News:24
“The lawsuit alleges that Publicis ‘engaged in myriad unfair and deceptive strategies that influenced OxyContin prescribing across the nation,’ a statement by Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey’s office said. Those strategies were carried out through dozens of contracts between 2010 and 2019, worth more than $50 million …
Tactics included combatting doctors’ ‘hesitancy’ to prescribe the medication, and persuading them to prescribe OxyContin over lower-dose, short-acting opioids, thus increasing the risk of addiction. Massachusetts is asking that Publicis Health pay ‘compensatory damages’ of an unspecified amount for having ‘created a public nuisance.’”
Publicis Knowingly Promoted Over-Prescription
Publicis Health argues that its work for Purdue was entirely lawful and limited to “implementing Purdue’s advertising plan and buying media space.” Publicis also claims the specific activities listed in the lawsuit fall outside the statute of limitations.
Some of those activities included placing illegal advertisements for OxyContin in the electronic medical records of patients, creating training materials for Purdue sales reps on how to combat doctor’s objections to the drugs, developing strategies to counter opioid guidelines issued by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and creating “patient stories” to “humanize” the OxyContin brand and counter negative press about addiction risks.25,26
According to the lawsuit, one patient vignette featured a 40-year-old man who had his dose increased from 10 milligrams a day to 20 mg in just three weeks. It also claims Publicis was responsible for creating and sending thousands of deceptive emails to doctors, encouraging them to not only increase patients’ dosages but also to prescribe the drug to patients who were already on less dangerous pain meds.27
Publicis also instructed Purdue to target doctors who were already writing out dangerously high numbers of prescriptions, even in the midst of a raging opioid epidemic,28 all while agency executives gleefully discussed the record fees they’d collect from the Purdue account. A March 2016 email exchange reveals the Publicis subsidiary was expecting to make up to $12.28 million from Purdue that year alone.
Publicis Also Represented Addiction Center
According to the complaint:29
“Publicis helped create a public nuisance of opioid use disorder, overdose, and death. By design, Publicis’s schemes worked to counter public health measures intended to reduce unnecessary opioid use, because more opioid use generated more profits for Publicis’s opioid clients.”
Like Purdue, Publicis also cashed in on the opioid addiction it helped create by pitching its services to organizations working to end addiction. As reported by Forbes,30 the agency “won the account to work on drugfree.org after touting how it’s been ‘immersed in the evolving national opioid medication dialogue going on between pharma companies, the government and FDA, and the public via inside access as a trusted and informed consulting partner.’”
In an interview cited by Courthouse News, Amanda Pustilnik, a senior fellow on law and applied neuroscience at Harvard Law School who also teaches at the Center for Law, Brain & Behavior at Massachusetts General Hospital, noted that:31
“The story of the opioid epidemic is often misrepresented as a story of irresponsible patients and over-prescribing doctors. This prosecution gets at the heart of the matter.
Patients and doctors were not, on average, irresponsible. They acted under the influence of a concerted plan of misinformation and over-promotion orchestrated up and down the supply chain for these medications.”
Publicis Admits Role in Censorship Push
As mentioned earlier, Publicis appears to be playing an important role in the global censorship of information relating to COVID-19, and Publicis Health admitted its involvement in this agenda as recently as April 27, 2021. In a tweet,32 the agency announced its partnership with NewsGuard, “to fight the ‘infodemic’ of misinformation about COVID-19 and its vaccines.”
In short, Publicis Health is dedicated to suppressing any information that hurts its Big Pharma clients, which include Lilly, Abbot, Roche, Amgen, Genentech, Celgene, Gilead, Biogen, AstraZeneca, Sanofi, GlaxoSmithKline and Bayer, just to name a few.
Publicis is more than a partner with NewsGuard, however. NewsGuard actually received a large chunk of its startup capital from Publicis, as detailed in “New Thought Police NewsGuard Is Owned by Big Pharma.” NewsGuard, a self-proclaimed arbiter of truth, rates websites on criteria of “credibility” and “transparency,” ostensibly to guide viewers to the most reliable sources of news and information.
In reality, however, NewsGuard ends up acting as a gate keeper with a mission to barricade unpopular truth and differences of opinion behind closed gates. Its clearly biased ranking system easily dissuades people from perusing information from low-rated sites, mine included.
Extensive Propaganda Network Works Against the Public
As detailed in “The Web of Players Trying to Silence Truth” (hyperlinked above), Publicis is part of an enormous network that includes international drug companies, fact checkers and credibility raters like NewsGuard, Google and other search engines, Microsoft, antivirus software companies like Trend Micro, public libraries, schools, the banking industry, the U.S. State Department and Department of Defense, the World Health Organization and the World Economic Forum.
Mind you, this is not a comprehensive review of links. It’s merely a sampling of entities to give you an idea of the breadth of connections, which when taken together explain how certain views — such as information about COVID-19 and vaccines — can be so effectively erased.
To understand the power that PR companies such as Publicis wield, you also need to realize that PR has, by and large, replaced the free press. In decades past, pro-industry advertising stood in stark contrast to the free press, which would frequently expose problems with products and industries, thereby serving as a counterbalance to industry propaganda.
When a free press with honest reporting based on verifiable facts actually does its job, ineffective or toxic products are driven off the market. All of this changed in the late 20th century, when media outlets started relying on advertisers for the bulk of their revenues.
As intended, journalists quickly came under the control of advertisers, who suddenly had the power to kill stories they didn’t like. Today, news organizations simply won’t run reports that might harm the bottom line of its advertisers and, not surprisingly, the drug industry is among the top-paying advertisers.
By further partnering with the “big guns” of media — such as the Paley Center for Media, which is composed of every major media in the world33 — Publicis and its industry clients have been able to influence and control the press to virtually eliminate your ability to get the truth on many important issues, including COVID-19.
Seeing how Publicis represents most of the major pharmaceutical companies in the world and funded the creation of NewsGuard, it’s not far-fetched to assume Publicis might influence NewsGuard’s ratings of drug industry competitors, such as alternative health sites. Being a Google partner,34,35 Publicis also has unprecedented ability to simply bury undesirable views that might hurt its clientele.
NewsGuard’s health-related service, HealthGuard,36 is also partnered with the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH) — a progressive U.K.-based cancel-culture leader37 with extensive ties to government and global think tanks that has labeled people questioning the COVID-19 vaccine as “threats to national security.”
The CCDH has also published a hit-list of 12 groups and individuals it wants Big Tech to bury, deplatform and ban for disseminating COVID-19 information that runs counter to status quo propaganda. Not surprisingly, Mercola.com is on that list, and a ramp-up of personal threats that cannot be defended against in a court of law recently forced me to delete many of the articles discussing alternative treatments for COVID-19 from my website.
The Crime of the Century
If you get the chance, I recommend watching Alex Gibney’s HBO documentary “The Crime of the Century,” which details how the opioid epidemic was manufactured. In a Wall Street Journal television review, John Anderson writes, in part:38
“In Mr. Gibney’s two-part ‘Crime of the Century’ … the cinema is as exhilarating as the journalism is exhaustive. Still, the style remains in service to the story: how big pharma lied and bribed its way into billions of dollars while leaving death and devastation behind, through a seemingly conscience-free crusade to sell stronger and stronger opiates to more and more people.
It’s a success story, from the industry’s point of view. It’s also a story of villainy, with a catalog of villains — not just the Sackler family of Purdue Pharma, but their sales representatives; the U.S. congressmen to whom they made outsize donations … former prosecutors hired as lobbyists … and officials of the Justice Department and the Food and Drug Administration …
‘The business of criminal cartels and pharmaceutical companies are connected,’ Mr. Gibney says in voiceover — the very obvious example being the drift to heroin by addicts thwarted by the increased expense and reduced availability of opioids. The director then goes about establishing how and why that is so.
The default argument of Purdue Pharma and its defenders is that drug users, not drug makers, are responsible for addiction. But as the miniseries points out, the information that was fed to doctors and on which patients based the use of prescriptions — including the claim that delayed-action OxyContin wasn’t addictive — was simply untrue.”
Unethical Behavior Is Par for the Course
While Publicis is trying to downplay its role in what has been described as the crime of the century, the lawsuit against it will hopefully result in a reevaluation of marketing ethics. The agency, knowing full well there was an epidemic of opioid abuse underway, resulting in tens of thousands of premature deaths each year, took on the job of increasing Purdue’s profits by making that lethal trend worse.
Publicis claims they were just doing what advertising agencies do — they created promotional materials that boost client revenue. However, this argument circumvents any notion of ethics and concern about public health. They’re basically admitting that it’s all about making money, regardless of the cost.
So, even if their actions were within legal limits (which the Massachusetts case will eventually establish), their actions were immoral and clearly undermined public health.
They now want you to believe they are protecting public health by supporting COVID-19 censorship, but this too is working against the public good. How can you possibly make an educated decision about whether or not to participate in this gene therapy experiment if you’re not allowed to hear anything about the risks?
What Publicis calls “misinformation” is simply information that contradicts the propaganda being put out by the hands that feed it, i.e., the drug industry. History tells us companies driven by profit interest make poor truth tellers, as negative information will clearly have a detrimental impact on their bottom line. So, they lie and obfuscate. It’s that simple.
Public relations firms like Publicis are mere arms of these notoriously untruthful industries. They do their bidding because that’s what they’re paid to do. To think that Big Pharma and paid propagandists are looking out for anyone but themselves is dangerously naïve.
It is ironic doublespeak that Publicis claims to defend against misinformation that puts the public at risk, while being clearly guilty of crimes against humanity, having played a crucial role in one of the deadliest health care schemes involving lies and deceit.
- 1 The Atlantic June 2, 2017
- 2 NEJM 1980; 302(2): 123 (PDF)
- 3 STAT News May 31, 2017
- 4, 24 Yahoo News May 6, 2021
- 5 Medscape September 28, 2015
- 6 JAMA March 6, 2018;319(9):872-882
- 7 CDC Drug Overdose Deaths
- 8 New York Post, September 11, 2018
- 9 STAT News September 7, 2018
- 10 Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Superior Court Case Number 1884-cv-01808 (BLS2)
- 11, 13 BBC News September 16, 2019
- 12 Reuters March 26, 2019
- 14, 17 CNN October 21, 2020
- 15 Reuters October 21, 2020
- 16 STAT News October 21, 2020
- 18 Associated Press October 21, 2020
- 19, 29 Commonwealth of Massachusetts Superior Court Complaint CA No. 21-1055 (PDF)
- 20, 26, 27, 28 Boston Globe May 8, 2021
- 21, 25, 30 Forbes May 7, 2021
- 22 CommonHealth May 7, 2021
- 23, 31 Courthouse News May 6, 2021
- 32 Twitter Publicis Health Media April 27, 2021
- 33 The Paley Center for Media 2018 Agenda
- 34 Ad Week September 22, 2008
- 35 Google Marketing Platform Partners, Publicis Sapient
- 36 NewsGuard HealthGuard
- 37 Off-Guardian August 11, 2020
- 38 Wall Street Journal May 6, 2021 (Archived)
Reproduced from original article:
by: Damon Hines, staff writer | May 14, 2021
(NaturalHealth365) The Western diet is continually under attack. In 2004, Morgan Spurlock examined the damaging health effects of fast food in the documentary “Super Size Me.” Today, almost 20 years later, President Biden is the bogeyman who threatened the West’s way of life when The Daily Mail ran a false story (since retracted) claiming the president – in his fight against climate change – would allow Americans just one burger a month.
If the War on Burgers has taught us one thing, it’s this: no matter how much bad publicity the Western diet gets, many people would rather eat a diet high in red meat, fat, salt, and sugar – all of which have been linked to serious health issues – than have the “Hamburglar” steal their right to beef. Nevertheless, Big Meat is under fire again. Using a mouse model, a team of scientists at Georgia State University in Atlanta speculated that the colons of people who eat a Western-style diet might be more prone to colonization with foodborne bacteria, such as pathogenic strains of E. coli.
A Western-style diet is to be blamed for far MORE than previously thought
According to Ian Myles, from the U.S. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease, “the biggest features of a Western diet are over-consumption of over-refined sugars, highly refined and saturated fats, animal protein and a reduced intake of plant-based fibers.”
Over the years, studies have linked the Western diet to heart disease, colon cancer, liver damage, and an increased risk of Alzheimer’s. Its connection to chronic gut infection is just starting to be better understood.
Gut microbes play a crucial role in the health and well-being of the gut and the whole body; these microbes are connected with the control of the immune system, which controls inflammation. Long story short: the Western diet causes the good bacteria in the gut to get pushed out, leaving you exposed to bad bacteria.
TRUTH: The Western diet is destroying our microbiome one meal at a time
Twenty-five years ago, the average American consumed roughly 1,850 calories a day. Since then, our daily diet has grown by 304 calories. The additional calories are enough to add an extra 31 pounds to a person every year. It’s no surprise then that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reports that 68% of all Americans are considered overweight or obese.
The health of gut bacteria lives in the shadow of these show-stopping statistics, but the gut is more complex than previously thought, and the health of the “second brain” affects our overall well-being.
Here is how to shift your gut flora in the right direction
As summer approaches, nobody is suggesting you should “throw back a plant-based beer with your grilled Brussels sprouts.” Nor is anyone going to take you to task for “meatposting” on Instagram. Still, there are steps you can take to improve gut health.
- Eat more fermented foods, such as kefir, kimchi, miso, and kombucha
- Eat more prebiotic fiber, such as bananas, asparagus, garlic, and whole grains
- Reduce your consumption of sugar and sweetener
- Exercise regularly
- Get enough sleep
Sources for this article include:
Reproduced from original article:
by: Damon Hines, staff writer | May 15, 2021
(NaturalHealth365) When it comes to vegetables, springtime is best described as a rhapsody in green. Asparagus, pea pods, freshly foraged ramps, sorrel, toddler carrots, yardsticks of rhubarb … Farmers’ markets and market stalls overflow with mineral crunch, reminding customers long full of winter’s starch and iron that it’s time to gorge on the green. “Eat your vegetables” is common advice parents give their children, but it appears that while all vegetables are created edible, not all are created equal when it comes to nitrate-richness and promoting heart health.
According to research conducted at New Edith Cowan University (ECU), just one cup of nitrate-rich vegetables each day can lower blood pressure and significantly reduce the risk of heart disease. The study, which took place in Denmark, analyzed the dietary habits and health of more than 50,000 people over a 23-year period.
Make space on your plate for THESE veggies to improve your heart health
So what vegetables are rich in nitrates? Leafy greens such as spinach, lettuce, arugula, and Chinese cabbage are high in nitrates, and non-leafy vegetables like radishes, celery, beet, carrots, and fennel also have a strong nitrate content.
While a cup of “raw” vegetables is recommended to encourage heart health, researchers estimate that cooking vegetables reduces the nitrate content by 50%, which is still enough to promote a wide range of cardiovascular benefits.
According to lead researcher, Dr. Catherine Bondonno, “the greatest reduction in risk was for peripheral artery disease (26 percent), a type of heart disease characterized by the narrowing of blood vessels of the legs. However, we also found people had a lower risk of heart attacks, strokes, and heart failure.”
Don’t be fooled: The difference between all-natural nitrates and added nitrates is night and day
Nitrate is a confusing word. Chances are you’ve been warned to steer clear of nitrates in food, but that’s a blanket statement that needs deconstruction.
Yes, synthetic nitrates such as potassium nitrate may cause health problems. These are the chemicals added as preservatives to processed foods like deli meat, cured meat, bacon, sausage, and hot dogs. According to the Environmental Working Group, when you consume synthetic nitrates or nitrites, your body breaks them down into a compound called nitrosamines, which have been linked to an increased risk of cancer.
Vegetables and fruit, on the other hand, acquire nitrates and nitrites from the soil they grow in. Nitrates are part of natural mineral deposits, while nitrites are formed by soil microorganisms that break down animal matter. Vegetables and fruits are protein-rich and contain protective components like vitamin C, polyphenols, and fiber, which have all been shown to reduce nitrosamine formation.
Load up on nitrate-rich vegetables to protect your heart
Globally, a staggering 17.9 million people die of heart disease each year. In the U.S., where heart disease is the leading cause of death for men, women, and most racial and ethnic groups, 655,000 people die per year.
The numbers tell us one thing:
It’s time to embrace the greens. If you want to promote heart health, eat a widely varied diet with plenty of nitrate-rich vegetables and avoid excessive amounts of processed meat.
Sources for this article include:
Reproduced from original article:
Analysis by Dr. Joseph Mercola Fact Checked May 16, 2021
- I was a guest on Mikhaila Peterson’s “Opposing Views” on the topic of COVID-19, which provides two opposing viewpoints on controversial issues
- Important topics are covered, including Event 201, The Great Reset, manipulation of case numbers, risks of lockdowns and more
- The other guest featured was Jeremy Kamil, Ph.D., an associate professor of microbiology and immunology at LSU Health Shreveport; I respond to some of Kamil’s statements, which I didn’t get to do during the interview
- I also shared how best to stay healthy; one key strategy is to be metabolically flexible, and my primary recommendation is to remove linoleic acid from your diet; get plenty of sunshine to optimize vitamin D and nebulized hydrogen peroxide can help against viral illness
I recently had the opportunity to be a guest on Mikhaila Peterson’s “Opposing Views” on the topic of COVID-19. Open debate and sharing of information from all sides is so important, especially now that censorship of certain groups, organizations and individuals — in direct violation of Constitutional law — is rampant.
The other guest featured was Jeremy Kamil, Ph.D., an associate professor of microbiology and immunology at LSU Health Shreveport, who has studied the herpes virus for two decades and has a passion for studying how viruses work. Peterson said she emailed 20 doctors to get views from the conventional medical community on COVID-19 — and Kamil was the only one who agreed to be on the show.
I encourage you to watch the video in full and make up your own mind about what you hear, but as I didn’t get a chance to respond to Kamil’s statements directly, I’d like to do that now, as well as provide a recap of some of the most important take-away points from the interview.
A Trial Run for COVID-19, a Lab-Engineered Virus
When talking about COVID-19, it’s important to start at the beginning — not the start of the pandemic but Event 201, which took place in October 2019.
Representatives from the World Economic Forum, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Johns Hopkins University Population Center, the World Bank, the Chinese government and vaccine maker Johnson & Johnson were among those at the event, which was organized by Bill Gates and, too coincidentally, simulated a worldwide pandemic triggered by a novel coronavirus.1,2
Mirroring what is now occurring, social media censorship was a prominent strategy used at the event to protect the dissemination of vaccine propaganda and the narrative surrounding the global event. If you are considering brushing this off as “conspiracy theory,” you can read about Event 201 for yourself at its official site.3
Peterson and I discussed a bit about Gates, and you may be wondering why I’m bringing him up. It’s part of understanding the immense power and control being wielded by private individuals and the ultimate goal of technocratic tyranny. When the U.S. withdrew funding from the World Health Organization in 2020, Gates became the biggest funder of the WHO.
The two — Gates and the WHO — have been instrumental in pushing for a global vaccination campaign, and Gates has a great deal of money invested in these vaccines. The WHO is the tool that was used to implement a global shutdown — a catastrophe — in 2020, with the end goal being wealth transfer, economic destruction and societal reformation.
It is also interesting that Gates and company have restricted access to this highly profitable vaccine only to countries that can afford it. The patents have not been shared with other countries so they could get this “lifesaving” vaccine, which clearly emphasizes that the primary purpose of this vaccine is not to save lives but to make large profits.
Gates isn’t the only player — there are many others, including Google and founder and executive chairman of the World Economic Forum (WEF) Klaus Schwab, who first started circulating the idea of The Great Reset. Kamil said he wasn’t familiar with the term, which is something I’d urge him to read up on as he formulates his opinions.
I also touched briefly on the overwhelming evidence suggesting that SARS-CoV-2 is an engineered virus that leaked from the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV), which was conducting gain-of-function research on coronaviruses, funded by Dr. Anthony Fauci.4 It’s a lot to take in, I know, especially if this is the first you’re hearing about it, but as the pieces of the puzzle come together, it becomes obvious what is really going on.
No Flu Cases Because ‘Masks Are Really Effective’?
When asked about the mysterious disappearance of flu during the 2020-2021 season, Kamil stated it’s because “masks are really effective [at] suppressing viral transmission.” If that’s the case, then why didn’t COVID-19 cases similarly disappear? The next rational question is, were flu cases and deaths simply reallocated as COVID-19 deaths?
Up until around July 2020, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) counted flu and pneumonia deaths separately, but then began reporting a combination of pneumonia, flu and COVID deaths, under a new category listed as “PIC” (Pneumonia, Influenza, COVID), via their COVIDView webpage.5
February 12, 2021 — toward the end of peak flu season in the U.S. — COVIDView was replaced with the COVID Data Tracker Weekly Review, which no longer appears to mention flu and pneumonia.6
As for the effectiveness of masks — and the absurdities surrounding their use during activities like swimming — there’s a wealth of evidence that masks are ineffective. Only one randomized controlled trial has been conducted on mask usage and COVID-19 transmission, and it found masks did not statistically significantly reduce the incidence of infection.7
A working paper from the National Bureau of Economic Research8 found that nonpharmaceutical interventions, such as lockdowns, quarantines and mask mandates, have not significantly affected overall virus transmission rates.9
Proper Response ‘Must Be Driven by Case Numbers’
When asked what the “proper” response to the pandemic would be, Kamil said, “It has to be driven by case numbers.” This sounds good in theory, provided the case numbers you’re basing recommendations on are accurate — and the resulting recommendations are in line with the severity of the disease and individual risk assessments. But, in the case of COVID-19, they most often were not.
What evidence is there that the case numbers were manipulated? PCR tests recommended by the WHO used to be set to 45 cycle thresholds (CTs),10 yet the scientific consensus has long been that anything over 35 CTs renders the test useless,11 as the accuracy will be a measly 3%, with the other 97% being false positives and artificially driving up case numbers.
Then, one hour after Joe Biden’s inauguration as the 46th president of the United States, January 20, 2021, the WHO — suddenly and out of the blue — lowered the recommended PCR CT,12 which automatically guaranteed that the number of “cases,” i.e., positive PCR test results, would plummet.
And this isn’t even getting into how the CDC changed how COVID-19 is recorded on death certificates in March 2020, de-emphasizing preexisting conditions and comorbidities, and basically calling all deaths in which the patient had a positive SARS-CoV-2 test a COVID-19 death.
‘Look to People Who Aren’t Making a Buck Off It’
Another one of Kamil’s points was to avoid getting data from “someone trying to sell you something.” I would agree, only Kamil used the example of someone “selling a health supplement online,” ignoring the fact that the real profiteers in this pandemic are not people selling supplements online but billionaires who are only getting richer.
Stéphane Bancel, CEO of Moderna, now has a net worth of $5.3 billion,13 to give one example. He joined the billionaires club April 2, 2020, when news that phase 2 trials of Moderna’s COVID vaccine were set to begin, driving up its stock.14
Meanwhile, Pfizer’s COVID vaccine has already generated $3.5 billion in revenue in the first three months of 2021,15 and the company said it expects “durable demand” for the vaccine to continue in coming years, similar to flu vaccines. Estimates suggest revenue will reach $26 billion for Pfizer’s COVID vaccine by the end of 2021.16
So, following Kamil’s own advice, Pfizer and Moderna would be among those to not trust, based on their making billions, which is exponentially more than any supplement manufacturer is making. But even putting profits aside, as I told Peterson, one point that should give anyone pause before trusting a company would be if it has a criminal history of fraud and selling dangerous products — of which both Pfizer and Johnson & Johnson can attest to.
Myth: It’s ‘Impossible to Die From COVID’ After Vaccination
Kamil made some statements that I strongly disagree with, one of them being that if you get a COVID-19 vaccine “it’s almost 100% impossible for you to die from COVID — even if you caught like the scariest variants we know of.” This is simply not true. As of April 26, 2021, there have been 9,245 reported cases of COVID-19 in fully vaccinated individuals, including 132 deaths.17 This is from the CDC’s own data.
There’s also a risk of death from the COVID-19 vaccine. According to the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), as of April 23, 2021, there have been 3,544 deaths reported following COVID-19 vaccination.18 Past investigations have shown only between 1%19 and 10%20 of adverse reactions are ever reported to VAERS, which is a passive, voluntary reporting system, so the actual number could be much higher.
Kamil also suggested that if you’re healthy, it makes no difference in terms of getting sick from COVID-19 because “viruses like healthy cells” and “they love a healthy [cell] just like a person might, if you’re a carnivore, might like a juicy steak.”
This seriously undermines the power that you have to take control of your health, because, in reality, it’s well known that people who are unhealthy, with underlying conditions, are far more likely to contract and die from COVID-19. Your state of health absolutely matters.
Kamil also seems to be seriously misguided about health organizations like the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, stating that it doesn’t “make a dollar more” by approving a vaccine and describing it as “one of the best organizations, like, as far as protecting your health and watching out for, like, Americans.”
While the FDA itself does not accept corporate money, it does receive money funneled via a nonprofit foundation, which in turn receives money from other nonprofits funded by private interests. It’s really all a façade because the end result is the same. Those donating the money ultimately end up with the ability to pull strings, when needed. The FDA’s conflicts of interest and failures to act on behalf of Americans’ best interests are also well noted.
Fear Is the Most Powerful Emotion to Drive Human Behavior
The pandemic has succeeded in generating fear and controlling human behavior, and anything that counters its final solution of vaccination is being censored — this is a clue that shouldn’t be overlooked. Vaccine passports are also being offered as part of this solution, as a tool to get your freedom back, but it’s at the price of — your freedom.
Imagine a world in which you cannot travel, go to a sports event, enter your workplace or even a grocery store unless you have the proper credentials. If it sounds like history repeating itself in the most horrific way, you’re not far off. Even open debate is being silenced, and it’s impossible to give informed consent to vaccination if you only know one side. When you only have one side to the story, then that’s propaganda, not real information.
What Should You Do to Stay Healthy Against COVID?
Peterson asked me one very important question, which was what should people be doing to stay healthy. One key strategy is to be metabolically flexible, and my No. 1 recommendation to do so is to remove linoleic acid from your diet.
Omega-6 linoleic acid (LA) is a pernicious metabolic poison that is highly susceptible to oxidation, and as the fat oxidizes, it breaks down into harmful subcomponents such as advanced lipid oxidation end products (ALES) and oxidized LA metabolites (OXLAMS). These ALES and OXLAMS also cause damage. To avoid LA, which is linked to chronic degenerative disease, you need to avoid all vegetable oils and eliminate virtually all processed foods and restaurant foods from your diet.
Other strategies to build immunity include optimizing vitamin D. My peer reviewed study, published in the journal Nutrients in October 2020,21 demonstrates the clear link between vitamin D deficiency and severe cases of COVID-19.
I also recommend familiarizing yourself with nebulized hydrogen peroxide, which can be used not only to improve symptoms but as a routine maintenance strategy to support optimal health. You can hear the rest of the interview in its entirety, including the unique risks posed by mRNA vaccines, by watching the video above.
- 1 The Defender, March 11, 2021
- 2 Event 201 October 2019
- 3 Center for Health Security, Event 201
- 4 Dr. Fauci’s COVID-19 Treachery October 19, 2020 (PDF)
- 5 COVIDView December 11, 2020
- 6 CDC, COVID Data Tracker Weekly Review
- 7 Annals of Internal Medicine November 18, 2020 DOI: 10.7326/M20-6817
- 8 National Bureau of Economic Research, Working Paper 27719
- 9 American Institute for Economic Research August 26, 2020
- 10 WHO.int Diagnostic detection of Wuhan Coronavirus 2019 by real-time RT-PCR, January 13, 2020 (PDF)
- 11 The Vaccine Reaction September 29, 2020
- 12 WHO.int Notice 2020/05 January 20, 2021
- 13 Forbes May 6, 2021
- 14 Forbes May 4, 2020
- 15 The New York Times May 4, 2021
- 16 BBC News May 4, 2021
- 17 CDC, Breakthrough Cases
- 18 Open VAERS April 23, 2021
- 19 The Vaccine Reaction January 9, 2020
- 20 BMJ 2005;330:433
- 21 Nutrients October 31, 2020;12, 3361; doi:10.3390/nu12113361
Reproduced from original article:
- Michael Yeadon, Ph.D., a life science researcher and former vice-president and chief scientist of allergy and respiratory research at Pfizer, fears the combination of vaccine passports and booster vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 variants may be part of a mass depopulation agenda
- Asymptomatic spread is a fallacy capitalized upon to spread fear and induce compliance. Only people who have discernible symptoms of a respiratory infection pose any health risk to others, because to be an efficient source of infection, you need a high viral load. If you have a high viral load, your immune system will fight back, which always induces symptoms
- The myth of asymptomatic spread was used to justify lockdowns, which in turn were a tool get you used to giving up your freedoms and go along with the intentional decimation of the global economy and old way of life, thereby justifying the Great Reset
- The Great Reset is about transferring global wealth and ownership rights to the technocratic elite, and giving them the power to control the world’s nations
- Digital vaccine passports will form the foundation of an unprecedented surveillance and control platform into which your entire life will be tied, from health records to biometric ID, to an all-digital centralized banking system and a social credit system, all of which can be turned off in order to coerce you into a particular behavior
How do you market and implement a financial system that nobody would want if they understood its full ramifications — a change so huge that it not only would mean the end of currency as we know it, but a total revision of sovereignty and individual rights?
In the interview above, which is part of the full-length documentary “Planet Lockdown,”1 Michael Yeadon, Ph.D., a life science researcher and former vice-president and chief scientist of allergy and respiratory research at Pfizer, shares his views on the COVID-19 pandemic, fast-tracked COVID-19 “vaccines,” the issue of mutated virus variants and the need for booster shots, and how this manufactured crisis is being used to strip us of our civil liberties.
Are You Putting the Pieces Together?
Yeadon has a degree in biochemistry and toxicology and a research-based Ph.D. in respiratory pharmacology. He’s spent 32 years of his career working for large pharmaceutical companies, and 10 years in the biotechnology sector.
“I’m in favor of all modes of new medical treatments, whether they’re biologicals or vaccines, small molecules, creams, sprays, ointments, whatever, but I’m fervently against unsafe medicines or medicines used in an inappropriate context,” Yeadon says.
“Some of the things I’m going to say are not favorable to the current crop of gene-based vaccines and it’s [because] they’re being inappropriately used. I don’t think they have a sufficient safety profile to be used as a sort of wide-spectrum public health prophylactic …
A few things have allowed me, I think, to spot what’s going on in the world at the moment. One, I’ve loved biology since I was little. I’ve been continuing to learn and to apply biology broadly, whether it’s pharmacology, biochemistry, molecular biology [or] toxicology. I’ve got a very broad grounding in all things to do with life science, in terms of health and disease.
[Secondly], one of my former supervisors said that I had a remarkable facility that stood out above the sort of ordinary things you’d have to do to be a vice president or a CEO. He said I was able to spot patterns in sparse data earlier than my peers. So, when there’s not enough data for most people to judge what was going on, I would often be able to see it.
I could see a pattern forming when there wasn’t quite enough information … On this occasion, it allowed me, quite quickly, to work out that what we were being told about this virus and what we needed to do in order to stay safe was simply not true.”
A Massive Fraud Has Been Perpetrated
Yeadon starts out by highlighting the “enormous changes” made in the U.K.’s attribution of causes of deaths. If you die within 28 days of testing positive for SARS-CoV-2, you are counted as a COVID-19 death, regardless of other underlying conditions. The same thing was done in the U.S. As noted by Yeadon:
“We’ve never had anything as absurd as the rule that is now used. It’s not just a matter of disagreeing professionally. It’s just complete nonsense.”
The shutdown of businesses and forcing healthy people to self-isolate also makes no sense. Yeadon points out that only people who are ill, who have discernible symptoms of a respiratory infection, pose any health risk to others:
“To be a good, efficient source of infection, you have to have a lot of virus. And if you have a lot of viruses attacking you, you are fighting back. That process produces symptoms, inevitably, not just occasionally. It must always happen …
And those people are not people who are walking around in the community, because if you’re full of virus and symptomatic, you are also ill, and ill people tend to stay at home or in bed.”
Asymptomatic spread, which has no sound basis, was used to justify lockdowns, which never had any basis in fact or science either. Lockdowns were implemented for entirely other reasons, namely to get you used to giving up your freedoms and your normal way of life, and to make you psychologically dependent on an outside source telling you when it’s OK to do what.
It’s obedience training and a tool to get the population of the world to go along with the intentional decimation of the global economy and old way of life, thereby justifying the Great Reset, which is about transferring global wealth and ownership rights to the technocratic elite, and giving them the power to control the world’s nations.
“Basically, everything your government has told you about this virus, everything you need to do to stay safe, is a lie,” Yeadon says. “Every part of it … None of the key themes that you hear talked about — from asymptomatic transmission to top-up vaccines [i.e., booster shots] — not one of those things is supported by the science.
Every piece is cleverly chosen adjacently to something that probably is true, but is itself a lie, and has led people to where we are right now. I don’t normally use phrases like this, but I think we are standing at the very gates of hell … It’s all about control …
The reason I’m commenting is because I believe it’s not just about my life. More importantly, [it’s the lives] of my children and grandchildren that are being stolen … by a systematic process of fear and control that’s going to culminate in, I think, some very horrible times, and I’m desperate to wake you up …
We’re probably quite used to politicians occasionally telling white lies, and we kind of let them, but when they lie to you about something technical, something that you can check, and they do it [with] many, many elements of the whole event, then please, you’ve got to believe me, [they’re] not telling the truth.
And if they’re not telling the truth, that means there’s something else. And I’m here to tell you that there is something very, very bad happening. If you don’t pay attention, you will soon lose any chance to do anything about it.”
Science Has Been Turned on Its Head
Yeadon rightly notes that everything we’ve known about virology and infectious disease has been turned upside down during this pandemic. None of the standard responses known to protect people from infectious disease was followed. Normally, you quarantine the sick to contain the infection.
Locking down entire societies has never been done and has no foundation in science or the history of epidemic control. Similarly, mass testing people without symptoms is without precedence. It simply isn’t done, and for good reason. It’s a waste of resources because as Yeadon explained earlier, we know how viruses spread. This isn’t our first rodeo. We’ve dealt with infectious epidemics before.
We know how viruses work in the body. When you have an active infection, you develop symptoms as your body mounts its defense. Without symptoms, your viral load is too low to pose a threat, either to yourself or others. The myth about asymptomatic spread has been a fear tactic.
T-Cell Immunity Is Far More Important Than Antibodies
Yeadon goes on to review how we’ve been misled about immunity and how your body fights off viruses. You’ve probably heard that the thing that gives you immunity against SARS-CoV-2 is SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies.
The entire vaccination campaign is built around the premise that by injecting a synthetic piece of viral RNA into your cells, your body will start producing the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, in response to which your body will produce specific antibodies that recognize that protein. This is also known as humoral immunity.
However, while antibodies are important, especially in bacterial infections, antibodies are not the only part of your immunity. More importantly, immunity against viruses — opposed to bacteria — actually does not depend on antibodies. Yeadon explains:
“Viruses are really tiny, and their business is to get as quickly as they can inside your cells. So, they bind to a receptor on the surface and inject themselves into your cell. So, they’re inside. Antibodies are big molecules and they’re generally outside your cells.
So just think about that for a moment. Antibodies and viruses are in separate compartments. The virus is inside the cell, the antibodies outside the cell. I’m not saying antibodies have no role, but they’re really not very important. This has been proven. There are some people in whom a natural experiment has occurred.
They have a defect and they actually don’t make antibodies, but they’re able to fight off COVID-19, the virus SARS-CoV-2, quite well. The way they do that is, they have T-cell immunity, cellular immunity. [T-cells] are cells that are trained to detect virus-infected cells and to kill those cells. That’s how you defend yourself against a virus.
So, all of these mentions of antibody levels, it’s just bunk. It is not a good measure of whether or not you’re immune. It does give evidence that you’ve been infected, but their persistence is not important as to whether you’ve got immunity …
We’ve known this for decades. We’ve known about T-cells for decades. They were clearly in my undergraduate textbooks. And we’ve known about their importance in defending you against respiratory viruses since probably the 1970s, certainly the 1980s. So, don’t believe anything where people suggest to you that their role is uncertain. We’ve known for a very long time that they are absolutely central.”
Antibodies Are Not the Answer to Variants
The central role of T-cell immunity, or cellular immunity, becomes particularly pertinent when discussing the threat of variants, mutated forms of SARS-CoV-2. As mentioned, your immune system is a multifaceted system that allows your body to mount defenses against all sorts of threats. Parasites, fungi, bacteria and viruses are the main threat categories.
Each of these invades and threatens you in completely different ways, and your immune system has ways of dealing with all of them, using a variety of mechanisms.
“You’ve got four or five different arms of the immune system: innate immunity, mucosal, antibody, T-cells and compliment[ary systems],” Yeadon says.
“There are all of these different wonderful systems that have integrated, one with another, because it needs to defend you against all sorts of different threats in the environment. What I’m telling you is that the emphasis on antibodies in respect of respiratory viral infections is wrong, and you can establish that quite easily by doing some searching.”
In essence, what Yeadon is saying is that whether you’re going to be susceptible to variants has very little to do with whether or not you have antibodies against SARS-CoV-2, because antibodies are not your primary defense against viruses. Your T-cells are the ones doing the heavy lifting.
What this means then, is that getting booster shots for different variants is not going to help you. It will not solve the problem, because these shots do not strengthen your T-cell immunity.
Carefully Rethink Need for Booster Shots
Of all the lies we’ve been told over the past year, the ones that worry and frighten Yeadon the most are the lies about virus variants and booster shots. In fact, he believes not buying into these lies may be key to your very survival, and here’s why:
“It’s quite normal for RNA viruses like SARS-CoV-2, when it replicates, to make typographical errors. It’s got a very good error detection, error correction system so it doesn’t make too many typos, but it does make some, and those are called ‘variants.’
It’s really important to know that if you find the variant that’s most different from the sequence identified in Wuhan, that variance … is only 0.3% different from the original sequence.
I’ll say it another way. If you find the most different variance, it’s 99.7% identical to the original one, and I can assure you … that amount of difference is absolutely NOT possibly able to represent itself to you as a different virus.”
He explains how, earlier in the pandemic, scientists obtained blood from patients who had been sickened with the SARS virus 17 or 18 years ago. SARS-CoV-1, responsible for that SARS outbreak, is 80% similar to SARS-CoV-2.
They wanted to know if the immune systems of these patients would be able to recognize SARS-CoV-2. They did. They still had memory T-cells against SARS-CoV-1, and those cells also recognized SARS-CoV-2, despite being only 80% similar. Now, if a 20% difference was not enough to circumvent the immune system of these patients, why should you be concerned with a variant that is at most 0.3% different from the original SARS-CoV-2?
“When your government scientists tell you that a variant that’s 0.3% different from SARS-CoV-2 could masquerade as a new virus and be a threat to your health, you should know, and I’m telling you, they are lying,” Yeadon says.
“If they’re lying, and they are, why is the pharmaceutical industry making top-up [booster] vaccines? You should be terrified at this point, as I am, because there’s absolutely no possible justification for their manufacture. And the world’s medicines regulators have said, ‘Because they are quite similar to the original vaccines … we won’t be asking them to do any clinical safety studies.’”
Are We Seeing a Mass Depopulation Agenda in Action?
Yeadon stresses that variants simply aren’t different enough to represent a threat, which is why you don’t now, and won’t in the future, need one or more booster shots. Yet they’re already being made, and regulators are giving them a free pass when it comes to safety and efficacy studies.
“I’m very frightened of that. There’s no possible benign interpretation of this,” Yeadon says. “I believe they’re going to be used to damage your health and possibly kill you. Seriously. I can see no sensible interpretation other than a serious attempt at mass depopulation.
This will provide the tools to do it, and plausible deniability. They’ll create another story about some sort of biological threat and you’ll line up and get your top-up vaccines, and a few months or a year or so later, you’ll die of some peculiar inexplicable syndrome. And they won’t be able to associate it with the vaccines.
That’s my belief — that they’re lying to you about variants so they can make damaging top-up vaccines that you don’t need at all. I think they will be used for malign purposes … We know that the people [SARS-CoV-2] injures and kills are only people who are elderly and or ill, usually both, so we’re talking about less than 0.1% [of the population] …
Given that this virus represents, at worst, a slightly bigger risk to the old and ill than influenza, and a smaller risk [than influenza] to almost everyone else … it was never necessary for us to have done anything. We didn’t need to do anything. [We didn’t need] lockdowns, masks, mass testing, vaccines.
There are multiple therapeutic drugs that are at least as effective as the vaccines are. They’re already available and cheap. Inhaled corticosteroids that are used in asthma reduced symptomatology by about 90%.
An off-patent drug called ivermectin, one of the most widely-used drugs in the world, is also able to reduce symptoms at any stage of the disease, including lethality by about 90%. So, you don’t need vaccines and you don’t need any of the measures that have been introduced at all.”
Key Safety Concerns of mRNA ‘Vaccines’
In December 2020, Yeadon filed a petition2 calling on the European Medicine Agency to halt Phase 3 clinical trials of the Pfizer mRNA vaccine until they’ve been restructured to address critical safety concerns. Of course, those trials were not halted. The four key safety concerns Yeadon specified in his petition3 were:
1. The potential for formation of non-neutralizing antibodies that can trigger an exaggerated immune reaction (referred to as paradoxical immune enhancement or antibody-dependent immune amplification) when the individual is exposed to the real “wild” virus post-vaccination.
Antibody-dependent amplification has been repeatedly demonstrated in coronavirus vaccine trials on animals.4 While the animals initially tolerated the vaccine well and had robust immune responses, they later became severely ill or died when infected with the wild virus. Put plainly, the vaccine increased their susceptibility to the virus and made them more likely to die from the infection.
2. Pfizer’s mRNA vaccine contains polyethylene glycol (PEG), and studies have shown 70% of people develop antibodies against this substance. This suggests PEG may trigger fatal allergic reactions in many who receive the vaccine.
Indeed, within days of the vaccine’s release, reports started coming in of people having life-threatening anaphylactic reactions,5 leading to warnings that people with known allergies should not take the Pfizer vaccine.6 Since then, anaphylactic reactions have been reported by recipients of the Moderna mRNA vaccine as well.7
3. The mRNA vaccine triggers your body to produce antibodies against the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, and spike proteins in turn contain syncytin-homologous proteins that are essential for the formation of placenta. If a woman’s immune system starts reacting against syncytin-1, then there is the possibility she could become infertile.
This is an issue that none of the vaccine studies is looking at specifically. Mass vaccinating women of childbearing age against COVID-19 could potentially have the devastating consequence of causing mass infertility if the vaccine triggers an immune reaction against syncytin-1.
4. The studies are far too brief in duration to allow a realistic estimation of side effects. Depending on what those effects end up being, millions of people may be exposed to unacceptable risk in return for a very minor benefit.
Health Freedom Undermined in the Name of ‘Emergency’
Even more fundamental than any particular safety concern is the fact that a vaccination campaign of this magnitude, using an entirely novel technology, sets a most dangerous public health precedent. By drumming up unnecessary panic, many are now willing to forgo all manner of freedom in the name of responding to a global health emergency.
One of these core freedoms is your right to refuse an experimental medical procedure. This freedom was acknowledged in the Nuremberg Code of 19478 and enshrined in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which states that “no one shall be subjected without his free consent to medical or scientific experimentation.”9
Yet despite that, and despite the fact that clinical vaccine trials are still two years out from being completed, governments around the world are talking about making these vaccinations mandatory, or blackmailing people to take them against their will by encouraging private businesses to restrict access to vaccinated-only.
As noted by Yeadon and many others, the implementation of vaccine passports has nothing to do with protecting public health and everything to do with setting into place a surveillance, tracking and control mechanism that can easily be expanded into all other areas of life, thereby controlling your every move.
“[Vaccine passports] are not required at all,” Yeadon says. “What they provide, though, is complete control over your movements to whoever controls the database that your vaccination status is connected to. I hope you grasp this because this is not optional.
This is what’s going to take over your life in a way that George Orwell in ‘1984’ didn’t even dream of. Imagine you’ve been vaccinated and you’ve been awarded a vaccine passport on an app. It’s going to be the world’s first database that contains your name, a unique digital ID in the same format as absolutely everybody else on the planet on the same database.
It’ll have like an editable health-related flag that will say [whether] you’ve been vaccinated. If you haven’t been, the algorithm that rules that works out what you can do … That’s what’s going to control the rest of your lives until you die.”
Vaccine Passport Is a Ticket to Tyranny, or Worse
Indeed, I’ve written several articles detailing how the tracking of vaccination status will usher in a surveillance apparatus greater than anything we’ve ever experienced before.
The precedent being set up right now is one that, in the future, will grant health authorities the “right” to force any number of experimental drugs, vaccines and technologies upon us in the name of public health. If the right to refuse an experimental medical procedure is not upheld now, the entire population of the earth will be available for experimentation without recourse.
But that’s not all. This initial vaccine surveillance system will ultimately be tied into other digital systems, such as all other medical records, biometric ID and an all-digital banking system.
The implementation of a Google-based social credit system, similar to that implemented in China in 2018, is also highly likely. Under a social credit system, points are awarded or subtracted for certain types of behavior. When your score falls below a certain point, punishment is meted out in the form of travel restrictions or the inability to obtain a loan, for example.
“Don’t allow their system to come into force,” Yeadon says. “It’s going to be used to coerce you. I believe if you allow a vaccine passport to come into force, you’ll be pinged one day and it’ll advise you to go to the medical center to have your top-up vaccine.
If you choose not to get your vaccine, your passport validity will expire, which means you won’t be able to enter a shop. You may not be able to use your bank card. All somebody needs to do is set a rule that says ‘After a given a date, before any bank card can be used, a vaccine passport has to be [validated] …
I’m absolutely terrified that the combination of vaccine passports and top-up vaccines is going to lead to mass depopulation, deliberate execution, potentially of billions of people.
You can stop it once you’ve heard what I’m saying. Even if you like the idea of vaccine passports, put the thing in place using written records or something … but do not allow it to be on an interoperable global fixed-format database, because that will be the end of human freedoms. And I just see no way of recovering from that.”
- 1 Planet Lockdown
- 2, 3 Wodarg, Wolfgang and Michael Yeadon, Petition/Motion for Administrative/Regulatory Action Regarding […], 2020
- 4 C-span Hotez Coronavirus Vaccine Safety Testimony May 4, 2020
- 5 New York Post December 19, 2020
- 6 The Conversation December 10, 2020
- 7 New York Post December 25, 2020
- 8 Nuremberg Code of 1947
- 9 Corbett Report Episode 392, The Future of Vaccines Transcript
Reproduced from original article:
by: Sara Middleton, staff writer | May 9, 2021
(NaturalHealth365) According to the Asthma and Allergy Foundation of America, more than 50 million Americans experience allergies of some sort every year. And with spring in full swing, millions of us are about to experience the hallmark sneezing, itchy throats, and watery eyes that signal hay fever in full effect.
Want to find relief that doesn’t depend solely on the pharmacy? Let’s review some of the most effective natural allergy options we know about.
HEPA filters, probiotics, and these additional allergy solutions might give you relief this spring and summer
If you’re trying to stay away from prescription or over-the-counter antihistamines, consider adding a variety of natural allergy relief remedies into your daily routine. Some may work for you better than others, so experiment with a few.
HEPA filters: It’s not clear if HEPA (high-efficiency particulate air) filters always or significantly improve allergy symptoms, but we do have some studies that support their use. For instance, one 2018 study from the Asian Pacific Journal of Allergy and Immunology found that the use of HEPA filters improved clinical symptoms of allergic rhinitis as well as reduced the amount of particulate matter in the air.
Probiotics: In 2015, a systematic review of 23 studies concluded that “probiotics may be beneficial in improving symptoms and quality of life in patients with allergic rhinitis,” but note that further research is needed to clarify recommendations. Currently recommended amounts for probiotic supplements range widely, from 1 billion to 10 billion or more colony-forming units (CFUs). The scientific plausibility of probiotics alleviating allergy symptoms is considerable, given that probiotics support gut and immune health.
Acupuncture: Ever tried acupuncture? A 2015 review of 13 papers, including 2,365 participants, published in the American Journal of Rhinology & Allergy, found that acupuncture appears to be a safe and valid natural remedy for allergy relief.
Frankincense oil: Inhaling this fragrant essential oil (either by putting it in a diffuser or placing it in a carrier oil and dabbing it behind the ears) may reduce fatigue, ease symptoms, and improve quality of life in people who have seasonal allergies, according to a 2016 randomized controlled trial. Other essential oils touted for their allergy-relief benefits include peppermint oil and eucalyptus oil.
Quercetin: Laboratory studies have found that this nutrient — found in foods like broccoli, cauliflower, onions, citrus fruits, grapes, and green tea — prevents the release of histamine, which is a key compound involved in the body’s allergic response. We don’t have strong human data to prove its effectiveness at reducing allergy symptoms, but anecdotal evidence suggests it offers benefits. Other nutrients and supplements said to promote allergy relief include vitamin C and the blue-green algae spirulina.
Here are 5 ways to reduce your exposure to allergens
Treating allergies, whether with medications or natural remedies, is important for improving your quality of life. But preventing an allergic response in the first place matters, too. Here are five simple ways to avoid your exposure to allergens in your home and community:
- Check the pollen forecast: Input your town and zip code at Pollen.com or a similar resource, so you’ll know how bad the pollen is in your area and will be prepared to take more preventive action.
- On high pollen count days, stay indoors and close the windows.
- When going outside, wear wraparound sunglasses to block allergens from your eyes, and try putting some Vaseline around your nose to trap pollen particles!
- Shower before going to bed to avoid bringing pollen and debris onto your pillowcase and bed linens.
- Vacuum and dust regularly.
And, finally, as a “bonus tip,” many integrative healthcare providers will remind you to avoid conventionally-produced dairy products, sugar or flour-based food products because they tend to cause mucus buildup.
Sources for this article include:
Reproduced from original article:
- COVID-19 has been a pandemic of false positive tests; the thing that kept the fraud going was the fact that laboratories were using excessively high cycle thresholds (CTs) when processing the PCR tests, resulting in false positives
- Now, as nearly 100 million Americans have been vaccinated against COVID-19, the CDC is lowering the CT from 40 to 28 when diagnosing vaccine breakthrough cases — cases where fully vaccinated individuals are diagnosed with COVID-19
- While healthy people have been misdiagnosed as having COVID-19 when they really didn’t because the CT was set to 40 or 45, the CDC is now trying to minimize the recorded number of breakthrough cases by using a CT that will minimize the number of false positives
- As of April 26, 2021, the CDC had received a total of 9,245 reports of vaccine breakthrough infections. Of those, 55% were under the age of 60, 835 required hospitalization (9%) and 132 died (1%)
- The U.S. Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System appears to be backlogged for months. Rare but serious side effects may be occurring but we just can’t see the trend, and the longer the backlog, the more people will be exposed to a potentially dangerous vaccine
For many months, experts have warned that COVID-19 is not so much a viral pandemic as it is a “casedemic” — a pandemic of false positive tests — and the thing that kept the fraud going was the fact that laboratories were using excessively high cycle thresholds (CTs) when processing the PCR tests.1
I detailed this scheme in “COVID-19 Testing Scandal Deepens” and “Astonishing COVID-19 Testing Fraud Revealed.” Tests recommended by the World Health Organization were originally set to 45 CTs,2,3,4 and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommend a CT of 40,5 yet the scientific consensus has long been that anything over 35 CTs renders the test useless,6,7,8 as the accuracy will be a measly 3%. The remainder, 97%, are false positives.9
In addition to artificially driving up the case rate, the PCR test fraud also fueled the myth that asymptomatic people posed a potential health threat, and therefore businesses had to shut down and everyone had to stay at home and self-quarantine.
January 20, 2021, the day of Joe Biden’s inauguration as the 46th president of the United States, the WHO suddenly lowered the recommended CT,10 thereby guaranteeing that the number of “cases,” i.e., positive PCR test results, would plummet.
Now, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has lowered the CT even further, in what appears to be a clear effort to hide COVID-19 breakthrough cases, meaning cases in which fully vaccinated individuals are being diagnosed with COVID-19.
How the CDC Is Covering Up Breakthrough Cases
As part of its COVID-19 vaccine breakthrough case investigation, the CDC has issued guidelines11 for public health, clinical and reference laboratories on how to test and diagnose cases where fully vaccinated individuals are suspected of having contracted COVID-19. In those guidelines, it specifies using a CT value of 28 or less.
So, in other words, while healthy people have, for the past year, been misdiagnosed as having COVID-19 when they really didn’t because the CT was set to 40 or 45, they’re now trying to minimize the recorded number of breakthrough cases by using a CT that will minimize false positives.12
Had a CT of 28 been used all along, we would have had nowhere near the number of “cases” currently touted and the pandemic would have been declared over sometime in 2020. Conversely, were a CT of 40 or 45 used to diagnose breakthrough cases, you can be sure the numbers would be far higher than currently reported.
Reported Breakthrough Cases Are Undercounted
As of April 26, 2021, the CDC had received a total of 9,245 reports of vaccine breakthrough infections via its national COVID-19 vaccine breakthrough REDCap database, into which state health department investigators can enter and manage data from their respective jurisdictions.13
Of those 9,245 breakthrough cases, 55% were under the age of 60, 835 required hospitalization (9%) and 132 died (1%). With an estimated 95 million Americans having been vaccinated, the reported breakthrough rate is only 0.0097%. However, the CDC also stresses that:14
“It is important to note that reported vaccine breakthrough cases will represent an undercount. This surveillance system is passive and relies on voluntary reporting from state health departments which may not be complete. Also, not all real-world breakthrough cases will be identified because of lack of testing.”
COVID-19 Vaccine Side Effects Are Underreported Too
This is worth keeping in mind, as the same applies to reported COVID-19 vaccine side effects, which as of April 23, 2021, included a total of 118,902 adverse events, 12,618 of which were serious and 3,544 of which died.15
As tragic as those numbers are, these too represent an undercount, as the U.S. vaccine adverse event reporting system (VAERS) is a passive surveillance system that relies on voluntary reporting. Historically, less than 10% of vaccine side effects are reported to VAERS.16 An investigation by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services put it as low as 1%.17,18
What this means is side effects may actually be 10 times or even 100 times higher than reported. We could, in reality, be looking at anywhere from 126,000 to 1.2 million serious side effects, and anywhere from 35,440 to 354,400 vaccine-related deaths.
Right now, it’s also difficult to get an accurate idea of where we are with regard to side effects as VAERS appears to be backlogged for months. On Twitter, Alex Berenson19 noted that it had taken until the end of April for the CDC to respond to a report from January, which indicates the data you see on VAERS does not reflect the true, real-time numbers of adverse reactions being reported.
This is important to know, since the system’s primary goal is to “detect new, unusual or rare vaccine adverse events” as a way to monitor safety of vaccines. A backlog by months indicates that, quite possibly, there are so many reports coming in that that the CDC can’t handle them.
Rare but serious side effects may be occurring but we just can’t see the trend because the data isn’t showing, and the longer the backlog, the more people will be exposed to a potentially dangerous vaccine.
Why Are Thousands of Deaths Ignored?
In an interview with journalist Alex Newman (video above), Dr. Peter McCullough stated he believes the government’s response to the pandemic has resulted in tens of thousands of unnecessary deaths, and the mass vaccination program is now causing thousands more and they’re just letting it happen.
He’s baffled at the government’s nonexistent response to the thousands of deaths already logged into VAERS, noting that the 1976 swine flu pandemic mass vaccination program was pulled after just 25 deaths and a few hundred cases of paralysis. Drugs are also yanked from the market at around 50 unexplained deaths.
On average, there are 20 to 30 deaths reported following the seasonal flu vaccine, which is given to about 195 million Americans each year.20 Compare that to the COVID-19 vaccines. At 95 million vaccinations administered, the death count is already at 3,542, the highest for any vaccine in history. The contrast in response is “alarming,” McCullough says.
Even more concerning, after reviewing 1,600 of these deaths, the FDA declared not a single death was related to the vaccine. McCullough doesn’t believe it, because he knows from first-hand experience it would take months to investigate that many deaths.
“It is impossible for unnamed regulatory doctors without any experience with COVID 19 to opine that none of the deaths were related to the vaccine,” he says. “We’re sitting on, right now, the biggest number of vaccine deaths, there’s been tens of thousands of hospitalizations, all attributable to the vaccine, and going strong …
In my professional opinion, the safest vaccine on the market was the J&J vaccine. And that was pulled for very rare blood-clotting events. We had seven million people vaccinated but the estimates are for the other two vaccines available [Pfizer and Moderna], the blood-clotting rates are probably 30 times that of J&J, and these others are going strong.”
Active Vaccine Surveillance Months Away From Implementation
The FDA has also admitted that its analysis of vaccine safety data will be delayed for weeks, if not months, due to the pandemic hitting right as they were transitioning away from its Post-Licensure Rapid Immunization Safety Monitoring (PRISM) network, which was used to track side effects from the pandemic H1N1 vaccine, into a new system called the Biologics Effectiveness and Safety System (BEST).
Using a patchwork of passive reporting systems rather than one comprehensive, active and central one, may ultimately prove disastrous. As reported by Kaiser Health News:21
“Potentially dangerous, unanticipated reactions to vaccines may not be so obvious in VAERS, a system that is believed to miss many potential side effects — or in the nation’s additional monitoring systems, including the Vaccine Safety Datalink and the CDC’s new phone-based tracking program, v-safe.
‘It’s quite a hodgepodge of different systems of collecting data,’ said Dr. Katherine Yih, a biologist and epidemiologist who specializes in vaccine surveillance at Harvard Pilgrim Health Care …
The Vaccine Safety Datalink, though highly regarded, did not include enough vaccinations within its data from nine hospital systems covering 12 million people to catch the J&J issue, CDC officials said.
And enrollment in v-safe has been less than expected, with about 6 million people enrolled by the end of March, just 6.4% of those who had been vaccinated at that point.
That means that, at a time when about 100 million Americans have been fully vaccinated against COVID-19, the U.S. continues to rely on a patchwork network of vaccine monitoring systems that may fail to monitor a large enough swath of the population, experts told KHN …
PRISM, which was repurposed for drug safety … has not been used to track vaccine reactions during the COVID-19 pandemic, said [former director of vaccine safety at the National Vaccine Program Office, Daniel] Salmon, who oversaw safety monitoring for the H1N1 vaccine. ‘With PRISM, we tested it in a crisis and it operated for a decade … I was really surprised when it wasn’t used for COVID-19. That was why we built it’ …
FDA officials said PRISM’s capabilities have been incorporated into BEST, which can examine data from 100 million people. Experts told KHN that it has not been used extensively to monitor post-vaccination effects, but [FDA spokesperson Abby] Capobianco said: ‘We disagree. BEST is built as a state-of-the-art active surveillance system’ …
The concern is that officials have leaned heavily on VAERS, a ‘passive’ system that relies on reports from patients and health care providers to flag issues after vaccination that may or may not be related to the shots. A robust ‘active’ surveillance system can search large volumes of patient care records to compare rates of adverse events in people who received vaccines with those who didn’t.”
CDC Ignores Reports of Serious Adverse Effects
Getting back to the CDC, it has also decided it will no longer monitor all reported vaccine breakthrough cases (perhaps because they’re overloaded with reports of side effects?) and will only investigate vaccine breakthrough infections that result in hospitalization or death.22
Recent complaints from medical professionals raise questions about the CDC’s ability to do even that part of the job.
As reported by Review Journal,23,24 the medical team that treated an 18-year-old girl admitted for blood clots in the brain, low platelet count and other signs of a rare blood clotting disorder shortly after receiving Johnson & Johnson’s COVID-19 injection, “urgently sought guidance” from the CDC, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and Johnson & Johnson for ideas on how to best treat their young patient.
Their inquiries and pleas for help were ignored all around. The FDA “basically hung up on me,” Dr. Brian Lipman told Review Journal, adding, “We basically got no help from anyone.” It took more than a week before the CDC even got around to calling back. That’s hardly what you’d expect from the world’s most preeminent infectious disease experts when you’re dealing with an acutely life-threatening case.
Rules for COVID-19 Death Reporting Changes Again
Signs that other countries are also starting to manipulate data in ways that will minimize vaccine failure rates can be seen in the U.K.’s decision to drop its rule that anyone having tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 within 28 days of dying are to be counted as a COVID-19 death.
Now that vaccines are out, COVID-19 is only to be listed as the cause of death if the patient actually died from an active case of COVID-19 and nothing else. The hypocrisy is nothing if not predictable at this point. As reported by iNews:25
“The daily tally of coronavirus deaths within 28 days of a positive test is likely to be dropped after scientific advisers warned the Government it will become an increasingly inaccurate measure of the pandemic and vaccine success.
The modelling sub-group of the Government’s scientific advisory committee Sage says that the 28-day definition was useful before widespread vaccination, because deaths in hospital within a month of a positive test were most likely due to COVID-19.
However now that tens of millions of the UK population have received their jabs, deaths from other causes could still show up in the daily data if they have previously tested positive for coronavirus.
A senior Sage source said: ‘If the definition remains the same, these people would be counted as ‘vaccine failures’, whereas the vaccine prevented death from COVID, but they really died from something else.’”
Compensation for COVID-19 Vaccine Injury Is Limited
In closing, it’s also worth remembering that all who are injured by the COVID-19 “vaccines” are left to fend for themselves financially.
Not only did they volunteer to be guinea pigs for an experimental gene therapy — which is what you’re doing if you get these “vaccines” now, as the studies are nearly two years out from being completed and the injections only have emergency use authorization — they’re also financially responsible for any and all medical attention they might need as a result of their generosity.
If you decide to participate in this experiment and are injured, you can try to apply for compensation from the Countermeasures Injury Compensation Act (CICP), under which COVID-19 “vaccines” are a covered countermeasure.26
You cannot apply for and will not receive compensation from the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP), which covers other vaccines, including the flu vaccine. You also cannot sue the vaccine manufacturer, the government, your doctor or anyone else involved in the manufacturing, distributing or administering of COVID-19 vaccines, as they have special liability protections under the PREP Act.
However, be aware that compensation from CICP is very limited, and only applies in cases of serious injury requiring hospitalization and resulting in significant disability and/or death. And, even if you meet the eligibility criteria, it requires you to use up your private health insurance before it kicks in to pay the difference.
You must also file a request for benefits within one year of the date the vaccine was administered, and it is your responsibility to prove your injury was the “direct result of the countermeasure’s administration based on compelling, reliable, valid, medical and scientific evidence beyond mere temporal association. In other words, you have to prove what the vaccine developer has yet to ascertain, seeing how you are part of their still-ongoing study. Good luck.
Additional details and hyperlinks to benefit request forms can be found in the Congressional Research Service’s legal sidebar, “Compensation Programs for Potential COVID-19 Vaccine Injuries.”27
- 1, 6 The Vaccine Reaction September 29, 2020
- 2 WHO.int Diagnostic detection of Wuhan Coronavirus 2019 by real-time RT-PCR, January 13, 2020 (PDF)
- 3 WHO.int Diagnostic detection of 2019-nCOV by real-time RT-PCR, January 17, 2020 (PDF)
- 4 Eurosurveillance 2020 Jan 23; 25(3): 2000045
- 5 FDA.gov CDC 2019-nCoV Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel Instructions, July 13, 2020 (PDF) Page 35
- 7 Jon Rappoport’s Blog November 6, 2020
- 8 YouTube TWiV 641 July 16, 2020
- 9 Clinical Infectious Diseases September 28, 2020; ciaa1491
- 10 WHO.int Notice 2020/05 January 20, 2021
- 11 CDC.gov COVID-19 Vaccine Breakthrough Case Investigation Guidelines (PDF)
- 12 European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases April 27, 2020; 39: 1059-1061
- 13 CDC.gov COVID-19 Breakthrough Case Investigation and Reporting
- 14 CDC.gov COVID-19 Breakthrough Case Investigation and Reporting, How to Interpret These Data
- 15 The Defender April 30, 2021
- 16 BMJ 2005;330:433
- 17 AHRQ December 7, 2007
- 18 The Vaccine Reaction January 9, 2020
- 19 Twitter Alex Berenson April 30, 2021
- 20 Leo Hohmann April 30, 2021
- 21 Yahoo News May 2, 2021
- 22 CDC.gov COVID-19 Breakthrough Case Investigation and Reporting, Identifying and Investigating COVID-19 Breakthrough Cases
- 23 Review Journal April 21, 2021
- 24 Review Journal April 21, 2021 (Archived)
- 25 iNews April 26, 2021
- 26, 27 Congressional Research Service Legal Sidebar CICP March 22, 2021 (PDF)